KOL (Key Opinion Leader) marketing has always been an important means of promoting Web3 projects. However, recently emerging platforms such as Kaito and Cookie have introduced a new "social fission" model involving a large number of micro KOLs, claiming to use AI and decentralized mechanisms to reshape the marketing landscape. How does this new model compare to traditional KOL marketing agencies? This article will conduct an in-depth comparison through real data and cases.

In the context of limited traditional advertising channels (such as limited audience for X platform advertising and strong regulatory resistance from Google advertising), project parties have turned their attention to KOL marketing on social media and innovative promotion activities driven by Kaito and Cookie. For example , when the Spark project launched an activity on the Cookie platform, it attracted 13,400 X accounts to participate, most of which were micro KOLs with less than 1,000 fans. Such a large lineup of long-tail KOLs is difficult to cover with traditional paid promotion, which also reflects the uniqueness of the new model.

This article will analyze the operating mechanism and effect of the Kaito/Cookie model, compare its advantages and disadvantages with traditional KOL marketing, explore the problems and opportunities, and provide decision-making references for B-side readers such as project parties, investors, and marketers. We will avoid generalizing and try to base the discussion on real data and facts.

What is Kaito?

In short, they are new platforms that use a large number of small and medium-sized KOLs on social media to promote themselves . Project parties publish marketing activities on Kaito/Cookie (such as Kaito's "Yap" activities or Cookie's social tasks), set up reward mechanisms (usually tokens or points), and allow many KOLs to freely participate in writing content and spreading project information. The platform distributes rewards based on the volume and interaction brought by each participant through an algorithm, thereby tokenizing attention : the more attention a KOL attracts, the more rewards he or she gets. This model is somewhat similar to " Yap-to-Earn " (making money by posting): let KOLs produce content and spread information in order to obtain rewards.

Advantages of the operating mechanism:

Unprecedented marketing scale

Compared to the traditional method of inviting only a few KOLs, the new platform can mobilize thousands of "small accounts" to speak together and achieve viral fission on social media. As mentioned in the Spark case above, tens of thousands of accounts participated in an event. Although these micro KOLs have few fans, they are huge in number and have a significant long-tail effect.

Flexible cost allocation

Kaito's Yap campaign is seen as a sign of its successful strategic transformation - significantly reducing marketing costs by leveraging "free" KOL leverage. The traditional method requires contacting KOLs one by one and paying high fixed fees, while Kaito only publishes a task page and sets algorithm weights and reward distribution rules. Many KOLs voluntarily participate in the promotion when they see that it is profitable, without the need for project parties to negotiate quotes one by one. The project party mainly pays the overall service fee and a certain proportion of token incentives, eliminating the cumbersome process of middleman matchmaking. The transparent algorithm allocation of data also enhances credibility. Many KOLs are willing to accept lower rewards and join, helping project information spread rapidly.

Decentralized and easy to manage

In the past, it was extremely difficult to manage hundreds of KOLs at the same time, but Kaito/Cookie provides a platform-based tool to make the ambassador program more decentralized and standardized. After the project party formulates the rules, a large number of small accounts can join on their own, and the platform automatically counts content data and calculates rewards. This allows marketing activities to expand in breadth while remaining controllable and easy to manage in execution.

The main problems are:

Content quality and signal-to-noise ratio

The influx of micro-KOLs is inevitably mixed. Many accounts mechanically produce content for rewards, and even use AI to generate stereotyped posts. As some analysts have pointed out, the X platform has recently been flooded with similar "industry in-depth analysis" posts, which appear professional but are actually empty, the interaction is formal, and the content is highly homogenized. This is figuratively likened to an "encrypted elevator advertisement" - the same information is played repeatedly in a closed space. In the short term, this bombardment can enhance memory, but users will soon develop aesthetic fatigue and turn a blind eye to the stereotyped content. When the platform is occupied by homogeneous content and KOLs are forced by algorithms to produce repeatedly, an information echo chamber/closed loop is actually formed, and truly valuable new content is difficult to reach the audience. It can be seen that Kaito's "mouth-rolling" mechanism has a hidden danger of failure in content quality , and too many low-quality advertising posts will lead to distortion of industry information dissemination.

Audience overlap and overexposure

Micro KOLs often follow each other and have overlapping circles. When hundreds or thousands of small accounts forward similar information together, it may seem like a huge volume, but in fact, the people covered are highly repetitive . Many participants are fans of each other, and information spreads back and forth within a small circle, making it difficult to reach a wider new audience. In **high-frequency activities (such as frequent Yap/Snap airdrops)**, this overexposure caused by audience overlap is particularly obvious - target users will easily get bored and disgusted when they see the screen-filling information repeatedly. In the end, despite the investment of a lot of resources, the conversion rate of new users may decrease.

