Is there any minimum amount of budget which should be paid in btc campaigns ?

[FIFA worldcup]

Don't know if it been discussed before or not but are there any limits that if anyone wants to publish any bitcoin signature campaign or social media campaign, then you need to pay minimum amount of money to the participants.
For example, if anyone start a bitcoin campaign by offering only $10 or $ 5 per week or even less, is it allowed ?

If there is no minimum budget, the campaigns can offer very little incentive in bitcoin and publish their campaign in bitcoin services section to get more exposure.

[1715553107]

1715553107

[Little Mouse]

No minimum. If it’s your project, it’s your wish.
Low payment will attract spammer while good payrate will attract the quality poster and eventually effective marketing.

[jackg]

I think the general consensus is you get what you pay for.

Sure you can pay tiny but you have to compete with others. A campaign advertising an ico offering $1k to peoplewho posts about them can be a lot more selective than those who don't.

A 1k follower and following twitter account for example with artificial followers don't have to care about followers leaving so can post 20 $5 campaign posts. A person who does and has a large following might make one or two campaign posts and get paid a much higher rate.

On this forum, a lot of companies pay for representation and a strong positive sentiment in the forum. Sites like yobit have, in the past, been temporarily banned from advertising here due to not moderating their posters - I think they may pay the highest rate per post now though so...

[FIFA worldcup]

Sure you can pay tiny but you have to compete with others.

I know that if anyone pays less , they can't compete with the other bitcoin paying campaigns and quality posters will not join the campaign but one can capture the whole altcoin campaign market participants as there will still many people who will join the low paying bitcoin campaign , instead of joining the altcoin campaign where there is no assurance of tokens being listed on exchanges.

[Lucius]

Don't know if it been discussed before or not but are there any limits that if anyone wants to publish any bitcoin signature campaign or social media campaign, then you need to pay minimum amount of money to the participants.

The administration has never interfered when it comes to the amounts someone pays participants to sign campaigns, and I don’t think that would be right. Anyone who wants to promote something can thus decide to pay someone $5 a week or $500 a week, it is up to each member of the forum to accept it or not.

If there is no minimum budget, the campaigns can offer very little incentive in bitcoin and publish their campaign in bitcoin services section to get more exposure.

What I see is that most signature campaigns are fairly uniform in how much they pay (with exceptions of course), but that part of the responsibility lies with campaign managers who negotiate with service owners and compete to offer better terms (read lower price). There were a few threads like this, and I remember one campaign manager admitting that he thought prices were low, but that if he didn’t accept the job, someone else probably would.

In other words, if you can pay a max $50 to a Legendary/Hero member to write 25-30 posts a week, why would someone else pay $100 for the same service?

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Low payment will attract spammer while good payrate will attract the quality poster and eventually effective marketing.

What are typical campaigns paying nowadays?  It's been a long time since I've even looked in the Services section to see what's available and what they're paying.  I assume Chipmixer is still one of the highest-paying campaigns out there, but I could be wrong.  In any case, even if you offered a very low rate, you'd still get tons of applicants--and you might even get some decent posters, too.  But whether a campaign ends up with a bunch of shitposters depends a lot on who's managing that campaign.  Some managers are way better than others (or at least that's how it used to be; I'm not sure how many campaign managers there are right now).

I think I have seen some campaigns try to pay a ridiculously low rate to its participants, and IIRC they didn't get that many applicants.  And I'd imagine that even if such a campaign got started, its participants would likely be applying for higher-paying ones simultaneously.  Who's going to be loyal to a campaign that pays less than other ones?

[NeuroticFish]

For example, if anyone start a bitcoin campaign by offering only $10 or $ 5 per week or even less, is it allowed ?

It is allowed, just be careful about the payments since if you pay bigger tx fees than the actual "wages", some may get angry  
Usually for low amount/pay, the altcoins are chosen because it's cheaper to send.
So my advice is to either pay altcoins, either pay less often. However, use escrow.

Of course, you'll have to not have too much expectations in quality, but still disallow spam, else you'll get in trouble.

