Decentralized Brands: Headless Brands

Headless Brands is a community-driven brand with no central management. Bitcoin's rise from obscurity to popularity is a classic example of the development of a headless brand. In the future, headless branding may evolve with the expansion of the decentralized autonomous organization DAO.

Headless Brands Headless Brands
Toby Shorin, Laura Lotti, Sam Hart Bryan Lehrer Other Internet is a planning and research firm

Pick to

Traditional brands are generally planned and designed directly by enterprises. In the centralized mode of direct brand management, the identity of the brand is synchronized with the planning of the enterprise, but the rise of Internet media poses a challenge to this mode. The new blockchain-based decentralisation goes further, providing users with financial incentives to spread the brand's story themselves.

In this article, we introduce the concept of Headless Brands to explain the power source of community-driven brand projects, which do not have a centralized governing body. We will discuss some of the elements of the headless brand life cycle represented by bitcoin and the process of brand formation to acceptance, and try to come up with strategies for brand continuity.

Toby Shorin, Laura Lotti, Sam Hart Bryan Lehrer
Other Internet is a planning and research company.

About the brand

1.1 What is a brand?

A brand is a collection of concepts, expectations, impressions, and reputations associated with a particular entity. A brand means different things to different people. For example, from the perspective of brand operators and consumers, a brand may be interpreted in N ways. WeWork, for example, is seen by some as a "not bad" brand.

But the brand is not the product itself, the brand is more the product characteristics and the way to reflect. When people touch a product, they have a first impression of the brand. Products have features that make an impression on the user and help the marketer position the product.

Brands are not just so-called "visual identity labels", but they are generally remembered by people through excellent trademark, product design, advertising and other graphical forms of expression.

So what is a brand if not a product, a copy, a mission statement, a founder's vision, a designer's aesthetic or an employee's behavior?

Branding is a cultural phenomenon that only occurs when people are exposed to certain things, and it lives in the minds of those who are aware of it.

People get a first impression of a particular brand, and they also associate things with that brand. But as the brand grows, its reputation will become increasingly important. Users share their ratings with each other (word of mouth), and people can feed a brand in this contagious mood.

1.2  What is a centralized brand, a centralized narrative?

Traditional advertising media provide convenience for a company to promote its brand. What users can hear often depends on what the company wants to produce. To some extent, they decide what kind of information users can learn. Viewers receive constant messages about brands through advertisements in print publications, radio and television, which are delivered in bulk, forcing them to remember a brand in the brainwash of repeating the same message over and over again.



Of course, personalized information transfer between people is also going on, but it is limited by the existing communication infrastructure. Brand promoters mainly send messages, emails or telephone messages.

As a result, aggregators such as Zagat, Consumer Reports and Kelly Blue Book saw an opportunity to become credible aggregators of pre-internet information.

Icon by Thomas Heibig, work collection Noun Project

Image above: one-to-many communication of the brand narrative, using traditional media such as television, radio and print publications
Below: one-to-one communication based on user experience, word of mouth, phone call and email

In the process of brand image transition from traditional media to network media, the uncertainty increases greatly. The Internet has greatly lowered the threshold for publishing information, allowing anyone to access published material and any user to share their views publicly. User-rating sites like Yelp have reduced the reliability of information provided by traditional aggregators and introduced new ways for users to access brand information and reach consensus on a company's brand. Today, public opinion, including user-review sites, personal blogs, and social media timelines, forms a new part of the brand narrative. They are more accessible and are the "look" of the brand, which can be compared and verified with the official brand information.


Image above: many-to-many transmission of brand narrative and user experience

Because brand communication is limited by the number of people associated with them, they are greatly influenced by the accessibility and speed of information. Nowadays, the mainstream emotions of consumers are becoming more and more obvious. Both positive and negative emotions towards brands can be rapidly upgraded and spread across the whole network.

Most small companies have a position (usually CEO, CMO, or vp of marketing) that is nominally responsible for managing the brand to manage people's impressions and expectations of the product. However, with the advent of social networking sites, a large number of real-time social media have more important signals than a few review sites, and the need for marketing teams to meet the needs of consumers, the Marketing Department's work is like a Sisyphus that never gives up.

Many companies employ social media managers and use passive or proactive brand management strategies to maintain brand image as a response.

