Bounty Reward Campaigns, Facebook

[JoonasR]

I have been following quite many ICOs over the past year. To raise awareness and knowledge of potential investors and to create the hype, almost all of the bounty campaigns use Facebook (or Twitter) as the main social media platform. Theoretically, it's logical and good idea, but when looked more closely at these campaigns, they do not seem to be very efficient.

What to point out:

Staking system - the stake of a bounty hunter solely depends on the number of his/her friends/followers.
I grasp the idea - the more friends, the more views the post will (should) get. But in real life, someone who has 5000 friends in Facebook, refers to someone who has a fake account. Of course, there are exceptions, but it's very unlikely IMO, that a person with real 5000 friends, will attend in a Facebook marketing campaign, post (some would say spam, every day) to make a couple of hundred bucks.

In the other hand, a person, who has a relatively small Facebook friends group, let's say 200-500 people (all of the friends are real), is likely not going to participate in the Facebook campaign, because his stake is averagely 5-10 times smaller (depending of the ICO) than a person's stake, who has 5000+ friends.

Let's take an average ICO, who spends 1,5% on the bounty campaign. Their goal is to raise 10 million USD. 1,5% of 10 million is 150 000 USD.
Facebook campaigns are usually between 10%-20% of the whole bounty budget. Which would be 15 000-30 000 USD.

So this staking system creates a situation, where ICOs are spending tens of thousands of dollars on Facebook bounty campaigns, but do not really get quality marketing for the money.

I'd like to raise a question - are there better ways to run a Facebook or social media campaign? An option would be to make an equation, which would consider the likes&shares, friends number, the quality of the post and bounty manager overall subjective rating.

It might look something like that:

Stake count =(10  + 1 + 1 up to 6  + 1 up to 10 )x 0,1 up to 1,5

10 - likes
1 - shares
1 up to 6 - friends number
1 up to 10 - quality of the post
0,1 up to 1,5 - bounty manager subjective rating

(10+1+ 6 +4) x 0,3 = 6,3

The bounty hunter would receive 6,3 stakes for his work.

I'd be happy to get some opinion about the equation and arguments, how to turn Facebook bounty campaigns more profitable for the ICO.

[1715002010]

1715002010

[1715002010]

1715002010

[Therowlingk2]

I also often see the number of facebook friends over 5000+ and that some are not active.

For answer your question (are there better ways to run a Facebook or social media campaign? )
I think running it in facebok and social media is very good where now social media is widely used, and stakes calculations in my opinion better based on the quality of post we make with our own language about ICO project that we follow, it will give good marketing to the project and attracted many investors.

[Lakai01]

You have to keep in mind that you have to share and post a lot (!) when you take part in Facebook campaigns. So you are spamming others Facebook walls and a lot of your "friends" will unfollow you.

[JoonasR]

You have to keep in mind that you have to share and post a lot (!) when you take part in Facebook campaigns. So you are spamming others Facebook walls and a lot of your "friends" will unfollow you.

Completely agree with that and that's why I think giving stakes only based on friends number isn't the best option

[NavI_027]

You have to keep in mind that you have to share and post a lot (!) when you take part in Facebook campaigns. So you are spamming others Facebook walls and a lot of your "friends" will unfollow you.

Hmm, I don't think so. I joined bounty campaigns many time before and yet I'm not experiencing to be unfollowed 'til now.

Completely agree with that and that's why I think giving stakes only based on friends number isn't the best option

But you can't blame why Bounty Campaigns work the way like that. Of course it's natural for an ICO to want their project make a traffic as huge as possible, right?
That's why giving of rewards on that kind of campaign depends on your friends simply because the more people who can see their advertisement, the more chances for their coin to be sold.

Actually, I don't understand why you are pointing out the difference of real and unreal friends. In advertising, personal connection to your friends doesn't matter a lot (IMO), the number does .  

