The problem with 'Social that pays' is that Hive fails to deliver on that promise. It sets expectations that they will make money here, and they are disappointed when they don't. We compound that disappointment by only giving half the advertised post reward to the author, and then locking half of that up in Hive Power (whatever that is).
Droves of people have come in on that promise and left bitter and disappointed.
The truth is, Hive pays some content creators, it pays investors and developers (sometimes). It doesn't pay ordinary users who are not "content creators" aka longform original content bloggers.
Thanks for taking the time to comment. And I appreciate your perspective here.
And I agree with you, that is what happens.
But if you tally up the numbers, that past bold value proposition is the reason Steem/Hive has 200,000+ active users. And the only people Hive loses for "failing to deliver on the promise" (<-- not true, Hive doesn't promise 'easy money' in my pitch) are tirekickers & abusers looking for a quick buck.
It works like this:
Exact same thing happened with Uber.
Want Uber-level growth? Do this.
Want to stay small while you fear a few disgruntled tirekickers? That's fine too.
Whatever Hive wants is fine with me.
Wishing you a great day. 🙏
As someone who's been here for 5 years and seen the user waves, that's false. We lose the ordinary users, every time. I have known dozens/hundreds of people in Steem/Hive personally who were not "tirekickers & abusers". Content creators do usually give it a longer go, but the reality is that normal people can't just use Steem/Hive as a social network and get financial value from it. As a consequence, they go where they get more of the value that they can get, be that interacting with their actual friends and family, or the best stream of cat videos and random interesting stuff that come up on their feed.
This is correct ⬆️. I have witnessed same thing
I've addressed this in other comments, but thank you for sharing! :) 🙏
You are reading comments left b4 we talked. You explained it well to me. These are from b4
Yes, it's my bad, I apologize, I'm dealing with a lot of comments and writing thousands of words to different people... it's a bit tricky to sort it out. Thank you for clarifying, I appreciate you. 🙏
Sounds good, then Hive can ignore all the advice I've offered here :)
I'm not saying that your point is wrong. It is the most compelling marketing we have. What we need to work on in my view is actually delivering on "social that pays". What we deliver on is more like "blogging site that pays if you adhere to our concept of quality content".
All good. Like I said, I'm here to offer wisdom and insight. People are free to take it, apply it, and win with it, or disagree with it and go a different direction.
From another comment I made:
But if these massively successful examples don't resonate with you or others on Hive, and people aren't comfortable marketing with the brand messaging I've suggested here, I fully encourage whoever is spearheading Hive's marketing (or the community at large) to go in whatever direction resonates most with them. 🙏
There is a difference between using stake holder votes and community funds to reward ppls content (which has been tried for the last 5 years And is not economically sustainable without huge jumps in user numbers and a lot more wide spread curation / reward mechanisms) and using a sustainable external money source which pays for a service such as all of the above example you site. If hive used external funds to pay users for providing a service, it would be more like the examples u site above. Presently hive does the equivalent of uber paying its drivers in ever inflating / diluting Uber stock. Uber sustains and grows partly because it does not pay out its drivers in its own stock and partly because venture capitalists love govt backed tax payer seed funded companies that serve elites. Hive is not those things
👍😀🙏
I think you have it backwards on those other platforms. Most users don't go to Fiverr, Uber or Youtube to make money. They go to get jobs done, get a lift and to watch videos. I don't think I was even aware for years after starting to use Youtube that it shared ad revenue with larger channels.
In all cases there must be a circular economy. There has to be someone paying, not everyone can be paid.
In theory we can get users by having the best content on Hive, just as Youtube did and all the other successful social platforms. In reality we are terrible at that, although we have improved in recent months/years compared to Steemit past and present.
The main point I want to make has not been that the money for posting is poor marketing, I absolutely think it's the best we have. The point I'm trying to make is that our problem is much more fundamental than marketing - it doesn't matter how well you market a product that fails to deliver. We have to make our product actually deliver value to the masses.
You're correct, but left out one important thing. They all figured out it was important to incentivize and monetize the desired behavior. And once they did monetize it, they used it as a selling point for mass adoption.
Hive already has people coming here to 'get jobs done' Such as a) create content and b) to get their feed of content. This is the job all social platforms serve.
Hive is the only / biggest platform I know that incentivizes and monetizes this 'job getting done.' Neglecting to leverage that is a tragedy that limits Hive's growth, period, in my opinion.
