Serviceplan Group for Cardano

We just submitted our budget proposal: "The Marketing-Powered Demand Engine for Cardano." Here's what it is, what it costs, and why it matters. THE PROBLEM Cardano stands on strong technical foundations. Yet for enterprise decision-makers, it's not an obvious "yes" — not because the technology can't deliver, but because they're missing use-case clarity, proof, and engagement paths. The business world sees Cardano as a respected ecosystem. Not yet as first choice for enterprise infrastructure. THE SOLUTION A complete enterprise demand generation system that repositions Cardano as "The Blockchain for Serious Business." The system operates through a three-stage funnel: Attention →Proof → Qualified Leads. Two recommended blueprint verticals: Institutional DeFi and Supply Chain Traceability — final selection to be validated with the GMC. Three pilot markets: UK, Germany, Switzerland. A central Cardano Hub serves as the evidence and engagement environment. Directly aligned with the Cardano 2030 Strategy Framework — Pillar 2 (Adoption & Utility) and Pillar 4 (Community & Ecosystem Growth), supporting core KPIs: TVL, monthly transactions, and monthly active users. THE INVESTMENT 12-month pilot. Four milestone-gated work packages — each one only unlocked when the previous one delivers. WP4 (V2 Supply Chain) is only released after the Q3 KPI checkpoint passes. Total investment: €2,978,738 (53% media, 47% agency — within industry benchmark). ADA surplus gets returned to the Treasury. WHO WE ARE Serviceplan Group — the only globally ranked agency that has built live Cardano infrastructure, deployed it in production, and holds a formal Cardano Foundation partnership. Official Intersect member. Masumi Network has been on mainnet since November 2024 with 25,000+ on-chain transactions. Independent Network of the Year at Cannes Lions 2025 (19 Lions). #1 globally on WARC Creative 100 and Media 100. 6,500 people, 40+ countries, €866M revenue. Full proposal and brochure in the reply below.👇

Thank you for taking the time to explain! One thought we'd leave here, since it's less of a disagreement than it might look: we'd also say Cardano's technological edge is its strongest marketing asset. The proposal is built on making that edge legible to enterprises, evidence before claims. So if the budget picture looks different in a future cycle, we'd be glad to meet you there. Thanks for engaging before the deadline! -Yves

NCLの観点、優先順位から棄権にしました。 他の多くの提案へNoにしていますが、予算が十分であればYesにしたいと思っています。マーケティングはとても重要だと思うからです。 それと同時にカルダノの技術という競争優位も保つことが、マーケティング視点で一番重要だと考えています。今回はNCLの優先順位とバランスを取った判断で棄権にしています。ご理解いただけますと幸いです。

@nagamaru_panda you abstained on our proposal (The Marketing Powered Demand Engine), and since voting closes June 12 we'd rather ask directly than guess what's behind it. To adress the bulk of community feeback in short: a Yes funds €1.62M unconditionally. The remaining €1.36M (WP4) only releases if the WP3 DeFi KPI checkpoint is passed and the GMC confirms the vertical. The conversion buffer has been tightened from 30% to 20%, fixed in writing during contracting. Surplus ADA returns to Treasury, minus documented conversion fees. We've also answered every point in @yutazzz 's review on Hydra, including the on-chain verification question, with the Cardano Foundation's own April 2026 vertical data. If something's still missing for a Yes, happy to hear it, here or on Hydra. Thanks! -Yves

@blockchain_pete Thank you for your "Yes" on the proposal. What we appreciate most isn't the "Yes" itself, but that you read the structure as intended: staged funding, the spend for Vertical 2 sitting behind the WP3 checkpoint, surplus returning to Treasury. You called it "evidence-led rather than hype-driven", and that's exactly the standard we want to be held to. Thanks! -Yves

@yutazzz @nagamaru_panda Hello @yutazzz No we didn`t delete anything. In fact I can see our latest comment on Hydra. Might be caught in the wrong thread? That´s on me than, sorry - Yves

@SPforCardano @nagamaru_panda It's a bit strange; the site doesn't show any response from you, but the API seems to be picking up your response.. Have you deleted the comment?🙏 Or is it some kind of bug?