The passive strategy aims at synchronizing the brand image management behavior with relevant news in the media and managing the user feedback dynamically in real time. Active strategies are designed to produce content that can be widely disseminated online, or to induce brand-friendly behavior from customers who identify strongly with the brand, and then make cases. The latter strategy, often referred to as "value-based brand communication" or "web celebrity marketing," relies on user activity to organically increase brand awareness and even defend the brand from negative feedback. This brand management attempts to use strategies inherent in the current web paradigm to guide the overall tone of the story.

Although these methods are widely used, in the process of managing reputation and controlling brand narrative, the company consumes a lot of resources and has great market risks. The fundamental tension in the control of brand narrative in the Internet age is that most companies impose hierarchical brand management on communication processes that are practically becoming distributed and permission-free. Brands will take on a life of their own when the emerging Internet meme culture meets the censorship resistant infrastructure.

Headless Brands

So far in the discussion of brands, we've been talking about centralised companies that are looking for ways to "manage" their brands. Most joint-stock companies, which centralise Labour (production) and governance (strategic direction), centralise the management of their trademarks, information and other "brand equity". For such companies, web celebrity marketing (impact marketing) is a common tool they use to tell stories for the market.

* influence marketing is done with the help of opinion leaders (broadly speaking, experts in a field, celebrity artists, bloggers, youtubers, web celebrity... Both in this range) cooperative marketing approach

But here, we found an interesting phenomenon.Web celebrity marketing is an early example of a gradual shift from centralized brand management to decentralization.

Who gets the power to manage the brand when ownership of the agreement belongs to every user on the network? Especially if these users also work for the network. That is, once they can benefit from continued contributions (in helping the network grow), these users will automatically spread and publicize the project. However, without a central agency to hire these "brand advocates", the description of a product or service is divisive and contentious.

Web 1.0 and 2.0 Web technologies have eliminated the marginal cost of brand communication, pushed the power of narrative beyond the Web, and weakened the cohesiveness of real-time social media branding and Web celebrity marketing. Similarly, the ownership and contribution models emerging in Web 3 pose a threat to brand cohesion and provide opportunities for community-driven models.

Let's take the bitcoins for example.

2.1  The currency

Bitcoin is arguably the first Headless brand.

Bitcoin is the pioneer of all modern cryptocurrency projects and by far the most recognizable brand in the field. Many people who have never touched Ethereum, P2P networks or blockchain know about bitcoin.



Bitcoin has many powerful branding features, including a remarkable origin story. But in reality, no one or entity is responsible for maintaining the story. Bitcoin is what we call a headless brand. While bitcoin was named by a visionary founder and given a visual ID, Satoshi Nakamoto chose a pseudonym and has now completely disappeared from the public eye. All subsequent brand collateral assets, information and positioning are created by community stakeholder groups. This has become the driving force behind bitcoin's evolution as a brand.

While bitcoin's core contributors influence its narrative, there are millions of other stakeholders, many of whom make meaningful contributions to the bitcoin brand. Nic Carter's vision for bitcoin captures the core of the evolution of the currency's emerging branding proposition: from electronic cash to censored stores of value to unrelated financial assets. These often conflict with each other, but all contribute to the overall brand image of bitcoin. Or we could say that there are many different bitcoin brands, which together contribute to the wider brand awareness of bitcoin.The point is that each narrative drives new market dynamics and new groups of buyers.

Visions-of-Bitcoin

Related to this, the bitcoin ecosystem can be divided into several ideological camps. The original cypherpunk mailing list was used to distribute the bitcoin software, and this group of original cryptographic anarchists formed just such a fragment. As technological fervor spread to the cpu-overcaged community, bitcoin also resonated broadly with the political spectrum of discontent that has emerged since the financial crisis, from the Tea Party to Occupy.

Since then, many libertarians have rediscovered their interest in Austrian economics and joined the ranks of "bitcoin maximizers," a group characterized by an unwavering belief in bitcoin's monetary supremacy. Extremists constitute so-called "lenders of last resort," and it is their insistence on refusing to sell bitcoin that supports the currency's floor price. Maximalism itself is an odd form of ideological extremism, as exemplified by the "bitcoin carnival", which extends libertarian ideals to eating habits and declares itself against both fiat money and "legal food".

Despite political differences on many fronts, what unites these extremist groups is the common goal of bringing about a super-bitcoinization event, the possibility of replacing fiat currencies with a single non-state alternative -- bitcoin.


