Pros & Cons for Rebranding LeoFinance

Rebranding LeoFinance sounds like a great idea as we want to build an "Everything App" for everyone. The existence of the word Finance may make people think that the app is not for their interest areas although there is no content limitation on the platform.

There are some great suggestions from Lions that emphasize the side of short-form content, a sense of community, and engagement. Some people come up with new brand names, which are totally independent of Lions or LEO, whereas a group of us still want to have some direct or indirect references to LEO. My humble expectation is to have a brand name with some inner references to our existing brand.

Do not forget, you can share your suggestions for 500 HBD prize by LeoFinance team.

Rebranding with Pros and Cons

In my daily life, I am interested in the economy, finance, crypto and the stocks market. As LeoFinance is a good place to engage with like-minded people, it became one of my first sources to learn about some ideas. Although there is a match between the name of the platform and my interest areas, I never questioned the harmony between them. However, when we think of photo enthusiasts, sports lovers, and other groups of content creators, rebranding is necessary.

First of all, remember that Facebook has become Meta, and Twitter is becoming project X of Elon. Social media platforms are renewing themselves in a way to integrate themselves into the new way of digital engagement: Attention Economy.
X is rewarding content creators with hundreds of dollars for their impressions and Meta is doing its best to be the first everything app in the competitive race.

The monetization of content is no longer something new in the world of engagement. Rather, the importance of content ownership, via blockchain as we do on Hive, freedom of speech and trustless platforms are the features that are almost impossible to find among actively used alternatives. It is even possible to make gains with some adult content if the case is monetization but owning your own content is the priority.

Rebranding is risky in its nature. You may think it like a face swap of a person who was eager to look like a different person. With rebranding, we may also lose the current popularity of the platform among some groups of crypto enthusiasts. Thus, we need to assess the risks wisely and make a clear SWOT analysis before we jump into that idea. LEO has some audiences who follow it remotely.

Timing & Action Plan

In terms of timing, I believe it is the right time for that shift. The process might be a bit tiring but I frankly believe that it will be worth it. The marketing power of ours will be fully based on the app that is targeting a wide range of audience with its catchy brand name. Sounds pretty good 😉

When it comes to the action plan, I think we may face some "less prioritized" concerns. For example, tokenization or monetization are no longer scarcely found narratives, however, true ownership, trustless security of data, and freedom of speech are also narratives that are not valued well enough. At that point, we need to prove that both monetization and all these narratives are served perfectly at the top of Hive blockchain with a couple of years of experience.

Time to prove that there is a real Web3 with all features and values for everyone via rebranding.

Hive On ✌🏼

Posted Using LeoFinance Alpha