@KTOP_Pool you abstained on our proposal (The Marketing Powered Demand Engine) in the Intersect budget vote. So here's summary of our replies to the main issues raised by the community, in case it helps with a final call before June 12: A Yes is €1.62M unconditional. The €1.36M for WP4 only releases on a passed WP3 KPI checkpoint plus GMC confirmation of the vertical. Buffer tightened from 30% to 20%, fixed during contracting; surplus ADA returns to Treasury. Longer answers in the Hydra discussions. If a specific concern drove the abstain, we are happy to talk about it -Yves

A follow-up on the conversion buffer, since it was one of the main concerns raised here and on Hydra. Fist off: Nobody's enjoying where the ADA price is right now, ourselves included. Back on May 29 we committed to moving from a 30% buffer to 20%, anchored to a more recent spot. That still stands. The original worry was that a buffered $0.17 baked in too much contingency, with no room under the NCL. Fair concern at the time, when ADA was at $0.21. It's now at $0.16. We mention this not to claim we called it, nobody wants to be right about a falling price. However, it shows what the buffer was actually for: protecting a 12-month campaign from being underfunded mid-flight, not padding the ask. The price right now isn't a verdict on Cardano. The whole market is down roughly $250B in two weeks. Enterprise infrastructure adopts on a 13-to-16 year curve, and Cardano is nine years in. The work that matters happens regardless of where the chart is on any given week. That's exactly why we think the timing argument cuts the other way: you build the demand engine before the cycle turns, not after. -Yves

@yutazzz thank you for the thorough critique, we've posted a full reply on Hydra. Short version here. The Supply Chain "no on-chain verification" point is the one worth revisiting. The Foundation's own April 2026 data shows live proof: SPAR running ADA payments across 137 stores, Petrobras on immutable training records, Würth with Iagon on tokenised IP. Plus a hard trigger: the EU DPP registry deploys July 2026, the kind of compliance clock that moves enterprise procurement. On scope: an agency doesn't pick its client's strategy, it executes it. The ecosystem set the four verticals in Strategy 2030; we're executing a priority, not inheriting one by accident. And on a Yes only €1.62M is unconditional anyway. The rest is gated on exactly the evidence you're asking for. -Yves

I reviewed the all feedbacks on the Hydra platform about the Intersect Budget Process proposals (and the comments I collected on X), and updated my comments and votes where needed. You can see all comments at the link below. This time, I changed my vote on one proposal. I'll review the Hydra feedback again before 0:00 UTC on June 8. I'm not refusing discussion on other platforms, but Hydra lets me collect comments through its API, so there's less risk of missing any. Thank you for your patience and your responses 🙏 adatool.net/b69-share2

Thanks, the grateful note goes both ways! We've been building on Cardano for a while now, well before this proposal and we'll keep doing that regardless of how the vote lands. A "yes" would make the next step a much sharper one for the whole ecosystem. Appreciate the support! -Yves

Of course Yves. I saw your presentation when you first announced this with Patrick your proposal. I really am grateful for your knowledge and expertise on this matter and am hopeful for the impact that Cardano will make. Unfortunately, the governance system on Cardano now is not mature enough to process the expertise of many different subjects - particularly Marketing. I am in support of the Serviceplan proposal. What you guys would create would be immensely beneficial to the entire ecosystem. I wish you best of luck!

