T-Marketing


Гео и язык канала: не указан, Английский
Категория: Telegram


Everything you should know about communication trends, Telegram (and a little bit of TON)
Beware of the visionaries inside!

Связанные каналы

Гео и язык канала
не указан, Английский
Категория
Telegram
Статистика
Фильтр публикаций


From personal observations.

With the launch of TON and (possibly, from day one) the official Telegram wallet for approximately 300 million active messenger users, the world of the blockchain will seriously change. I don’t know if you thought about it, but this number is many times larger than the entire existing user base of all other blockchain projects combined.
Somewhere (in my estimation) 10-15 times. For understanding, there are now about 27 million wallets (not users) in bitcoin. Blockchain.com provides statistics on 40 million addresses in general for all blockchains. At the same time, it is very likely that no less than two-thirds are those who have wallets in a variety of "networks". I would carefully evaluate the existing user adoption at 10-15 million people.
And now, potentially, this number will grow to 300, in one day.

All of these people, for the most part, have never dealt with crypto or blockchain.

This will create a huge layer of new questions and problems, traditional for a sharp transition in adoption from early adopters to early majority.
The amount of scam, spam, fraudulent schemes, and, at the same time, niches for new business models, will also increase many times.

If (even if not) everything goes as it should, in November Telegram will be awash with users running through chat rooms, channels, bots (and even over the ceiling) trying to understand what is happening.


A detailed illustration of the polarization of American society on the example of the voting of various groups in Congress from 1975 to 2012.
Please note that the count of Republicans and Democrats used to intersect much more, due to a larger number of "connected" mediators. Now there are almost none, and the gap is catastrophically growing, exceeding the level of the beginning of the 20th century.

It's funny that it began with the collapse of the USSR.


I waited for a while to write about Puerto Rico, but the protests in this, de facto, state of the USA, have been going on for the last week.

The essence of the protests — the demand for the resignation of the governor.
The reason — local journalists through their sources in the chat, pulled out 900 pages of correspondence between the governor and his team, which they conducted in a private chat in Telegram.
Degree of protests escalated to such an extent that Trump and even Ricky Martin already got involved in the case (if you remember, this is the dude who sang Livin la Vida Loka and something else).

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/07/16/us/puerto-rico-governor-rossello-private-chats/index.html

Thanks to these scandals Telegram firmly occupied the top of the Puerto Rican AppStore and Google Play.
So not all privacy scandals are harmful, and it’s impossible to call ordinary social engineering a Telegram problem.

It’s still worth remembering - people decide everything. People, not technology :)


The polarization of society is a direct consequence of the internetization and penetration of social networks.
We tend to have around 150 "weak ties", which include sources of information.
When life and the Internet throw 100,500 people onto us, the media, services, brands, and opinions (and all this takes the “connection” slot), we have to filter and share in order to stay at a comfortable level.

As a result, people are gradually becoming radicalized in their reactions, they are draining, cleaning information space and becoming increasingly sensitive in order to clean up their surroundings even more radically.
The more incoming channels of information, white noise, and people, the stronger the desire to fence.

The Snowflake Generation is a generation of people defending themselves from the ever-increasing amount of random social and informational contacts.

Therefore, Facebook or Twitter fight with hate speech makes me funny. Social networks are struggling with what they themselves generate. Ouroboros, snake devouring its tail.


Mini tip. For those of you who share links to posts from Telegram outside, for example on Twitter.
Add /s/ after t.me in the link, thus showing a normal preview of the channel + if the post had a sequel, it will also show.
https://t.me/s/tgmarketing_en/19 for example.


3. Structure. Yes, a powerful and correct structure can involve many people in the community. Give them a clear instruction, funding, and roles - they, most likely, due to the disorganization of the rest of their lives, will begin to do something. Communities around places, by the way, also belong to the “structural” one, as these people want, do not want, cook in the same territory. Public spaces (the unfortunate Pit, new Moscow public space which became contradictory popular in just about 3 months) also belong to this type of community.

✅Summary: all elements can be expressed in the community (experience, ideas, structure), or two of the three, if there is only one thing, then, as a rule, it is not formed. The fastest way to form communities: ideas> experience> structure. If there is no ideology, then experience > structure.
The structure > ... approach is the most complex and, oddly enough, the most frequently used, especially in the novice hallucinations.

P.S. As always, errors fixes are appreciated.


Over the past three months, I talked about the community 5 times in a presentation format, as a result, except for the finally formed basic presentation (from 20 to 45 minutes of the story) I packed the base into two key theses, more or less understandable at any level of competence.

