Marketing Proposal

The number of daily active users of Crypto Unicorns has not significantly increased since the game launched last year, and the team has spent very little of the treasury on marketing. I propose we use $80,000 USDC from the EFund fund for me to hire and manage a marketing team to market Crypto Unicorns on social media.

To significantly increase the number of daily active users
To significantly increase the price of RBW

The marketing team will consist of myself and 7 full time marketers. We will market Crypto Unicorns on Twitter, Reddit and /biz/ - Business & Finance - 4chan. Our marketing campaign will begin immediately and last for 6 months

Milestones that we wish to achieve in the next 6 months

Month 1 - increased RBW demand, 1,500 DAU
Month 2 - increased RBW demand, 1,750 DAU
Month 3 - increased RBW demand, 2,000 DAU
Month 4 - increased RBW demand, 2,500 DAU
Month 5 - increased RBW demand, 3,000 DAU
Month 6 - increased RBW demand, 4,000 DAU

How the budget will be disbursed

$30,000 USDT will be disbursed on the first month
$10,000 USDT will be disbursed on the second month
$10,000 USDT will be disbursed on the third month
$10,000 USDT will be disbursed on the fourth month
$10,000 USDT will be disbursed on the fith month
$10,000 USDT will be disbursed on the sixth month

Crypto Unicorns is the best play to earn game, we just need to market it to the right people


cuppy to the rescue!

1 Like

Against this strongly until further detail on USDT spending and marketing plan is provided. This is far to vague, but love the initiative!


voting for.
I think the payout structure should be incentive based , disburse when DAU milestones are hit. Perhaps 50% on monthly schedule other 50% is at DAU milestones.
if you don’t hit 1750 DAU in month 2 you get 5k, but if you hit both 1750 and 2000 DAU in month 3 you get 5k + 5k for 1750 + 5k for 2000 DAU.

Other than that yeah I am all for it, I trust cuppy more than I trust anyone else to do this … 1) I have known him for a very long time and he is trustworthy and has honor so he will do the right thing no matter what 2) he has the largest vested interest in making the game successful of anyone outside the team as the largest RBW and asset holder by far. 3) he has the connections to hire the right people.


I think the payout structure should be incentive based , disburse when DAU milestones are hit.

This is really the way it’ll be disbursed, failing to hit the previous month’s target means that nothing gets disbursed for the following month.


I support this proposal, looks like marketing is what needed… marketing, marketing, marketing… about time!!!

1 Like

This sounds great! finally we get some more marketing done!

Since CU is still doing their own marketing while this is on going, how do we measure that work given on this are those going to be separated or combined with CU marketing efforts?

What does “increased RBW demand” means?
DAU 1,500 is great. this means daily active users in all platforms. what is the scope of the considered “DAU”? if say on that 1500 if someone leaves because of any reason are they still be considered as DAU?

Does this mean 1,500 DAU for month 1 and another 1750 DAU for month 2? or total DAU based on the data warehouse? or Total DAU added for the whole month duration?

i’m curious to how this will work. but its a great start that we can finally have this proposal on the table.


1 Like

This was a change we requested from our end. Initially, cuppy wrote price targets for RBW. However, price is not a reasonable measurement of onboarding into the game so it just translated to a demand for RBW.

DAU is measured as an average over the period of coverage for the grant.

My understanding is month 1 average is expected to be 1500 additional DAU from what we have at the time the proposal is approved.

1 Like

Thanks for the proposal Cuppy!

With Mitch and CU finally getting more marketing focused, the impact might be harder to measure. But the more marketing reach, the better.

Agree, however, with the thoughts on incentive based for targets met Re: payout schedule.

I’d suggest updating the payout schedule (based on targets met) in the proposal to reflect the payout structure so it’s clear. Whether Cuppy goes with Von’s payout idea or with what Ignanessa mentioned.

1 Like

I am generally in favor of this proposal.

I want to encourage more people to come forward and seek funding from the ecosystem fund when they feel they have ideas to drive awareness and growth.

As others have mentioned I think these proposed KPIs will be hard to directly attribute to these efforts vs other ongoing initiatives. My advice is to simply present the “monthly” results to the community (ie. list of posts, impressions driven, etc). This will be far easier to quantify vs trying to attribute RBW demand or DAW growth which will likely be attributed to a number of factors.

As an example:

  1. List of Posts: Share all the content created and posted on our social media platforms during each month.
  2. Impressions Driven: Report on the number of times our content was displayed to users on social media platforms.
  3. Engagement Metrics: Provide data on the number of likes, shares, comments, and retweets each post received.
  4. Website Traffic: If applicable, share the number of new visitors directed to our website through the social media posts.

I think with the information above it will be easy to see if this strategy is driving results. From there it will be clear around whether or not further milestone tranches are justified.

