Every company faces a different "cold start problem": how do you start from nothing? How to acquire customers? How do you create network effects—that is, when more people use your product or service, your product or service becomes more valuable to customers—incentivizing more users to come?
In short, how do you " go to market " and convince potential customers to spend their money, time and attention on your product or service?
Web2 is the Internet age defined by large centralized products/services, such as Amazon, eBay, Facebook, and Twitter, where the vast majority of value is generated by the platform itself rather than the user. The response of most Web2 organizations to the above questions is to invest heavily in sales and marketing teams as part of a traditional go-to-market ( GTM ) strategy that focuses on lead generation, acquisition and retention customer.
But in recent years, a whole new model of organizational building has emerged. This new model leverages decentralized technology to bring users into the role of owners through digital primitives called tokens , rather than being controlled by corporations—that is, centralized leadership formulating relevant All decisions about a product or service, even when using user data and free, user-generated content.
This new model, called Web3 , has revolutionized the GTM (go-to-market) philosophy of these new types of companies. While some traditional user acquisition frameworks are still relevant, the introduction of tokens and new organizational structures such as Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) require various GTM strategies. Since Web3 is still new to many people, but there is huge room for growth in this area, in this post, I will share some new frameworks for thinking about GTM in this context, and what is possible in this ecosystem Different types of organizations exist. I'll also provide tips and tactics to help builders who want to create their own Web3 GTM strategy as Web3 continues to evolve.
Catalyst for a new GTM strategy: Tokens
The concept of the user acquisition funnel is at the heart of GTM, and most businesses are very familiar with this concept: from Awareness & Lead Generation at the top of the funnel, to Conversion and Retention at the bottom of the funnel ,As shown below. Therefore, traditional Web2 GTM addresses cold-start problems through this very linear user acquisition perspective, including areas such as pricing, marketing, partners, sales channel mapping, and sales force optimization. Measures of success include website click-through rates, revenue per customer for the business, and more.
Web3 changes the entire approach to launching new networks, as tokens provide an alternative to the traditional way of solving the cold start problem. Instead of spending money on traditional marketing to attract and acquire potential users, the core development team can use the token to attract early users , who can be rewarded for their early contributions when the network effect is not yet evident or has yet to begin. These early adopters are not only evangelists who bring more people into the network (they also want to be rewarded for their contributions), but in essence this makes the early adopters in Web3 more efficient than traditional business development or in Web2 Salespeople bring greater impact .
For example, the lending protocol Compound (disclosed, a16z is an investor in this protocol and other organizations discussed in this article), which uses tokens to incentivize early lenders (lenders) and borrowers (borrowers), that is, in COMP tokens. The form provides additional rewards for users participating in its " liquidity mining " to "guide liquidity". Any user of the protocol, whether a lender or a borrower, will be rewarded with COMP tokens. After the liquidity mining program launched in 2020, the total value locked (TVL) in the Compound protocol jumped from $100 million to $600 million. It is worth noting that although token rewards can attract users, this method alone is not enough to make users "sticky", which will be discussed in detail later. While traditional companies do incentivize employees with equity, they rarely incentivize customers financially over the long term.
To summarize: In Web2, the main GTM (go-to-market) stakeholder is the customer, usually acquired through sales and marketing; while in Web3, an organization's GTM stakeholder includes not only their customers/users , as well as their developers, investors and partners. As a result, many Web3 companies find community more important than sales and marketing roles.
GTM matrix in Web3
For a Web3 organization, based on its organizational structure (centralized vs. decentralized) and economic incentives (no Token vs. using Token) , its GTM (go-to-market) strategy depends on the organization's position in the following matrix:
The GTM strategies adopted by the four types of Web3 organizations in the figure above are all different, ranging from traditional Web2-style GTM strategies to emerging and experimental GTM strategies. Here I will focus on the top right type of Web3 organization, i.e. decentralized teams that use tokens , and contrast it with the bottom left type of organizations (i.e. , centralized teams that don't use tokens ) to illustrate the Web3 vs Web2 GTM strategy difference between.
Token-based decentralization
First, let's take a look at the top right type of Web3 organization in the image above, including organizations with unique Web3 operating models (such as DAOs), networks (such as the Ethereum network), and protocols (such as DeFi protocols) that require novel GTM strategy .
Organizations of this type follow a decentralized model (though they usually start with a core development team or operations staff) and use token economics to attract new members, reward contributors, and adjust incentives among participants.