Above: hyperbitcoinization

The last but crucial pillar of the bitcoin brand is its protocol nature. Many of Mr. Nakamoto's early design decisions have become recognizable elements of the bitcoin brand's existence.

「Hard currencyA fixed supply of 21m and the resulting deflationary economy have been the main drivers of adoption.

「Non-fiat currencyAs a non-state currency, bitcoin is often caught up in narratives of anti-authoritarian, economic crisis and collapse.

「Workload proof"-- the new consensus mechanism introduced by satoshi nakamoto solves a difficult problem in cryptography; More recently, the term has also come to be used as a metaphor for any proof of energy and resource expenditure.

「The white paper"-- bitcoin's publishing format is one of its most iconic elements, spawns thousands of imitators.

「Block chain"--" blockchain ", an abandoned phrase once mentioned in the white paper, has taken on a life of its own.

In the absence of structured brand management, these design decisions became a well-known principle of bitcoin branding. The invariance of these core protocol mechanisms makes it easier to tell a story. But the fork in bit-cash is an exception to this rule.

When bitcoin cash forks, OG Bitcoiners can express their trust in the new brand by adopting an amount equal to their balance in the fork chain. The fact that many chose not to take over BCH, or simply dump it on the exchange, illustrates the profound brand differences between the two visions. While BTC has grown in strength since the bifurcation, the fact that BCH has experienced more bifurcations also illustrates the fact that the bitcoin cash brand continues to evolve, albeit in a more painful way.

To sum up, the transformation of bitcoin brand has three characteristics:

1) bitcoin is headless and completely lacks a centralized entity that tries to control its brand presence; 2) the protocol design decision defined by it is immutable; 3) users are the monetary stakeholders and workers in the network who will benefit from the increasing popularity of bitcoin protocols. Users' financial interest in the deal has prompted them to spread their bitcoin stories. If branding is a consensus system, bitcoin is a collection of stories that converge on a single schelling point *: the dominant BTC backbone.

* schelling point: a firm's intention is to influence its competitors' expectations of the firm's actions in such a way as to enable its competitors to make decisions favorable to the firm based on expectations.

2.2  Exit vs bifurcation and headless governance

The bitcoin hard fork is a narrative divergence that begins with two different visions of the blockchain and ultimately leads to two different bitcoin brands -- BTC and BCH.

Headless brands, especially those without a formal governance structure, risk this narrative bifurcation. This leads to another set of questions: to what extent do we want to reduce differences, rather than allow vision, narrative and aesthetics to diverge and evolve in their own way?

The hard bifurcation in question stems from narrative differences among existing stakeholders. However, while these differences may jeopardise the consistency of the original brand, allowing dissent to retreat could help to cement the narrative, thereby attracting new connoisseurs and avoiding the danger of internal cannibalism. Bitcoin's main community, for example, has benefited from explicit decisions about the size of bitcoin blocks, with dissidents neatly migrating to the BCH fork chain.

Tier 1 projects with governance on the chain, such as Decred, Tezos, and Amoveo(and upcoming projects, such as Polkadot and Dfinity), provide a different set of strategies for handling narrative branches. They have internalized the option of exit and reformulated it as a stronger voice, not unlike the unifying effect of universal suffrage in modern constitutional democracies.

For example, Decred and Tezos approve support for backward-incompatible changes by voting on the token holder's chain. Amoveo created a path to legitimacy by adopting the "fork-futures" model, originally proposed by Paul Sztorc before BCH fork, in which different protocol rule sets were solved by predicting market results. These strategies provide new ways for their communities to form meta-consensus, for better or worse.

While these designs do not prevent users who do not recognize themselves in the main narrative from exiting the system altogether, these projects can change the dynamics of community cohesion and coordination around the brand narrative by providing an additional intra-protocol path to resolve the problem. Protocol design choices, especially governance models, directly affect the consistency of headless brands.

The development of the Headless brand

Headless is a new product and service model that owes its success entirely to distributed cryptographic networks. Decentralized brands are driven and disseminated by users who are truly empowered and motivated to create their own stories.

However, the use of blockchain networks alone does not guarantee the success of a headless branding strategy. One of the questions is, how does this license-free decentralized system maintain brand continuity and consistency? Is there a good time to "decentralize" the organization for web 3.0? How are the protocols and products of the system designed to find and be adopted by the right audience? In this section, we will discuss the elements of a successful "headless" brand at each stage of its continuous development.

