Keyword staking and consumptive model

Ad 1) I agree that Presearch has no clear anti-abuse policy and it allows “advertisers” to place any “ad” they want unless someone will “flag” it as “abuse/controversial” and it will be analyzed and may be removed by the platform.

This “free-to-use-for-whatever-reason” policy is distinctive in comparison to Google/Bing.

You know, Google doesn’t like affiliates and often doesn’t allow advertisers to place “affiliate” keyword ads (often requested by the affiliate program itself that doesn’t allow search engine advertising).

Also, Google/Bing have many restrictions concerning tolerated ad types such as…

  • Prohibited content: Content you can’t advertise on the Google Network.
  • Prohibited practice. Prohibited practices: Things you can’t do if you want to advertise.
  • Restricted content. Restricted content and features: Content you can advertise, but with limitations such as Sexual content, Alcohol, Gambling & Games, Healthcare and medicines, Political content, Financial services, Copyright & Trademarks.
  • Editorial and technical standards: Quality standards for your ads, websites, and apps.

And yes, some Presearch token holders may and some probably will use the keyword staking for “promoting” content that won’t show up in the (top) search results (as you are doing), and others use them for ads “forbidden” by Google/Bing.

And of course, you can have “sympathy” for specific keyword ads/promos placed on the Presearch platform that are impossible to place on Google… and for some, you can even argue that these ads should be free as to stimulate “freedom” of choice and/or to promote charity or other “good for humanity” events…

But in essence, keyword ads are a form of (paid) advertising, especially if placed on the #1 spot result placement… a place that can often be better monetized as explained in many other ways.

The only difference so far is that keyword staking was free (with a winner-takes-all model), or in other words… the PRE token has “utility”, i.e. something for free that you (an advertiser) should otherwise pay for.

(Just think about it… the lower the minimum PRE keyword stake threshold… the higher the presumed PRE token “value”)

So, yes, I do agree that keyword staking in the current form is meaningful for Tokenomics, and if we go for a full consumptive model (and stop with the “Free” advertising option ), in that case, the “utility value” will be gone, resulting (in theory) a negative effect on Tokenomics.

But there should be a balance between free ad utility and paid ad income (monetization)…

And as you don’t want to show too many ads on the search result pages, otherwise users will leave… you should decide what and how often you want to show paid vs free ads (the same decision the team had to make between the percentage of free background images vs PTA ads).

I focused on the monetization and user experience part (the quality of these ads)… and I also focused on the main user group of keyword staking ads… the “wannabe” affiliate types.

A significant part of these “affiliate ads” are forbidden on Google… and that’s for a reason… you may not always like the reasons but it’s not that Google doesn’t want to make money… they do think about user experience and have to apply to international advertising laws… or to say it in other words…

Just as Google has a more professional advertising platform it has a more professional “attitude” and can fall back on better “experiences” of what ad content should be allowed (by law and “moral” standards).

The small part of “free sympathy” ads is not something to ignore… but you can argue whether it should be the goal to give PRE token holders the free opportunity to promote anything they want… at the #1 spot…

Some (currently a minority) will use it for good practices such as promoting “charity” or “unknown content”… but others will use it for “bad” practices such as annoying (often irrelevant) “affiliate” ads or other intrusive ads.

For me, “banning” all affiliate (keyword) ads and adding more professional restrictions may be a solution to improve the ad quality and user experience.

I think “affiliate programs” can be better monetized by the team itself… if a user knows that a hyperlink is “trustworthy” and authorized by the team and by clicking you support the project… this will improve CTRs drastically (and the team will earn all income… resulting in higher ad income in comparison to free or paid keyword staking).

And yes, managing affiliate campaigns is labor intensive but if set up smartly, it can also be (largely) automated.

So, what you see as a USP, “give users the freedom to post any ad for free by staking PRE”, is in practice biased to “wannabe” affiliate marketers… resulting in a poor user experience, making this USP less effective.

Ad 2 The goal should not be to get as many keyword ads as possible as thousands of keywords and phrases that would otherwise never be utilized by any other traditional advertiser.

The focus should be on effective and interesting ads that users will like as they help the user with their search queries.

The current system fails to achieve this. In short, the ads are often annoying or irrelevant.