The fundamental difference between this type of Web3 organization and those using the more traditional GTM model involves a key question: What is the product? Web2 companies and those that fall into the bottom left category of the above diagram largely have to start with a product that appeals to the public ("come for tools, stay for the web"), whereas Web3 companies go through purpose (purpose) And the dual perspective of community (community) to enter the market.
Having a product and a solid technical foundation is still important, but it doesn't have to come first. What these Web3 organizations need is a clear purpose that defines their raison d'être: What is the only problem they want to solve? It also means raising funds not just based on a white paper and founding team, but also having a strong community — not just “community-led” or “community-first,” but community-owned — thus Blur the distinction between owners, shareholders and users . Long-term success in Web3 is defined by clear goals , an engaged and high-quality community , and matched with the right organizational governance . As shown below:
Now, let's take a deeper look at the two main types of Web3 organizations located at the top right in the matrix above: 1) Decentralized applications ; 2) L1 blockchains, L2 scaling solutions & other protocols .
GTM Strategy for Decentralized Applications
"Decentralized applications" cover use cases such as decentralized finance ( DeFi ), non-fungible tokens ( NFTs ), social networking , and gaming .
- DeFi DAOs
A major category of decentralized applications is DeFi applications, such as decentralized exchanges (like Uniswap or dYdX) or stablecoins (like MakerDAO’s DAI). While they may have similar GTM strategies to other standard, non-decentralized applications, the way value is generated is also different due to differences in organizational structure and token economics.
The path many DeFi projects follow is that the protocol is first developed by a centralized development team . After the protocol is released, teams often try to decentralize the protocol to increase its security and distribute its operational management to a decentralized group of token holders. This decentralization is usually achieved by simultaneously issuing governance tokens, launching a decentralized governance protocol (typically a decentralized autonomous organization, or DAO), and granting control of the protocol to the DAO organization.
This decentralization process may involve many different structures and physical forms. For example, many DAO organizations do not have any associated legal entities and simply operate in the digital world, while others use multi-signature (multisig) wallets, acting on the DAO's instructions. In some cases, non-profit foundations are established to oversee the future development of the protocol under the direction of the DAO. In almost all cases, the original development team continues to operate as one of the many contributors to the ecosystem created by the protocol and develop complementary or ancillary products and services.
Here are two well-known DeFi examples:
- MakerDAO started as a DAO in March 2015, established a foundation in June 2018, and disbanded in July 2021. MakerDAO has a stablecoin, DAI, whose purpose is to allow users to conduct fast, low-cost, borderless, and transparent transactions in stable units of value. The stablecoin can be used to purchase goods and services or participate in other DeFi applications. Additionally, MakerDAO has a governance token, MKR. This DAO organization approves various governance changes as well as certain parameters of the protocol's operation, including the staking rate that the protocol uses to mint DAI.
- The Uniswap protocol was initiated by a centralized company, but is now owned and managed by the Uniswap DAO, which is controlled by UNI token holders. Uniswap Labs, the protocol's creator, runs an interface to the Uniswap protocol, and is one of many developers contributing to the protocol's ecosystem.
So what does the GTM (go-to-market) strategy look like here? Take DAI as an example, the algorithmic stablecoin is issued and governed by MakerDAO. One goal of most algorithmic stablecoin issuers like MakerDAO is to get more usage of their stablecoins in the financial ecosystem. As such, its GTM (Go to Market) moves are: 1) listed on cryptocurrency exchanges for retail and institutional trading; 2) integrated into wallets and apps; 3) accepted for payment for goods or services. Today, there are over 400 DAI marketplaces (including exchanges, DeFi apps, etc.), integrated into hundreds of projects at the same time, and accepted as a form of payment through major commerce solutions like Coinbase Commerce.
How did they do that? MakerDAO did this initially through a more traditional business development team that drove many of the early collaborations and integrations. However, with the increase in decentralization, the MakerDAO community established the Growth Core Unit, dedicated to the continuous development of the DAI stablecoin and the Maker Protocol through strategic partnerships and business development, a sub-community of Maker token holders ( subDAO). Additionally, because MakerDAO is decentralized, its protocol operates trustless and permissionless, and anyone can use the protocol to generate or buy DAI.
DeFi DAO's GTM Strategy : With the advent of web3's new GTM (Go-to-Market) strategy, new ways to measure success have also emerged. A typical success metric for DeFi applications is the aforementioned Total Value Locked (TVL) . It represents all assets used for trading, staking or lending using a protocol or network.