[Strufmbae]

If the campaign manager requires to do so then your inquiry will be satisfied.

when it comes to marketing, it doesn't depend on how many likes you got or how many share it depends on how many people you will reach and introduce profesionally the project you are promoting.

In marketing the quantity of marketers are important because that is also a way that says and proves that a project has quality. 

[guybrushthreepwood]

I have been following quite many ICOs over the past year. To raise awareness and knowledge of potential investors and to create the hype, almost all of the bounty campaigns use Facebook (or Twitter) as the main social media platform. Theoretically, it's logical and good idea, but when looked more closely at these campaigns, they do not seem to be very efficient.

So this staking system creates a situation, where ICOs are spending tens of thousands of dollars on Facebook bounty campaigns, but do not really get quality marketing for the money.

You seem to be mistaken about several things. 1) Bounty campaigns spend little to nothing on promotion. 2) Bounties are a great way to promote their campaigns. Yes, it might not be a truly efficient way to advertise but it doesn't need to be. ICO campaigns print their own money for free then give it away to anybody who will spam their ICO over as many platforms as possible. True, a lot of them will be advertising to nobodies or fake friends, but it doesn't matter. All they want or need is for their name to be spread out there and hope they catch some fish. What they're essentially doing is walking around with a loudspeaker shouting about the product across half the internet. Of course, half of the time it will fall on deaf ears but not always. There's always going to be idiots who want to get rich quick on the next big thing and there's always more bounty hunters that are all too eager to promote anything as long as they can get pennies out of it. As long as one person hears it then it's money well spent for the ICO (or not spent seeing as no money has been spent when you create your own for free).

Let's use this analogy: Think of ICOs like dandelions:



Dandelions spread out thousands of seeds via the wind in the hope that a few of them will find ground and spout a new plant, but many of them just end up wasted falling by the roadside or on the pavement or rotting in water etc. But a few will make it and a new plant will quickly grow with thousands more seeds to spread. ICOs are the same. They have thousands of people spreading their word but most of it is worthless and goes to waste, but they will get one or two hits that find worthwhile and fertile ground. Those users will then carry on the promotion or invest themselves and spread the same message thousands of other times and the cycle repeats. And this is why advertising doesn't need to be targeted; they just need to get their name out there and they will land some success and no money has been wasted in the process if you've printed your own monopoly money.

[JoonasR]

I have been following quite many ICOs over the past year. To raise awareness and knowledge of potential investors and to create the hype, almost all of the bounty campaigns use Facebook (or Twitter) as the main social media platform. Theoretically, it's logical and good idea, but when looked more closely at these campaigns, they do not seem to be very efficient.

So this staking system creates a situation, where ICOs are spending tens of thousands of dollars on Facebook bounty campaigns, but do not really get quality marketing for the money.

You seem to be mistaken about several things. 1) Bounty campaigns spend little to nothing on promotion. 2) Bounties are a great way to promote their campaigns. Yes, it might not be a truly efficient way to advertise but it doesn't need to be. ICO campaigns print their own money for free then give it away to anybody who will spam their ICO over as many platforms as possible. True, a lot of them will be advertising to nobodies or fake friends, but it doesn't matter. All they want or need is for their name to be spread out there and hope they catch some fish. What they're essentially doing is walking around with a loudspeaker shouting about the product across half the internet. Of course, half of the time it will fall on deaf ears but not always. There's always going to be idiots who want to get rich quick on the next big thing and there's always more bounty hunters that are all too eager to promote anything as long as they can get pennies out of it. As long as one person hears it then it's money well spent for the ICO (or not spent seeing as no money has been spent when you create your own for free).

