For a moment, imagine all of this is new to you.
You're a creator, marketer or business owner and you’re thinking about how to get your work/brand in front of as many people as possible. This applies no matter the size of your business – start up or multinational industry leader. The internet has made it easier than ever to reach a global audience, but there are still a lot of choices to make when it comes to deciding how and where to share your work.
You've heard of Web3 - the next generation of the internet that's powered by blockchain technology and you think it’s inevitable that this will be the future of communication and commerce. The question you are grappling with is:
Should you take Web3 as a concept to your existing audience or build a new audience in Web3 by adjusting your narrative?
Let’s explore the pros and cons of both approaches so that you can make an informed decision about what's best for your brand.
PRO: Increased visibility.
One of the biggest benefits of taking your story to Web3 is that it will help you reach a wider audience. This is because Web3 is still in its early stages, which means there isn't as much competition for attention as there is on more established platforms like Facebook and Twitter. In other words, if you can get your narrative in front of people via Web3, you're more likely to be seen and heard than you would be on other platforms.
CON: Unfamiliar territory.
Of course, one of the downsides of taking your story to Web3 is that it's uncharted territory. This means that there's a lot we don't know about how people interact with content on this platform – what works and doesn’t work is still very unpredictable. What's more, because it's still early days for Web3, your potential audience is smaller than you’ve been used to via Web2.
PRO: More engaged audience.
Although the number of people using Web3 right now may be smaller than other platforms, those who are using it tend to be more engaged. This is because they're early adopters who are passionate about this new technology and its potential implications for the future. As such, they're more likely to pay attention to the stories being shared on this platform and engage with them in a meaningful way.
CON: Requires more effort.
Because there's still so much unknown about how best to use Web3 for marketing purposes, it requires a firm vision and a lot of trial and error which can be time-consuming and expensive. Additionally, since most people are still unfamiliar with this platform, you'll need to put in extra effort to ensure that your story resonates with the target audience and compels them to take action.
So, should you take your story to Web3, or bring Web3 into your story? There's no easy answer, and ultimately it depends on what's most important to you as a creator. If reach is your primary concern, then taking your story to Web3 might not be the best option since the user base is still relatively small. However, if you're interested in exploring the new possibilities that Web3 offers for interactivity and collaboration, then bringing your story to Web3 could be worth the effort.
In a recent conversation with Preston Johnson, co founder of WAGMI United & Co-Chair of Cawley Town Football Club, he shared his views on what it meant to build a business with both Web2 and Web3 audiences in focus:
“When the news broke in April that we were acquiring Crawley, they said How are you going to sell NFTs to Crawley Fans? Liverpool tried to sell 175,000 NFTs and could only sell 9,700”.
“So immediately I jumped into a fan AMA and said, that our intent is not to follow this approach. The reason Liverpool’s sale didn’t work is because 99.9% of the Liverpool fanbase doesn’t care about NFTs, and also, they were selling to the same people that they are asking for money all year anyway”.
“Our strategy is quite literally the opposite, and we didn’t want to force anything on our local fans, instead, we’re bringing a professional club to NFT fans. People that got the tech, got what we’re trying to do, and wanted to tell the story with us”.
But, by leaving the local fans to it, they have sought to educate themselves and join the project, many of them minting a WAGMI United NFT as their first.
Infrastructure is key
Harnessing Web3 technology can be expensive – but as an early adopter there is huge opportunity to emerge as a thought leader in the space with an amazing reputation.
Building a platform that allows for decentralized applications (dApps) is in many people’s opinions, the next big paradigm shift in customer experience. dApps are built on decentralized protocols which gives them a lot of advantages in terms of censorship resistance and security.
This opens new possibilities for interactivity and collaboration that weren't possible before. A dApp could allow readers to directly support creators by tipping them or buying digital goods like e-books. And because dApps are built on decentralized protocols, they can also be connected to other dApps in interesting ways. For example, a blogging dApp could be connected to a social media dApp, which would make it easy for readers to share your work with their friends.
However, Web3 is still a new platform, which means that there's not yet a large user base. This can make it difficult to reach your target audience if they're not already familiar with Web3. In addition, because dApps are still new, there's often a learning curve involved in using them. This can make them less user-friendly than traditional applications, which can be frustrating for users who just want to consume content and don't want to deal with figuring out how the dApp works.
I recently covered the requirement for market disruption in the Web3 space. Audiences will only grow and dApps will only find mass adoption, as businesses and individuals take the time to invest in and develop the techniques and technology.
It is my firm belief though, that the reward for being an early member of the pack, ready to push things forward in Web3, will ultimately be very handsome.