Hi dob,
Thank you for the thoughtful and constructive response. I appreciate you taking the time to engage with the proposal and for adding useful context around the current governance process, funding initiatives, and marketing challenges.
Based on your feedback, I think it makes sense to narrow the scope of the proposal rather than trying to address treasury strategy, governance, marketing, product strategy, and token economics all at once.
However, after looking at the current Explorer data, I also think the urgency needs to be stated more clearly.
Recent usage trends suggest that Livepeer may be facing a demand replacement problem, not just a marketing or governance problem.
If a major legacy live-streaming demand source such as Trovo winds down or stops contributing meaningful usage, then the network cannot rely on the old livevideo/transcoding demand base to carry the protocol economy.
This creates a much more urgent question:
What new products can realistically replace that demand, generate recurring usage, grow fees, and create value for the network and its delegators within the next 3 to 6 months?
That is why I think this proposal needs two tracks:
- A focused pilot/RFC for treasury discipline, milestone-based funding, SEO, community activation, delegator alignment, and performance-based growth.
- A separate emergency stabilization plan focused on replacing lost demand through the new product lines closest to revenue.
The strongest near-term area of alignment seems to be treasury risk management, milestone-based accountability, and urgent product-led demand generation.
1. Treasury Stable Buffer
I still believe it is worth exploring whether part of the active treasury should be diversified into stable assets to reduce exposure to market drawdowns and improve operational predictability.
To be clear, I am not suggesting an immediate aggressive treasury move or a sudden large conversion that could negatively impact the market.
A better approach would be risk-managed treasury diversification over time, using predefined limits and execution safeguards.
A possible first step could be to explore a 15 to 20% stable asset buffer, implemented gradually and transparently, with clear limits, reporting, and community oversight.
2. Clearer Milestone-Based Funding
I agree that generating real demand is easier said than done, and I do not want to imply that funded teams are not trying. My concern is more about the structure of funding and how strongly it is tied to verified traction.
A possible improvement would be to separate baseline operational funding from performance-based funding.
Baseline funding could support necessary public goods, infrastructure, maintenance, and core development work. Larger follow-on tranches could unlock only when predefined milestones are met, such as verified network usage, integrations, recurring demand, user acquisition, fee generation, or other measurable outcomes.
The goal should not be to stop funding experimentation. The goal should be to reduce open-ended funding risk and make the path from funding to measurable network value more transparent.
3. Governance and Delegator Participation
Thank you for clarifying the existing governance structure. I understand that stake-weighted governance and delegator override rights already exist today.
My concern is not that the mechanism does not exist. My concern is the practical gap between having governance rights and actively using them.
Most delegators are unlikely to follow every proposal closely, review every funding decision in detail, or actively override their orchestrator’s vote. As a result, governance may technically be available to token holders, but in practice many delegators remain passive.
So rather than proposing a full replacement of the current governance model, I think it would be useful to explore better visibility, alerts, summaries, and UX around major treasury decisions.
This could make existing governance more effective without requiring a radical redesign.
4. Product-Led Demand Generation
On the marketing point, I agree that the raw protocol layer may not be the right thing to market broadly to end users.
A more practical approach would be to market the new product layer, gateways, APIs, developer tools, and specific AI/media use cases that make Livepeer’s capabilities easier to access.
The focus should not be on trying to revive old livevideo demand as the main growth path. The focus should be on new products that can create fresh demand, including AI-driven media, creative tools, real-time media workflows, and other productized use cases built on top of the network.
Developers, startups, creators, and AI/media teams are not looking for node infrastructure. They are looking for reliable, affordable, easy-to-integrate solutions for specific problems.
That is where problem-first content and SEO can become very valuable.
Livepeer could identify the exact pain points people are already searching for and build content around those problems. This type of content can work like a demand magnet: it attracts people who already have a problem, then routes them toward the Livepeer product layer when there is a clear fit.
This is not just content for awareness. It can become a market discovery engine.
If certain topics attract traffic, signups, product usage, leads, integrations, or builder interest, that gives the community real data on where product demand exists.
The initial SEO foundation does not need to take months to organize. The first 30 days could be used to build the core structure: topic clusters, keyword maps, content briefs, comparison-page opportunities, landing-page priorities, tracking requirements, and a publishing roadmap.
Execution can then be handled through specialized contributors, community bounties, or external partners with clear deliverables.
5. New Product Revenue and Delegator Alignment
One important point is that new products should not only create usage in a general sense. They should also be designed to generate measurable crypto-native revenue for the network where technically possible.
If Livepeer already has existing infrastructure where network usage can generate ETH-denominated fees or other crypto-native payments, then new products should try to use or extend those rails rather than creating isolated revenue streams that do not benefit the protocol economy.
This matters for delegators.
