Wallet Bounty - What you think?
Wanted to see what everyone thought about creating a wallet bounty with a council managing it to onboard more wallets from other ecosystems to support and market Polkadot.
Our current ecosystem is realistiaclly not usable for the average user and we lack any real adoption. Even after we have funded close to 10 million $ between 3 wallets:
Nova Wallet = 5 million $
— 50k downloads on Android and IOS unknown;
Sub Wallet = 3 million $
— 300k downloads on browser extension, 100k on Android and IOS unknown;
Talisman Wallet = 1.8 million $
— 100k downloads on browser extension
Basically for 10 million $ our current 3 primary wallets we have funded have a combined downloads of 550k (excluding IOS for Nova Wallet and Sub Wallet which will be less than Android) so if we said generously we have 650k total downloads.
Meanwhile multi chain wallets have millions of downloads, such as Coinbase, Trust Wallet, Exodus, Infinity Wallet and Phantom. These multi chain wallets are built for the average users and are years ahead of our current wallet ecosytstem that really lacks user expereince or innovation, instead the 3 primary wallets we have supported are doing what other wallets done years ago rather then actually been leaders and innovators in the wallet space.
I honestly think without good wallet infrastructure we won't achieve adoption by general users, we need wallets that are leading in innovation and have existing user bases, not new wallets fully dependent on us funding them to operate and basically redo the wheel. The fact is the average user wants easy to use multi chain wallets where they can access everything and not single chain wallets.
What I would like to suggest is allocating a budget to a bounty and reaching out to work with top wallets to get them to integrate and market Polkadot. This would bring new infrastructure to Polkadot and also act as marketing of Polkadot to these existing wallets user bases. Access to lets say 500k-10 million users on average per a wallet for an average of 200k$-1.5 million $ an integration is far better money spent then with current wallets we have supported and far better money spent then all these marketing campaigns we have spent tens of millions of $ on with miminal results. Atleast with the wallet integrations its permentant infrastructure and marketing to actual users in the space, rather then a one off marketing campaign to waste money.
Comments (2)
I agree marketing has been more then pointless and that is based on facts, just go look Twitter https://x.com/DefiIgnas/status/1807784567241351286
37m USD on advertisement with decrease in usage on the network, meanwhile we decline every new project looking to enter the ecosystem.
Funding more wallet integrations would be 1000x more value then marketing in the short and long term, shame there is literally zero interest from larger governance voters to fund new projects never mind wallets.
A prime example of this can be found with a wallet you mentioned in the list that actually already has a proposal "Infinity Wallet milestone 2". The thing is this is not even limited to the odd project that wants to enter the ecosystem, this is every project time and time again that looks to bring their project and users to Polkadot and just gets pushed away by governance (handful of large holders). The only way for wallets or projects to get funding is if they are actually part of the ecosystem already (aint working to grow the ecosystem though LOL).
https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/referenda/930 - Proposal by Infinity Wallet that has one wallet voting 30 million DOT NAY. The laugh is the wallet @5GUcg5jbHVTNa446KBq5ETDA3ooSMnNcP9cGrEK2KuATySmr is the main reason most of the marketing budget was spent on useless marketing proposals that brought zero value.
There seems to be a massive miss alignment with some larger voters and users, with them voting based on personal opinions rather then the good of the ecosystem, they basically vote AYE if a project is already deployed on Polkadot, but they have zero interest in voting AYE on what users or the ecosystem actually need. The fact is that at the moment governance is short sighted this is why we have little activity as a chain and will continue on the same path of little adoption and wasting funds unless this is resolved.
What really bothers me is how we are willing to spend 37 million USD on marketing and hundreds of thousands on individual proposals for marketing, yet are against new projects and wallets onboarding into the ecosystem for a fraction of the cost of marketing proposals, while these wallets and projects proposals bring developments and more users aka marketing to Polkadot then any marketing proposal. Its beyond me how anyone in governance can vote like this, but finally people are realising what is happening and might wake up.
this can be a great idea