Correct. And part of that circular economy is a healthy balance of consumers. Hive's economy is out of balance, and desperately needs consumers. Most creators here get 2-3 comments per post. Minimal shares. Because the type of human being who comments, shares, engages, upvotes aren't creators & devs, they're consumers.
My approach here is aimed at solving this pivotal issue in Hive's growth and human economy.
I agree totally. But Hive(.Blog) does deliver. In fact, it practically has a monopoly as the only social platform that rewards consumer behavior in crypto, financially rewarding and valuing their vital consumer-behavior, where FB, IG, YT, Twitter simply steals their data and rewards them not at all for their consumption. Hive literally has no competition here. It's a dream come true for consumers.
"You mean I can 'like' and actually earn a little something for it? Sign me up!"
Anyway, I don't imagine we'll see eye to eye on this anytime soon, and I can only explain my perspective to a certain level of detail due to time-constraints, so I'm happy to agree to disagree, thank you again for your input, and wish you a great day! 🙏
That's right.
Even if a couple of dozen people are successful on hive, it will attract more and more people. And keep the current ones working harder/smarter to achieve more success, to reach to the top!👌
Well said! 👌🙏
Not all. Just/only advertising the platform with the money earning opportunity. That will mostly attract selfish and greedy people. A perfect example for this is Steemit. They made that mistake. Hive should not.
I've addressed this in other comments, but thank you for sharing! 🙏
This marketing attracts mostly selfish and greedy people, who are not really content creators. Steemit made a mistake (advertised its platform with the money earning opportunity), and looks like the Hive blockchain is about to do the same mistake. Not good. Absolutely not good.
Thank you for your input @xplosive & @geneeverett .
To be clear, this marketing attracts everyone who is being turned into a product by Facebook and Instagram as they swipe, by showing them they can be valued and rewarded for their activities.
Everyone wants money, not only selfish and greedy people.
From my other comment:
I hope this clarifies things, wishing you a great day. 🙏
That is mostly true.
But will they get anything? There is no guarantee.
There are already a lot of people, who do not earn anything with their posts, simply because their posts are being ignored or overlooked so much that the pending payout does not reach the payout threshold ($.0.02) on their posts.
My earnings are also low, and I am here for more than 4 years (since 2017.05.17).
This marketing is almost a lie.
If so, all 3 of those companies are lying and everyone should hate them. But guess what? They all do quite well, and only a few tire-kickers who joined them think they're liars.
Because real people, decent people, know that no company can 'guarantee easy money'.
These huge brands know that it's fine to market themselves as a money-making OPPORTUNITY, because that is 100% truly what they are. Money-making opportunities. And they know only tire-kickers will get upset and leave, and that real users who stick around are the ones they want.
The exact same thing applies to Hive. This isn't rocket science it's been done by many brands to achieve rapid growth and mass adoption.
What I've explained here is like a simple recipe for making grilled cheese, use it and get a sandwich, or don't, I don't really mind. :) 🙏
I understand your point on here. Though one thing to understand is content creators benefit more from developing followers and building a brand on main social networks than spending time here on HIVE. HIVE fails to deliver followers to content creators and paying content creators, it's the nightmare of every social network that is trying to reach the mainstream.
If other social have reached mainstream, like TikTok, snapchat... It is because they deliver some type of experience on the web different from the other socials.
The main argument we have is that what you post is going to a blockchain to be there forever. And access it from whatever web you want that integrates with HIVE.
What hive really needs is a developer friendly environment, so that some developer gets that different social network that delivers a new level of experience on the web. That will mostly go with video, as is the general trend, that's why the speak network is one of the things more important here.
Hope that clarifies the direction we are going.
The rewards are just a thing to keep some users here, to not lose relevance while we continue to build.
The end goal is not to deliver a social that pays, that already exists with Instagram, youtube, etc. If you don't earn, well, you need to work harder my friend.
The end goal is to deliver a social network where content creators and general people can be confident to put their content or opinion as it won't be removed and will be accessed from multiple sites. Also if you don't like that an A.I. chooses the content (the current way mainstream social networks work), or for privacy concerns, you can go to another web that does it different but still access the same content.
Now i ask you, how we get there? Do you have ideas for a good, new experience of social? Because that is what we really need.
My suggested campaign is 100% focused on getting consumers ('followers') on to Hive. This is literally the nightmare my campaign would be solving. I've written thousands of words here, focusing over and over on the power of bringing consumers to this platform, the same way Uber attracted drivers and YouTube attracted directors/editors. Incentivized behavior. Just apply it to consumers, and voila, Hive gets more 'followers' on their platform.