Delegators are currently exposed to inflation, market downside, and the loss of previous demand. If new products generate usage but that value does not flow back into the Livepeer network economy in some form, then delegators still carry the risk while product value may remain disconnected from tokenholder value.
So part of the product strategy should be:
- create new product demand
- route usage through Livepeer where technically possible
- generate measurable fees in ETH, stables, or other crypto-native payments
- make fee generation visible in dashboards
- explore how those fees can supplement or support delegator yield over time
This does not need to require a complete redesign if existing fee infrastructure can already support part of this. The key is to make sure new products are not only useful products, but also value-accruing products for the network and its delegators.
6. Community Activation and Social Proof
Passive delegators are not only a governance issue. They can also weaken the strength, visibility, and social layer of the ecosystem.
If most delegators only stake passively and do not actively understand, discuss, share, or identify with the products being built on Livepeer, then the network loses a major potential advantage: its own community as a distribution and credibility layer.
This can be improved through better communication, social media, product storytelling, and community education.
Delegators should not only see themselves as passive token holders. They should understand what Livepeer products are solving, which markets they target, what progress is being made, and how network usage connects back to the long-term health of the protocol.
If delegators identify more strongly with the products and use cases, they are more likely to share updates, discuss progress, create content, give feedback, participate in governance, and help create social proof.
Marketing should therefore not only target external users. It should also activate the existing Livepeer community and help passive delegators become more informed, engaged, and product-aware participants.
7. Performance-Based Partner and Affiliate Growth
Another practical way to reduce upfront marketing risk would be to introduce a performance-based partner and affiliate model.
Instead of relying only on fixed marketing budgets, Livepeer could reward contributors, publishers, developers, creators, agencies, and community members when they generate measurable outcomes.
This could include rewards for qualified B2B leads, developer signups, first product usage, new applications built on Livepeer, tutorials that drive onboarding, or customers that create recurring network usage.
The benefit is that part of the growth budget becomes performance-based. Livepeer pays when there is a verified result, rather than paying large upfront retainers without knowing whether a channel will work.
To protect the treasury and avoid low-quality spam, this should be tied to clear tracking, attribution, quality standards, and milestone-based payouts.
Rewards should be based on verified outcomes, not just impressions or vague awareness.
8. Suggested Next Step
Since there appears to be some agreement around treasury diversification, milestone-based funding, and improving accountability, I think the most productive next step would be to turn this into a narrower RFC.
This should be framed as a practical pilot/RFC, not as a full protocol overhaul or a complete rescue plan.
A focused first proposal could cover:
- risk-managed treasury diversification over time, using predefined limits and execution safeguards
- a possible 15 to 20% stable asset buffer for treasury risk management
- clearer reporting on treasury outflows versus measurable network demand
- milestone-based funding tied to verified usage, integrations, leads, or fee generation
- better visibility and UX for delegators around major governance and treasury decisions
- a 30-day SEO and content-led demand generation foundation
- a clear framework for how new products generate crypto-native fees and how that value connects back to the Livepeer network economy and delegators
- community activation and social media to help passive delegators become more product-aware and engaged
- a pilot program for performance-based community bounties, partner referrals, and affiliate-style growth
This would keep the scope realistic and allow the community to evaluate concrete improvements instead of debating the entire long-term strategy at once.
To be clear, I am not suggesting that Livepeer should stop funding public goods or core infrastructure. Those are essential.
My point is that treasury-funded growth initiatives should become more measurable, more performance-based, and more directly connected to real demand and value accrual for the new product layer.
Thanks again for engaging constructively. I am happy to help refine this into a more concrete RFC if there is interest from the community.
Emergency Stabilization Plan: 0 to 180 Days
The proposal above is intentionally framed as a focused pilot/RFC. But if the recent Explorer data reflects a structural demand shock rather than a temporary fluctuation, then Livepeer also needs an emergency stabilization track.
This should not be framed as panic. It should be framed as treasury discipline, product focus, demand recovery, and delegator alignment.
The goal is simple:
Protect runway, reduce waste, identify the fastest paths to real usage, and rebuild demand around new products that can generate measurable network activity and crypto-native fees.
Phase 1: 0 to 30 Days, Triage and Focus
1. Lost Demand Replacement Analysis
Before discussing long-term growth, the community needs a clear view of what demand has been lost.
If a major customer or usage source has stopped or is winding down, the key questions are:
- How much usage did that source represent?
- Which product line did it use?
- Which gateways or SPEs were exposed?
- How much fee generation disappeared with it?
- Was this usage profitable, subsidized, strategic, or low-margin?
- Can similar demand be replaced, or is that market no longer a priority?
Without this analysis, the community is guessing.