There is always a community, even if it is not visible

Regardless of whether your product/business/initiative has a community or the potential to create one, working with the community is possible and necessary.
Is it possible to build a community around a grocery store? In theory - yes, in practice it is not necessary. But most likely, your customers are still part of a community that you can work with.

Examples:
— the gentrification of sleeping areas leads to the fact that local activists and the community around them can squeeze out or not let them open in the house, for example, Dixi (it's Russian cheap prices retail brand)
— if you are looking for money for your project, it may be worth joining the community of business angels - by attracting one, you give everyone else a signal that you can put money in you.
— when Discord was launched (it's an instant messenger for gamers), they did not create their own community. Instead, they gave the tool for more convenient communication to other communities.

✅Summary: people live and communicate not within the framework of abstract strata, and not even within the framework of abstract social graphs, and certainly not alone, but within communities. Even if you do not have your own and do not need it, you still need to study the principles of the community - it is worth any marketer or manager.

The community will start only if people need it

Let's start a group, let everyone communicate with us... Mmm, anyone? Businessmen, marketers, guys from the Forbes list, women from 29 to 31 with bad habits. So it does not work. To create a community, it has to be necessary for those you've gathered. What will they communicate with each other about? The weather?

There are three ways.

1. The general ideological base, and the ideological base, which benefits from the fact that it is discussed, and people with this base feel better among like-minded people.

Example: all underground, marginal movements are brilliant examples. In terms of organizing a community, they give a head start. It is much easier to gather around a gay club, kinky-party, libertarian movement, or, God forgive me, flat-earth theories. When society as a whole does not share your ideas, you seek an echo chamber. Mainstream values are more complicated; here ideology will not help much.

2. General occupation. It has to be useful to unite and do something together.

There are three different ways.

— a collaboration is when jointly common tasks are solved together, and the benefits are also shared. Lobbying industry interests, for example, is a collaboration. Wikipedia too.
— cooperation, this is when private tasks are solved together and the benefit is also private. For example, kinky-party (sorry). Joint procurement - cooperation in its pure form.
— competition. Yes, competition can also be an important factor in joint activities. Almost all games are built precisely on competition, which "unites" the community. In the end, even showing off boys in front of girls, and girls in front of boys (and sometimes in mixed versions) in private chat rooms - this is also it. The general occupation is capable to unite, but only if it is. Competition in the queue to the store for the last bottle of beer - not considered


Scam skills, lvl.100


A delightful and absolutely necessary for understanding the Internet landscape, the annual report on the Internet trends in 2019 from Bond, by authorship of Mary Meeker, arrived. This is one of the best review materials that you can see, I recommend.

A lot of interesting.
- For example, in 2018, the share of Android for the first time in 10 years decreased.
- The average price for a customer acquisition (CAC) continues to grow, in FINTECH it's already under $50 - this makes almost all advertising (and businesses) unprofitable even in a long run.
- The share of Facebook is falling, and Youtube, on the contrary, is growing, but Instagram is also growing and (suddenly for many, but obviously for those who follow) Twitter is growing.
- The podcasts are growing at a giant pace (yes, yes). In the US, the number of podcast listeners was 70 million MAU, in 2008 there were 22 :)

For other insights, go through the link :)
Enjoy and have a nice day. Or night.


TechCrunch released the article about the GRAMs (TON cryptocurrency) listing on the Liquid exchange, initiated by the Gram Asia fund.
Hand on heart, it looks like PR of Liquid - the stock exchange is not the first echelon. This is evidenced by referral mechanics - for example, “earn grams attracting friends”. The method is viral, but typical of b2c projects.

In addition, there are questions about how such a “sale” fits into the terms of the 1st and 2nd rounds of TON / GRAM sales. In the market, in principle, there is supply and demand, but this is done very carefully, quietly, through the sale of shares in funds. And then the exchange, public, techcrunch. Either the guys are very brave, or stupid, or something is not said :)

(This is a personal opinion, not associated with any company)


An interesting scientific study on the topic of ISIS distribution in Telegram has been published.
In short, the authors of George Washington University analyzed how the ISIS English-speaking supporters use the instant messenger to distribute their ideas.
There are a lot of curious figures, details, but I especially want to highlight recommendations on how to deal with it.

First, the study emphasized that "Heavy-handed approaches—such as weakening or limiting encryption, or banning Telegram—are disproportionate, ineffective and create negative side effects."

Secondly, it is recognized that Telegram's distributed legal and architectural infrastructure creates difficulties with judicial and regulatory influence.