Adoption. Adoption. Adoption. We all know Cardano needs more adoption — but what does our plan actually look like? - Building safer, faster, better technology? Essential. - Making life easier for developers? Absolutely. - DeFi, interoperability? No argument there. But technology alone is not a plan. Who are we building for? What unites us while preserving decentralization? How are we adapting to market shifts and emerging opportunities? As @phillip_pon recently put it: "Institutional/enterprise is the future of web3. Retail, historically the leader, is now a follower. Institutional adoption is everyone — the large banks, asset managers, insurers. If we don't have native integrations, they simply will not build on Cardano." I fully agree. Through institutional adoption, we can bring the real benefits of blockchain and decentralisation to the masses. Stablecoins and cross-border payments are the obvious starting point. The next wave will likely come through seamless UX/UI — onboarding people who don't even realise they're using blockchain. My conviction: within 5–10 years, blockchain will be invisible infrastructure that delivers value to every person on the planet, whether they know it or not. Think about the internet. We needed the infrastructure first — connectivity, speed, better hardware. That was the baseline. But then came the applications, and with them, an entirely different mindset: user-first, enterprise-focused, industry-disrupting. Blockchain is at that same inflection point. The Product Committee did a great work in 2025 establishing a vision, mission, and north star KPIs — a strong foundation for direction. Through collaboration with the GMC and Product Committees, we identified two areas where the ecosystem can meaningfully improve: 1. A Vertical Strategy Rather than spreading efforts thin, we need focused investment in areas where Cardano has a genuine strategic advantage — Bitcoin DeFi and government solutions are prime examples. Each vertical should have: - A disruptive solution addressing a massive, real-world problem - Dedicated tech infrastructure and tooling (across multiple Cardano teams) - A clear go-to-market strategy - World-class partners ready to scale - KPIs aligned with the Cardano 2030 roadmap - Multiple dApps delivering solutions across vertical use cases *Both the Orion Fund and Service Plan have independently identified vertical focus as critical to their success. 2. Lead Generation & Enterprise Onboarding A coordinated lead generation layer would allow the ecosystem to: - Proactively reach the most relevant companies - Manage incoming leads more efficiently - Connect prospects with the right Cardano builders - Support enterprises through onboarding (where BD teams invest the most time) - Deploy a dedicated business task force — Pentad-style — to close deals This treasury cycle will likely fund mostly technical proposals. They are all important — but technology alone will not drive adoption. DReps are working incredibly hard under real pressure, and a budget framework (allocating across tech, business, and admin) would have helped guide decisions. We don't have that this time. So to the ecosystem and to our DReps: please give serious attention to business and adoption-focused proposals. Engage with them, ask questions, push back where needed. Non-technical proposals may seem easier to critique (especially for non developers) — but remember, supporting adoption is not a soft goal. It is a strategic necessity. Funding technology alone increases risk; it doesn't reduce it. I am deeply optimistic that Cardano will become a leader in meaningful, large-scale adoption. It depends on us — this extraordinary community, built on an incredible technical foundation. It is time to take it to the next level. Thank you. P.S. Sorry for the long post — I have plenty more to say about it 🙂

@BkAlaskan11722 @OrionFund Totally, thanks for pointing this out @BkAlaskan11722!

Absolutely well thought out piece. @SPforCardano I hope our DReps are focused on how they can get to a Yes. Just like the @OrionFund. And moving forward find the way to asses the value of marketing proposals for what they are and not what we think they should be.

@yutazzz one clarification worth surfacing, since it seems to be behind a lot of the No votes: WP4 was never an unconditional ask. It only releases if the WP3 DeFi KPI checkpoint is hit, and stays revisable with the GMC before deployment. So a Yes is €1.62M unconditional, plus €1.36M contingent on both performance and continued community alignment. That's not coming across clearly. You said your vote's open to change with feedback, so worth a fresh look. On the buffer we've also moved from 30% to 20%, anchored to recent spot, with a slippage cap open for discussion. Full breakdown is in this thread x.com/SPforCardano/s… Let us know you thoughts. -Yves

I voted for all 69 proposals in the Intersect Budget process. My reasons for voting can be found at the following site: My vote is subject to change and I welcome feedback. adatool.net/b69-share2

That's a fair point: higher ADA price means more purchasing power for the same amount of ADA allocated. But that doesn`t that logic apply to every proposal, always? There's no natural "now is the right time" moment from a treasury perspective, because the community will always prefer to wait for a higher price. The question is whether the timing makes sense for the work itself and for enterprise pipeline building. We think the answer is yes, for the reasons we outlined. -Yves

@SPforCardano @Padierfind I just don't see the urgency to fund marketing when cardano's price is at 5 year lows. I suspect the community will be much more receptive in maybe 6 months time after the price recovers and non critical/urgent proposals can return far greater value.

