Subscriber-only contents are cool, but small creators need this instead

First off, kudos to Leo for what it's built so far, it's impressive, although the UI isn't quite there yet, maybe it's time to shift some attention to developing the mobile app.

That said, the Subscriber-only feature that has been introduced isn't what creators here need.

The average Hive user isn't creating content worth subscribing to, sorry, but everyone knows this.

Now, this does not mean that Hive creators are incapable of creating such high value content, it's just that the demand for it isn't there, so it would be a waste to do that.

You're building something for consumers that are not here because creators here are not creating the type of content they consume.

Remember ad revenue? Well, that is dead now. Reasons why?

Creators here weren't creating content that would drive traffic that makes these pages generate as clicks. Frankly speaking, you cannot blame them because there were no worthwhile incentives to do so.

Most of our “SEO-Oriented” creators are gone. Remember Finguru?

We've stagnated. Frankly declining. Hive is dumping due to the lack of external interest. Leo token votes are not worth jack, and its Hive curator account has been turned into something I don't wish to give a name.

Does Leo not have a business advisor? Are we carrying out any market study? Peakd just launched Snaps, well oh snaps, Leo is about to lose a chunk of its active threaders.

Multiple frontends fighting for the same small userbase, the story continues.

Pay A Portion Of Leo Premium Fees To Creators!

I have said this before, and I'm saying it again.

First time I said this was on December 10, 2023, here's the post for those that care.

Guess what? X just recently updated their Creator revenue sharing program to share revenue from premium fees to creators instead of ads.

Will Leo finally take my advice seriously now that X is doing exactly that?

Maybe, let's see in a couple of months.

I don't have the luxury of time to write too much here. I did this market study way back in 2023 and saw an opportunity Leo could have leveraged, but it seems Leo was more interested in filling up the liquidity pool.

To sign off, here's what Leo should do: when a user subscribes to premium, use $4(40%) to buy back Leo and fill the liquidity pool - that's beneficial to investors.

The outstanding fee, $6(60%) should become a virtual tipping value each premium account holds.

When said premium account interacts(votes) with a content(thread or post) from another premium account, the system takes a record of the votes to premium accounts and the percentages headed out.

At the end of the premium term(30days of being subscribed) of this account, the system analyzes all data and distributes that $6 amongst all accounts that were voted in proportion to the number of votes received and the percentage.

This is bound to boost how many people will sign up for premium knowing that they would hold a significant vote value and likewise, other small premium creators they interact with can also reward them.

No more ass licking whales. No more terrible content from creators because they now have to compete for the most votes from other regular creators and consumers.

The best part is generating revenue and value for creators and the platform outside the Hive rewards pool.

This is what Medium has been doing for years, this is what X is now transitioning to. Noticed that “subscribe-only” content didn't take off on X?

That's because it's not viable unless you're selling “how to make money” as a creator and have proven records or you're selling pussy.

Neither of those things are here on Hive.

Leo still has a chance to beat X to maximize this(as a blockchain alternative). But what do I know?

I'm just a researcher.

By the way @khaleelkazi, I've been reaching out and having my team reach out to you and your team to discuss some marketing proposal that will actually bring results, yet to get a hit back.

See you Hive, whenever next!