[Non-constitutional][RFC] ARB Incentives: User Acquisition for dApps & Protocols

Proposals
25

I’m very interested in this proposal, which wants to optimize user acquisition strategies and improve the growth efficiency of the ecosystem.

Previously, IOSG proposed a growth framework, which I strongly agree with:
The proposed growth framework operates as a self-reinforcing system, beginning with comprehensive user analysis and service optimization. This foundation attracts high-calibre projects to the ecosystem, fostering healthy competition in serving user needs. As these projects optimize their offerings, they generate sustainable MEV through organic user activity, creating a virtuous cycle where enhanced user retention drives ecosystem value. This increased value, in turn, attracts both additional users and innovative projects, perpetuating the growth cycle and strengthening Arbitrum’s network effects. ARB's Wake-Up Call: A Critical Pivot is Necessary

The proposal is based on this core idea, and on that basis, some personal questions

  1. This proposal is worth trying in many places, after doing it first, you can iterate to see how effective it is, how to do the balance here with so many projects allocated for the 3 million dollar program?
  2. Why not integrate it with LTIPP/STIP instead of creating a separate program?
    • Arbitrum DAO already has LTIPP and STIP to facilitate ecosystem development, increase TVL and acquire users. While these programs have not been very effective and have encountered some problems, why not refine their frameworks instead of introducing a completely separate program?
      3, It is mentioned here that the true effectiveness of these campaigns is measured through kpi and then data tracking and analytics. does the tool provided by Patterns have an advantage over the existing data analytics tools? These on-chain data tools already provide a lot of analytics capabilities, where is the value-added that Patterns provides? And it costs $15,000 to hire 2 full-time staff. All funds are honored according to KPIs, but what if the project falsely declares KPIs? Is there a strict verification mechanism?

my opinion consider combining with LTIPP / STIP or extending the program to improve overall governance efficiency, need more detailed LTV / CAC calculation methodology and impact tracking program.

1 Like