3.1  Anonymous founder

In bitcoin's case, other organisations have also recognised the value of hiding project sponsors, inspired by its unique brand reputation as the ancestor of a decentralised cryptocurrency. For example, Monero's white paper is also published under the pen name "Nicolas Van Saberhagen" and the code base is initiated by a group of anonymous developers. Newer projects like Grin and Fomo3D also distributed under pseudonyms, which sidestep regulatory concerns while injecting a bit of punk code mystique into their origin stories. Grin, for one, published the white paper as Mimblewimble on the #bitcoin-wizard IRC channel, and several members of its core development team used aliases, such as "Ignotus Peverell" (owner of the invisibility cloak in harry potter). Grin's headless is supported by other powerful brands. Its symbol of rebellious, laughing face -- which allows people to paste it on the face of the person in the photo -- makes it very suitable for altcoin's dissemination and commemoration.




3.2  Whether the individual is the key to success or failure

The "bus factor" is a typical measure of how decentralized a system is. We can measure the value of a brand by asking the following questions: if a core team member or founder leaves due to various factors, how much damage will the brand suffer?

Ethereum is an inspiring example, and the project's brand is largely tied to its founder Vitalik, who may be the only person in the Ethereum ecosystem with the ability to change the brand's identity, so he could be a key player in this "bus factor." However, the Ethereum team has come up with some headless designs that indicate an effort to "minimize the impact of personal factors", such as a revised Ethereum logo for the project endorsement. Also, questions about what ETH really is (is it a world computer? Or money? Or lego bricks to make money?) Proof that the ethereum brand is undergoing headless evolution. Vitalik hasn't commented on the ETH is money issue, but the energy of the community, combined with the power of the #DeFi brand, is evidence that ethereum is becoming less dependent on its founders.

In contrast, TRON, a clone of Ethereum (from a plagiarised white paper to the standard for a "trc-20" smart contract), revolves around a cult of personality for its CEO, Justin Sun. So, when sun announced that his much-anticipated dinner with warren buffett had been postponed due to health reasons, TRON tokens dropped 13.5 percent in 12 hours. This suggests the potential risks of building a brand around the role of the founder: in any Web 3.0 branding strategy, an identifiable founder can be a key point of failure and influence market dynamics in sudden and unpredictable ways.

3.3  The white paper

The white paper started with a re-creation of the way bitcoin was issued, and has since become a trend and a tradition in the blockchain industry. With the headless entity in particular, the white paper plays a key role in setting the tone and direction for the continued development of the project.
As in the constitution, we see that we can see that the textual theorist and the intentionalist are describing the opposition of the initial construction. This also applies to white papers and technical drafts and information exchange during the inception period. What does Mr Nakamoto mean by "peer-to-peer cash"? How does Vitalik use the term "smart contract"? Just getting meaning from the text, or looking at these artificial creations through an intentional lens, can lead to very different results.

Like a thousand hamlets in the minds of a thousand readers, white papers are constantly being reinterpreted in situations where information is not fully available, either to fill in the gaps, or to pursue deeper meaning or the true intentions of the founders. Since the design of cryptocurrencies directly affects distribution and distribution, selective interpretation of a text (for example, accepting or rejecting ASICs) can lead to huge differences in the distribution of wealth.

So, even in projects where the founders are anonymous or cut off completely, the headless dynamic interpretation and refactoring that fills the gap is by no means completely disordered, and active followers will find a way to push the headless project forward.

3.4  Product brand differentiation VS agreement

While product brands often have a clear focus, should agreements follow the same strategy? In general, layer 1 protocols are used to define generality and generality protocols, while applications are used to meet specific needs that are highly differentiated. Projects such as IPFS, bitcoin, and W3C standards are standards, features, or platforms designed to implement and deliver generality based on their ideas. This minimalist and universal approach is similar to the universal design languages used by global infrastructure companies such as IBM, Oracle and AWS.

However, a common brand strategy seems to conflict with efforts to expand its decentralized network, such as building a vertically integrated product or solution across multiple layers.Confusion can arise if the product or solution shares brand elements with the underlying protocol, as the diversity and complexity of the top product/solution contaminate the minimalism and generality of the underlying protocol in terms of the brand concept.

