Technology vs. Marketing. Which is more important? - page 7.

TPTB_need_war

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 262

Quote from: Fuserleer on January 22, 2016, 06:45:39 PM

The problem is that generally tech guys are not good marketers and marketers are not good tech guys, thankfully I've been successful at both so maybe my doc will serve to educate a little also

I observe that also.

I am looking forward to your document. I have always thought I will join the best project, even if it isn't mine, especially if there is nothing I can add of unique value with my own project.

50cent_rapper

legendary

Activity: 1344

Merit: 1000

Quote from: TechorMarketing on January 22, 2016, 06:15:45 PM

I think both Technology and Marketing are essential.

Right now I am evaluating two projects. One has great tech but a small community and very little marketing. The other project has a larger community and fancy marketing materials but its underlying technology is not as strong.

Which project should I support? Is it easier to fix broken tech or implement an effective marketing plan?

Aren't small community signals crappy tech?

Spoetnik

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1011

FUD Philanthropist™

What is more important ?
Repeating the same question(s) asked here infinity for years ?
or
Making another topic to ask again ?

Fuserleer

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1016

Both are critical to the success of a project, but thus far marketing competence has been lax at best.

I'm planning to drop a full on manifesto and strategy for eMunie in the next week or so, its 20k words / 60 pages of intense dissection of how we intend to take the mass market.

The problem is that generally tech guys are not good marketers and marketers are not good tech guys, thankfully I've been successful at both so maybe my doc will serve to educate a little also

TechorMarketing

full member

Activity: 174

Merit: 101

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on January 22, 2016, 06:26:47 PM

Please distinguish marketing from promotion. Most of you would be referring to promotion to the speculator community, as the chosen marketing strategy. But there may be other marketing strategies which are superior and have greater real adoption. So far most altcoins have been merely promoted to speculators as the sole marketing strategy (perhaps DOGECOIN was an exception, maybe others).

I agree about DOGE being the best marketed alt coin so far (with adoption and use as the goal).

TPTB_need_war

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 262

Quote from: TechorMarketing on January 22, 2016, 06:31:21 PM

However multiple BTC core developers (and highly respected cryptographers) have said positive things about CryptoNote. To my knowledge exactly 0 BTC core developers have said anything positive about DarkSend.

Comparing deceit & technological ineptitude (Dash) to interesting technology without a future (Cryptonote/RingCT)[1] means there is no distinction on the long-term future from a technology impact standpoint (presuming that characterization is accurate[1]).

Be careful with trusting the opinion of the BTC core devs, since they managed to allow Bitcoin to end up in a Tragedy of the Commons on block chain size and economics of mining. They are smart on technology, but apparently clueless about economics and marketing positioning.

Then again I am not appealing to authority, as you have no good reason to trust my acumen/opinion either.

[1] Start reading from this post forward: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13636077

TechorMarketing

full member

Activity: 174

Merit: 101

Quote from: simon66 on January 22, 2016, 06:23:43 PM

Quote from: TechorMarketing on January 22, 2016, 06:15:45 PM

I think both Technology and Marketing are essential.

Right now I am evaluating two projects. One has great tech but a small community and very little marketing. The other project has a larger community and fancy marketing materials but its underlying technology is not as strong.

Which project should I support? Is it easier to fix broken tech or implement an effective marketing plan?

I would say the small community with little marketing because that means you are getting in early and it has room to grow by starting there marketing and growing there community. Especially if you feel there tech is very strong.

The one with the larger community and has already marketed may already be at the peak of its growth especiallt if its tech is not very good. The pump may already be over.

These thaughts are based on the limited description you give only. Can you say exactly what "projects" you are talking about?

I am trying to decide between AEON and DASH. AEON does not even have a website yet and DASH has well funded marketing efforts in multiple languages. At first glance DASH seemed like the obvious choice.

However multiple BTC core developers (and highly respected cryptographers) have said positive things about CryptoNote. To my knowledge exactly 0 BTC core developers have said anything positive about DarkSend.

TPTB_need_war

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 262

Please distinguish marketing from promotion. Most of you would be referring to promotion to the speculator community, as the chosen marketing strategy. But there may be other marketing strategies which are superior and have greater real adoption. So far most altcoins have been merely promoted to speculators as the sole marketing strategy (perhaps DOGECOIN was an exception, maybe others).

simon66

sr. member

Activity: 423

Merit: 250

Quote from: TechorMarketing on January 22, 2016, 06:15:45 PM

I think both Technology and Marketing are essential.

Right now I am evaluating two projects. One has great tech but a small community and very little marketing. The other project has a larger community and fancy marketing materials but its underlying technology is not as strong.

Which project should I support? Is it easier to fix broken tech or implement an effective marketing plan?

I would say the small community with little marketing because that means you are getting in early and it has room to grow by starting there marketing and growing there community. Especially if you feel there tech is very strong.

The one with the larger community and has already marketed may already be at the peak of its growth especiallt if its tech is not very good. The pump may already be over.

These thaughts are based on the limited description you give only. Can you say exactly what "projects" you are talking about?

LucyLovesCrypto

sr. member

Activity: 414

Merit: 251

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on January 22, 2016, 06:18:36 PM

Both if you don't want just a P&D.

Marketing to speculators if you want a P&D.

Both was also going to be my answer. In the long term marketing should be easier to fix than poor cryptography so if I had to choose one over the other I would choose the project with better tech.

TPTB_need_war

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 262

Both if you don't want just a P&D.

Marketing to speculators if you want a P&D.

TechorMarketing

full member

Activity: 174

Merit: 101

I think both Technology and Marketing are essential.

Right now I am evaluating two projects. One has great tech but a small community and very little marketing. The other project has a larger community and fancy marketing materials but its underlying technology is not as strong.

Which project should I support? Is it easier to fix broken tech or implement an effective marketing plan?

Topic: Technology vs. Marketing. Which is more important? - page 7. (Read 6474 times)