空投2.0指导框架:加密货币空投的下一阶段是什么?

DeFi之道Опубліковано о 2023-01-13Востаннє оновлено о 2023-01-13

Анотація

这里有一个空投 2.0 的指导框架和示例。

每个人都喜欢空投(Airdrop),毕竟谁不喜欢免费的赠品呢?但从项目的角度来看,代币分配的正确与否,可以决定一个社区的成败。

加密货币空投的下一阶段

空投是一种原生的 Web3 营销策略。如果操作得当,它们可以帮助推动新用户的增长、保留和 TVL。

考虑到这一点,我们花时间研究了过去的空投,如 UNI、HOP、ENS、1INCH、Mooncats 和 Optimism,以确定空投的真实效果。当前方法的空投结果并不是很好:保留率低至 1%。

Crypto 需要重新审视现有的空投方法。

为什么空投很重要?

首先,重要的是要理解为什么空投对今天的 Web3 如此重要。有两个原因:

空投是接触匿名用户的最佳可用策略之一

空投提供了将所有权分配给用户的机制,这是 Web3 的一个关键要素。

现阶段的空投是什么样的?

每个使用空投的项目都将其用作 Web3 营销工具来获取新用户。是的,他们也希望借此形成一个社区,让用户继续使用该产品,并希望用户 hold(持有)而不是 dump(抛售)。

正如我们所看到的,挑战在于这种情况很少发生。目前能看到的两种类型的空投:

Push 空投

这是指合法代币或 NFT「神奇地」出现在用户的钱包中——通常是通过全额投放,或者有时是通过一个索赔。

当钱包所有者发现钱包中出现的东西,并尝试使用该应用程序时,Push 空投会为项目带来新的客户。不幸的是,今天大多数 Push 空投都被用作诈骗手段。

Pull 空投

这是用户主动需要领取奖励的时候。大多数项目都属于这一类别,例如 Uniswap、ENS、1INCH 和 Cow Swap。

Pull 空投通常是当一个项目预告他们将奖励使用其项目的用户时产生的结果,最常见的是通过代币或 NFT(不太常见)。这里的目的也是为了帮助项目获得新客户。领取奖励的具体标准通常是秘密的,就像项目的一种「核启动代码」一样,以避免有人玩弄这个系统。

虽然这两种方法在机械上都是可行的,但我们接下来要进行的分析表明,它们通常无法创造可持续的增长。

现阶段空投的挑战

Dune Analytics 的专业研究员对 UNI 空投进行了一个很好的深入研究,同时也对其他一些空投做了一个快速的观察。鉴于我们最近写了关于跟踪其他重要的 Web3 项目健康指标的文章,我们希望将 Dune 的分析与其中一些指标相关联,例如客户获取成本、投资回报期、保留率和客户生命周期价值(Customer Lifetime Value)。

这些指标让我们对项目的可持续性和健康状况有了基本的了解。将这些指标与空投的结果进行分析,将帮助我们了解空投作为一个可持续的 Web3 营销和增长工具的有效性。

首先,UNI「Pull 空投」的结构是什么?

他们将 UNI 分配给超过 25 万用户

获得空投的条件很简单——你基本上需要在 2020 年 9 月 1 日之前使用 Uniswap

空投是如何进行的?

就当今的大多数项目而言,很大一部分用户都在期待空投——这也是空投作为一种营销工具的好处之一。鉴于 Uniswap 空投似乎是同类产品中的第一个空投,如果它受到更多期待,它可能会获得更多的用户。

如果你想对上述某些指标进行更深入的分析,Tomasz Tunguz 使用这些数字对 Web2 和 Web3 的客户获取成本(CAC)进行了比较。你也可以在 Dune 查询中深入研究这些数据,看看我们是如何得出其中一些数字的。

当前形式的空投是项目用户基础增长的亏本买卖。为了使空投对项目更有效并推动可持续增长,我们需要将它们转移到空投的 CAC 小于项目用户生命周期价值(CLV)的地方。

一个框架:使空投更有效

虽然目前形式的空投仍然被视为不如预期有效,但我们仍然看到项目将约 44% 的供应分配给社区。好消息是,我们看到一些项目正在进行试验,这可能将使我们更接近下一次更有效空投的演变。