But some projects have managed to sidestep this challenge while pursuing ecosystem building by involving team members in tier 2 and tier 3 projects under new brands. In 2018, for example, Blockstack co-founder Ryan Shea and another founding engineer joined an independent group based on the Blockstack network, a high-profile attempt at this strategy.

3.5  Discovery of product-market convergence (PMF)

To quote Clayton Christensen, traditional startup brands are meant to solve a backlog. Especially in B2B markets, a startup often communicates with its target customers, asking them specific questions and promising to solve them. For early-stage venture capital Web 2.0 companies, branding represents the following:

1. Description of "solvable problems, work to be done" and commitment to find product/market convergence;

2. Target customers and expected market size.

In this scenario, the role of the brand manager is to establish an interface between the product and the potential customer base. When the product is finally connected to the right customer, the brand is often reconfigured to reinforce its "brand market fit."

Whether headless or not, how do you find the right product market fit in the Web 3.0 era? In a sense, they don't.Because in a highly decentralized system of decentralization, the products and solutions that community members find for themselves become, in turn, "marketplaces." The cryptographic economy protocol itself becomes a market framework for finding potential products and applications.The task of exploring possibilities, discovering or testing different applications and solutions is assigned to each member of a wide ecosystem, so that the drips can support all boats.

Decentralized Finance (DeFi) is an example of an emerging ethereum ecosystem. However, DeFi is not a single, coordinated entity, but a series of new financial products based on ethereum protocols, non-permissible composability, most notably MakerDAO and Compound Finance, which are growing rapidly. Likewise, DeFi is not a single narrative or aesthetic, each project is free to tell its own story and define its own use case, but they also come together under the #DeFi banner, reinforcing the meme of ethereum's "programmable currency." The recent failure of Maker to apply for the DEFI trademark seems to further support this argument.

The discovery of DeFi as A core example can be attributed to: A) the development of token standards, and B) the community of eaeum owners and traders looking for new instances to increase their wealth, but not arbitrarily extrapolating the deployment of new currencies or smart contracts into the ecosystem to ensure that the community can find success stories or use cases.


Image above: Alethio DeFi series

The advanced strategy of headless brand

Web 3 projects are all open source in nature, which means that not only can technology move from one protocol level to another, but the entire state history can bifurcate. This begs the question: how can a project maintain its competitive edge if it no longer has exclusive rights to the technology or underlying data?

Branding is one of the most valuable assets of a decentralized agreement. Headless brand strategy is an ecological affair that requires the mobilization of decentralized participants. In essence, it provides agency to different stakeholders so that they can coordinate more effectively and feel connected to the brand. In this case, what the project can do is provide resources, tools, and methodological equipment to various stakeholders so that they can fuse around the same story.

Here are some Suggestions for various participants in the headless brand ecosystem to promote and reinforce the social consensus of emerging stories.

4.1  Protocol developer

4.1.1  security

Protocol developers can make programming language design choices that play a key role in providing initial conditions for the emergence and development of headless brands.

For peer-to-peer protocol and encrypted network security, the choice of password and security model remains key to brand trust. Any security breach, whether exploited or not, could directly damage the brand built around it, with the base chains such as Ethereum Classic and horizonen still rebuilding their brands after being hit by 51%.

4.1.2  Node operator experience

While specialization of node operations is a common trend, promoting consumer node operations can be beneficial for headless brands, which can also contribute to network availability and decentralization. How can run nodes deliver more compelling experiences? How do I signal to my friends that I'm running a node? Is the experience of running a node comparable to a game? Blockchain projects may move from older distributed computing projects such as seti@home, genomic @home, and folding@home to transforming distributed computing for public use into user-facing applications. *

* see:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_distributed_computing_projects

In the Clovers Network game, players "dig out" new permutations of visual patterns as "proof of work," demonstrating that a game-like social layer can both enhance and legitimize cryptocurrency. While many believe that users of blockchain apps in the future "won't even know that the apps they use are based on blockchain", improving the mining, mortgage and node operation experience could still be a fruitful innovation route.

4.1.3  Token ownership experience

If each token and agreement has its own brand, why should token ownership be limited to the banal metaphor of a digital "wallet"? Can tokens and cryptographic assets be displayed directly in front of the user's phone? Or turn token ownership into an aesthetic or collective experience, in which crypto portfolios can be presented to token holders and projects like Pinterest's interface or Instagram photo streams. What determines the design and implementation of these experiences is the development of infrastructure components that are not typically part of a single protocol, such as wallets and content production markets. Projects that place a high value on their brand and want to build network effects around the value of users' social sharing may want to consider this strategy.

