The "Marketing Aesthetics" of Crypto: Celebrity Coins, Blur Points, and the Rise of Solana

Author: YBB Capital Researcher Zeke

1. Celebrity Coin, from Birth to Marketing

Warren Buffett has continued the charitable legacy of his late wife, Susan Buffett, for 23 years, transforming the admiration of a group of business elites into a globally renowned "time auction," creating the most iconic "lunch with a price tag" model in the history of human philanthropy.

The monetization of celebrity time is actually not uncommon in Web3, from the ancient Time New Bank to the later Friend.tech, the exploration of SocialFi has been going on for seven or eight years. However, in most cases, there is little thunder and even less rain. After all, in the on-chain world, the importance of speculative trading often outweighs the "fragile social" established by tokens. Most users are not genuinely interested in exclusive insights shared by celebrities, but rather focus on the "volume and price" of celebrities. In other words, for top celebrities, the profit pool of SocialFi platforms is too small and cumbersome, and for KOLs, the already scarce influence seems awkward and foolish when placed in a SocialFi platform with transparent prices and few users.

The lack of accumulation means that the path of SocialFi is currently unfeasible. Therefore, the monetization path for celebrity value in Web3 needs to be differentiated, transitioned, and then evolved. A paid subscription community and a blue-ticked X account are the Web2 combinations that KOLs currently need. However, the value conversion path for top celebrities has always been less than smooth, much like a large enterprise with millions of products waiting to be offloaded; To B is not cost-effective, and To C lacks a carrier.

The monetization of time to the monetization of influence is a relatively successful first step in the exploration of the path, with NFTs playing this role for a long time. However, it is clear that the characteristics of NFTs, which emphasize scarcity, fixed-price sales, and lack of liquidity, do not satisfy both buyers and sellers. This form of selling souvenirs has temporarily failed after the BTC ecosystem went silent.

The value of celebrities needs a new carrier. Although the answer has long been hidden in the story of Musk and Doge, this matter still requires some opportunities. Last year, the token issuance frenzy of Pump.fun swept the crypto space, and the Meme trend coincided with the U.S. presidential election, during which various grassroots-issued presidential coins emerged. The extremely high price increase and popularity made some behind-the-scenes operators in the crypto space smell opportunity, getting real celebrities to issue tokens through contracts or inducements, while the rest was left to them to operate. This sounds somewhat similar to the collaboration model between MCN agencies and influencers, but the actual situation is extremely violent. From Caitlyn Jenner (American Olympic decathlon champion and one of Trump's biggest fans) with JENNER to President Milei's LIBRA. It starts with a tweet and ends with a vertically descending candlestick. The whole process can take several days, or sometimes it can be completed in just a few hours. Then the script often involves social media influencers urgently "investigating the case," with the token issuance team posting and shifting blame onto each other, ultimately leading to nothing, and the concept of celebrity coins was born amidst this chaos.

But in any case, this path has indeed become very clear. Just from the initial effectiveness, the Meme distribution channel with a low threshold is perfect, but what happens to the celebrity Memes, which lack intrinsic value, once their popularity fades and the PvP ends? The question shifts from the medium to longevity. AI Agents can tell you about the future of humanity, RWA can describe a Hundred Trillion dollar track, but what story can celebrity coins tell?

Trump's answer is quite clichéd; he wants to offer a "presidential time" to the top 220 holders of TRUMP, while the top 25 holders will be invited to a special VIP tour of the White House the next day. The value support of the celebrity coin has once again rolled back to "time." In my view, this plan can save the urgent need for token unlocking, but it cannot support the long-term growth of the token price.

