Want to make money in Web3? I'd advise you not to rush into becoming a KOL just yet
TechFlow Selected TechFlow Selected
Want to make money in Web3? I'd advise you not to rush into becoming a KOL just yet
Don't count on catching "stray fish" from public traffic.
Navigating Web3 tides with focused insightsBy Liu Ye Jinghong
Let me start with some off-topic thoughts today, and also take this opportunity to thank the major influencers in the community for recently sharing my work.
I personally have an X account, but I currently don't plan to actively operate on X. This isn't a spontaneous decision—it's one I've carefully weighed over time. I'll begin with this point before getting into the main topic. I've been running this自媒体 for several years now. My readers are mostly old friends who've weathered multiple bull and bear markets together, and most of my followers have followed my content for many years, so I’ll be straightforward and share some honest reflections.
Why I Don’t Operate on X
To explain this, I need to first discuss the monetization logic for Web3 KOLs.
From a personal KOL perspective, it's actually very difficult to monetize purely through content itself. As far as I know, only a rare few—like Liu Jiaolian—can sustain themselves primarily through pure content monetization.
In my view, people in this space generally fall into two categories:
-
Crypto traders
-
Web3 users
The first group—crypto traders—won’t pay for "content"; they only pay for "traffic." A typical example is posting screenshots of hundreds-of-points returns on X or public forums, then teaching you how to trade. I don’t consider this content monetization. Fundamentally, it’s about using return-rate screenshots to attract traffic, then converting and harvesting it.
The second group are Web3 users—possibly professionals, entrepreneurs, or those who genuinely have comprehensive ideas about Web3 and are willing to think deeply. These users do pay for high-quality content, but they represent a very small proportion. Subjectively estimating across the entire crypto traffic pool—and filtering out all kinds of fake metrics—I’d guess this group makes up less than 20%.
More importantly:
This group shares a common trait—they think for themselves.
The more someone thinks independently, the harder it is to sway them into spending money with simple marketing tactics. This is far more challenging than “tricking a group of traders into joining a paid group.” Therefore, pursuing “content monetization” by chasing broad traffic on X holds little appeal for me.
The Most Common Monetization Method for KOLs: Promotions
Besides direct content payments, the most common way KOLs monetize today is through various forms of promotion.
Whether single sponsored posts, tweet-based product placements, or so-called KOL agency-led joint campaigns, these are fundamentally serving clients. In most industries, this business model is reasonable and legal. But this is crypto—a place where “fraud” can be packaged as “narrative.”
I personally am unwilling to take on significant legal and ethical risks for financial gain, let alone end up “fleeing abroad” due to a few promotional posts. So over the years, I’ve largely avoided such promotions. More realistically, these promotions aren’t guaranteed profits—the risk of blowing up or losing money is substantial.
Moreover, Web3 KOLs have now become fully industrialized.
Several MCN agencies are mass-producing Web3 KOLs:
They post content at scale across X, Xiaohongshu, and Douyin to drive traffic, collect users into private domains, and then conduct unified conversions—some sell courses, others earn commissions by guiding trades, while some directly encourage users to buy tokens. My自媒体 does none of these things, so I don’t see myself as a “KOL.”
I’m more like an independent writer sharing thoughts within the space, occasionally expressing personal views—nothing more. Over the past two years, my primary focus has actually been on “product-research-related incubation and services.” Below, I’ll share some personal experiences in this area—highly subjective, and possibly very different from your own understanding. If you disagree, that’s normal; everyone walks their own path.
Experience One: Use “Reverse Thinking” to Make Money
I’m somewhat of a product manager, and through work and collaborations, I’ve observed a very common pattern:
Most people start with:
“I have a good idea → turn the idea into a product or service → then find users, sell it, and scale up.” From a “product methodology” standpoint, this is certainly debatable. But purely from a “making money” perspective, I prefer reverse thinking:
First, clearly define: Who am I going to make money from?
→ Then design products and services around these “people willing to pay,”
rather than building something first and then searching everywhere for users. Among the projects I’ve collaborated on, some failed, while others made money.
-
Last year, I worked with a team on an RWA-related business. Their logic was very clear: they already had confirmed buyers for their assets
-
The buyers needed compliant, legitimate RWA solutions
-
Therefore, they reverse-engineered the need: create an RWA project to meet this pre-existing demand
-
This is a classic “buyers first, product later” approach.