However, TVL is not an ideal measure of long-term organizational health and success. Although new DeFi protocols can attract large capital inflows and TVL by copying the open source code of existing protocols and providing high yields, this does not necessarily have user stickiness - traders usually leave when the next project comes along .
Therefore, the more critical metrics to track are things like the number of unique token holders, community engagement frequency and sentiment, developer activity . Also, since protocols are composable - i.e. can be programmed to interact and build upon each other - another key metric is integrations , the number and type of integrations can be traced to the protocol in other applications such as wallets, exchanges and products How and where to use.
- Social, Cultural and Artistic DAO
For social, cultural, and artistic DAOs, entering the market means building a community with a purpose—sometimes even starting with text chats between friends—and growing it organically by finding others with the same purpose Community. But isn't this "just a group chat," or just like a traditional Kickstarter crowdfunding?
No, because while the organizers of traditional web2 crowdfunding projects may also have a clear goal, they must be more aware of the top-down approach to achieving that goal. Project sponsors often detail the purpose of raising funds, a clear product roadmap, and a comprehensive timeline. In the web3 model, the purpose is paramount, but the method is usually determined later - including how the funds will be spent, the product roadmap and the timeline.
For example, for ConstitutionDAO , its purpose is to buy a copy of the U.S. Constitution; for Krause House , its purpose is to buy an NBA team, pioneering fan management of a team; for LinksDAO , it is creating a community of golf enthusiasts A virtual country club; and for PleasrDAO , it is to collect, showcase and creatively add/share with the community NFTs that often represent culturally significant ideas and movements.
Take ConstitutionDAO, which raised $47 million from a community of strangers who all came together for this purpose. The entire process was completed within a few weeks, starting with a clear goal and raising funds only for that specific purpose. Other than that, ConstitutionDAO didn’t have much — no clear roadmap, execution plan, and even no token at the time (it was created after a failed auction). Those who donated were so aligned with that goal and so incentivized by the community that they just wanted to contribute and spread the word, and Twitter was at one point flooded with memes about it.
Friends with Benefits is a social DAO organization that can be joined by holding its Token, originally a token-gated Discord server for web3 creators. In addition to holding at least $FWB tokens (representing membership in the DAO), potential members must apply to the FWB through a written application. The community continued to grow, connecting through various Discord channels, and eventually realized that one of the products they could build was an event app that required a token to join. FWB gives creators a real stake in the community, and the DAO framework enables this decentralized social group to coordinate at scale, such as allocating budgets and completing projects from publishing content to producing events.
GTM Metrics for Social DAOs: One of the key metrics for measuring the health of a DAO is the quality of community engagement , which can be measured by the primary communication and governance platform it uses. For example, a DAO can track chat channel activity on Discord; member activation and retention, community conference call participation, participation in governance (who voted on what, and how often, and work actually done (number of paid contributors) .
Other metrics might be new relationships established in the network, or measuring the trust established between members of the DAO community. While some tools and frameworks do already exist, social DAO metrics are still an emerging field, so as the field grows, we will see more tools emerge and develop.
Game DAO
Today, most web3 games, whether it be Play -to-Earn, Play-to-Mint, Move-to-Earn, or any other type of game, Both are very similar to popular web2 games - with two key differences:
- Web3 games use in-game assets on an open global blockchain platform instead of the closed, controlled economies of traditional Pay-to-Own and Free-to-Play games body;
- Web3 gamers are able to become true stakeholders and have a say in the governance of the game itself.
In Web3 games, GTM (go-to-market) strategies are established through player referrals and cooperation with guilds . Guilds like Yield Guild Games (YGG) allow new players to start playing by renting game assets. Guilds choose which games to support based on 3 factors: the quality of the game, the strength of the community, and the robustness and fairness of the game economy. Game, community and economic health must be maintained at the same time.
While blockchain-based game developers may have lower ownership percentages and/or royalties, by incentivizing players to become owners, developers are helping everyone grow the overall game economy.
But unlike Web2, Web3 games are purpose and community driven. For example, Loot, a game that starts with content and then moves to gameplay, drives GTM based on purpose and community rather than product. Loot is a collection of NFTs, each called a Loot bag, which has a unique combination of adventure gear items (such as dragon leather belts, silk gloves, etc.). Loot essentially provides building block primitives upon which games, projects and other (virtual) worlds can be built. Inspired by the Loot bag, the Loot community has created games ranging from analytical tools to derivative art, music collectibles, quests, and more.
