Map the path from creator clips to first deposits and prioritize the next measurable fix.
<aside> 🚀 🚀 FREE STRATEGY CALL Want to grow your product through viral reach? We help teams across iGaming, mobile apps, AI products, and SaaS build creator-led organic distribution generating tens of millions of views at CPMs starting from $0.03.
<aside> 🚀 Book a free strategy call
</aside>
On the call you'll receive:
Find the largest measurable leak between a creator clip and a first deposit, then turn the finding into one fix, one creative brief and a weekly test board. All numerical examples are fictional. They demonstrate calculations, not expected results.
Supply an asset ledger and an aggregate event table. Keep a stable clip_id through creator links, landing sessions, registrations and eligible first deposits where attribution is available. Do not pretend every viewer can be joined to a customer. Separate directly attributed outcomes from inferred or self-reported discovery.
Asset ledger: clip_id, creator_id, angle_id, mechanic, hook, platform, published_at, market, offer_id, landing_url, tracking_tag, production_cost and rights status.
Event table: cohort_start, cohort_end, maturity_cutoff, market, offer_id, clip_id, sessions, registrations, verified_users, users_with_deposit_attempt, new_ftd_users, acquisition_cost and measurement_status.
Customer-level joins, if needed internally, should use pseudonymous IDs. Publish only aggregate data. Limit campaigns to eligible adult audiences and permitted markets; respect self-exclusion and marketing restrictions in every audience export.
Clip exposure → tracked landing session → completed registration → required verification → deposit attempt → first successful deposit.
| Transition | Formula | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| Content → destination | Tracked sessions / comparable clip views | Directional traffic yield; views are not unique people |
| Session → registration | Unique registrations / eligible landing sessions | Destination continuity and signup completion |
| Registration → verification | Verified users / registrations | Completion of required verification |
| Verification → attempt | Unique attempting users / verified users | Readiness and payment access |
| Attempt → FTD | Unique FTD users / unique attempting users | Customer-level payment completion |
| Registration → FTD | Unique FTD users / registrations | Combined post-registration journey |
| New-FTD CAC | Defined acquisition costs / unique new FTD users | Cost per acquired depositor |
Use transaction counts only for transaction questions. The attempt-to-FTD ratio above uses people, not attempts. A person may make several attempts. Keep successful transaction rate as a separate operational metric.
Set a common cohort maturity cutoff and attribution window. Mark missing data as missing. A fresh cohort's unfinished journey is not automatically a conversion failure.
Illustrative mature cohort: 200,000 clip views, 4,000 landing sessions, 800 registrations, 640 verified users, 400 attempting users, 320 new FTD users. Defined acquisition cost: $9,600.
| Measure | Calculation | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Traffic yield | 4,000 / 200,000 | 2% |
| Session → registration | 800 / 4,000 | 20% |
| Registration → verification | 640 / 800 | 80% |
| Verification → attempt | 400 / 640 | 62.5% |
| Attempt → FTD | 320 / 400 | 80% |
| Registration → FTD | 320 / 800 | 40% |
| New-FTD CAC | $9,600 / 320 | $30 |
Estimate one-stage opportunity as: upstream count × proposed conversion-point improvement × observed downstream conversion. Targets below are scenario assumptions, not industry benchmarks.
| Isolated change | Calculation | Additional FTD sensitivity |
|---|---|---|
| Registration rate 20% → 25% | 4,000 × 0.05 × 0.40 | 80 |
| Verification 80% → 90% | 800 × 0.10 × 0.625 × 0.80 | 40 |
| Attempt rate 62.5% → 70% | 640 × 0.075 × 0.80 | 38.4 |
| Attempt-to-FTD 80% → 90% | 400 × 0.10 | 40 |
Do not add these estimates: improving one stage changes the counts entering later stages. If several changes are modeled together, recalculate the full chain. A fractional expected count is a sensitivity value, not a literal customer forecast.