From what I have witnessed, I think that signature campaign is more effective because most of people from Bitcointalk have decent knowledge about Bitcoin. In social media, it is very hard to find someone who knows about cryptos so that it is kinda useless and waste of money. If I am a marketing manager, I will never ever make a social campaign about bitcoin-relate services.
That is certainly true, but I see that it all depends on the target that they seek. For those who do that all have different targets and sometimes they do the right thing. not forever signature gives a positive impact for those who hold and not always social media give positive impact, it all depends on how we use media that we are very strategic. So, think back to everything before deciding something so that the results obtained are more optimally
there are some numerous campaign has been failed since they didn't get their expected exposure on that time, and also i think if we combined those two campaigns surely advertisers can gain more success but its all matter really on how they can sustain it since sustaining a ad campaigns surely can cost a lot and making it running for long time is a must if we are aiming to get a long term users and lured them all.
Its normal that some numerous campaigns will be failed because of competitions with other sites raising campaigns in signature campaign. But if you ask me what would I prefer to have is, I would highly confirm that signature campaign is more effective rather than social media campaign. People viewing at social media doesn't gain any interest with the promotion that's been linked to their pages and yet most of them were avoiding to view ads in social media, including the campaigns we have.