The key idea here is that Loot grows not because of existing products that users flock to, but because of the ideas and knowledge it represents: an open, composable network that welcomes creativity and incentivizes users through tokens. It's the community that makes the product, not the network making the product and hoping the product will attract and evolve into a community. So a key metric here is, say, the number of derivatives, which can be considered more valuable than traditional metrics.
GTM strategies for L1 blockchains and other protocols
In Web3, L1 refers to the underlying blockchain . Avalanche, Celo , Ethereum , and Solana are all L1 blockchains. These blockchains are all open source, so anyone can build on top of them, copy or modify them, and integrate with them. The growth of these blockchains comes from building more applications on top of them.
L2 refers to any technology that runs on top of existing L1 to help solve the scalability challenges of L1 networks. One type of L2 solution is Rollups. L2 Rollups "roll up" transactions off-chain in batches, and then send transaction data back to the L1 network through a "bridge". There are two main types of Rollups: Optimistic Rollups and ZK-Rollups - the former will "optimistically" assume that these off-chain transactions are honest and valid, and prove fraudulent transactions by submitting fraud proofs, or use "zero knowledge" Proof to ensure the validity of the transaction. Most of these L2 solutions are currently being developed on Ethereum and do not yet have their own native token.
Additionally, the protocol can be built on top of other L1 or L2, such as Uniswap, which supports Ethereum L1, Optimism (L2), and Polygon (L2).
Growth of L1 blockchains, L2 scalability solutions, and these other protocols may come from forks, where the network is copied and changed. For example, Celo was forked from Ethereum (the L1 blockchain). Nahmii and Metis forked the L2 solution Optimism. Sushiswap also came through the fork of Uniswap. While this may seem negative at first, the number of forks in a network is actually a measure of success, indicating that others want to replicate its success
These examples and mindsets belong to the type of Web3 projects (decentralized projects that use Tokens) at the top right of the matrix above. Broadly speaking, they are current state-of-the-art examples of Web3. However, depending on the type of organization, there is still a considerable mix of Web2 GTM strategies and emerging Web3 models. As builders start developing their GTM strategies, they should understand the scope of the various strategies, so now let's look at a hybrid model that mixes Web2 GTM and Web3 GTM strategies.
04. Centralization & No Token: A Mix of Web2 and Web3
Many companies of the type at the bottom left of the aforementioned matrix (ie , centralized teams that do not use tokens ) provide users with entry points and interfaces to access web3 infrastructure and protocols.
For these types of businesses, there is a significant overlap between web2 and web3 in their GTM strategies—especially in terms of SaaS (software as a service) and marketplaces.
Software as a Service
Some companies in this space follow traditional software-as-a-service (SaaS) business models, such as Alchemy, which provides node-as-a-service. These companies offer on-demand infrastructure through various tiers of subscription fees that are determined by factors such as the storage capacity needed, whether nodes are dedicated or shared, and the volume of requests per month.
This SaaS business model typically requires a traditional Web2 GTM (go-to-market) strategy and incentives. Customer acquisition is achieved through a combination of product-oriented and channel-oriented strategies:
Product-oriented UA focuses on getting users to try the product itself. For example, one of Alchemy's products is Supernode, an Ethereum API aimed at any organization that is building on Ethereum but doesn't want to manage their own infrastructure. In this case, users try Supernode through the free tier or freemium model, and these users will recommend the product to other potential users.
In contrast, channel-driven UA focuses on distinguishing between different customer types (e.g., public and private sector customers) and aligning sales teams with those customers. In this case, the company may have a sales team that focuses only on public sector customers (such as government and education) and will have a deep understanding of the needs of such customers.
In this article, I provide an overview to help explain the differences between web2 and web3 GTM strategies, with the caveat that developer-centric outreach and developer relations (including developer documentation, events, and education) ) is also very important.
Markets & Exchanges
Other companies in this space rely on marketplaces and exchange models that consumers are relatively familiar with, such as NFT marketplace OpenSea and cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase. These businesses generate revenue -- "commissions" -- based on transaction fees (usually a percentage of the transaction), similar to the business models of typical Web2 marketplaces such as eBay and Amazon. For these types of companies, the growth in revenue comes from an increase in the number of listings, the average dollar value per listing, and an increase in the number of users of the platform — all of which have resulted in increased transaction volume, while increasing in diversity , market liquidity and other aspects to benefit users.