As with everything we do this is an experiment. I encourage the community to take the small initial risk here to see if Cuppy can really deliver on what they claim.


I’m in favour of launching a marketing initiative for CU.

However, I find the proposal vague on detail and would like to see some more explanation provided to make a more informed decision. Specifically:

  1. We all know cuppy as our beloved whale, but what are your credentials for running a marketing campaign? Why would you be the right person to handle this?
  2. Same for the team of “7 marketers”: who will these people be? What are their qualifications, why should we trust this team to deliver?
  3. It would be great if you could provide a high-level action plan of what exactly it is that you will be doing on the sites listed. I assume there are several approaches to see which one sticks? What are those?

Regarding the measurement of success - I agree with Aron that it would be better to define clearly attributable KPIs as opposed to RBW demand or price, as this could change due to many factors not related to the marketing initiative.

1 Like

$60,000 will be used to pay the salaries of 7 full time marketers for 6 months. $10,000 will be used to acquire twitter accounts, etc. $10,000 is my fee.

1 Like

I used to market low market cap projects that were under the radar on social media for several years, and I was always satisfied with the results

Links to all our content will be posted in a public discord group I create for our marketing campaign

If the DAO is not 100% satisfied with results, the marketing campaign can be terminated at any time

I am intrigued by the proposal, supportive of it, but fear it may be too vague for the playerbase to vote for at the moment. Trying to avoid questions and observations that have already been raised:

  1. $60,000 for 7 full time marketers allows each marketer a wage of $1,400 per month - is this a realistic amount to sustain someone on a full time basis? and given that CU is a global product what definition of full time are we using?
  2. What is the anticipated output per marketer - is this a numbers game of post on as many forums as possible? is it design of marketing materials? what channels of communication will be undertaken - short form video ala tik-tok, twitter posts, blog articles?
  3. what additional support from the CU team is required to drive success of this initiative (if any)? art assets, road map details, etc.
  4. I am making the assumption the $30,000 dollars in the first month include the marketer salary for the month of $10,000, the $10,000 start up costs and the fee of $10,000 to Cuppy. I am not against the principle of payment for work, but I do question the optics of the most visible whale in the community requiring payment up front and would be concerned that this might hurt getting broader player support behind the proposal.
    4b. I think a large portion of the community would not be able to equate $10,000 value to the action of “acquire twitter accounts etc”, some sense of scale of effort involved may assist (are we talking hundreds of accounts flooding channels, or a small number of targetted ones) as well as any other costs that make up this figure - software licences or whatever.
  5. providing commercial sensitivities allow, is it possible to point to any the previous low market cap projects that have had satisfactory results, to assist the CU player base in making this decision?

I’m glad to see more activity around marketing lately, I’m sure all this efforts will pay of.
Cuppy initiative is very good, but I would expect more details in terms of spendings. As cuppy remind us every day in serious about team expenses and extending runway, it seems only fair that this proposal has more depth regarding spendings.
Proposal also must have relevant indicators to link the objective (increase DAU) with the results.
As we have efforts to increase DAU in many fronts, we have to be able to track if this campaign specifically delivers on targets.


Hello, IslandGurl! This was announced before but I’d like to share it here as it seems relevant.
One of the roles of the Governance Facilitator is to check if agreed upon milestones are up to specs in behalf of the DAO and to initiate the grant distribution when targets are met. We had a case before where we did not issue any reward for Carson (Dune) because their output wasn’t satisfactory so the section of not being disbursed the reward is always built in within any proposal! Rest assured that even without edits, this goes into effect regardless!

1 Like

2 changes need to be made to this proposal:

1. Proposal needs to state who owns the accounts.

If the service is terminated or ends - who do the accounts go to?

CU should own the accounts as we are funding their acquisition. Either way, the outcome needs to be stated in the proposal.

2. The $10,000 service fee Cuppy has asked for should be pro-rata’d and paid out each month.

Cuppy has mentioned in a comment in the draft proposal ‘If the DAO is not 100% satisfied with results, the marketing campaign can be terminated at any time’ . Since he would need to refund CU for the months of service that were not fulfilled, it will be much easier if we paid him each month (10,000/6).

what type of users would you guess you would bring in? 1499 DAU who are all scholars may not be the best measurement. Can we see some examples of previous campaigns you have run? bots can easily inflate numbers and it sounds like the marketing that was previously done was heavily automated to bring impressions in. If you could provide more detail on the types of campaigns/resources/methods for implementation that may ease the minds of some who are hesitant. Also if some of those methods are directly what our own Marketing team is doing, wouldn’t it it be better to not double dip. Also, how do we make sure that all the content being marketed is on brand, thinking about if this goes south, we’ve got 6 months of potentially conflicting info/off brand impressions out there.

Playing devils advocate here, but my intentions are more to make sure that if this goes through, it is done in an “ethical/clear/way that CU wants” and bring clarity to the proposal.