A sufficiently good Meme should emphasize emotion and narrative, rather than empowerment. The value of celebrity coins lies not in the insights and time of the celebrity, but in the stories of the celebrity and the emotions behind them. Trump's dinner invitation is more like selling an ultra-expensive version of a Social Token, and everything will fade away once his presidential term ends. How to market TRUMP well, the crypto team behind Trump might want to seek advice from Doge Minister, as Doge is tied to Musk, SpaceX, and Tesla. "To The Moon" is still a slogan etched in the hearts of crypto users, and the people's currency makes holders believe 1 Doge = 1 USD, challenging traditional finance aligns with the gene of crypto. In fact, every bit is Musk using his own power to sell emotions to the public, even if most of these stories have yet to come true. The marketing of celebrity coins still has a long way to explore; the memeification of personal influence should not be as crude as a tweet or a single favorable news. Making money in the crypto world is not detestable, but one must at least understand the crypto world first.

II. Evil Dragon

The Blur project has rarely been mentioned lately; I remember the last time it was discussed was when Blast launched its points system.

As the narrative of NFTs fades away, many stories have become a thing of the past, but the imprint that Pacman left on this circle will not disappear. Blur relied on a combination of "Points + zero fees, royalties + social fission" to conquer OpenSea, completing a rural encirclement of the city in a PDD-style approach. The orange logo that filled Twitter on airdrop day is something I believe no NFT player will forget. From a marketing perspective, Blur's strategy is invincible; it not only defeated competitors that other NFT platforms could only dream of, but also encouraged many users who had never played with NFTs to join the score-boosting army, breaking multiple records in just a few months. Almost all Web3 projects after Blur have regarded this marketing template as a bible.

At that time, NFT players who had suffered from OpenSea for a long time were clapping their hands in delight, but Blur ultimately transformed from a dragon-slaying boy into an evil dragon. To put it mildly, Airdrop3 was my first experience of disgust towards Web3 incentive activities; Blur adopted a self-destructive strategy to exchange for TVL and trading volume. At the start of the entire event, I had already stated that NFTs would accelerate their demise. The Bid For Airdrop mechanism encourages users to place orders without actually purchasing, leading to false demand and a downward spiral in prices. The mechanism attracts arbitrageurs rather than genuine buyers, and once the value of Blur's token collapses, all blue chips will be buried together. In my view, the death of NFTs was initiated by Blur's Bid incentives, while the launch of Azuki's Elementals series marked its conclusion. Of course, more fundamentally, it can be attributed to NFTs never finding a suitable path (excluding Pudgy).

Later, Pacman successively launched the NFT lending protocol Blend and the Ethereum Layer 2 Blast. The strategies of these two protocols basically continue the underlying strategy of Blur. Blend uses a lending point reward mechanism, where users participating in NFT collateral lending can earn airdrop points, continuing the logic of "trading is mining." Blast adopts a "deposit points + invitation points" model, where users staking ETH or stablecoins can earn native Blast rewards and airdrop points. The revenue logic of the former relies on common revenue methods in the lending market, such as lending interest and liquidation arbitrage. The latter realizes profits by staking ETH in DeFi protocols like Lido for yield. Pacman builds a self-circulating crypto bank through the locked ETH among the three, but the returns given back to users are unequal. Besides, the early returns from Blur were quite substantial, but the subsequent incentive activities of projects have basically announced the end of the airdrop era. Centralized points make all incentives a black box, with self-defined rules, and the spontaneous point-based gameplay has been criticized by users.

What consequences has the points system caused? First is false prosperity; when rewards are visualized, users will lock assets into various protocols merely to exchange for project Tokens. Meanwhile, project teams can take these false user data and extremely high TVL to raise funds everywhere, leading to massive losses for VCs who are accustomed to measuring value with data. The second point is that it hinders innovation; projects that perform well in activities are favored over those with real technology but poor marketing, leading to the neglect of the latter. The third point is the fragmentation of liquidity; truly valuable assets are locked in various protocols just to play this seemingly risk-free game. The fourth point, and the most important one, is that when the points system is launched, it is equivalent to issuing tokens openly. A large number of studios, retail investors, and whales flock in just to compete for a small piece of the pie. It's a matter of either quantity or funding, and there are instances where retail investors receive such a small allocation that it barely covers Gas fees, marking the true end of the airdrop era.