4.1.3  governance

As shown in the previous examples of bitcoin, Tezos, and Amoveo, the governance model of the protocol directly affects the strategy of the headless brand. The project shall ensure that its brand strategy reflects and follows the protocol design choices. In traditional media, brand strategy is bound to be limited by product characteristics, while the headless feature of Web 3 brand directly has the function of claiming or withdrawing from the agreement.

4.2  The open source community

Under the idea of opinion leader marketing and "decentralized brand management", developers, contributors and community celebrities are also a source of publicity and network effects. Here are some ways to enrich the social layer of a project and demonstrate the appeal of technology and related brands.

4.2.1  Brand composability

Projects can gain social recognition from the companies they choose to build. Composability already exists in the ethereum ecosystem, with folktales such as #DeFi. In the same way, the emergence of new items in the agreement can enhance the credibility of the relevant brands! CDAI is a living example of this, and it benefits both Compound and DAI brands, and developers in the project ecosystem need more opportunities for such "portfolio branding".

4.2.2  Developer experience

Learning about the new development stack is a significant investment for individuals, many of whom have strong personal opinions and aesthetic preferences about the tools they use. Functional programming, contributing JS, Rust, WASM and other language ecology, is the embodiment of the powerful segmentation interest knowledge base in the era of Web 2.0, and is increasingly closely related to the open source community of Web 3 projects.

4.3  Vc fund

As early proponents of decentralization agreements, venture capital funds play an important role in the success of the headless branding strategy. In addition to providing liquidity and price support in the open market, venture funds can also use a "broad mining" approach. *

* see:https://twitter.com/jbrukh/status/1055553854291562497

Such as pledge, operation node, organization, voting, etc. actively participate in the network, attract talents to participate in the project under their own brand, and improve the ecological vitality through funding projects and grant programs.

Venture capital funds not only provide developers and other web participants with key organizational functions, but also expand the brand's story point. Efforts by vc funds are certainly strategic disclosures, but they may also come from deeper community involvement, opening up the development, validation, and evolution of investment arguments.

4.4  Token holder

Token holders themselves are important contributors to the project. If they believe in a project, they can tell it to each other: make memes, write articles, make up jokes and spread them, and of course talk about them, give developers meaningful feedback, compliment you on the money you've bought, and expose people who haven't. As the name implies, the size and robustness of the community supports the value of the token project.

Finally, we would like to say a few more words.

We are moving from a centralized, bureaucratic era of value creation companies to a decentralized, permission-free era of value creation networks. With the change of organizational model, the intangible cultural products produced by these new institutional forms will also change.

Brands, stories, memes, and now we can choose our own headless gods.

The original intention of decentralizing the brand questions how we define the brand and how we envision it to work. In 1971, the JWT advertising agency, JWT, now is the world's largest marketing company) brand manager Stephen King (Stephen King) describes the first condition of successful brand: "first of all, it must be a coherent whole, rather than scattered points. The product, packaging, as well as the name, style, advertising, price, promotion and so on elements, all communications must be merged into a brand personality." In 2019, it's unclear whether this theory will work, even for traditional products and services.

A decentralized brand is a meme. It doesn't belong to anyone. Unlike Coca-Cola, Uber or the New York times, a decentralized brand can only be "designed" in a limited way. Decentralized brands are self-run, self-motivated, powerful stories that are born and grow unexpectedly and irrepressibly.

Decentralized branding is the realization of fictional stories, thought forms, and self-sovereign entities that grow through a great deal of imagination and belief. It's hard to define what a decentralized brand is. It wasn't created by some discussion group, strategist, or image designer. Decentralized brands like bitcoin have autonomy, which is contributed by one participant after another, and by a chorus of millions.

Thanks to Darren Kong and John Palmer for their feedback and thoughts. The ICONS in this article are from Thomas Helbig of the Noun Project.

© 2019 Other Internet

Text link:https://otherinter.net/web3/headless-brand

Welcome to join the official BlockBeats community:

Telegram Subscription Group: https://t.me/theblockbeats

Telegram Discussion Group: https://t.me/BlockBeats_App

Official Twitter Account: https://twitter.com/BlockBeatsAsia