与「TIMEマーケティング部」相关的搜索结果

TBS【THE TIME,】🐣 #TIMEマーケティング部# 【大阪焼肉ごりちゃん】🥩 【人類みなまぜそば】🍜 【SABURO 36 BURGER】🍔 美味しくて、お店の方の関西魂を感じることができる素晴らしい3店舗でした❤️‍🔥 取材にご協力いただいた皆様、ありがとうございました✨🙏 #thetime_tbs#

あす12/10（水）#TBS【##THETIME#,】🐣 7:30すぎ頃〜『TIMEマーケティング部』にVTR出演します🏃‍♀️ 古き良き街並みと、最新の観光スポットが混在する【街ごとホテル】🌇 香川県『NIPPONIA 仁尾 水鏡の町』を2日間取材させていただきました🎤✨ ※生放送のため内容変更の場合があります #thetime_tbs#

あす4/2（木）TBS【THE TIME,】🐣 6:35過ぎ頃〜 『プチマーケティング部』VTR出演します🌸 豪快&背徳感🤤じわじわ広がる 【手袋グルメ】を取材しました🧤 ぜひ、ご覧ください🌈 ※生放送のため急遽、放送内容変更の場合もあります #thetime_tbs#

お知らせ💫 明日TBS「THE TIME」 6:38ごろ〜プチマーケティング部 にリポーターとして出演します！ ぜひご覧ください☺️ ※生放送のため変更の可能性があります

11/3（月・祝） TBS 【THE TIME,】 🐣 6:35過ぎ頃〜放送予定の 『プチマーケティング部』に出演します🎤 文化の日に無料開放する博物館・美術館を取材しました🏛️✨ ぜひ、ご覧ください💙 （朝の情報番組のため放送内容変更の可能性もあります） #thetime_tbs# #プチマーケティング部# @THETIME_TBS

A trading platform becomes truly valuable when users can make better decisions without becoming dependent on it. That's an idea I've been considering while following @Hypesium. In Web3, platforms often compete by offering more features, faster execution, and access to additional markets. Those improvements can make trading more convenient. But there's another question I think deserves attention. Does a trading tool make its users more capable, or simply more dependent on its interface? Imagine someone who has spent months trading through a single application. They understand where to click, how to place orders, and how to navigate its features. But if that application suddenly becomes unavailable, can they still evaluate opportunities and manage their positions independently? If the answer is no, convenience may have created an unexpected weakness. Hypesium offers a Telegram-based trading workflow focused on the Elysium ecosystem, connecting activity across multiple launchpads. I see this as an interesting example of how specialized infrastructure can simplify market participation. However, I believe the strongest trading products should preserve user independence. Traders should understand the assets they hold, the networks they use, and the risks associated with their transactions. They should also know how to verify important information outside any single interface. This isn't an argument against trading bots. It's an argument for using them as tools rather than treating them as substitutes for knowledge. For me, @Hypesium is worth examining through this perspective because accessibility and independence should develop together. A convenient trading experience can save time. But genuine confidence comes from understanding the process well enough to operate without that convenience when necessary. The best infrastructure shouldn't make users feel trapped inside one workflow. It should make them more capable wherever they choose to participate. Would you trust a trading platform more if it helped you become less dependent on it?

we have all seen the comparison going around token prices in 2021 vs today. i wanted to do one for @BNBCHAIN on what it was in 2021 and what it has become. during all these years, fundamentals didn't just hold, they kept getting stronger. “build and build” (and still, the price followed with a first 4 digit all time high last year). plus with the new L1 in the works the future is already being prepared. extremely bullish on what's coming for this ecosystem.

The trade you didn't take might teach you more than the one you actually executed. That's an idea I've been thinking about while following @Hypesium. In fast-moving on-chain markets, traders naturally focus on completed transactions. They remember their entries, exits, profits, and losses. But what about the opportunities they deliberately ignored? A new token launches, volume begins increasing, and the chart suddenly moves higher. You notice it, examine the available information, and decide not to enter. An hour later, the price has doubled. It's easy to look back and call that decision a mistake. But I don't think that's always fair. If the token had insufficient liquidity, unclear contract information, or risks outside your strategy, avoiding the trade may have been completely reasonable. Hypesium provides a Telegram-based trading workflow focused on the Elysium ecosystem, where multiple launchpads create a constant stream of potential opportunities. What interests me is how traders can develop better judgment while navigating that environment. I believe missed trades deserve their own research journal. Record what caught your attention, why you decided against entering, and what happened afterward. Over time, those observations might reveal useful patterns. Perhaps your filters are too restrictive. Perhaps they consistently protect you from unstable launches. Or perhaps certain market conditions deserve further investigation. The important part is evaluating the original decision without letting hindsight rewrite the reasoning. For me, @Hypesium is interesting because easier market access makes selectivity even more important. You don't need to participate in every opportunity to learn from it. Sometimes watching a market without risking capital is the most productive decision. Would you rather track only your completed trades or also study the opportunities you deliberately skipped?

FAN SZN with @IPXExchange As a creator, do I ever hold the raised money directly? Only the part that's unlocked. The rest stays in escrow until its stage is approved. Picture a concert tour: Ticket sales sit in a box-office account the tour manager can't touch Each stage's installment opens only after that stage is signed off The tour manager takes one installment at a time, never the whole box at once Here's how it works, per IPX: 1. Raised capital never sits in a creator's wallet. It's held in a non-custodial smart contract escrow 2. Before the raise, the creator submits a line-by-line budget. IPX says its AI agent, Alfred, sets it up in a contract tied to milestones, and that CertiK audited it 3. After the project graduates, its budget moves into a separate escrow. A stage unlocks once the creator submits proof and the platform approves it, and then it's available for the creator to transfer My read: as a creator, I'd hold an installment only after I prove its stage, and never the whole raise up front. Real count, from IPX's text: it names 3 example stages: pre-production, filming and post-production. Made-up scenario, not a real project: a film uses those 3 stages. Pre-production is approved, so 1 of 3 installments is available to transfer. Filming and post-production stay in escrow until they pass their checks. My take: the first thing I'd ask is how long an approval takes. If a stage sits locked while I wait, that could hold up the whole shoot. What comes out the other end, per IPX? • Each stage's installment, after its milestone is approved • A record of every request, approval and release on IPX and Base, so supporters can follow along • What a creator pays, if anything: I didn't find it listed, so I'd check the project terms The honest part: • IPX says unlocks happen automatically with no human gatekeepers, and also says the platform approves each milestone. I couldn't find how those fit together or how long an approval takes • The Defiant labels the announcement "Presented by IPX," and I haven't seen anyone outside IPX confirm how it runs • I haven't seen it run on a live project yet So before I launch, I'd find out who approves each milestone and how long an approval takes. I'll want both answers before I confirm. Why this matters for creators and fans: → Creators know the payout path before they launch → Fans can see which stages are open and follow each release → Both sides work from the same milestones Source: IPX's router announcement and its KPI-Gated Escrow announcement Which would you check first: the budget lines or who approves each milestone?

Huge thanks to @IWDominate for helping us set up scrims during Worlds finals week, and to every player who took the time to scrim with us. You helped us get ready for the biggest match of our season. We really appreciate it.🥰🥰