There are millions of consumers/followers on the planet who are happy to 'swipe all day for free'... not one of them gives a f**k about how long content lives. This is not appealing to them, and that is why I am not focused on Hive's blockchain longevity, to do so, would be terrible marketing for consumers/followers.
I've been far clearer than literally anyone who's replied, lol. Clarity and understanding are my obsession. :)
That's fine, if you don't want to use the rewards to attract consumers, then don't. My post is simply a guide, ideas, brainstorms and a call towards superior marketing.
What? I've earned more in 2 months here, starting with 0 followers than anybody else... what are you referring to?
I have thousands of ideas, you're the first one who's asked for them. :)
Thanks for your comment, and wishing you a great day! 🙏
Well, then you maybe need to revisit social psychology. Because before the internet people built 'books' of photos to share and to keep for longevity, or diaries, or blogs we call today. That still applies today.
Maybe not consumers, but content creators they do care. And they do care to show what they've been producing to their followers. There are a lot of angry youtubers with the 'algorithm' for example.
Content creators do care of what they write/produce/whatever you do. It's who they are, they are artists.
People do give a f**k about what is from them, maybe not so much from others(family and friends yes, that's why people follow other people in the first place :) on social) but from them yes, when we get older we like to see what we've done with our lives and to remember memories or compare how much we've grown and changed. It is a basic human need and a wonderful experience.
The marketing we need to do needs to appeal to this. As you may know the best marketing is the one that appeals to emotions.
Not to say that FREE-SPEECH is the other point on here. Society is becoming everyday more censored, and less things can't be said, we are turning into very sensible creatures, and that shows on the policy on twitter for example.
Joe Rogan is another example.
I recommend you do more research on this topic, you'll be surprised of the amount of things you don't know.
Rule for life: "Accept that with who you talk knows something that you don't."
Have a great day. You are rocking on hive nonetheless.😉
I addressed the free speech issue elsewhere in the comments, @meesterboom & @oblivioncubed seemed to understand my take on it, but I respect that you feel it's worth marketing.
I wrote 15,000 words on free speech here: https://peakd.com/hive-161155/@ryzeonline/freedom-censorship-and-you-the-ultimate-guide-emmas-dilemma-pt-1 -- can you guess how much research it took? Who has done more research on free speech and censorship, you, or me? Food for thought. :)
Follow your own rule ;)
Wishing you a great day too! We're both rocking nonetheless! :) 🙏
If anyone else on this post mentions 'content-creators' to me again, I honestly am not sure what I'll do, lol.
My post mentions consumers 13 times.
My post mentions creators 1 time.
This was a subheading from my post:
Guess which one my entire post is all about? Guess which one this particular suggested marketing is targeted at?
I am extremely wise, smart, and talented. I have decades of experience building businesses, brands. I clearly understand the difference between the two, and how to secure growth in either demographic. I'm fully capable of marketing to creators, as you seem so enthusiastic about, but Hive's entire population is predominantly creators. They are not needed right now. The creators who are here, need followers, commenters, upvoters. Hive needs consumers. So, that is who I chose to target with my example marketing campaign.
I've written and explained this 1000s of times now, so hopefully it's clear enough, but if not, I'm happy to just agree to disagree. Either way, I thank you for your input and sharing here, and wish you a wonderful day. 🙏
Ok so I disagree, consumers follow good content and good experiences, that's as easy as that. Which means hive doesn't have good content and it's a bad experience overall.
Earning free money just to upvote can't work, unless you power up a good amount of money.
So we need to re-think all this. We need "people" to incentivize it's followers, if you want consumers to earn to consume, which brings us to the start---> good "people" that knows how to engage.
You seem to get what means to engage, since you already have 300 comments 😉 on just this post. See it's not about the consumers, the "people" that makes posts is about, on hive they are greedy mostly, looking to make a few bucks fast and free, without engaging.
If you want more consumers, first you have to reshape the other part of the social😉.
As long as im breathing and have a say, that will not happen.
I have to agree 100%
"Social that pays", while certainly not true for everyone, is our USP and ace that sets us apart from other, possibly bigger, web3 blockchains. Not using our USP in a marketing campaign would be a big mistake in my opinion.
I agree. My point is not that it's bad marketing, but that we need to start delivering.
People are pointing out charts of active users, but the times we were growing, we were also better delivering on the USP than we are now (particularly since we nerfed author rewards in favor of curation rewards).