A key move for GTM here is to increase channel distribution by partnering with other platforms to showcase curated tokens. This is similar to Amazon's Affiliate Program, in which bloggers can link to items they like, and any purchases made through those links will give the blogger a commission. But a key difference between web2 and web3 is that in addition to affiliate fees, web3 allows royalties to be distributed to creators. For example, OpenSea offers the traditional affiliate sales channel through their White Labe program, purchases made through referral links give the affiliate a percentage of sales, but it also allows for royalties, and creators can continue to make money from any secondary sales Get a certain percentage of profit. (Cryptocurrency makes this web3 feature possible because smart contracts can pre-encode percentage arrangements, blockchain tracking provenance, etc.)
Since creators now have the opportunity to continue monetizing their work through a secondary market -- something they couldn't see, let alone acquire, in the Web2 system before -- they are incentivized to continue promoting this market. Creators also become evangelists for Web3.
GTM strategy
Now that I've shared an overview of key mindsets and example use cases, let's look at specific GTM strategies that are often seen in web3 organizations. Although this article only touches on the core parts, the content is not comprehensive, but it can still help builders enter and explore the Web3 field and understand the relevant strategies and options.
airdrop
Airdrops are when a project distributes tokens to users to reward specific behaviors the project wants to incentivize, including testing the network or protocol. These tokens can be distributed to all existing addresses on a specific blockchain network, or sent in a targeted manner (such as specific key influencers); often, these tokens are used to solve the cold start problem - to bootstrap early adoption of a project, Reward or incentivize early adopters, etc.
In 2020, Uniswap airdropped 400 UNI to anyone who used the platform. In September 2021, dYdX airdropped DYDX to users. In November 2021, ENS airdropped anyone with an ENS domain name, anyone with an ENS domain name before October 31, 2021 is eligible to claim $ENS tokens (the deadline is May 2022), which The token holders are provided with governance rights over the ENS protocol.
In the NFT space, NFT project airdrops are also gaining popularity to help more people access and other reasons. A recent notable airdrop was from the Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC), a series of NFTs consisting of 10,000 unique ape figures. On August 28, 2021, BAYC created the corresponding Mutant Ape Yacht Club (MAYC) . Each BAYC NFT holder gets a Mutant Ape NFT, which allows them to mint 10,000 Mutant Apes, in addition, new participants get 10,000 new Mutant Apes. Because there are different types of serums, serums can only be used once, and since the bored ape cannot use multiple serums from the same tier, serums add a new scarcity mode.
The basic reason for creating MAYC is to "reward our Boring Ape holders with a whole new NFT" - a "mutated" version of the Boring Ape they hold - while also allowing newcomers to trade at lower tiers. Membership into the BAYC ecosystem. This maintains accessibility to the wider community, rather than diluting the exclusivity of the original original series, or making those original owners feel like their contributions have been relegated. (Another approach to accessibility is NFT fragmentation, where an NFT is owned by multiple owners.) While MAYC's floor price has always been lower than BAYC's floor price, its owners have essentially the same benefits.
These airdrops are retroactive to reward NFT holders or network and protocol users (just like ENS airdrops), but airdrops can also be used as a proactive GTM strategy to attract and encourage awareness and attention to specific projects . Since the information on the blockchain is public, a new project can be airdropped to, for example, all wallets using a particular market, or all wallets holding a particular token.
In any event, projects should clearly articulate their overall token distribution, distribution, and plans prior to airdropping. There are many examples of airdrops being used for nefarious purposes, and many examples of airdrops going wrong. Additionally, token airdrops in the United States may be considered an offering of securities, so projects should consult legal counsel before engaging in any such activity.
Developer Grants
Developer grants are grants from the protocol treasury to individuals or teams that improve the protocol in some way. This can serve as an effective GTM (go-to-market) mechanism for DAO organizations, as developer activity is an important part of the protocol's success . Examples of current projects and protocols with developer grants include Celo, Chainlink, Compound, Ethereum, and Uniswap, among others.
However, grants can be awarded for everything from protocol development to bug bounties, code audits, and other activities beyond coding. Compound even has a business development and integration related grant to fund any integration that promotes the use of Compound, an example of this is their grant to integrate Compound with Polkadot.
meme
Meme images are another GTM strategy of the web3 organization. Given the complexity and breadth of the cryptocurrency ecosystem, and the short attention spans of social media users, memes allow information to spread quickly. Memes can also express belonging, community, goodwill, and more in a highly information-dense way.