Now what about the possible negative effect of introducing (a full) consumptive system?

The moment you add a consumptive fee and/or you make them less interesting for the advertiser (such as placing the ads at the bottom, showing less frequently, shorting title/text seize)…

You can expect keyword stakers to stop their keyword campaigns (either fully or stop specific keyword campaigns).

This is a logical effect of making something less interesting.

Should we be afraid of the effects?

Look again at the stats…

There are just 16K staked keywords and 27M PRE staked.


What is the additional income if the platform charges a 1% staking fee per month (as Tim came with this example)?

Of course, it depends on how many of the current keyword stakers will continue with their campaigns (and how many will stop).

Let’s assume that 50% (of total PRE staked) will continue and the other 50% will stop, in that case, the monthly income will be $2970 (13.5M x 1% x $0.022).

That’s less than $100 per day.

So, that’s the “median” calculated income… the actual income will be between $0 and $200 per day.

I classify this as hardly interesting in financial terms.

You can just pay for some coffee for the team.

If you compare that with how much Google is earning for their best 16K keyword phrases each day…

I leave it over to the smart people to try to estimate this… but Google is earning several hundred times more in comparison to what Presearch can earn via this 1% fee of stake PRE per month model.

By knowing this… you can ask yourself…

Why the rush to (finally) start with consumptive fees for keyword ads?

Because it’s for many years on the roadmap?

And now we are looking at some (easy-to-implement) changes to get some additional ad income.

Why not mimic Google and create a professional keyword advertising platform that will attract professional advertisers and take some time?

And yes, I agree, by introducing a consumptive fee, there is the risk that keyword stakers will leave “en masse” if not implemented and communicated correctly.

But I’m not afraid of the effects for Tokenomics. Just to compare…

27M PRE tokens are less than 10% of the current node staking (active staked nodes ~260M, inactive ~30M).

Some keyword stakers will become node operators, others search stakers, and some will just stop staking. And only in this last group, there may be token holders who will sell their tokens. So what?

The token inflation is gigantic anyway.

But if these staked keyword ads are replaced by other ad types, and/or for a professional keyword advertising system… the team will earn substantially earn more ad income… with on balance, a positive effect on Tokenomics.

Ad 3) Yes, you can combine all kinds of ad monetization.

But you can’t show too many ads at once. So, you have to make decisions, and you better choose the most effective (taking into account user experience vs ad income).

I don’t agree with your assumption that if every keyword staker will get views no matter how much he stakes (more or less in the ratio of staking percentage) this will attract more keyword stakers.

Let alone, that this will lead to better ad copy and a better user experience.

By eliminating or worsening the winner-takes-all concept, there is no (or less) need to overbid and increase the stake. The reason that Google is making so much money is due to this bidding process.

Also, let’s say you want to bid on the term “Kucoin”, and every keyword staker will try to promote this CEX with their affiliate link. The ad title/text may vary a little, but in essence, the user sees the same ad content, and there is no “best ad copy” trigger.

If you compare that with Google which has created a system to reward the best ad copy (the higher the CTR the less CPC)… unfortunately, Presearch has no such system.

So, the user experience at Google is by definition better as ads with better ad copy are shown more frequently.

So, why not let these wannabe affiliates bid against each other to increase the PRE stake or CPC price?

Why reward “freebie seekers” with free ads?

In most cases, the advertisers who want to pay zero or less than the top bidder, their ad is less effective than the top bidder. So, more annoying for the user.

For example, for the keyword Kucoin, you may promote another CEX, let’s say Gateio… this ad is less effective, and shouldn’t be shown.

Anyway, it’s good to discuss these kinds of topics… but I’m afraid that the team will make a small change and introduce a marginal consumptive fee with a minimal effect.

I would leave everything the same as it is now…

So, no consumptive fee, and ads are shown at the bottom with the current winner-takes-all model.

You know the positive income effect of the consumptive model would be marginal while you unnecessarily chase away current keyword stakers.

The “problem” with user experience is already “solved” by moving the ads to the bottom.

So, finally, focus on setting up a professional keyword advertising system for professional advertisers for #1 spot placements who want to pay and are capable of creating professional ad copy.

And in the meantime, use the #1 spot for other ad types.

1 Like