September/October signature campaign season?

[FinneysTrueVision]

I've only just this week joined my first signature campaign. I would've joined one much sooner but there was hardly any opportunities for Member level accounts to join anything. I see this as an overall positive because now I don't have to look for scammy shitcoin bounties and it might encourage bounty hunters to level up since the requirements to reach Member are not that difficult and the incentives are better.

[1714717099]

1714717099

[1714717099]

1714717099

[1714717099]

1714717099

[1714717099]

1714717099

[1714717099]

1714717099

[Lucius]

I was just about to write the similar thing, as I noticed lately people that are probably not good enough for altcoin campaigns are easily getting into BTC campaigns.

The criteria have dropped significantly whether some want to admit it or not, and a larger number of signature campaigns only means that the opportunity must be given to those who would not otherwise have a chance - because slots must be filled.

I keep hearing from veteran members that campaigns used to pay much more. What was the reason for that? Was it simply due different market situation, high demand for posters pushed the price or something else?

It’s true that campaigns used to pay much higher amounts a few years ago, and then those amounts got smaller and smaller - and as far as I can see the main role in that is played by campaign managers because they probably suggest to the advertiser what pay rates to set, and each advertiser will refer to those prices that have already been set, because why pay a Hero/Legendary member $100 per week, if all campaigns pay $40- $60 for the same thing. If a common position of all managers would be created that prices must go up, and that this must be accompanied by the quality of content, I believe that advertisers would agree to the new conditions.

Shitposters can not join any good campaigns today with one line posts. The ugly style is shitposters try to make their posts look informative by sketching it with non-sense vocabularies and grammar is broken. They don't know how to make succinct posts and don't want to try it.

What about those who post 2 lines, or those who write nonsense without reading anything but the OP and the title (like the example I posted)? Not only these have become acceptable, but they get bonuses for their posts...

[gentlemand]

I keep hearing from veteran members that campaigns used to pay much more. What was the reason for that? Was it simply due different market situation, high demand for posters pushed the price or something else?

I think nostalgia is getting the better of people.

In fiat terms Chipmixer is vastly more than any other I can remember. I was in the bitmixer campaign, which paid out in BTC and never changed the amount too, and that was $10-15 a week for a long time.

Another one was Coinsbank which was effectively unlimited in how much you could post and my best haul was about $50 in a week.

There've been a handful of fiat denominated campaigns that paid over $100 a week to heavyweights but they were few in number.

[jademaxsuy]

Yes, I saw many slots open for the moment and this is the  best time for other users to join signature bounty that pays btc.

Surely this will not happen everyday and for those who were not able to notice this then this will be the very good chance and opportunity to earn. It may not be that enough but at least an this is consider as an easy job that could earn and at the same time to learn projects related to cryptocurrency.

[tomahawk9]

There've been a handful of fiat denominated campaigns that paid over $100 a week to heavyweights but they were few in number.

off topic: i wonder why there are so many sig campaigns with fixed payments in fiat rather than btc. Back in the day (1 or 2 years ago?) seeing pay rates in fiat was considered a novelty on the forum, not it's the norm

[Lucius]

I was in the bitmixer campaign, which paid out in BTC and never changed the amount too, and that was $10-15 a week for a long time.

I was also a member of the Bitmixer signature campaign, but only when Lauda took it over from the bot (yes the campaign was without a manager), and pay rate was 0.0007 BTC per post (max. 0.035BTC/week), and since time line is end of October 2016 price of BTC was around $700. So the maximum you could get was about $25 a week, but when we look at the payout in BTC it's almost identical to what CM pays today, with the difference that CM has kept its pay rate in BTC until today, while no one else is even close to following it - but because of that they do not achieve good results. No campaign that lasts 2-4 weeks, which pays very poorly, can not expect a good promotion, that is a fact.

[gentlemand]

off topic: i wonder why there are so many sig campaigns with fixed payments in fiat rather than btc. Back in the day (1 or 2 years ago?) seeing pay rates in fiat was considered a novelty on the forum, not it's the norm

Volatility? I remember watching a few campaigns that kept chopping and changing the BTC pay rate as the price rose and everyone whining like mad about it. Sometimes it followed it closely, other times it was an excuse to pay much less.

I'd do the same thing most likely. Starting off with a fiat equivalent saves a lot of ball ache and moaning. Maybe the majority have learnt their lesson.

[NeuroticFish]

Any thoughts to why this time of the year is when services decide to launch signature campaigns?