The points system remains the mainstream model in Web3 today, and "points mining" has led to rampant speculation culture, while the Point Market has further amplified this phenomenon. The incentives from airdrops have distorted the essence of early users and communities; the airdrop era initiated by Uni years ago was originally well-intentioned, promoting DeFi Summer and achieving real user retention and growth. In this era, every project launch means a significant withdrawal of funds and the emergence of a "ghost town". If a project cancels this model, it will fall into an even more passive situation. In this dilemma, users can only seek new habitats.

Public Chain

Ethereum developed through a reliance on technological pathways and a commitment to decentralization during the wilderness era, which ultimately formed such a vast ecosystem. However, the path to success varies in every era. If we consider ten years ago, who could have predicted that Tencent could not replicate a short video platform, while Taobao would eventually be eliminated by an e-commerce platform filled with cutthroat competition? Similarly, two years ago, I could not have imagined that Solana would one day actually trip the giants. But the fact is, in this era where the application layer is stagnant, marketing and practicality outweigh the so-called technological faith.

Two days ago, the Ethereum Foundation (EF) published three articles reiterating its vision for the future of Ethereum and its management structure. The key information revealed is not complicated: first, the EF decentralizes its power, strategically intervening in projects when necessary and proactively withdrawing when not needed. Second, the restructuring of the EF leadership enhances execution efficiency and strengthens communication with the community. Third, it maintains a layered scaling technical path and is also exploring RISC-V as a substitute for EVM. Although there is still a somewhat rigid feel overall, the EF has indeed lowered its proud stance.

But is this really the problem with Ethereum? I can only say it is related, but not absolutely. Some of the changes mentioned are mainly focused on user dissatisfaction with EF, and the unwillingness to integrate into the secular world is also a root cause of Ethereum's issues, and this person is naturally Vitalik. Not understanding, or not wanting to understand Meme is actually not wrong, but the mistake lies in Vitalik himself still having an absolute leadership role in Ethereum. A project with a market value of 220 Billion led by a somewhat capricious and idealistic young person, who is unwilling to accept the current mainstream culture in the circle, makes the present loneliness an inevitability. However, fortunately, among the many aloof Layer 2s, there are still sparks like Base that can tussle with Solana. If I were a member of EF, I would definitely apply for some external support from CB.

Looking at BNB from a perspective free of conspiracy theories, at least CZ, as a leader who also doesn't understand memes, is doing his utmost to embrace these concepts. During this period after his release from prison, he has also brought out hot tracks like DeSci, but the lack of a basic foundation in the West makes each prosperity of BNB seem somewhat fleeting.

Solana's victory lies in its lower profile. After the collapse of SBF, Solana is no different from a child who has lost parental protection. In the face of the giant Ethereum, it must seize every opportunity. Starting with the catalyst of Silly Dragon, followed by various super memes, Dapps, and PayFi. In the past, we often mocked Solana as a single-player chain, but in terms of its inclusiveness and support for the ecosystem, it appears to be more decentralized.

It is not Pump.fun that allows Solana to turn the tide, but rather that Pump.fun can only be born from the soil of Solana. This is similar to the relationship between Uni and Ethereum a few years ago. The core concept of Solana's marketing is that the first chain for non-technical users is about being accessible, easy to use, and efficient. As Crypto moves towards mainstream users in the West today, pragmatism prevails, and the common people thrive. Solana is indeed suitable to become the first chain.

Conclusion

Regarding the story of marketing, I have omitted NFT and GameFi here. If both can be revived in the future, I may add them. The narrative of the crypto world continues to evolve through the tug-of-war between technological idealism and human greed. The rise of tokens, the prosperity of projects, and the revival of public chains essentially all stem from a successful marketing campaign. In the past, we listened to technological narratives, but now we must integrate into the secular world.

Source: YBB Capital