Topic: Technology vs. Marketing. Which is more important? - page 6. (Read 6464 times)

A billion?  Hey that's not bad marketing.

In other words 1 BILLION dollars STOLEN while you all argue over $1.50 worth of Dash or Monero 

They mined the speculators. Their marketing strategy was to extract money from speculators. They did not have a marketing strategy for increasing adoption above and far beyond that of Bitcoin (if that is possible), because it is much easier to mine to the speculators. Achieving a million users adoption is difficult and very risky to attempt. The most likely outcome of such an ambitious attempt is FAIL.

But note you are conflating exchanges with altcoins, which isn't entirely valid since this thread is I presume about altcoins. Nevertheless my reply applies to altcoins. Centralized exchanges also mine the speculators, and the propensity to cheat and/or lose coins is inherent. Some centralized exchanges claim to have some form of transparent auditing, but I doubt that resolves the inherent ability to cheat and/or lose coins (I need to study these more).

Note I am working a bit also on decentralized exchange, which could hopefully eliminate the need to use centralized exchanges.

What do these have in Common ?
MintPal, Cryptsy, OpenEx, Coins-EX, BTER, MT Gox, ComKort, Poloniex, Crypto Trade, BTCe ?

Ya uhhh better get working on that marketing..
or
Tech (AKA: Anon coin methods)

Where can I read those details?

I just read that Jackson Palmer was formerly with Adobe as was Steve Guttman (marketed Photoshop to #1) our VP of Marketing when I was working for Fractal Design Corp (what is now Corel Painter, the one that shipped in a real paint can). I interacted with Steve Guttman even though I was a programmer. After leaving that, I marketed my own CoolPage (downloaded software for web page editing) to 1 million downloads (back when the internet was 1/10 the population) and 335,000 confirmed websites created with my product (imagine soccer clubs, churches, etc). Note I did this from a Nipa Hut in the Philippines, living in squalor until end of 1999 when the profit was pouring in.

So maybe soon you will be able to say two altcoins were marketed. And Fuserleer also claims he will bring marketing expertise to his altcoin.

Any way, I am eager to learn from others. If you can kindly send me a link, I would be grateful. In particular he seems to better understand social memes than I do. I am more focused on user needs (being very pragmatic in my thinking). So maybe I can readjust my thinking and learn from him.

Read “non-existent, with one notable exception” as I've yet to encounter anyone who appears to share an appreciation of the details of Jackson Palmer's input to the design of Dogecoin.

I suspect this lack of appreciation is leading people to ascribe to sheer coincidence the fact that out of over 2500 altcoins launched, Dogecoin is the only coin with an inarguably vibrant community and is also the only coin where a senior marketing professional was involved in the creation.

It isn't coincidence.

Cheers

Graham

I dropped a hint recently but I doubt anyone can guess what I have in mind:

True to a point.  So how should a coin be marketed?  I have always been wondering about this.

Hahaha. Spoetic.

Hey but if they somehow had so many users interested in tipping and using the coin, then maybe it could have potentially (or still is in the process of?) scale to wider scale adoption. I am skeptical though.

I tend to agree with you that the marketing strategy is almost certainly too niche to scale out to a diverse ecosystem. But it is still more than most shitcoins accomplished in terms of adoption (or at least the hype is that it did, but maybe there never were any significant number of real users?).

THAT ?

Makes me think noobs haven't been here long enough and think their reinventing the wheel.

Notice who is responding ?

The many thousands of old school users who already replied to this topic posted before ?
or
The usual Dash vs. Monero Shill'tards who are the only guys left in the altcoin scene *bickering* ?

i said they would kill crypto, play dumb then move to the long con..
Then bicker and fight over the scraps for attention fro their bag holder club.

What is the point talking about this with idiots want to appear smart for the noobs that come here ?
All anyone ever did here was spam & troll this forum then call it marketing.
..sorry Fake Social Media circle-jerk campaigns do not count.

THE REAL TOPIC IS AND SHOULD BE..
Does traditional marketing tactics taught in school today apply to crypto ?
Because apparently it does to some Fail rejects here who said YES it does long ago.
I have seen a few guys in crypto brag about being trained in "marketing"
And then watching how they act made me laugh my balls off.

What has any shit coin "team" every accomplished in "marketing" ?
NOTHING.
Sorry Nascar paint jobs & Olympic bob sled team donations for a combined 55k is utterly retarded.
Whoever thought of that Marketing idea should be dragged into the street, flogged & pissed on + laughed at.

Is Tech more important ?

Are we playing rhetorical questions with a new dummy account OP ?

I just can't guys.. you all are idiots sorry but that is what i see here.
I am not discussing things with Altcoin scene morons.. STILL HERE pushing shit coins.
Short-con to long-con pushers..

It is plausible to contemplate that sometimes lower tech is enough, because sometimes higher tech features have no market or actual adoption utility.

I definitely considered that in my analysis of what tech was worth working on. To invest so much effort in some very complex tech and then come to find out after all there really isn't a market for it. How frustrating to lose all that effort. So yeah, I haven't felt entirely wrong for going slower and taking time to analyze the markets before jumping into implementing. Any way, that is my perspective from a potential (but current vapor) altcoin dev.

Then again if you mean lower tech as in comparing Dash's off chain mixing anonymity (relying on masternodes to keep the secrets) to on chain mixing anonymity (and I would argue Zerocoin being the only tech that in theory makes the entire block chain zero knowledge), then I would argue that the lower tech in this case is inferior to the point of being useless for anything other than convincing speculators to enjoin a P&D.

Yet I may agree if you mean lower tech in the sense of straightforward Bitcoin clone with some marketing innovation, as compared to some complex Zerocoin project, given the privacy markets are unproven and undeveloped, so who knows when and if such complex tech will attain adoption (outside of the speculators who are investing in it). Anonymity tech causes tradeoffs (block chain bloat, etc) so can in some ways argued to be retrogressive (especially if there is no proven market for anonymity with those maybe severe tradeoffs). The devil is in the details. Some coin might someday do anonymity well enough and have very astute marketing strategy. I am not saying it can't happen. I am saying it is very complex to analyze.

Imo, not really.  But it could be.  What if merchants slowly start accepting Doge for ther products/services.  Lot's of people (consumers) hold it, probably enough.  And volume and liquidity is not that bad if you decide to cash out to BTC.

It's puzzling that the 'lower tech' coins, LTC and Doge still have good trading volume.

So viral adoption would be an indicator of a good investment, same as for DOGECOIN?

Good technology have there own marketing by there own customers. People who spread the word is the most successful campaign.

That can be Sybil attacked unless these are connected to verifiable identities.

Seeing the title, Doge vs NXT came to mind.

The number of non-zero accounts in cryptocurrency ?

So far the consensus seems to be that BOTH tech and marketing are essential. Good feedback so far.

How do you measure the size of the community? By number of sockpuppet accounts posting in official threads?

A gut intuition based on reading quality comments in official threads?

Endorsement by Hero members?

Not necessarily, but that almost surely signals crappy marketing and/or simply bad communication practices.