Let's use this analogy: Think of ICOs like dandelions:

https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/1/1-dandelion-seeds-bess-hamiti.jpg

Dandelions spread out thousands of seeds via the wind in the hope that a few of them will find ground and spout a new plant, but many of them just end up wasted falling by the roadside or on the pavement or rotting in water etc. But a few will make it and a new plant will quickly grow with thousands more seeds to spread. ICOs are the same. They have thousands of people spreading their word but most of it is worthless and goes to waste, but they will get one or two hits that find worthwhile and fertile ground. Those users will then carry on the promotion or invest themselves and spread the same message thousands of other times and the cycle repeats. And this is why advertising doesn't need to be targeted; they just need to get their name out there and they will land some success and no money has been wasted in the process if you've printed your own monopoly money.

Hey Guybrushthreepwood, thanks for your long reply. I agree with you that bounty campaigns are a great way to raise money for the ICO.

You have a very good example of dandelions, except there's one big difference. Dandelions, cannot change their way of distribution. They cannot make their distribution more effective.
On the other hand, ICOs can, and in my opinion, they should. Doesn't matter that they ''print money''. Investors are buying the stake in the company, and I'm sure that most investors wouldn't want that their hard earned money is spent ineffectively.
Just because the bounty manager is ''playing'' with someone else's money, doesn't give him/her the right to spend it ineffectively.

[guybrushthreepwood]

Hey Guybrushthreepwood, thanks for your long reply. I agree with you that bounty campaigns are a great way to raise money for the ICO.

You have a very good example of dandelions, except there's one big difference. Dandelions, cannot change their way of distribution. They cannot make their distribution more effective.
On the other hand, ICOs can, and in my opinion, they should. Doesn't matter that they ''print money''. Investors are buying the stake in the company, and I'm sure that most investors wouldn't want that their hard earned money is spent ineffectively.
Just because the bounty manager is ''playing'' with someone else's money, doesn't give him/her the right to spend it ineffectively.

Neither can ICOs change their advertising model because they don't have the advertising budget to do it. The money you invest in these companies is not invested in anything and 99% of the time the money just goes directly into the pockets of people who are running the ICO and that's all they're for. The guise of the ICO is just some sham to make people think they're investing in something worthwhile so they give them some money. ICOs only advertise in the places where they can get away with doing it for free. What effective ways do you think they should be spending it? As I said, they don't care as long as they're blasting their name out there in any way they can and via bitcointalk, Facebook and twitter etc is essentially the only way. They're spam campaigns at the end of the day that want to reach as far and wide as possible, and not some sophisticated advertising campaign promoting an established or up and coming brand. Most of them are fly by night scammers who want as much money as quickly as possible and then to run with the money. They spam their message in as many places as they can and hope they catch some flies. They can't do specific targeted advertisements on say YouTube or Facebook because they cost money and they can only pay people in monopoly money that they've created themselves so that's why they're limited in what they can do and that's why paying people to spam facebook/twitter is the only way.

[JoonasR]

Hey Guybrushthreepwood, thanks for your long reply. I agree with you that bounty campaigns are a great way to raise money for the
You have a very good example of dandelions, except there's one big difference. Dandelions, cannot change their way of distribution. They cannot make their distribution more effective.
On the other hand, ICOs can, and in my opinion, they should. Doesn't matter that they ''print money''. Investors are buying the stake in the company, and I'm sure that most investors wouldn't want that their hard earned money is spent ineffectively.
Just because the bounty manager is ''playing'' with someone else's money, doesn't give him/her the right to spend it ineffectively.

Neither can ICOs change their advertising model because they don't have the advertising budget to do it. The money you invest in these companies is not invested in anything and 99% of the time the money just goes directly into the pockets of people who are running the ICO and that's all they're for. The guise of the ICO is just some sham to make people think they're investing in something worthwhile so they give them some money. ICOs only advertise in the places where they can get away with doing it for free. What effective ways do you think they should be spending it? As I said, they don't care as long as they're blasting their name out there in any way they can and via bitcointalk, Facebook and twitter etc is essentially the only way. They're spam campaigns at the end of the day that want to reach as far and wide as possible, and not some sophisticated advertising campaign promoting an established or up and coming brand. Most of them are fly by night scammers who want as much money as quickly as possible and then to run with the money. They spam their message in as many places as they can and hope they catch some flies. They can't do specific targeted advertisements on say YouTube or Facebook because they cost money and they can only pay people in monopoly money that they've created themselves so that's why they're limited in what they can do and that's why paying people to spam facebook/twitter is the only way.