It is difficult for top KOLs to participate effectively

Although Kaito/Cookie focuses on long-tail KOLs, for top KOLs with a large number of fans, a small reward that simply relies on the platform algorithm is far from enough to attract them to invest their time. Such big Vs usually either do not accept this kind of task-based promotion at all, or require additional high remuneration. Some project parties reported that even if they released activities through Kaito, they had to pay extra to invite top KOLs to the platform , and Kaito was just an intermediary to contact them. This means that if you want to cover both the long tail and the head, the project party has to spend "three times" : a platform service fee to Kaito (according to feedback, about 150,000 USDT), a project token reward to a large number of small and medium-sized KOLs, and finally a separate payment to a few top KOLs. With such triple payment , the actual effect may not be ideal, and the cost-effectiveness is inevitably worrying.

ROI benefits are questionable

Ideally, the Kaito model should leverage a large amount of publicity with a relatively small budget, but in reality, many project owners have questioned its input-output ratio. Industry insiders have reported that many project owners have complained that after spending a lot of money on Kaito, "most of the results were AI advertising accounts," and the effective voices that really reached the target audience were very limited. In other words, most of the budget turned into noise and did not translate into equivalent users or word of mouth.

In addition, from the perspective of creators, Kaito's algorithmic incentive mechanism may depress the value of content : some mid-level KOLs, whose market price for each piece of content starts at $500, are willing to accept returns far below the market price on Kaito. In the short term, they join for points and rankings, but in the long term, this may reduce their creative enthusiasm or depth of expression (as some people have criticized, some creators can only exert "50% or even less expressiveness" under this model). These factors may weaken the efficiency advantage that the Kaito model should have over traditional marketing.

The Kaito/Cookie model boldly commercializes attention and enables the participation of a large number of small KOLs, which indeed brings scale and fission that the traditional model does not have. But it also introduces new challenges: how to control information noise, filter out valuable real voices , and solve the problem of insufficient coverage of top KOLs. This decentralized marketing is more like a double-edged sword, which can become an efficient lever or evolve into more ineffective noise.

The Current Status of Traditional KOL Marketing Agencies

Traditional KOL marketing is usually operated by professional marketing agencies. The project party gives the budget to the agency, which then looks for suitable KOLs, negotiates quotations, plans promotional content and release timing. This model has been running in the Web3 circle for many years and has served many mainstream protocols (Mantle, Aptos, etc. have agencies to undertake marketing activities). Compared with the emerging platform model, the operation of traditional agencies is more sophisticated and the relationship is closer , but it also faces some inherent pain points and bottlenecks.

Advantages of traditional agencies:

Strict screening and core list

Excellent KOL marketing agencies attach great importance to the quality of KOLs. In terms of screening criteria, they generally believe that the number of fans is not the most important indicator (importance is only about 2.93/5). On the contrary, the real exposure of each post, the quality of interaction and the proportion of "smart fans" are more valued (importance 4.1/5); in addition, the content quality, research ability and past professional experience of KOLs are key assessment indicators (importance as high as 4.7/5). To this end, all agencies will check whether the account has fake traffic, and more than half of the agencies use data tools such as Kaito and Cookie3 to screen and evaluate the quality of KOLs. Through these measures, the agency will select a group of "core KOL lists" from the huge KOL library for key cooperation. The survey shows that nearly 50% of agencies only rely on 50-100 core active KOLs in most activities, even if the total number of KOLs in their reserve may be thousands. It can be seen that they pursue a " few but good " strategy to ensure the promotion effect.

Content control and strategic coordination

Traditional marketing emphasizes the combination of content and strategy , not just publishing. The agency will customize the communication points for KOLs according to the characteristics of the project. Some voices focus on technical depth, some are good at humorous popular science, and some provide professional endorsements, each performing their duties to form a combination punch. Excellent agencies are well aware that "KOLs are not miracle workers". No matter how big the Internet celebrity is, they cannot make a bad product successful out of thin air; but on the contrary, a good content strategy can make the KOL's voice more convincing. Therefore, they often adopt some effective methods : for example, encouraging long-term and continuous voice ( long-term repeated posting can build fans' trust and bring higher conversions), arranging interactions between KOLs ( cross-quoting opinions rather than simply forwarding official announcements can create a more real discussion atmosphere), using less blunt official language (let KOLs express themselves naturally in their own language, and the community is very sensitive to hard advertising), focusing on interaction in the comment area rather than purchasing placement ads (real users' discussions are often more touching than banner ads), etc. These techniques often require the coordination and guidance of the agency to be effective.

