Included in this repository is analysis of the positioning of alternatives to the Tokenize platform relative to the wants of market segments.
To determine how to best make Tokenize a desirable platform, we identified the characteristics of possible target market segments – Corporate Brands, Digital Artists & Creators, Influencers, and NFT Hobbyists. We performed rudimentary analysis to compare the existing wants of possible customer bases to the needs met by existing alternatives to our product and determined that it would be best to target artists and creators as our analysis shows that their needs aren't currently satisfied.
Alternatives are assessed based on their positioning on two axes:
- Accessibility on the y axis
- Functionality on the x axis
The "accessibility" axis is used to quantify the ease of using an alternative, with respect to the required monetary investment, background knowledge, and time commitment. The "functionality" axis refers to the level of control an alternative gives the end-user, as well as what exactly the alternative allows the user to do pertaining to things like site design, NFT specifications, and contract deployment.
To quantify the above, alternatives were assigned scores from 0-10 in various metrics pertaining to the axes, where the higher the score is better. Scores were assigned by achieving consensus on the personal experience of Tokenize's founders while investigating and testing alternatives to our platform.
Each metric is assumed to have equal weight in the value of the axis they belong to. As such, the positions of alternatives on the axes were determined by summing their scores and taking the percentage of their total possible score for the axis.
Accessibility was measured using two metrics. "Simplicity" reflects how easy it is to use an alternative, and how much time it would take to be able to achieve what Tokenize offers. "Resource requirement" reflects the amount of prior education AND monetary investment required to use the alternative. To be consistent, a high score in resource requirement means that minimal resources are required to use the alternative.
The max possible score for accessibility is thus 20, and axis values are calculated as: Accessibility = ((Simplicity + Resource Requirement) / 20) * 100
Functionality was measured using three metrics. "Features" refers to how much one can possibly do in terms of storefront and NFTs using a given alternative, i.e drop NFTs in different ways, implement and use things like SEO, site analytics, etcetera. "NFT Control" refers to how much freedom an alternative gives the end user with respect to things such as NFT contract type, asset type, and what kind of features the NFTs can have. "Presentation Control" refers to how much control an alternative gives one over the actual storefront.
Market segments were positioned using our descriptions of them to infer what they'd desire in a product based on our definitions of the axes.