Saying that 99% of ICOs are scam is false. To run a campain, that has been well thought through you don't need an actual budget. And that's what I'm suggesting,  that Facebook campaigns should be more efficient

[guybrushthreepwood]

Saying that 99% of ICOs are scam is false. To run a campain, that has been well thought through you don't need an actual budget.

I'm not going to get into the semantics of what the true exact percentage of ICOs are scams, but by scam I mean any ICO that hasn't delivered what it promised and investors got little to nothing for their money, which is the vast majority of them whether it is much less than 99% of them or not. Can you really name more than a handful of successful ICOs that delivered on whatever product it was they were selling? Most of them are either scams from the get-go or they fail because it's some half assed attempt and they haven't thought it through properly, but it doesn't matter because they have your money anyway. They're just cash grabs at the end of the day and they might as well try because they have nothing at all to lose. If these people were serious about their business then they would just seek funding elsewhere or through the proper channels, but because ICOs are unregulated and are filled with greedy get rich quick schemesters they're prime for abuse and people are all too quick to throw their money at them.

And that's what I'm suggesting,  that Facebook campaigns should be more efficient

But more efficient by how? And again, they don't care. They pay people just to get their name out there as fast as possible. They're throwing shit at walls and hoping that some of it sticks (which it inevitably does). They can't really be any more efficient than that because they don't have the time, money or expertise to do so. They just do whatever they can with their fantasy budget and so far that includes getting people to spam their name around for their made up tokens on social medias regardless of whether it's actually reaching the people in the most efficient way. 

[JungleBadman]

The problem with your staking system is that when a bounty has maybe 2000 participants, it would become very time inefficient for the manager to have to calculate those stakes for each post from every person. The truth is, the more followers on a page and the more the posts are shared, the more coverage a project gets. there are so many projects out there now that seeing the same project name over and over again almost legitimizes that project in some regards. Atleast to the point where people will think it is a serious project and look into it more.

[Naida_BR]

Nice post here. Thank you for raising this issue.

I would not agree more that Bounty campaigns may need a better structures. This is mostly because a user may "Use" many smurf spamming accounts and eventually he will get many stakes without doing his work correctly. These accounts are malicious and needs to be eliminated.

Moreover, Having 300 "real" friends gives more quality to the bounty than 1000 fake. These campaigns are very  tricky because social media accounts can be manipulated easily.
The No. of friends can be manipulated, No. of likes, shares etc. I am not sure how bounty campaigns can change in a different structure by i think something needs to be done. I am fed up with hunters that use multiple fake accounts in order to get more stakes.

[dark1234]

Nice post here. Thank you for raising this issue.

I would not agree more that Bounty campaigns may need a better structures. This is mostly because a user may "Use" many smurf spamming accounts and eventually he will get many stakes without doing his work correctly. These accounts are malicious and needs to be eliminated.

Moreover, Having 300 "real" friends gives more quality to the bounty than 1000 fake. These campaigns are very  tricky because social media accounts can be manipulated easily.
The No. of friends can be manipulated, No. of likes, shares etc. I am not sure how bounty campaigns can change in a different structure by i think something needs to be done. I am fed up with hunters that use multiple fake accounts in order to get more stakes.

in fact we can not detect fake accounts and spam friends that exist and this is a very complicated thing
and most of the facebook and twitter campaign hunters are fake accounts and these are used by forum users who use more than one account

[irianto18]

You have to keep in mind that you have to share and post a lot (!) when you take part in Facebook campaigns. So you are spamming others Facebook walls and a lot of your "friends" will unfollow you.

that is true . some people say it's just rubbish, for people who do not really understand bitcoin / facebook campaign. i experienced it, my friend was initially 5000 but after i got into bitcoin world (facebook campaign) my friend poked (decreased) every month

[verita1]

There are already some ICOs that require participants to share quality comments to be rewarded, I think that currently social media campaigns are more demanding and that's fine to better achieve the objectives of spreading the word about the ICOs that we represent .
The example of guybrushthreepwood with the analogy: Think of ICOs like dandelions is a clear example of what happens with social media campaigns.

