


Polkadot
We turned Web3 education content into clips their community actually shared.


Case studies · Crypto & Web3
242M+
verified views across eight crypto & Web3 tokens.
Every campaign below, and every number on it, comes from a live dashboard. Add it up yourself.
The tokens we have run


















Case studies · Crypto & Web3
Here's exactly what each of these eight campaigns delivered, pulled straight from the dashboards we ran them on.



We turned Web3 education content into clips their community actually shared.





Distributed staking and DeFi content across the feed instead of one channel.





Explained blockchain simply enough for a retail audience to actually watch.


Made decentralised identity into clips people actually watched to the end.





Turned Bitcoin coverage into thousands of clips built for the feed.





Built exchange reach without waiting on ad approval.





NFT and Web3 communities pulled together around one drop





Crypto news reframed as clips the timeline actually shares.


Method & proof
How the results happen
Why it is verifiable
The next campaign
Eight are on the board with the receipts to prove it. Bring the ninth and we will run it the same way, verified views only.
Start a campaignNo ad accounts · Custom CPM · Live in 72 hours












How to read this page
A case study page is easy to fake, so the useful question is not how large the numbers are but how they were produced. Here is the counting rule behind every figure above, and the shape of the campaigns that produced them.
Each figure counts views on real creator accounts that passed bot checks and sat under a per clip cap. An impression number for the same campaigns would be considerably larger and considerably less honest.
Every campaign runs against live dashboards. The number published here is the number those dashboards showed, which is also the number the client was billed on.
These eight campaigns differ in length, budget and market. The 242M+ total adds them up. It is not a promise about what any single campaign delivers, and it should not be read as one.
None of the eight required an approved ad account anywhere. That is the structural point of the model rather than a coincidence of these particular campaigns.
Campaign shapes
The eight brands above fall into a small number of repeatable shapes. Recognising which one you are is usually enough to know whether clipping fits before you speak to anybody.
A token has a date and needs attention concentrated around it. The campaign is short, dense and timed to the bell. Success is measured on verified views delivered inside the window rather than over a quarter, which is why a 24 to 72 hour start matters more here than anywhere else.
An established chain or protocol has news that deserves reach beyond its existing audience. The constraint is rarely budget, it is that paid crypto inventory is restricted in the exact markets that matter. Organic creator distribution routes around the approval gate entirely.
A product that is live and needs consistent feed presence rather than a spike. Clips run continuously, budgets stay flat month to month, and the useful metric is cost per verified view holding steady rather than a single large number.
A podcast, AMA, panel or long interview already exists and is reaching almost nobody. One asset becomes many clips built for the feed each will run on. This is usually the cheapest campaign to start because the source material is already paid for.
Running the ninth
| Stage | From you | From us |
|---|---|---|
| Brief | One source asset, your markets, your claim rules and the date it has to be live | A read on whether clipping is the right tool, honestly, before a quote |
| Setup | Approval on the creator shortlist and the claim rules | Creator matching by hand, clips cut and reviewed against your brief |
| Live | Nothing operational | Distribution across TikTok, Reels, Shorts, X and Telegram, live within 24 to 72 hours |
| Reporting | Nothing to reconcile | A live dashboard, with removed posts and rejected views already deducted |
| Invoice | Payment on verified views only | A custom CPM applied to what actually landed, no retainer and no minimum |
Straight answers
Because they are views rather than impressions, capped per clip, and net of anything that failed a bot check or was taken down. An agency reporting impressions on the same campaigns would publish a much larger figure for the same work.
The eight above span exchanges, layer one ecosystems, NFT marketplaces, media and infrastructure. If your vertical is not represented, say so on the call and we will tell you plainly whether the pattern transfers.
Client spend is not ours to publish. Pricing is a custom CPM, so the useful comparison is cost per verified view against whatever you are paying now, and we will map that on the call.
You pay for the verified views that landed. There is no retainer to absorb and no minimum to make up, so a campaign that underdelivers costs you less rather than the same.