[sujonali1819]

That means op you are talking about that if there any minimum budget for paying in bitcoin if you want to run the signature campaign in service section right? Otherwise this question could not come in mind where manager can run bounty campaign with token or stable coins in bounty section where there is no barrier that you have to must pay in bitcoin.

In this case I think 50% is the best ratio of paying bitcoin and project token. I saw few days ago a campaign in service section, which wanted to pay 20% payment in btc and others 80% in project token maybe. But later I saw the thread was removed to bounty section. Nor sure it was moved by the campaign manager or by the forum administrators.

[Imran232]

According to my experience i think there is no minimum budget for campaign. And if it is your project then choice is your how much budget you want to set for you campaign. But yeah it might have effect on a point which is marketer. If your budget will be low then you might get lowest or spammer type influencer to promote your project. Because higher budget can give you quality or premium type influencer. The reason is quality influencer spend their time on that platform where they get highest value from their time. So now its your choice.

[skarais]

I think I have seen some campaigns try to pay a ridiculously low rate to its participants, and IIRC they didn't get that many applicants.  And I'd imagine that even if such a campaign got started, its participants would likely be applying for higher-paying ones simultaneously.  Who's going to be loyal to a campaign that pays less than other ones?

Generally, there are no loyal participant in a campaign that payrate a small if one day a campaign like Chipmixer or BestChange open a slot. At least that's what we can always see. In my opinion, manager campaign and higher payrate can attract quality poster to send application, while those who find themselves and their post unqualified will ignore the opportunity simply because they don't want to be disappointed when they are rejected.

It is allowed, just be careful about the payments since if you pay bigger tx fees than the actual "wages", some may get angry 

I also think that a low payrate is still allowed and will not be a problem if the payment received by participant each period are still in accordance with the condition of transaction fee. It is certain that if the payment is only enough to pay the transaction fee, then the participant may be angry. 

[virasog]

Low payment will attract spammer while good payrate will attract the quality poster and eventually effective marketing.

What are typical campaigns paying nowadays?  It's been a long time since I've even looked in the Services section to see what's available and what they're paying.  I assume Chipmixer is still one of the highest-paying campaigns out there, but I could be wrong.  In any case, even if you offered a very low rate, you'd still get tons of applicants--and you might even get some decent posters, too.  But whether a campaign ends up with a bunch of shitposters depends a lot on who's managing that campaign.  Some managers are way better than others (or at least that's how it used to be; I'm not sure how many campaign managers there are right now).

It look like that you have been out of touch to the campaigns running at bitcointalk at present but believe me nothing much have changed except for the fact that most campaign now prefer to pay in dollars (converted in bitcoins) because of continuous rising prices of bitcoin. Due to this reason, the campaigns pay less as compare in the old days when they used to pay satoshi per posts.
Chipmixer is still the highest paying campaign and there are only few good campaign managers as before.

[qwertyup23]

Don't know if it been discussed before or not but are there any limits that if anyone wants to publish any bitcoin signature campaign or social media campaign, then you need to pay minimum amount of money to the participants.
For example, if anyone start a bitcoin campaign by offering only $10 or $ 5 per week or even less, is it allowed ?

If there is no minimum budget, the campaigns can offer very little incentive in bitcoin and publish their campaign in bitcoin services section to get more exposure.

It is allowed as it depends upon the person if they wish to join or not.

Currently, the competition for campaign signatures have been increasing due to a number of campaigns closing in less than 3-4 weeks, though it depends on the budget given to the campaign manager. I remember that there were campaigns who offered low weekly payments but lots of people applied since only a few campaigns were operating at that moment.

I also think that a low payrate is still allowed and will not be a problem if the payment received by participant each period are still in accordance with the condition of transaction fee. It is certain that if the payment is only enough to pay the transaction fee, then the participant may be angry. 

Imagine, earning 5-10$ per week but the transaction fees are higher than what you receive weekly. Well, that is to be expected given the current value of bitcoin in the market.

[Upgrade00]

but still disallow spam, else you'll get in trouble.

This is usually not the case, except in extreme cases such as Yobit campaign, in other cases, managers would get off without paying more attention to the quality of posts their participants make and also in what thread.
Managers and companies have the freedom to set their rules and guidelines, with some forum guides; dictating what thread fits where etc.