In contrast, most projects I see look like this:
-
No clear buyer profile, no real demand
-
Constantly chasing market trends, switching stories, changing narratives, restarting hype
-
Hoping to catch a few “stragglers” from public crypto traffic
To me, this involves enormous uncertainty.
The probability of project failure exceeds 50% from day one. Let me give another concrete example to illustrate how “reverse thinking” helps generate revenue.
-
Previously, I collaborated with a friend on a content project—I provided a batch of high-quality content.
-
His logic was simple and pragmatic: he had access to real Solana community resources (both domestic and international)
-
He had connections with various community moderators, allowing him to post content in groups without being kicked
-
I produced high-quality content, which he distributed across these genuine communities
-
People in the communities were naturally drawn to the content and initiated private conversations
-
He then moved these individuals into new groups for secondary engagement
-
When meme season erupted, he introduced a CA into this already “pre-screened” group, encouraging them to jump in
The result? He indeed made a significant profit during the recent pump.fun boom.
The key here was:
-
He already had buyers: a real, reachable user base
-
Then brought me in to provide the service: high-quality content tailored to these users
-
Only then could monetization happen
Why do I believe “reverse thinking for profit” is more likely to succeed?
This leads to my second lesson.
Experience Two: Clearly Assess Your “Sunk Cost” First
In the race to make money, “ideas” are the least valuable asset.
Everyone has their own ideas and paths to profit. An idea you come up with, someone else has likely thought of too—perhaps earlier and more thoroughly. So the question becomes: when everyone has ideas, what breaks the deadlock?
The answer: execution.
Ideas are always constrained by execution. Many people have ideas, but those who actually act on them are fewer than one in ten.
Most people stop at “watching how others make money,” retreating when it comes to taking action themselves. Take a more universal example—food and beverage.
Many people have considered a similar path:
“Once I have some startup capital, I’ll open my own shop.” But when it comes time to actually open the shop, they often choose a “safer” route: franchising.
They hope to leverage external support to bypass the execution costs of starting from scratch. The result?
They hand over control of the most critical supply chain capabilities and pricing power to others,
ending up in the kinds of “franchise pitfalls” we often see in news reports. This example illustrates two points:
-
Execution capability is scarce
-
Execution is ultimately limited by “cost”
Why do so many people prefer paying franchise fees rather than starting from zero?
-
Because execution has costs: learning costs (e.g., mastering supply chains)
-
Communication costs (coordinating suppliers, managing staff, negotiating with landlords)
-
Time and energy costs (you must actually be present in the store, not act as a passive owner)
I collectively call all these: sunk costs.
And execution is precisely what gets blocked by sunk costs. So when you truly plan to start a venture, I believe your primary motivation is likely profit. Before acting, one sequence is crucial:
-
First, assess the sunk cost: What will I have to sacrifice? Time, money, relationships, energy, reputation—evaluate the price across all dimensions. Can I afford it even if everything fails, blows up, or collapses?
-
If the sunk cost seems acceptable, then consider: execution ability—given your current resources, skills, and manpower, do you stand a chance of doing it well?
-
Only then should you ask: within this business logic, can you incorporate your own “creativity and ideas” to create differentiation?
Get the order wrong, and it easily becomes:
Idea → excitement → start executing → halfway realize the costs are unbearable → abandon midway
Not only failing to make money, but also leaving yourself stuck in a difficult position.
Conclusion
If you see the crypto space as a giant casino, then most people spend their days discussing “how to play the cards.”
-
Rarely does anyone seriously ask: Who owns this casino?
-
Who designed the chips?
-
Who wrote the rules?
-
And am I really a player—or just a chip?
Choosing not to operate on X, refusing to play the traffic game—this is merely a personal choice for me:
I’d rather spend my time on projects serving real needs, engaging with those who think independently and are willing to pay for value. If you’re also thinking about how to earn money, start ventures, or transition careers in this industry, I hope you remember two things: find the “buyer” first, then build the product.
Don’t count on catching “stragglers” from public traffic—that’s the game of KOLs and institutions, not ordinary people. Calculate your “sunk cost” before discussing execution and creativity.
No matter how brilliant an idea may seem, if the cost is beyond your capacity, it’s just an illusion. As for how to find your own group of “buyers,” and how to evaluate your tolerable sunk cost,
maybe I’ll write about it in detail another time.
Join TechFlow official community to stay tuned
Telegram:https://t.me/TechFlowDaily
X (Twitter):https://x.com/TechFlowPost
X (Twitter) EN:https://x.com/BlockFlow_News