1. 鼓励行为循环

在考虑 Pull 空投时,他们目前的标准主要属于「二手产品」的通用类别。虽然对用户很慷慨,但今天的空投对项目本身来说并不慷慨,因为它实际上并没有将用户「挂钩」到产品上。

一个来自 Web2 的良好行为挂钩的例子是 Twitter。

考虑行为循环还有一个额外的好处,即可以确定你的理想用户是谁,以及你认为哪些行为可能会「吸引」他们。这种努力将对获得新用户和通过其他营销努力留住用户产生下游影响。

在考虑 Push 空投时,你不太可能已经与该项目进行交互,因此你要寻找的标准将是类似项目的行为和声誉,或代表类似买家的项目。

2. 基于声誉的空投

谁能获得空投的标准需要升级为「声誉标准」,因为项目从相当于相亲到找到一个匹配者。

一般标准:你有一家披萨店,上个月有 500 位顾客。你可以给这些顾客每人 50 美元,希望他们回来光顾。

声誉标准:你向客户提供 50 美元,你知道这些客户 50% 的食物预算都花在了披萨上,每个月来过你的商店 5 次,并定期在你的披萨店参加音乐之夜,偶尔会拜访你的竞争对手。

3. 空投「浪潮」

Blur 和 Optimism 在这方面做得很好。与大规模的一次性事件空投相反,根据更有针对性的标准制定空投「浪潮」计划将是有效的,原因有二:

1.它鼓励人们继续使用你的产品

2.它允许你使用数据来测试你的声誉标准,以便你可以查看它是否为项目创造了预期的结果,例如更好的保留率和客户生命周期价值(CLV)。

空投「浪潮」创建了一个过程,使得项目可以通过该过程设置其声誉标准、执行空投、监控结果,然后使用这些结果来改进下一次空投。

4. 创造项目忠诚度以留住用户

忠诚度很重要,不仅因为你花费了多少营销资金来获得客户,还因为回头客的花费比新客户多 67% (使用 web2 作为代理)。

再看看 Dune 的分析,无论是 UNI、1INCH,还是其他项目,在大部分用户在空投后抛售,98% 的空投用户都没有参与任何 UNI 投票的情况下,留存率这么低也就不足为奇了。

治理和纯粹的经济利益(如质押)并没有被证明是鼓励用户保留的最有效手段。

我们需要寻找新的方法来建立忠诚度。如果我们看看一些最成功的 Web2 和 Web3 品牌,它们通过以下方式建立忠诚度:

为客户量身定制体验,表明他们了解客户

设计良好的代币经济学和 NFT 设计

给他们的客户一个再次光顾的理由

让客户感觉自己是品牌的一部分

提供赎回性奖励

案例研究:下一代空投在实践中会是什么样子?

我们没有水晶球,但我们知道一些项目已经在试验上面提到的一些想法,以及空投归属等其他策略。我们是测试、使用数据跟踪结果和共享的忠实拥护者,因此这里有一个空投 2.0 计划的示例。

项目类型:DEX

行为目标:当用户成为流动性提供者(LP) 时,其「粘性」挂钩是最强的,这使得我们的第二个挂钩实际上在 DEX 上进行交易。你的行为目标还可能取决于你要优化的内容,你应该为推动项目的最大价值和为用户带来最佳回报(你的挂钩)进行优化。

基于声誉的空投标准:由于我们正在改进空投标准,除了声誉指标之外,我们将在其中考虑行为目标。通常需要 7 到 15 次交互才能养成行为习惯,因此我们也会考虑这一因素。

空投浪潮:

第 1 波:LP 小批量。以下是项目可能添加的一些声誉标准的示例:

已创建或添加了两次 LP,金额为 10000 美元或更高

与协议交易至少 5 次,金额为 1000 美元或更高

上个月和这个月至少交易过一次

曾多次在 Uniswap 上担任 LP

在过去的 6 个月里,每个月都活跃在 DEX 上

第 2 波:更小的交换批次。声誉说明:鉴于本次范围更广,我们将寻求以交换为中心的行为挂钩,并希望尽可能多地淘汰空投猎人。声誉标准示例:

