Pump /
Turning eight nights of attention into participation

Define the mechanism before the first show

The first product decision was how people would participate. Users would choose an eight-digit number for each ticket. During the live show, a number would be revealed. Tickets with at least three matching digits would qualify for the corresponding prize tier, with prize pools shared within tiers.

Partial matches gave more participants a place in the outcome. The mechanism also connected the product to the programme: choose a number, follow the live reveal, then return to see the result. The draw took place near the end of the show, giving participants a reason to stay through the broadcast.

Under the deadline, agreeing on these rules was the priority. Ticket entry, the studio reveal, and the results experience needed to describe the same system. A polished landing page would only work if the participation model underneath it was coherent.

By the evening, we had agreed on the structure. I worked through the night to turn it into designs the development team could build the next morning.

Make each mission lead back to a ticket

Tickets became the common reward across different campaign goals. Users could earn them through missions such as signing up, buying cryptocurrency, watching campaign content, following Wallex on social media, and inviting friends. Each additional ticket gave them another entry in its assigned night’s draw.

The business purpose varied by mission. Signup and purchase supported acquisition and activation; content and social actions supported awareness; referrals connected participation with bringing someone else into the campaign. For the user, the immediate reward stayed consistent: another chance to take part.

The interface placed tickets close to the missions that could earn more. We also offered one free ticket each day, giving people a simple reason to return even when they were not ready to complete another mission. The daily ticket, evening draw, and SMS reminders formed a repeatable journey across the eight nights.

The cohort dashboard supplied evidence of that repeat participation. One daily-ticket cohort recorded approximately 49% repeat participation on day one and 32% on day seven. This showed activity across the campaign window; it did not establish retention after the campaign or isolate the effect of reminders.

Make the harder mission worth the effort

Referral was a priority for acquisition, but participation in the mission was initially low. It also required more effort than actions users could complete alone: another person had to get involved.

We increased the reward for each invitation from one ticket to three. The redesigned mission made the offer explicit, showed progress across invitations, and displayed the tickets available to claim. The interface connected the additional effort with a visible reward.

Following the change, reported referral mission participation rose to more than five times its earlier rate. The change in reward and the change in participation are different measures: three times as many tickets per invitation, and more than five times the earlier mission participation rate.

For me, this was an incentive decision as much as an interface decision. Using tickets everywhere did not make every mission equally appealing. Referral needed a reward that better reflected the effort it asked of participants.

Bring the campaign into the daily product

Pump served both people arriving through the campaign and people already using Wallex. In the campaign’s ticket-participant snapshot, roughly 72% were classified as new users and 28% as existing users. These audiences needed different routes into the experience.

Early in the campaign, only a small share of active Wallex users were participating. We introduced a prominent home-screen module that brought together the daily prize, programme guests, a claim-chance action, and the next draw time.

This placed the campaign inside a journey existing users were already making. They could understand the offer and enter directly from the product, without first discovering the campaign through another channel.

Following the change, reported campaign participation among daily active users reached approximately 9.5 times its earlier rate. The claim-chance action also ranked first by total taps in the home-screen heatmap.

These signals answered different questions. The participation rate described involvement in the campaign; the heatmap showed interaction with its entry point. Neither should be confused with the participant-mix snapshot or treated as a count of acquired customers.

Keep tonight’s tickets easy to find

Launch began another part of the work. We continually monitored user feedback and fixed issues while the campaign was running. Some problems appeared in participation data; others became clear when users tried to understand their own tickets.

One recurring issue was discoverability. People had already entered numbers for that night, but could not easily find those tickets again. The landing page helped them acquire chances, yet the route back to an existing entry was too difficult to locate.

We added a secondary action directly below the main CTA in the hero, shown when the user had tickets for that night. It gave returning participants an immediate route to their entries while keeping ticket acquisition as the primary action.

That conditional placement mattered: the page needed to support both getting another chance and checking a chance already claimed. The right next action depended on the participant’s current state.

Make the draw status unambiguous

Finding a ticket was only the first problem. Users also needed to know whether it counted in the live draw they were watching.

Tickets could belong to different nights. A user might complete a mission while the programme was already underway, but the ticket earned from that action would count towards the following night’s draw. Showing all tickets together without a clear distinction made eligibility difficult to understand.

We redesigned the ticket view around draw dates. A flashing green indicator marked the group participating in the current night’s programme. Tickets assigned to the following night remained visible in their own dated group, alongside earlier entries.

This made an operational rule legible in the interface: earning a ticket now did not always mean entering the draw happening now. Users could see both what they held and when it would count.

After these changes, the team reported almost no support calls about which tickets counted in the draw. This gave us a direct signal that the eligibility confusion had been addressed.

Connect the live reveal with the result

The prize experience had to work across a studio screen and a personal screen in the product.

The broadcast displayed the eight-digit reveal prominently, then showed a winner breakdown by matching tier. The campaign landing page organised results by night and repeated the winning number and prize tiers.

This shared structure helped people connect the result they watched with the ticket they had entered. The journey continued after the reveal, when participants needed to understand what had happened to their own entries.

Make the prize experience credible and personal

The prize promise also needed supporting detail before and after a draw. We included a page showing winners from earlier Wallex campaigns, giving users a concrete record of previous awards alongside the current campaign’s offer. Its purpose was to support trust in a large prize promise.

When a participant won, they could access a personal winnings page. It showed their total winnings and organised the details by night, connecting the winning number, their ticket, and the relevant prize tier. This let a winner understand how the outcome related to their participation across multiple draws.

Together, these screens extended the product beyond entry and excitement. Previous awards supported the decision to participate; a personal record helped winners make sense of the result.

What changed across the eight nights

The clearest outcomes came from addressing different parts of the participation journey: the value of an invitation, the route in for existing users, and the clarity of ticket eligibility.

These observations cover different behaviours, populations, and evidence types. The participation changes are rounded before-and-after comparisons; the support outcome is qualitative; the cohort measures activity within the campaign.

The other campaign dashboards helped put these outcomes in context. The mobile scroll map showed that around 83% of sampled page views reached the mission-card area. That indicated visibility, not mission completion. The mission dashboard also showed much stronger participation in low-effort and content actions than in trading. Campaign engagement therefore needed to be read separately from deeper exchange usage.

The Google Trends snapshot showed rising indexed interest in the Persian search term “Wallex,” briefly crossing “Bitcoin” late in the displayed period in Iran. This was an awareness signal, rather than proof of category leadership or a product-level conversion result.

At campaign level, DMBoard reported that Pump brought Wallex one million new users. That result reflected the combined work of the programme, marketing, distribution, and product.

The campaign’s success also led to the creation of Pump as a business line. An experience built for eight nights became the starting point for a longer-term initiative.

What I took from the project

Pump required product ownership before, during, and after the first launch. I helped define how people would participate under an unusually tight deadline, translated that model into the interface, and continued improving it as behaviour and feedback became visible.

The most useful changes were specific: give a demanding mission a more meaningful reward; put the campaign where existing users already are; help participants distinguish tonight’s tickets from tomorrow’s. Each connected a business goal or operational rule to something a person needed to understand or do.

The project also sharpened how I read campaign results. Attention, ticket participation, fewer support questions, and sustained product adoption are different outcomes. The evidence supported strong campaign participation and clearer eligibility. The next question would be how much of that activity continued as meaningful exchange usage after the prizes ended.

My contribution was to own that connection between goals, rules, interface, and observed behaviour—and keep improving it while the campaign was live.