Third, and this is important, the authors propose to encourage Telegram to cooperate with non-governmental, industrial organizations, standards and platforms, such as the Global Internet Forum for Counter Terrorism (GIFCT) or Tech Against
Terrorism’s Knowledge Sharing Platform (KSP), emphasizing that Telegram's competence in dealing with extremist content can be of great benefit to the entire network community. The proposal focuses on the fact that communication with the messenger should occur through independent, non-pro-state resources.

I really like this rhetoric: a long-term, if not instant, self-organization of the industry is much more useful than thunder, lightning and prohibitions from above. No one disputes the fact that terrorism is evil, but even greater evil is to pour a child with water, destroying a sense of justice and restricting the freedom of communication under the sauce of protection from fanatics.


Geo based chats & discovery. Soon. Already in beta.
As long as the long awaited group & channels ownership transfer.




Telegram added seamless login through bots.
What does this mean in practice, apart from comments (picture below)?

Cases are many. I will highlight two of them.

1. CPA

Yes, it is CPA advertising. And not only with the transition to the advertiser's site, but also with a subscription to his bot. This is a double lead - a person goes to the site, and then, if the target action has not happened, you catch him up with your bot. Well, for example.

2. Onboarding in Web-based bots is now reactive

In fact, the button works even better than the usual /start of the bot. Do you understand why? Because for two taps (first on the link, and then on the permission) they give a total of three actions - transfer to the site, authorization in the bot and launch (or rather permission to send a message) of the bot.
And launching a bot into the same two actions (open the link to the bot, press start) does not transit anywhere, but only launches the bot.
On the example of @combot - earlier, for example, onboarding looked like this:
- Tap on bot's username
- Tap on the start button
- receiving the first message from the bot
- Tap on the login button in the bot (or on the login link in the message)
- go to the site
- tap on the widget button
- a huge login confirmation process via telegram widget (what the hellish hemorrhoids to do it in the built-in browser of the phone, since you need to close the browser to confirm the login)

Now it fits in tap on 1 link.
Comments are superfluous.

If you have your own thoughts on what unexpected mechanics can be done with a new seamless registration via bots, write me in the PM, I'll post your cases with a link to you or your chat / channel.
By the way, if you notice errors in my posts (stylistic, grammar and so on) - I will be grateful if you'll correct me through private messages :)


A few thoughts about why the advertising market in Telegram has not yet formed (and what prevents it).
There will be several long texts, today I will write about the formats.

The first reason for the weakness of the advertising market in the TG - a limited number of effective formats.

Obviously, the platform does not have enough ways to show advertising and accompany it with a link - advertising without a link can not even be considered, it is either a political post or a top brand decided to spend a penny on a couple of hundred thousand of coverage (in addition to millions of budgets for regular media advertising).

✅What works:
- posts in the channels
- mailing in bots
- personal recommendations in chat rooms
🙄What works, but so-so
- add advertising to bots' service messages
- pins in chat rooms
❌ What does not work:
- spam in private messages (Telegram works great with this type of spam)
- spam in chat rooms (and as the Combot CAS evolves, things get worse)
- sponsored channels in a proxy (most of the proxies are ad-free)
- advertising through stikpak (links to the channel or chat or bot in the title)

Channel posts are text. Maximum - text with a picture. In the era of interactive advertising in the stories and roundabouts, it is hard to surprise and hook the user with the text “buy our coffee maker”.
Round videos, games, gifs, stickers - it's all fun if awareness is needed, but basically everyone needs advertising from advertising.

In the end, there are two options:
- put the text with a link to the channel, or send it through a dozen bots ready to send advertising.
Why without personal recommendations in chat rooms? Because it is necessary to work with the community, which almost no one can do, almost no one can grow evangelists, and honestly, no one knows how to scale it except by referral links - and for that a) people are beaten in the face now and b) it is the substitution of meaning by form.
And besides, it is hard to automate if you don’t understand the principles :)

As a result, we have what we have - a text with a link. That's all. In the next post I will tell you why making a good text with a link is another quest.


Some funny news on Saturdays.
Telegram was a little offended in Israel after it began to offer Emoji with dollars as a clue to the word "jew": 💵 💸💰 :)
Telegram quickly apologized and removed this option, referring to the error of the moderator, who missed it in the system - I want to remind you that Emoji system is offered by users.

Traditional risks of UGC content moderation.


Made some analytics of spam topics in the Telegram groups.
Based on the CAS stats, the three most common topics are:

- airdrops and crypto (mainly in the English segment)
- advertising of Telegram channels and groups, most often with wiring such as "trader diaries" (expressed the same in all languages, but use different buzzwords, in English for example it's IQ trading)
- drugs (the Russian segment is in the lead)

Obviously, Telegram perfectly blocks spam in private messages, otherwise there would have been no such mass campaign in chat rooms.
Well, in the chat rooms we have, by the way, the platform itself does certain things to prevent spam as well.