交易至少 20 次,金额超过 50 美元

上个月和本月至少交易过一次

最近 3 个月一直在 DEX 上活动

第 3 波以及更多:我们不会详细说明每一个额外的「浪潮」,但是你可以根据从 LP 批次和交易批次了解到内容修改的标准。

计划空投的后续步骤

如果你正在考虑为钱包营销做一个基于 Push 或 Pull 的空投,上面的框架应该会让你走上改善结果的道路。我们相信空投的未来取决于确定你的最佳用户并激励他们为你的长期持续增长提供动力。

Пов'язані матеріали

Silicon Valley 'Startup Guru' Steve Hoffman: Web3 + AI Could Be a Trap

Silicon Valley investor and "Godfather of Startups" Steve Hoffman warns that combining Web3 with AI is likely a trap, not a promising venture. In an interview, Hoffman argues that while AI is a foundational technology touching all industries, Web3 adds complexity, friction, and regulatory risk without solving mainstream consumer or business needs. He advises founders to focus on deep, specialized applications where startups can out-iterate giants, rather than on generic features easily replicated by large tech companies. Hoffman observes that Silicon Valley will lead foundational AI research, while China excels at rapid, large-scale application and commercialization, particularly in robotics. He stresses that AI-driven autonomous agents capable of collaborative, multi-step tasks are 2-4 years away, which will cause significant job displacement. The solution is not to slow AI but to redesign business models around human-AI collaboration and reform social systems like education and retraining. For startups, Hoffman recommends focusing on vertical, expertise-heavy domains to build defensibility. He sees major opportunities in AI fraud detection and cybersecurity. Key founder mindsets include systemic thinking over feature-focus, relentless customer centricity, building adaptive teams, and deeply understanding AI's capabilities and limits. Hoffman is also leading a non-profit initiative to establish university centers aimed at training future leaders in responsible, human-value-aligned AI innovation.

marsbit47 хв тому

Silicon Valley 'Startup Guru' Steve Hoffman: Web3 + AI Could Be a Trap

marsbit47 хв тому

Token Inefficient, Economy Tokenless

The article "Tokens Aren't Economical, Economics Aren't Tokenized" analyzes a pivotal shift in the AI industry from a technology-driven narrative to one dominated by capital efficiency. It highlights two concurrent trends: a severe capital shortage due to the exorbitant and recurring costs of compute (e.g., OpenAI's high burn rate) and a wave of corporate spin-offs where major tech companies are separating their AI units (like Kuaishou's Kling and Baidu's Kunlunxin). The core argument is that AI's "anti-internet" business model, where user growth increases costs rather than profits, has created a disconnect between high valuations and actual cash flow. Spin-offs address this by allowing AI assets to be valued independently. Within a parent company, they are seen as cost centers, but as standalone entities, they are priced based on their growth potential and scarcity in the primary market, leading to massive valuation premiums (e.g., Kling's estimated value tripling post-spin-off). The industry is at an inflection point, moving from "model worship" to "value realization." The competition is evolving from a pure compute (GPU) race to a broader focus on systemic efficiency and full-stack engineering (involving CPUs and orchestration) to achieve viable commercialization. The year 2026 is framed as a critical moment where the industry must definitively answer how to economically translate AI capability into tangible business value, reshaping the sector's future power structure.

marsbit52 хв тому

Token Inefficient, Economy Tokenless

marsbit52 хв тому

Crossing the 'Memory Wall': The Wafer-Level Revolution and Computing Power Routes in the AI Inference Era