I think that it may be related to the rise of Bitcoin price in the last months and the expectations for even higher prices.
High / rising price for Bitcoin means that Bitcoiners' "wealth" worth more in fiat and they may spend more. Also means that more trader wannabes are coming into the ecosystem.
This means that it's a good time to make the service more visible, hence more signature campaigns.

And on volatility and USD payments... obviously they try to get maximum exposure with minimum effort (money). And since Bitcoin is on the rise, fixed prices in USD can easily save some bucks.

but when we look at the payout in BTC it's almost identical to what CM pays today, with the difference that CM has kept its pay rate in BTC until today, while no one else is even close to following it - but because of that they do not achieve good results

Chipmixer is an exception. A great one. It's not only the better pay with rates kept from the beginning (in Bitcoin), it also has no minimum post count. It's also something from the past and I don't think that there's another campaign "alive" with no minimum.

[Rikafip]

It’s true that campaigns used to pay much higher amounts a few years ago, and then those amounts got smaller and smaller - and as far as I can see the main role in that is played by campaign managers because they probably suggest to the advertiser what pay rates to set, and each advertiser will refer to those prices that have already been set, because why pay a Hero/Legendary member $100 per week, if all campaigns pay $40- $60 for the same thing.

I don't know exactly how campaign managers work, but I think setting up pay rates is combination of their recommendation and the client budget. It makes sense that if you plan to have signature campaign for a longer period of time to pay more than average in order to attract more quality members that will make signature campaign more successful and I hope that managers are suggesting exactly that.

When I look at those long term campaigns (CM, Yolo, Bustadice, Sportsbet,Crypto.Games etc) that are going on for years, all of them (well with the exception of Bitvest and 777Coin) pay more than average so hopefully others that plan long term will choose that approach too. As a matter of fact, the one I'm currently part of, BestChange, did exactly that. They cut down number of participants significantly and increased pay rates, in order to attract/keep better posters.

If a common position of all managers would be created that prices must go up, and that this must be accompanied by the quality of content, I believe that advertisers would agree to the new conditions.

Regarding quality of content, what I would like to see is managers doing those "cleanups" more often, and removing not only those that don't meet post quota, but also those that don't meet the certain standards. People tend to get a bit lazy if they see that they are safe as long as they meet the weekly quota so maybe even unconsciously they lower post quality.

I think nostalgia is getting the better of people.

Yeah I know that people tend to look at past through rose tinted glasses, that's why I was curious about that. It makes sense though that campaigns from 3-4 years ago were great in the amount of BTC payed out, since BTC was much lower back then, so maybe that makes people think of that, they remember all those big BTC payouts week after week.

[Findingnemo]

off topic: i wonder why there are so many sig campaigns with fixed payments in fiat rather than btc. Back in the day (1 or 2 years ago?) seeing pay rates in fiat was considered a novelty on the forum, not it's the norm

Volatility? I remember watching a few campaigns that kept chopping and changing the BTC pay rate as the price rose and everyone whining like mad about it. Sometimes it followed it closely, other times it was an excuse to pay much less.

I'd do the same thing most likely. Starting off with a fiat equivalent saves a lot of ball ache and moaning. Maybe the majority have learnt their lesson.

Immediately changing ( decreasing) the pay rate when they see constant increase in the bitcoin price is just normal practice of signature campaigns in the past few years, only few campaigns managed to pay what they are paying in their beginning whether it is fixed in BTC or fiat. Normally people don't care if the pay rate gets decreased but its not really looks like a fair practice by the management.

[iamsheikhadil]

I guess it is just a coincidience that we are seeing much more campaigns in these months rather than a defined pattern lol. The market is rising, people are in homes and are bored so this is also a great opportunity for new casinos to come online and make money and hence we are seeing an uproar of them and they need ads so the uprising in signature campaigns as well. This is a good time as well for everyone to earn some money by participating in them.

[YOSHIE]

Any thoughts to why this time of the year is when services decide to launch signature campaigns?

My mind is quite simple this year has been flooded with signature campaigns compared to the years that have passed, the reason is only one "Covid-19 pandemic" this is the main factor.

With limited human activity, the best option that people around the world can make is to play games, so that entrepreneurs / companies and the public can make money through gambling or gaming.

For that an alternative that can be done on the internet is to promote certain site game service ads on this forum, through a signature campaign.
So it happens like now 90% of signature campaigns advertise gambling sites.