Blockchain sleuth ZachXBT has published what he calls a “price sheet of 200+ crypto influencers and their wallet addresses” tied to a recent promotional push, igniting a fresh backlash over undisclosed ads on Crypto Twitter. “From 160+ accounts who accepted the deal I only saw wrote, adding that the spreadsheet includes addresses and transaction links used to pay creators.
How Much Crypto Influencers Secretly Make
Three screenshots of the ledger show columns listing X profiles, quoted fees per post, recipient wallet addresses, and links to Solana block explorer pages. The sheet also assigns “Tier” labels that appear to bucket accounts by perceived reach or value. Payments vary widely, from lower three-figure sums to five-figure and even one extreme five-figure outlier, with ZachXBT emphasizing that the documentation is on-chain. “60K is not a typo here’s the transaction hash to the KOLs wallet for payment… the wallets / txns on the sheet are legit,” he stated, posting the hash.
ZachXBT stressed that the dataset does not represent the entire industry, explaining it reflects a single campaign. “It’s all of the KOLs from a single project (I didn’t compile),” he said. His central critique targets non-disclosure rather than the practice of paid promotion itself. “Have stated multiple times there’s nothing wrong with influencers doing paid promotion as long as: 1) you genuinely believe in the project 2) you disclose to your followers,” he wrote. He also underscored the regulatory dimension: “Yes it’s illegal in most jurisdictions but just is rarely enforced.”
The leak quickly set off a wave of incredulity and finger-pointing. Commenters zeroed in on a listed $60,000 payment for a single post to the account @Atitty_. When asked “why are they getting 60k for a single post,” ZachXBT replied, “Seems they do small giveaway posts to farm engagement from people in developing countries.” Others focused on the broader disclosure problem. “It’s wild people in crypto don’t see the need to alert their following with a #ad at the end of the post,” wrote Erick (@EB7). ZachXBT agreed, reiterating that transparency is the crux: “Agreed there’s nothing wrong with paid promotions when you disclose and it’s a project you genuinely believe in.”
The ten highest-priced placements visible in Tier-1 include @atitty_ at $60,000 per post (one post listed); @sibeleth at $10,000 per post (one); @MediaGiraffes at $5,000 per post on a $10,000/two-post package (two); @ApeMP5 at roughly $4,250 per video on an $8,500/2-video package (two); @DaoKwonDo at approximately $2,166 per post on a $6,500 package; @herrocrypto at $2,500 per post on a $5,000/two-post package (two); @fuelkek at $2,500 per post on a $5,000/two-post package (two); @TedPillows at $2,250 per post on a $9,000/four-post package (four); @EddyXBT at $2,000 per post on a $12,000/six-post package (six); and @Regrets10x at $2,000 per post on an $8,000/four-post package (four).
The thread also captured collateral allegations swirling around individual personalities and account quality. Community member Loshmi revived earlier accusations that @xiacalls rebranded and “changed his complete female appearance,” claiming “people still pay him NEARLY $2000 bucks for 2 paid promos.” ZachXBT’s response was curt—“Many such cases”—and he later suggested many of the accounts in the spreadsheet are either newcomers or artificially boosted, saying, “Most of them are from the most recent class of CT or are just botted accounts.”
Beyond the headline numbers, the screenshots illuminate how industrialized the pay-for-post market has become. Rows enumerate per-post price cards, bundle offers, and “package” deals, with dedicated fields for payment addresses and “PAID – SOL SCAN” links that appear designed for quick auditability. That level of bookkeeping, juxtaposed with claims of widespread non-disclosure, is what makes the leak so combustible: it offers a rare, structured glimpse into how some campaigns are organized, priced, and settled on-chain while the public output often reads like organic enthusiasm.
ZachXBT’s position, repeated throughout the exchange, is not to vilify paid placements but to force a reckoning with transparency norms that other online advertising markets have largely internalized. “It’s about 155/160 accounts not disclosing,” he wrote, calling the situation “still a big problem in the industry after so many years.”
At press time, the total crypto market cap stood at $3.77 trillion.
Featured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com
Editorial Process for is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.