In 2026, a historic shift occurred in AI as major cloud providers' inference spending surpassed training spending for the first time, signaling a move from "building large models" to "using large models." This shifts the core challenge from computing power to the "memory wall"—the bottleneck of data movement (model weights, activations, KV Cache) between external DRAM and processors, where energy and latency from data transfer far exceed computation itself. Companies like Nvidia face GPU idle time due to bandwidth limits. In contrast, Cerebras Systems adopts a radical "wafer-scale" approach with its Wafer-Scale Engine (WSE). Instead of cutting a silicon wafer into many chips, Cerebras uses almost the entire wafer as one massive chip (WSE-3). This design provides 44GB of on-chip SRAM, delivering memory bandwidth thousands of times higher than traditional HBM (e.g., 21 PB/s vs. Nvidia B200). For LLM inference, weights are streamed layer-by-layer from external MemoryX storage to the chip, avoiding HBM bottlenecks. This results in token generation speeds 1.5–5 times faster than Nvidia's B200 in some models and significant advantages in first-token latency and long-context tasks. Additionally, Cerebras's architecture offers much lower interconnect power consumption (0.15 pJ/bit vs. GPU's ~10 pJ/bit). However, Cerebras faces challenges: SRAM scaling has slowed with advanced nodes, limiting future capacity gains; the chip requires specialized liquid cooling and custom software stacks; and its external I/O bandwidth (150 GB/s) is low compared to NVLink, hindering multi-system scaling for very large models. Competition is intensifying. Major players are pursuing three paths: 1) Developing proprietary inference ASICs (e.g., Google TPU, Microsoft Maia), 2) Leveraging advanced packaging (e.g., TSMC's SoW) to democratize wafer-scale-like integration, potentially eroding Cerebras's process advantage within a few years, and 3) Exploring optical interconnects for ultimate bandwidth. Commercially, Cerebras is transitioning from a hardware vendor to a service provider, facing the immense challenge of building high-power, specialized data centers to meet large contracts (e.g., 250MW/year from 2026–2028). In conclusion, the AI inference era presents a fundamental architectural trade-off. Cerebras opts for extreme physical optimization for low-latency, single-task performance, while Nvidia prioritizes versatility and massive cluster throughput. The path forward remains uncertain, with technology and business models still evolving in the race toward advanced AI.

marsbit58 хв тому

Crossing the 'Memory Wall': The Wafer-Level Revolution and Computing Power Routes in the AI Inference Era

marsbit58 хв тому

Has Bitcoin's 'Rebound Ended', Officially Entering the Late Bear Market Phase?

**Title: Has Bitcoin's Rebound Ended, Entering the Late Bear Market Phase?** **Summary:** Bitcoin's price has declined by 13% this week, signaling a potential return to late-stage bear market conditions. The price fell to around $67k, positioned between the Realized Price and Realized Cap Weighted Average. For the first time since early 2022, the Short-Term Holder cost basis has dropped below this key average, confirming a hallmark of late-cycle bear markets. Profitability metrics have collapsed sharply. The 7-day average of the Realized Profit/Loss ratio plummeted from a local high of 3.16 to 0.29, mirroring the February panic sell-off. Critically, the 90-day average never breached the threshold of 2, indicating the recent rally to $82k was a bear market bounce, not a structural shift. Realized losses surged to $1.35 billion daily, with $770 million coming from Long-Term Holders selling at a loss. This accelerating redistribution of supply from weak to strong hands is a necessary but ongoing process for a market bottom. The rally stalled almost precisely at the aggregate cost basis (~$83k) of US spot Bitcoin ETF investors, turning that level into strong resistance and leaving the average ETF holder underwater again. Spot market flows have turned decisively negative, showing sellers are dominating order books despite the price drop. While a significant futures long liquidation event cleared over $400 million in leverage, providing a potential reset, sustained spot demand is yet to materialize. Options markets continue to price in higher future volatility (Implied Volatility) than recent price action (Realized Volatility) has shown, with a persistent skew towards put options, indicating ongoing demand for downside protection. In conclusion, multiple metrics point to a fragile market structure. Resistance at the ETF cost basis, accelerating realized losses, dominant spot selling, and cautious options pricing all suggest the bear market trend persists. A sustainable recovery likely requires a resurgence of spot demand, ETF holders returning to profit, and a clear reduction in selling pressure.

marsbit58 хв тому

Has Bitcoin's 'Rebound Ended', Officially Entering the Late Bear Market Phase?

marsbit58 хв тому

TechFlow Intelligence Agency: Anthropic Calls for Global Pause in AI Development While Preparing for Trillion-Dollar IPO; SpaceX IPO Roadshow Heats Up, But S&P 500 Rejects Fast-Track Inclusion

