I honestly think that Ryan is wrong to continue 'focusing' on South America. His stuborness on this strategy is worrying. No matter how well intended it is, it is wrong to put too much focus on a market in an underdeveloped region.
We need someone who is present in the crypto space and promotes the hell out of Dash and I have much doubt that this new head of marketing will be able to do so.
I understand Ryan's reasoning, but he needs to face up to reality and that is that crypto still is a speculative asset and therefore you need to primarily attract speculative investment where it is available!
Honestly, everyone involved in Dash needs to step up and do their part in promoting Dash on all his available channels. Promote Dash on social media (Twitter, Youtube, Reddit, Facebook ...). Use your existing accounts or make new ones to talk about or promote Dash. Get active. Add comments about Dash to popular crypto videos, but also on Dash's official videos. Get the number of views and comments up. Add comments about Dash on tweets. Make memes. Whatever. Make noise. It will have much more effect than the 'Venezuela' adoption strategy. Hundreds, thousands of Dash holders spreading the message is far more powerful than what any single 'marketing' person can ever achieve.
It's been more than two years since I said that, and nobody paid attention to me.
I always put the same example. I have traveled to South America, and there they perfectly accept euros and dollars, do you know why?
Well, because it is the currency that is used mostly in international trade in the first world.
Do we want Dash to be used in South America by precarious and weak economies or for it to be used in the first world and then spread to the rest?
I have nothing against projects in South America, there are people and projects with potential there, but to sell something popular, you have to promote it where there are large movements of people and capital.
Make Dash go mainstream in countries like the USA, Europe or Japan, and I guarantee that South America will run after dash and not dash after South America.
Absolutely my take on this, but the DCG CxO level persists and it seems most MNOs are still following along. Adoption needs to come more naturally and not through subsidizing. We likely? have something good going there, I respect the work and effort that has been put in it, but it does not (seem to) create the network effect we are after.
Vote accordingly.
I've again provided this feedback to Ryan directly on the Dash Talk discord. I've already done this over a year ago, but it had no effect.
Give 1000 Dash tomorrow to random wallets in South America, and I guarantee that all Dash holders, as soon as they know how to convert it into dollars, will do it quickly.
They won't even wonder what Dash is, if it's a coin, a reward for being smart, or a McDonald's promotion.
And this I tell you because I know it, and I have seen it.
Not only happens with Dash, the same happens with LTC, BTC ...
Countries with significant needs for essential consumer goods do not think of investing or maintaining a long-term investment when they can convert it into dollars that they need for yesterday.
This would not surprise me at all.
Masternodes do not vote in a coherent way, after long years of throwing money into a bottomless pit, we can openly say that masternodes vote without thinking or evaluating the project.
I have always said that if there is no good project, it is better to burn the dash in an address without a private key than to deliver it to a bad investment.
Therefore I vote No on everything that it is not DCG or development related. Unfortunately the DCG package is always "everything or nothing".
I support Dash Watch too as otherwise there would be zero control over the grants, but it would be better to simply not vote for these projects that promise adoption, et cetera. I asked DCG and the Dash community to take on a LEAN & MEAN approach about a year ago and I'm not sure if the message got through in any way.
Imagine if all the Dash thrown in bad projects had been invested in gold for example on behalf of the holders.
For each Dash to have, for example, 1/20 part of an ounce assigned ... wouldn't this have been better?
Perhaps yes, but we should not need this. I simply see most of those projects as waste or low/no return. The quintessential problem is that too many masternodes look or looked at the treasury money as 'free money' that must be spent and that is not correct.
My whole life has been dedicated to investment, and venture capital, and I have seen enormous stupidity here when it comes to distributing the budget.
I still remember Ryan spending thousands of dollars to change the Dash logo when a 14-year-old photoshopped it just as well.
Then people like F. Gutierrez who passed through the Dash Core Group with hardly any noise.
Years ago I asked please to hire a global marketing company, and they told me no, it was better to wait for the product to be finished.
While the product is being finished, the price drops from $ 500 to $ 60.
Good product, bad management, that's Dash.
I see these problems also.
Don't get me started on Fernando, I asked for his resignation more than a year ago. Some people were upset, because they take this as a personal attack. It's not, it's nothing personal at all. It's about seeing that someone is not a good fit for the job and with Fernando it was very obvious. Of course his support is very welcome, but you cannot be in the CMO position imo.
Dash has truly great development (referring to layer two in the model I posted here), but the highest abstraction layer has issues. It's possible that the base economics layer (high MN service rewards) also creates a problem (as previously discussed here). It is hard to deny that these problems are not somehow related to the non technical CxO level. It was acceptable when Dash was a small project, but to go from $1B market cap to $10B is going to require a stronger CxO level (strategies, promotion, et cetera) and a smarter more conservative MNO network. Things have improved though, I can see that DCG has taken some of the feedback into account and provides better communication towards the community. The level of treasury scamming or exploitation has also drastically reduced. I just don't know if it's going to be enough.
It is a challenging position to be in, with many people having high expectations. I understand that, but this should not be an excuse.