[Welsh]

If there is no minimum budget, the campaigns can offer very little incentive in bitcoin and publish their campaign in bitcoin services section to get more exposure.

Which personally I'm quite surprised by the fact that campaigns don't do this. I'd like the think that the Bitcoin sections, are better for advertisers since its less saturated. Over in the Altcoin section, almost everyone there posting, from all kinds of different users that its very saturated, and you tend to ignore anyones signature over in that section.

You'd think that bounty owners, and campaigns owners would prefer paying in Bitcoin to try, and get into a new market. It rarely happens though.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

Imagine, earning 5-10$ per week but the transaction fees are higher than what you receive weekly. Well, that is to be expected given the current value of bitcoin in the market.

I am yet to see such campaigns LOL
But honestly speaking if you come up with this type of low payment then you will be basically hiring low value spammers in the service board. In the altcoin bounty board it's possible even paying $0. Most of those altcoin do not worth a penny but still you will see bounty hunters and signature spammers are promoting those ICO, Defi and recently IDO.

If there is no minimum budget, the campaigns can offer very little incentive in bitcoin and publish their campaign in bitcoin services section to get more exposure.

Why would be there any minimum at all. If anyone is willing to wear a signature for zero payment then they still can.

[OgNasty]

Imagine, earning 5-10$ per week but the transaction fees are higher than what you receive weekly. Well, that is to be expected given the current value of bitcoin in the market.

This. Bitcoin is basically unusable for small value transactions during times like now. It’s sad, but this is where our leaders have led us. You can use the Lightning network *if you can find someone else who uses it, but perhaps a better idea would be to pay the BTC out on your own platform so it can be converted and withdrawn using an altcoin that is still functional as a p2p currency (if your platform can offer that). That’s the only way to get around the BTC only payment rules on this forum while not completely destroying any incentive for participants.

*A big fucking IF.

[yahoo62278]

Not all companies have a large budget. Unestablished gambling sites, new token projects, and other sites just starting out have to use the little bit of start up money they might have wisely.

As a manager I show potential clients many different examples of different campaigns and rates. They decide the budget upon seeing what others are paying. Offering high rates does not guarantee a campaign is a success either.

Basically the company has the final say on what money is offered, if you don't like it, don't join.

[logfiles]

It's a free market out here. It's up to the owners of the campaign to decide on what they can afford and also up to the advertisers to decide if they can join the signature campaign for a certain pay or not.

The forum is not some sort of Government or organization where the "employees" minimum wage has to be set 

[NeuroticFish]

but still disallow spam, else you'll get in trouble.

This is usually not the case, except in extreme cases such as Yobit campaign, in other cases, managers would get off without paying more attention to the quality of posts their participants make and also in what thread.
Managers and companies have the freedom to set their rules and guidelines, with some forum guides; dictating what thread fits where etc.

That's correct, it's usually not the case. But with low pay the campaign may not attract quality posters and since the expectations will be kinda low, this can happen. So a warning on the matter won't hurt, especially if the campaign manager would be somebody (inexperienced) from within the team, to save more money.

[UserU]

What are typical campaigns paying nowadays?  It's been a long time since I've even looked in the Services section to see what's available and what they're paying.  I assume Chipmixer is still one of the highest-paying campaigns out there, but I could be wrong.  In any case, even if you offered a very low rate, you'd still get tons of applicants--and you might even get some decent posters, too.  But whether a campaign ends up with a bunch of shitposters depends a lot on who's managing that campaign.  Some managers are way better than others (or at least that's how it used to be; I'm not sure how many campaign managers there are right now).

I think I have seen some campaigns try to pay a ridiculously low rate to its participants, and IIRC they didn't get that many applicants.  And I'd imagine that even if such a campaign got started, its participants would likely be applying for higher-paying ones simultaneously.  Who's going to be loyal to a campaign that pays less than other ones?

Standard rates are starting from $20 for Members all the way to $65 onwards for Legendary members. Below is a great way to track the rates across all signature campaigns:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=615953.new#new

Too low and it would be hard to find reputable campaign managers that are willing to take on more work + lower commissions.