After reading this discussion, all parties' viewpoints are well-founded.
InfoFi-type platforms are essentially information advertising tools. By driving attention within the Web3 community, projects gain exposure opportunities. But there is a problem often overlooked — advertisers truly care about **who** is viewing this content.
Looking at it from another perspective. When projects choose to advertise on such platforms, they focus not only on traffic numbers but more importantly on the quality of the audience behind that traffic. Reaching the right people makes one message worth ten. Conversely, if it's just for impressive numbers, it becomes a mere numbers game.
This is also why some projects gain high popularity on such platforms but perform mediocre in actual ecosystem development and user retention.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
13 Likes
Reward
13
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
BridgeNomad
· 22h ago
nah this is exactly why i stay paranoid about tvl migration patterns... seen too many projects pump on infofi then ghost their actual liquidity. the audience quality thing hits different tho—it's like optimal routing but for attention. garbage in, garbage out fr. real users vs noise bots, massive counter-party risk if you're betting on retention metrics instead of protocol fundamentals.
Reply0
SneakyFlashloan
· 22h ago
Basically, good-looking data doesn't mean much; the key is to retain users who actually bring in real money.
View OriginalReply0
PaperHandsCriminal
· 22h ago
Ha, basically it's just traffic inflation. High popularity = high conversion? What are you thinking?
A good-looking number is enough, ecosystem construction? That's a story for another time.
View OriginalReply0
AlgoAlchemist
· 23h ago
That's reasonable, but most projects can't distinguish between traffic volume and quality at all.
High popularity doesn't translate into conversions; in most cases, it's just money wasted in the wrong places.
When it comes to actual audience quality, almost no one has seriously calculated it.
View OriginalReply0
PumpStrategist
· 23h ago
Well, to put it simply, it's a matter of chip distribution. High popularity does not equal high-quality users; this logic has long been made clear in on-chain data. Look at those projects with explosive reach; the number of truly active addresses that have settled down is often a joke. It's a typical rookie mentality to treat traffic numbers as signals of an established pattern.
After reading this discussion, all parties' viewpoints are well-founded.
InfoFi-type platforms are essentially information advertising tools. By driving attention within the Web3 community, projects gain exposure opportunities. But there is a problem often overlooked — advertisers truly care about **who** is viewing this content.
Looking at it from another perspective. When projects choose to advertise on such platforms, they focus not only on traffic numbers but more importantly on the quality of the audience behind that traffic. Reaching the right people makes one message worth ten. Conversely, if it's just for impressive numbers, it becomes a mere numbers game.
This is also why some projects gain high popularity on such platforms but perform mediocre in actual ecosystem development and user retention.