Multi-platform reach

Traditional agencies are also more diversified in their promotion channels. They will not put all their eggs in one basket, X (Twitter), but will combine multiple channels such as Telegram communities, Discord, Substack articles and even offline activities to build a stereo volume for the project. The reason is simple: although the X platform is the main battlefield for crypto discussions, it is full of noise and too much content that users just swipe past. On platforms with a higher signal-to-noise ratio such as TG and Substack, more serious audiences can often settle, leaving in-depth exchanges and better conversion rates. Therefore, the Agency will help the project break out of the limitations of a single platform and integrate multi-channel marketing resources.

Limitations and challenges of traditional agencies:

High cost and poor scalability

Unlike Kaito, which opens tasks with one click and allows thousands of KOLs to join, each additional KOL in the traditional model means additional communication and expenditure . Agencies need to negotiate and sign contracts one by one, and the communication process is cumbersome, with a lot of room for bargaining and low efficiency. This makes it difficult for them to call thousands of accounts at the same time like Kaito does - managing dozens of KOLs is already quite strenuous, and more will be too much to handle. In addition, the quotes from big Vs are very high, and some top KOLs charge five-digit dollars for a tweet. If the project party wants to cover more audiences, it is bound to increase the budget, but the input-output ratio does not necessarily increase linearly. Therefore, traditional marketing is often constrained by the budget : if there is more money, more KOLs will be hired, and if there is less money, a few key KOLs will be selected, which cannot achieve low-cost large-scale reach.

Traditional KOL marketing agencies have their advantages in professionalism and control. By carefully selecting KOLs and customizing content strategies, they can create relatively high-quality communications for projects. However, it is limited by the scale and cost of manual operations, and its coverage of popular communities is relatively insufficient. Moreover, in the current noisy market environment, even agencies can hardly guarantee that every investment will have output - marketing uncertainty always exists. This leaves opportunities for new models like Kaito, but the traditional model will not die, but will continue to optimize itself as the industry develops (paying more attention to long-term community management, multi-platform operations, etc.).

Comparison of the differences between the new and old models: Which is better?

In summary, we have sorted out the core differences and advantages and disadvantages between the Kaito/Cookie model and the traditional KOL agency model :

Breadth of coverage

Kaito/Cookie relies on platform fission to mobilize a large number of micro KOLs in a short period of time, creating an overwhelming voice. Traditional institutions tend to focus on a limited number of top/middle KOLs , whose voice is relatively controllable. The former casts a wide net, while the latter catches big fish, and each has its own focus.

Cost Structure

Under the new model, the project budget is divided into platform service fees + token incentives, and payments are more result-oriented (KOLs need to interact to get rewards). On the surface, small KOLs help to promote "for free", reducing cash expenditures. But in fact, project parties often still have to pay a lot, and the total cost may not be less than the traditional one, and even "three payments" may occur. In the traditional model, the budget is mainly paid to KOLs and institutions in the form of fixed fees . The money is spent clearly, but the unit price is expensive and lacks flexibility. Compared with the two, the Kaito model may be more friendly to small and medium-sized projects (future tokens can be exchanged for current publicity), but it adds additional costs to projects that require top influence.

Content Effect

The traditional model has relatively high content quality and credibility due to the careful selection of KOLs and strategic control. Generally, KOLs will create original or in-depth interpretations of projects. Even if the number is small, they are often meaningful and can arouse a certain degree of trust. However, Kaito/Cookie is driven by rewards, and the content is full of templated propaganda , and the content of real discussion is low. There are marketing accounts that "pay to shout 24/7" everywhere, but there is a lack of voices from the heart. Excessive marketing may also cause disgust. Senior users can see at a glance that this is an airdrop task text, but question the value of the project. It can be said that the new model has increased the volume , but it may not be better than the traditional model in terms of influence . As someone recently reflected: "Chattering ≠ strategy, mind share ≠ influence" - crazy screen swiping does not mean truly impressing users.