A total of 6 votes so far, with 1 Drep dominating the entire vote.

The Hydra discussion sharpened our thinking on one point: the ADA conversion rate. We looked at it again, the argument holds up, so we adjusted it. The original 30% buffer at submission put the assumed ADA rate at $0.17 per ADA. It's there to cover ADA price movement between submission and disbursement, so the campaign doesn't end up underfunded if ADA drops in the window. Several DReps (@nimuepool, @SIPO_Tokyo and others in posts) raised a concrete point: even though surplus ADA returns to Treasury, the requested amount still counts against NCL headroom, which puts pressure on what else can get funded in this cycle. So, we are prepared to commit to 20% instead of 30%. That meaningfully reduces the ADA we'd actually need locked, freeing NCL room for other proposals. We're also open to discussing a hard slippage cap. Both would get fixed in writing during the contracting phase. -Yves

@blockjock2017 Thanks for the support!

Intersect Hydra Voting results below, which include rationales for each, if you find any of this to be in error please send me a dm referencing the proposal name and rationale provided along with your counterpoints as to why I should change my vote. YES: - Intersect: Governance Coordination and Technical Stewardship for the Cardano Ecosystem Rationale: Critical operational infrastructure. Supports technical stewardship, incident response, release coordination, repository management, and governance continuity. Reduces operational risk while improving ecosystem resilience. - The Marketing Powered Demand Engine for Cardano Rationale: Directly targets enterprise adoption and lead generation. Cardano's challenge is no longer technology but demand creation and commercial awareness. - Cardano Builder DAO Rationale: Proven funding framework with measurable KPIs tied to Vision 2030. Improves capital allocation while maintaining accountability. - Support Cardano 2030: A Techstars Strategy for Global Ecosystem Adoption & Utility Rationale: Strong enterprise and startup pipeline. Connects Cardano to institutional networks and global founders capable of creating sustainable economic activity. - Amplify Cardano: Ecosystem Accelerator + Community Led Marketing & Events Fund Rationale: Addresses Cardano's historical weakness in ecosystem promotion and project visibility. Supports growth of homegrown success stories. - DeltaDeFi: Cardano Flagship Exchange Treasury Loan Rationale: Repayable treasury loan with perpetual revenue share. Strong alignment between treasury capital deployment and long-term ecosystem upside. - Cardano Enterprise Adoption: Production Ticketing Platform Rationale: Existing business, existing customers, existing revenue. Represents a real-world commercial deployment with treasury repayment provisions. - DeFi Ecosystem Connectivity via Ledger Wallet with Clear Signing Rationale: Improves security and usability for Ledger users while unlocking additional DeFi participation and liquidity. - Dano Finance: DeFi Kernel, American Options, and Orderbook SDK Rationale: Expands Cardano's DeFi primitives, liquidity coordination, composability, and financial infrastructure. - GOV.EXE by TxPipe & gf Consulting Group Rationale: Government execution transparency represents a meaningful enterprise and public-sector adoption opportunity. - Tx3 by TxPipe: Open API Layer for Cardano's dApp Protocols Rationale: Improves developer experience and lowers integration friction for Cardano applications. - Cardano Content Creator Consortium (C4) Rationale: Education and content remain critical weaknesses across the ecosystem. Supports awareness and onboarding. - Cardano Business Development Network Rationale: Enterprise adoption requires dedicated business development capacity. Directly aligned with commercial growth. - Hardware Wallet Maintenance 2026-2027 Rationale: Security infrastructure is foundational to ecosystem trust and user retention. - Research Validation & Market Pilots - Intersect CPC Rationale: Provides evidence-based validation before large-scale deployment and funding decisions. - Intersect Technical Steering Committee