[READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal ] Kromatika

I will be voting NO, because 50% of the proposal seems to be for incentives from airdrop, liquidity, staking rewards and referral program, which is way to much. Then the other 50% is for influencer marketing which benefits both you and OP, although OP could do that by its self without needing to do mutual marketing.

1 Like

Hello, I would like to ask how the time node of early user rewards is defined?

1 Like

I am not a delegate, but I am an active member of the DefiLATAM and OptimismESP community.

The value proposition of the protocol is very good although the funds requested are quite high. They should request 50%.
It does not seem reasonable to me to allocate 50% to MKT (influencer), as it is difficult to evaluate the content generated with a criteria, I think that amount of funds could be used in a better way.

Hi @DeFi_LATAM_Joxes
Thank you for taking the time to go through our proposal. We appreciate your feedback.

The end goal of our entire proposal is to onboard as many new users to the Optimism Network because we are big Layer 2 fans. It is not restricted to Kromatika dApp itself.

However, we understand your concerns with influencer marketing. Still, as a startup with zero external funding to be utilized for marketing campaigns, press releases, speaker events etc, we do feel like our voice is unheard by the hundreds of traders out there who’d surely benefit from our one-of-a-kind solution platform in the DEX space. And, this is why we went with a 50% allocation for influencers. Basically in our thought process, anybody with a decent following who can produce educational threads, youtube videos etc qualifies for an “influencer”. We don’t work with coin shillers per se.

We really value your input, and if we don’t get through this round of grant approval, we will re-work our proposal after gathering all the delegate inputs here.

Perhaps we will reduce the allocation for influencer marketing (and/or hire a PR agency and not having to deal with influencers), and increase the gas refunds allocation.
On that note, I am curious if you have any thoughts toward hiring a PR agency instead of influencers. Would love to hear from you.

Please do keep us in mind, and go through our proposal if we re-submit it.

Cheers!

Hi @solarcurve,

Thank you for taking time to go through our proposal and thank you for your comment.

Apart from the influencer marketing part, were you ok with the other parts of our proposal?

Also, what would you suggest for a startup with no external funding that needs help in raising awareness for a product that is definitely making its mark in the DEX space? In terms of marketing, other than influencers, would you suggest that we hire a PR agency instead?

Or what if, we reduced the allocation for marketing, increased the allocation for gas refunds, and then re-submitted our proposal? Would you vote for our proposal then?

We really love Layer 2, and hence Optimism. In fact we ran our dapp on the beta version of Optimism last year. So our end goal after winning the grant would be to onboard new users onto Optimism and not just Kromatika.

Thank you in advance for your comments :slight_smile:
Look forward to hearing from you.

Hi @polynya.eth,

Thank you so much for taking the time to go through our proposal and all of our responses to understand the intent behind it all. We are so grateful that you see it. We are also grateful that you support our proposal.

However, it looks like we may not win the grant at this stage judging from the For vs Against votes.

If we have to re-submit our proposal, we will reduce the allocation for marketing and increase allocation toward gas refunds since that’s what seems to be the voice of the majority of the delegates who have voted.

Would love for you to keep an eye out for us, in case we do resubmit our proposal. :slightly_smiling_face:

Thank you again for your energy and support!!

Cheers!

3 Likes

I’m voting no on this specific proposal with a similar reason to other delegates that I don’t feel the 50% towards influencer marketing is the best use of funds. I’m happy to re-review the proposal if you end up resubmitting it as you mentioned.

2 Likes

Vote: No

We echo some of the comments made in regards to reducing marketing incentives and focusing it more in on refunds, educational content or other activities that simplify adoption for users. We are more than happy to consider an updated proposal for the next cycle!

1 Like

I voted NO :x: for this proposal.

Project value: Okay, from the description the project sounds like it could be providing something unique. But I have never heard of the project before.

Amount: Bad, high for TVL metrics

OP distribution: Bad, incentives are basically all for incentives or self marketing.

1 Like

Would you define educational content?
Wouldn’t that come under marketing since the project intends to pay content creators to produce educational content?

1 Like

I think the fact that you haven’t heard of the project before is why they are heavily leaning toward raising awareness via marketing.
They have a solid product but limited resources to promote their brand via marketing. That’s why their proposal does make sense to me. :slight_smile:
I hope they re-work and re-submit their proposal because I’d like to see them win the grant and then more users to discover this platform on Optimism.

1 Like

The original plan for marketing mentions “content influences” but it’s better to be a bit more specific about what topics Kromatika plans to cover. The way the proposal is written makes it seem more like an influencer direction than a content direction, albeit they can overlap, but that is the feeling I get when reading it.

1 Like

very good :heart_eyes:
Thank you for sharing these details

1 Like

Thank you for sharing these details :smiling_face:

1 Like

We voted no on this proposal. We appreciate that Kromatika deployed on Optimism back in December 2021, but we feel that a 50% allocation for influencer marketing is not the best use of funds. We’d be happy to review a restructured proposal.

1 Like

[Final]

Voting: No

Protocol with valuable use case for certain types of users. Plan for the use of OP tokens is not well seen.

  • Contribution: Positive
  • OP distribution: Inappropriate
  • Co-incentives: Not confirmed (or not clarified)
  • Impact in LATAM: Neutral

Suggestions: This proposal can be seen better if it reduces amounts where other delegates point out. Try to add other incentives such as retroactive gas refunds or trading competitions, taking care of the requested amount. Let us know what do you think.

2 Likes

Snapshot vote - not passed

Hello
@OPUser @william @lefterisjp @Defi_LATAM_axlvaz @solarcurve @polynya @Bobbay_StableNode @Robor2b102 @fig

Thanks again for all of your wonderful feedback, we heard what you said and we have rearranged the funds.

Please take a look, and share your thoughts on our new proposal.

1 Like

@Beta @Cryptoz @555 @Defi_LATAM_axlvaz @linda @fewol @quixotic

1 Like

It is the reflection period, so most might be inactive regarding proposal feedback. I’d said wait until the next voting season begins.