If Livepeer is moving away from relying on legacy livevideo/transcoding demand and toward new AI/media products, then the strategy needs to be explicit: which new products are expected to replace the lost usage, on what timeline, with what revenue targets, and with what go-to-market support?
2. Treasury Spend Review
Temporarily review all non-critical treasury-funded initiatives.
This does not mean stopping essential infrastructure, security, protocol maintenance, or critical public goods. But every non-essential or speculative initiative should be reviewed against current urgency.
During a demand shock, treasury spend should prioritize survival, usage, product-market validation, and products that can create measurable network fees.
3. Milestone Gate Freeze for New Large Allocations
No large new treasury allocations should be approved without:
- clear deliverables
- measurable usage targets
- reporting requirements
- timeline
- success/failure criteria
- expected path to fee generation
- pause or milestone-gating logic where possible
The community should not continue open-ended funding while demand is falling.
4. Concentration-Risk and Fee Dashboard
Add a dashboard or monthly report showing:
- top demand sources by percentage of network usage
- product-level usage trends
- recurring versus one-off usage
- fees generated per product path
- ETH, stable, or other crypto-native revenue where applicable
- treasury spend versus demand generated
- how new product revenue connects back to network value and delegators
If one customer or product line can materially change network usage, the community needs to see that concentration risk clearly.
Phase 2: 30 to 90 Days, Product-Led Demand Recovery
5. Prioritize New Products Closest to Revenue
Livepeer should focus resources on the new product paths most likely to create measurable demand within 90 days.
Priority should go to products that can create real usage and generate measurable crypto-native fees through Livepeer’s existing or easily extendable fee infrastructure, so new product traction is connected back to network value and delegator alignment.
This is not the time to spread resources evenly across every idea. The community needs focus.
The priority should be the product lines closest to real usage, real customers, recurring fee generation, and value accrual for the network.
6. 30-Day SEO and Demand Foundation
Build the demand foundation immediately:
- keyword maps
- topic clusters
- pain-point landing pages
- comparison pages
- product onboarding content
- use-case pages
- tracking and attribution setup
- conversion paths from content to signup, usage, or contact
The goal is not just rankings. The goal is to identify which pain points create real interest, leads, product usage, and customer conversations.
7. Outbound and Partner Sprint
Run a focused outreach sprint toward the users and companies most likely to need the new product layer.
This should be tied to specific product offers, not vague ecosystem messaging.
8. Performance-Based Bounties and Affiliate Pilot
Open a small pilot for community and external contributors.
Pay for verified outcomes, such as:
- qualified B2B leads
- developer signups
- first product usage
- published tutorials that drive onboarding
- comparison pages that bring qualified traffic
- social content that increases product awareness
- integrations that create measurable usage
- customer acquisition that generates measurable network fees
Avoid paying for vanity metrics. No rewards for empty impressions, spam traffic, or low-quality content.
Phase 3: 90 to 180 Days, Decide What Survives
9. Kill, Pause, or Scale Based on Data
After 90 days, every growth initiative should be reviewed.
Scale what produces:
- real usage
- qualified leads
- recurring demand
- developer adoption
- fee generation
- product integrations
- community activation
- measurable value accrual for the network
Pause or stop what does not.
10. Treasury Reallocation Based on Demand and Fees
Future treasury funding should increasingly follow evidence.
If a team, product, or campaign creates measurable network demand and fee generation, it earns more support.
If it only produces narratives, roadmaps, or vague ecosystem value without measurable usage or fee potential, it should not receive large follow-on funding during a demand crisis.
11. Delegator Communication Reset
Delegators need a clearer monthly view of:
- what products are growing
- what demand was lost
- what treasury funded
- what milestones were met
- what usage was generated
- what fees were generated
- how product revenue connects to the network economy
- what risks remain
- what decisions are coming to governance
Passive delegators become more active when the information is clear, relevant, and connected to their economic exposure.
12. Six-Month Success Criteria
The emergency plan should define concrete six-month targets.
For example:
- stabilize or reverse the decline in network usage
- reduce demand concentration risk
- increase qualified product leads
- increase product onboarding
- increase fee-generating usage
- improve treasury reporting
- make all major growth funding milestone-based
- create a clear connection between new product revenue and delegator alignment
- activate delegators through clearer product and governance communication
If these targets are not met, then the community should be honest that the current structure is not working and deeper changes are required.
Summary
The current situation should be treated as a demand and concentration-risk warning.
Livepeer does not only need better marketing. It needs product-led demand recovery, treasury discipline, milestone accountability, crypto-native fee generation, and a stronger community distribution layer.
The immediate priority should be:
- protect runway
- stop vague spending
- focus on new products closest to revenue
- make sure new products create measurable network fees where technically possible
- rebuild demand through SEO, outreach, partnerships, and bounties
- show delegators how new product revenue connects back to the network economy
- measure everything
- scale only what works