Support Rationale: Supports governance coordination and technical oversight during ecosystem growth. - MLabs Core Tool Maintenance & Enhancement: Plutarch and Ply Rationale: Maintains critical developer tooling used throughout the Cardano ecosystem. - Catalyze Africa: Building Scalable Projects from CATS 2026 Rationale: Expands Cardano adoption into emerging markets with long-term growth potential. - Nula: Cardano's Token Streaming Protocol Rationale: Improves payroll, vesting, recurring payments, and enterprise payment workflows. - Cardano Enterprise Activation Sandbox Rationale: Provides an environment for enterprise experimentation and onboarding. - Cardano Budget Committee: Budget Process Improvement and Treasury Transparency Rationale: Improves treasury oversight, reporting, and accountability. - Full Integration of CIP-113 with Clear Signing across Ledger Products Rationale: Strengthens security, usability, and tokenized asset adoption. - Oura by TxPipe: Maintaining Cardano's Event Pipeline Rationale: Critical infrastructure relied upon by developers and ecosystem tooling. - UTxO RPC by TxPipe: Maintaining Cardano's Integration Standard Rationale: Important middleware for application builders and enterprise integrations. - Dolos by TxPipe: Maintaining Cardano's Lightweight Data Node Rationale: Improves infrastructure accessibility and operational efficiency. - Pallas by TxPipe: Maintaining Cardano's Core Rust Libraries Rationale: Core development infrastructure with broad ecosystem impact. - Civics Committee Governance Expert Led Sustainable Education Program Rationale: Governance education remains necessary for long-term decentralization. - BloxBean Java/JVM Toolchain for Cardano Rationale: Expands developer access through enterprise-friendly tooling. - Cardano MCP by Lido Nation & 2 Lovelaces Rationale: Supports developer tooling and AI-enabled ecosystem growth. ABSTAIN: - Wormhole Cross Chain Infrastructure Rationale: Significant opportunity, but concerns remain around bridge architecture, security assumptions, and long-term dependency. Further evidence desired. - Innovation & Growth DAO Rationale: Concept has merit but requires stronger accountability and overlap controls before treasury commitment. - Mithril Protocol Rationale: Important infrastructure but additional clarity around execution, ownership, and funding scope was desired. - DeFi Rails & Deployment Pilot Program Rationale: Valuable objectives, but execution boundaries and overlap with other initiatives require further validation. NO: - Bridge Fund RWA Real Estate Fund Rationale: Treasury should not function as a real estate LP. Risk profile, capital lockup, and mandate concerns outweigh potential returns. - Project Janus Rationale: Large request with significant technical complexity. Concerns around scope, governance, and execution risk. - High Performance Partner Chain Factory using Ouroboros Tachys Rationale: Strong technology, but uncertain near-term economic impact relative to treasury cost. - STAG Security Threat Assessment Guard Rationale: Valuable work, but funding level and structure did not sufficiently justify the ask. - Cardano Startup Mainnet Runway Rationale: Enterprise onboarding is important, but concerns existed regarding cost efficiency and projected outcomes. - Cardano Tooling DAO Rationale: Potential overlap with other funding mechanisms and insufficient differentiation from existing structures. - Paid Open Source Model Continued Rationale: Open source support is important, but accountability and measurable outcomes remain concerns. - Indigo Innovation Proposal Rationale: Interesting direction, but scope expansion across RWA, BTCFi, privacy, and revenue sharing creates execution risk. - Wirex Payments Infrastructure Rationale: Commerce is important, but concerns around structure, ownership, and ecosystem alignment prevented support. - Eryx Zero Knowledge Capabilities Rationale: Strong technology, but near-term ecosystem demand and measurable adoption remain uncertain. - MLabs TrueInventory Rationale: Useful tooling, but lower priority compared to initiatives with clearer commercial and economic impact.