The Pudgy Penguins series of NFT projects has a total of 8888 penguins and was launched thanks to its memetic abilities. The collection sold out within 20 minutes of launch and was featured in major media outlets, helping such projects go mainstream. The social presence and community element of the "PFP" (profile picture) NFT series -- in web3, people set up NFTs as their social media profile avatars -- also contributed to the virality. Twitter recently rolled out a feature that allows users (by connecting to OpenSea's API) to set their own NFT as a profile avatar and display it as a special hexagonal shape.
When NFT holders with a large number of social media followers change their avatars to one of the NFTs in the project, it draws attention to the project, and the NFT holders of the project usually follow all the NFTs of the same project. Other NFT holders. These moves in turn lead to other memes, such as in Crypto Covens (crypto witch) and the "web2 me vs. web3 me" meme, where users show images of their witch NFTs next to real faces, conveying a sense of identity, belonging and other information.
***
So what does all this mean for Web3 founders?
In a Web2 company, the founder not only sets the top-down vision, but is also responsible for the growth of the team, planning and executing against the vision. In Web3, the founder plays more of a gardener role, helping to nurture a potentially successful product while also preparing for it to happen. While the Web3 founders still set the goals of the organization and its initial governance structure, the governance structure itself may soon bring them new roles. Rather than optimizing headcount growth or revenue and profitability , founders may optimize protocol usage and community quality . Furthermore, after decentralization, founders must adapt to an environment where there is no hierarchical power structure , where the founder is one of the many actors that underpin the success of a particular project. Therefore, before decentralizing, founders should ensure that such an environment is set for the success of their projects.
I witnessed some of this firsthand when I was chief of staff to Tony Hsieh, former CEO of Zappos.com. Zappos.com is an e-commerce company, now part of Amazon. Starting in 2014, the company experimented with a more decentralized (rather than top-down) governance structure, including a self-organizing management system known as "holacracy." Holacracy deals with the hierarchy of jobs, not the hierarchy of people, with mixed results. However, Tony Hsieh offers a useful metaphor, comparing his role to that of a grower of greenhouse plants (in a holistic governance model) rather than the best plants. He has said that he needs to be the "architect of the greenhouse" - creating the right conditions for all other plants to thrive.
This is echoed today by Alex Zhang of the social DAO group Friends with Benefits (FWB), who describes his work as "not setting a top-down vision" but promoting "a framework for community membership, permissioning and rules" and build upon it. While the Web2 leader is focused on updating product roadmaps and driving new product releases, Alex Zhang considers himself more of a gardener than a top-down builder. His role includes following FWB's "neighbors" (aka its Discord chat channel) and doing curation work by weeding out unattractive Discord channels and helping support and grow momentum ones. As a result, Alex Zhang became more of an educator and communicator.
For founders of NFT projects, their role is primarily as initiators and interim managers of intellectual property (IP). Yuga Labs, creators of Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC), wrote: “We see ourselves as interim stewards of intellectual property that is becoming more and more decentralized. Our goal is to become A community-owned brand reaching out to world-class games, events, and streetwear." Owning an NFT—whether it's an image, video or sound clip, or whatever—will convey to the owner something relevant to that NFT of all rights. As an NFT is bought and sold, its ownership also transfers, and as the ecosystem around the NFT grows, these benefits flow to the owner of the NFT, not just the NFT project's founding team.
NFT ownership can also be community-driven licensing and community-driven content (unlike traditional IP licensing). An example is Jenkins The Valet, an NFT avatar (see image below) from the BAYC series (Ape #1798 to be specific) that has an agency agreement with the agency Creative Artists Agency (CAA) across various media formats . Jenkins The Valet was created by Tally Labs, which owns this Ape #1798. Tally Labs decided to infuse the "ape" with its own branding and backstory, and changed the notion that the statistical rarity of NFTs is a major determinant of its price and success. They then created a way for others to create content around the Jenkins The Valet avatar through a members-only site called The Writer's Room, where community members could vote on the genre type of the first book, for example.
Also, as more people embrace Crypto, decentralized technologies, and the Web3 model, we will see more possibilities. The traditional Web2 GTM frameworks are a useful reference and provide some useful playbooks -- but they are only a small subset of the frameworks available to Web3 organizations. The key difference is that the goals, growth, and success criteria for Web2 and Web3 are often different. Web3 builders should have a clear goal around which to build a community, and match their growth strategy and community incentives — and go-to-market actions — accordingly. We will see a variety of models emerge.