An analysis of publicly available data from AppAnnie and Sensor Tower for April / May 2019 shows that our recent assumption about the accelerated growth of Telegram in African countries is confirmed.

The approximate number of official iOS / Android client installations in April was about 10 million users (2 million on iOS, 8 million on Android), against 8.5 million in March.

As in the previous cases, the growth of the platform in a particular country begins with the users of iOS devices, as more advanced and responsive to new trends in the region.

Along with Africa, Telegram is growing in several European countries, as well as in South America and Asia.

In the case of Europe, we can talk about the cumulative contribution of at least two events:
✔️ mass ban of a number of political and "TMZ-style" (yellow news about online celebrities) of bloggers on Facebook, Youtube and Snapchat, in particular:
- Podemos, Spain, left-populist party
- Laura Loomer, Alex Jones and other alt-right activists in the US
- Aqababe, France, tea (Atlantic article in case you're not aware of "tea"), althought he closed his first channel and started the new one.
- Tommy Robinson, UK, far right activist

✔️ Durov's program statement on insecurity WhatsApp against the background of the serious problems of this messenger in particular, and Facebook in general.

In addition, the growth in a number of countries and regions was also affected by the massive blocking of social services due to tragic/political events in Sri Lanka and Venezuela, which caused Telegram growth not only there, but also in neighboring countries of the region.

The growth of the platform in the CIS is due to general trends that emerged as far back as 2018, and with the exception of the peak take-off in Ukraine due to such factors as the use of the new President Zelensky Telegram channel as the main platform, as well as the permanent VKontakte (russian leading social network) ban, everything is stable and you can talk about the gradual conquest of the region.

The list of countries with the greatest growth in service in April-May 2019 was (not limited to):
Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Kazakhstan, Bolivia, Cambodia, Israel, Tajikistan, Azerbaijan, Kenya, Armenia, Venezuela, Qatar, Portugal


From European countries, ups were (and continue):
France, Great Britain, Slovenia, Romania, Sweden, Slovakia, Macedonia

You can also note the peak jumps that have not grown into consistently high positions in the stores, in countries such as:
Papua New Guinea, Gambia, Panama, Costa Rica, Paraguay, Turkey


Absolutely, of course, the leftist article from Facebook co-founder, Chris Hughes.

For starters, Chris makes a fair claim to both Facebook as a whole and Mark personally: the platform has accumulated such opportunities to influence American society, which no one has ever had, and Mark’s ambition to “dominate” (direct quote) is not the best motive to use such power.
Secondly, and this of course just recently seemed to be utterly insane, Hughes proposes to split FB into separate companies, removing at least WhatsApp and Instagram from the management of Zuckerberg and his team.
Thirdly, Chris calls for the creation of a government agency dealing with user privacy issues that would do something like a European GDPR. And there would be nothing strange in this, such initiatives can be welcomed, that is when everything ends on completely awesome notes.

> Finally, the agency should create guidelines for acceptable speech on social media.
Starting from this part of the article, Hughes encourages the creation of guidelines for free speech. Say, the Internet is filled with Haight, let's protect democracy.
So hello. State censorship at its best. Once Mark can not cope, you need to intervene.
And the article ends with a passage in the best traditions of the authoritarian regimees statements:
> Mark Zuckerberg can't fix Facebook, but our government can.

My personal attitude to this story, of course, is twofold.
Privacy must be protected. FB really turned into a monster.
Encouraging the government to create "norms of freedom of speech", which in itself contradicts the freedom of speech as a concept - nonsense. And it is also proposed to turn on the "regulator" and play back all earlier decisions when FB allowed to conduct WhatsApp and Instagram deals and grow into principle.
State, help.

Unfortunately, Chris, in my opinion, is missing the point: the state as an institution, in its current form, should go to the dustbin of history. The farther, the more obvious that only decentralized, self-governing systems are ways to transfer civilization to a new stage of development. Centralization at one time was the answer to the crisis of manageability - but information technologies now allow to solve these issues.
Following any technological revolution, there is a revolution in government and state institutions.
Industrialization led to the collapse of empires.

What will lead informatization, we will see in our age.

Not Mark or any other person, and not the state should be involved in regulation.
Community. Only the product / service / platform community itself has the right and should deal with the regulation of its ecosystem.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/09/opinion/sunday/chris-hughes-facebook-zuckerberg.html

Показано 19 последних публикаций.

122

подписчиков
Статистика канала