We would, obviously, disagree. Institutional B2B sales cycles in Institutional and Enterprise environments run 9–12 months from first qualified contact to contracting, even longer in compliance-heavy verticals. So, leads generated in Q3/Q4 2026 won't convert to signed deals until Q2/Q3 2027. That timing aligns with the Cardano roadmap. By the time decision-makers in our funnel reach contracting, Cardano's strongest institutional proof points are in place. Starting later means missing that window. Marketing isn't the thing you once for a couple of weeks and add after the product is done. Its about building a positioning over time, prove it again and again and be present with a clear message in people minds. So the right people are paying attention when it is. -Yves

@Padierfind you know what makes sense, timing and product we have neither we need leios, it unlocks platforms and users thats when we need to spend on marketing

@virtuoso1333 @Padierfind @virtuoso1333 made a little film as well to explain it in a nutshell -Yves

@Padierfind jeezus... who the hell wants to read a 56 pager about marketing. booooring! But im sure some of you will get it done and explain it to the rest of us. thanks! on another note, this seems like a much better approach than the KOL approach.

Tech is good. But Cardano needs users. We need marketing. One of the biggest, most prestigious award winning marketing agency groups in the world has created a 56-page proposal for how to position & market Cardano. Normally they work for companies like Uber, Coca Cola, BMW, Lufthansa, and so on. This is a unique chance for Cardano. Let's not waste it.

@alexander_codes Hey @alexander_codes maybe I can jump in here. What do you mean?

what will they use? serious question.

Thanks „for the „have my support" line! Three quick responses: Markets: UK/Germany/Switzerland is, according to the data, the best European blend across audience potential (UK 2.3M + Germany 1.5M lead by the Responsible Pragmatists segment), crypto adoption maturity (CH 15.1%, UK 9.8%, DE 8.9%), and operational footprint (s. Appendix pp. 21-23 drive.google.com/file/d/1qHyWFK…). US adds higher CPMs (ca. 2.4x), India needs a different B2B go-to-market. Brazil and Argentina are on the watchlist (s. p. 30 of the proposal drive.google.com/file/d/1Mrq7FN…). Any expansion comes back as a separate Year 2 proposal. We'd rather prove the engine in three markets than spread thin across six. Verticals: Framework is exchangeable, however we have aligned with key stakeholders in the ecosystem before putting out the proposal. That being said: This is not set in stone. Final selection happens with the GMC and relevant stakeholders. RWA, AI and Payments all on the table for V2. 2030 goals: If the strategic framework gets refreshed, our proposal adapts. We're working with what's currently endorsed by the community. -Yves

i think it needs different primary target markets (US, India should be on top of the list) and the verticals are not ideal and should be reconsidered with the key marketers in the ecosystem. The 2030 goals (where it was taken from) are outdated. Other than that it‘ll have my support

Next one we feel worth surfacing from Hydra: what a „Yes“ vote actually funds. There's a common reading that a „Yes“ is a blank 20.87M ADA (€2.98M / $3.55M). That’s not correct. WP1 through WP3 (11.03M ADA / €1.62M / $1.87M) covers the strategic foundation plus the DeFi vertical. WP4 (9.23M ADA / €1.36M / $1.57M) only releases if the WP3 KPI checkpoint shows DeFi is generating enterprise demand at scale. If DeFi underperforms, WP4 stays in Treasury and is not disbursed. So the effective envelope on a „Yes“ vote is closer to 11M ADA (€1.62M) than 20M ADA (€2.98M), because 9.23M ADA is contingent on data. Surplus ADA also returns to Treasury. The phased approach a few of you suggested in the comments is already built in. Voting „Yes“ is voting for ca. 11M ADA unconditionally, plus ca. 9.2M ADA conditional on demonstrated DeFi performance. -Yves