In today's TechFlow Intelligence Briefing, several major tech stories highlight a growing theme of trust and credibility gaps across AI, crypto, and finance. AI company Anthropic has publicly called for a global pause in AI development, citing risks from Claude's "recursive self-improvement." Ironically, this coincides with reports the company is preparing for a massive IPO targeting a near $1 trillion valuation. This perceived hypocrisy, coupled with widespread user complaints about Claude's declining performance, is sparking debate over whether the safety warning is genuine or a competitive tactic. Meanwhile, in a substantive security move, Anthropic open-sourced a framework for AI-powered vulnerability discovery. In the crypto market, Bitcoin's price drop below $61,000 triggered over $1.16 billion in liquidations, flipping the market into a state where more BTC is held at a loss than at a profit, a historical bearish signal. On the corporate front, SpaceX's highly anticipated IPO is generating immense Wall Street excitement, with Goldman Sachs projecting 100x revenue growth by 2030. However, the S&P 500 has refused to fast-track the company's inclusion post-IPO, potentially limiting immediate institutional demand. Separately, ByteDance's AI app Doubao lost over 6 million monthly active users after introducing a subscription model, highlighting the challenges of AI monetization. Other notable developments include Nvidia certifying HBM4 memory from Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron; Cloudflare's acquisition of front-end tooling company VoidZero; and its CEO warning that bot traffic now exceeds human traffic online. The underlying narrative connects these events: a trust crisis. From AI firms' contradictory actions and crypto volatility to the clash between SpaceX's hyped narrative and institutional rules, a pattern is emerging where stated intentions and actual practices are increasingly misaligned.

marsbit1 год тому

TechFlow Intelligence Agency: Anthropic Calls for Global Pause in AI Development While Preparing for Trillion-Dollar IPO; SpaceX IPO Roadshow Heats Up, But S&P 500 Rejects Fast-Track Inclusion

marsbit1 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси

Популярні статті

Як купити UNI

Ласкаво просимо до HTX.com! Ми зробили покупку Uniswap (UNI) простою та зручною. Дотримуйтесь нашої покрокової інструкції, щоб розпочати свою криптовалютну подорож.Крок 1: Створіть обліковий запис на HTXВикористовуйте свою електронну пошту або номер телефону, щоб зареєструвати обліковий запис на HTX безплатно. Пройдіть безпроблемну реєстрацію й отримайте доступ до всіх функцій.ЗареєструватисьКрок 2: Перейдіть до розділу Купити крипту і виберіть спосіб оплатиКредитна/дебетова картка: використовуйте вашу картку Visa або Mastercard, щоб миттєво купити Uniswap (UNI).Баланс: використовуйте кошти з балансу вашого рахунку HTX для безперешкодної торгівлі.Треті особи: ми додали популярні способи оплати, такі як Google Pay та Apple Pay, щоб підвищити зручність.P2P: Торгуйте безпосередньо з іншими користувачами на HTX.Позабіржова торгівля (OTC): ми пропонуємо індивідуальні послуги та конкурентні обмінні курси для трейдерів.Крок 3: Зберігайте свої Uniswap (UNI)Після придбання Uniswap (UNI) збережіть його у своєму обліковому записі на HTX. Крім того, ви можете відправити його в інше місце за допомогою блокчейн-переказу або використовувати його для торгівлі іншими криптовалютами.Крок 4: Торгівля Uniswap (UNI)Легко торгуйте Uniswap (UNI) на спотовому ринку HTX. Просто увійдіть до свого облікового запису, виберіть торгову пару, укладайте угоди та спостерігайте за ними в режимі реального часу. Ми пропонуємо зручний досвід як для початківців, так і для досвідчених трейдерів.

418 переглядів усьогоОпубліковано 2024.12.12Оновлено 2026.06.02

Як купити UNI

Обговорення

Ласкаво просимо до спільноти HTX. Тут ви можете бути в курсі останніх подій розвитку платформи та отримати доступ до професійної ринкової інформації. Нижче представлені думки користувачів щодо ціни UNI (UNI).

活动图片