Data Monitoring and Transparency

Platforms such as Kaito are based on algorithms and data , and provide rankings, indicators and other tools to quantitatively measure KOL contributions. Project owners can see in real time how many people are participating, how many posts are interacting, etc., and have an intuitive understanding of the effectiveness of the activity. This transparency is also one of its selling points. Traditional marketing relies more on manual summary of feedback, and the information may not be transparent and timely. However, excellent agencies will provide reports and analyze KPIs regularly, but the industry lacks unified standards. Under the Kaito model, because everything is recorded on the chain or platform, fake volume is easier to be discovered, and theoretically it is more fair . But on the other hand, the rationality of the algorithm itself becomes a new problem - if the algorithm indicators cannot truly represent the quality, then data transparency is meaningless. For example, a user once rushed to the top ten of the Kaito rankings with only three hot content, which raised questions about the effectiveness of the algorithm.

Impact on all parties in the industry

For project owners, Kaito provides a new tool to quickly detonate the volume of voice , but they need to be wary of the side effects of excessive noise; traditional agencies are steady partners who may be more reliable in brand building and in-depth management. For KOLs, the new model lowers the threshold for participation, and everyone has the opportunity to realize their influence, but it may also lower the average income and dilute the value of high-quality content. Some mid-level KOLs lose money to gain publicity in order to compete for points, which may lose motivation in the long run. For marketing agencies, Kaito is undoubtedly a challenger or even a predator - it eats away at the market share of the original agencies that match KOLs. Many people joke that Kaito is essentially a marketing agency in an AI shell , but it has a high valuation of more than 1 billion FDV. This reminds us that old wine in a new bottle may not double its value unless it truly improves efficiency and effectiveness. At present, Kaito is impacting traditional agencies on the one hand, and traditional agencies are also learning these tools and even incorporating them into their own systems on the other. The future pattern is likely to be a fusion and coexistence of the two models : large-scale campaigns use platforms to create momentum + core KOLs to detonate at specific locations, while small projects flexibly use community fission to acquire early users.

Summarize

Based on the above analysis, Kaito/Cookie marketing and traditional KOL marketing have their own strengths and weaknesses, and it is difficult to simply assert which is better. KOL marketing will not disappear, but what the industry urgently needs is a real and persuasive voice, rather than a 24-hour paid shouting account full of scripts. For project parties, instead of being obsessed with the number of KOLs or short-term voice, it is better to focus on cultivating KOLs and communities that truly recognize the project ; new models can be used as tools for trial, but it is important not to put the cart before the horse and let marketing gimmicks overshadow the value of the product itself. After all, if the product lacks highlights, no matter how many KOLs create momentum, it will only be short-lived; on the contrary, a potential project, combined with an appropriate marketing strategy, can achieve twice the result with half the effort.

Platforms such as Kaito and Cookie provide a new experimental field for Web3 marketing. They take marketing in a decentralized direction, which is in line with the spirit of the crypto industry in concept and also gives opportunities to grassroots creators. However, the ultimate goal of marketing is to gain the mind and trust of users, which requires long-term cultivation and real interaction to achieve. Whether decentralized or centralized, efficiency and reputation are what the project party cares about most . If the noise brought by a new model is greater than its value, the market will eventually adjust and examine it calmly.

As industry insiders have said, Kaito and Cookie only provide a lever, and it is still unknown whether they can become a truly effective marketing tool. We need to continue to observe how these platforms improve their algorithms and content quality, and how traditional institutions respond to innovation. Perhaps the ultimate solution is to learn from each other: let AI and data assist human strategic decision-making, and find a balance between large-scale coverage and high-quality reach.

FAQ

Q1: What kind of projects are Kaito and Cookie marketing suitable for?

A1: Suitable for projects that require short-term large-scale exposure, have sufficient budget, and are mainly targeted at "coverage". However, it is not suitable for projects that have high requirements for reputation and precise conversion.

Q2: What are the advantages of cooperating with KOLs through ChainPeak?

A2: As an institution, we have the power to negotiate in bulk, and the price is much lower than that of individual project parties. And the screened influencers are not AI accounts. Long-term cooperation can also enjoy customized packages and annual discounts, saving more than 30% of costs.

Q3: Why are many of Kaito’s contents posted by AI accounts?

A3: Platforms such as Kaito have an open participation mechanism by default, which can be easily abused by advertising accounts that generate AI content, resulting in a decline in content quality.

Q4: How do traditional KOL agencies avoid this problem?

A4: Traditional institutions generally have clear screening mechanisms, and the cooperating KOLs are mostly manually operated and have real interactions, so they can be precisely targeted by field.

Q5: Is the price really more expensive?

A5: It depends on the demand. Kaito service fee plus token incentives and top KOL fees may be much higher than the customized quotes from traditional institutions.

Q6: Can they be used in combination?

A6: Yes. Some projects use Kaito for basic exposure and then cooperate with traditional KOLs to build key reputation, which is more cost-effective.