[Ojengonggu]

There are already some ICOs that require participants to share quality comments to be rewarded, I think that currently social media campaigns are more demanding and that's fine to better achieve the objectives of spreading the word about the ICOs that we represent .
The example of guybrushthreepwood with the analogy: Think of ICOs like dandelions is a clear example of what happens with social media campaigns.

you are right with so the goal of bounty facebook campaign and twitter can be achieved only we hope as bounty hunter hope the percentage of gift distribution in added because more difficult this work with the addition of work done so we get paid accordingly

[paxmao]

Saying that 99% of ICOs are scam is false. To run a campain, that has been well thought through you don't need an actual budget.

I'm not going to get into the semantics of what the true exact percentage of ICOs are scams, but by scam I mean any ICO that hasn't delivered what it promised and investors got little to nothing for their money, which is the vast majority of them whether it is much less than 99% of them or not. Can you really name more than a handful of successful ICOs that delivered on whatever product it was they were selling? Most of them are either scams from the get-go or they fail because it's some half assed attempt and they haven't thought it through properly, but it doesn't matter because they have your money anyway. They're just cash grabs at the end of the day and they might as well try because they have nothing at all to lose. If these people were serious about their business then they would just seek funding elsewhere or through the proper channels, but because ICOs are unregulated and are filled with greedy get rich quick schemesters they're prime for abuse and people are all too quick to throw their money at them.

And that's what I'm suggesting,  that Facebook campaigns should be more efficient

But more efficient by how? And again, they don't care. They pay people just to get their name out there as fast as possible. They're throwing shit at walls and hoping that some of it sticks (which it inevitably does). They can't really be any more efficient than that because they don't have the time, money or expertise to do so. They just do whatever they can with their fantasy budget and so far that includes getting people to spam their name around for their made up tokens on social medias regardless of whether it's actually reaching the people in the most efficient way.

Far too biased. Examples:

"Many dollars are used by narcos, Dollars are bad"
"Some criminals use planes, planes should be banned"

Truth - People get into investing without any knowledge and then they blame the ICO, the teams, and the moon if necessary.

Truth - You lost your money because you don't have a hint about business, venture capital or investment analysis and you trusted the wrong people.

Truth - Had you invested 1000 USD in Ethereum on ICO you would be a millionaire now.

Note: The rate of success in ICOs is higher or at least similar than in Seed Investment or Venture Capital investment.

Stop blaming ICOs, start learning, become a bit more knowledgeable and then, invest.


@OP
At the moment, you should be more concerned about Facebook banning any kind of ICO promotion. Get another train before that.

[guybrushthreepwood]

Far too biased. Examples:

"Many dollars are used by narcos, Dollars are bad"
"Some criminals use planes, planes should be banned"

I'm not sure how this is relevant to anything I said. I'm not saying ban them. The majority of ICOs are get rich quick scams, regardless of the small percentage of them that are for something actually useful or genuine. Most cash isn't used for crime either.

Truth - Had you invested 1000 USD in Ethereum on ICO you would be a millionaire now.

Truth - 99% of ICOs won't make you a millionaire. Again, one 'good' ICO out of 100 of them falls in line with 99% of them being rubbish or scams.

[baghdatis1990]

         A simulator should also be created on facebook to identify false accounts so that those who participate in the social media bounty campaign can only participate with friends with real accounts on facebook. Just how to identify the fake accounts on twitter, identify those on facebook.