Crypto-marketing. A scheme in which promoters of securities tied to cryptocurrencies recruit investors to pitch the investments, often to friends and family and through social media and blogs. In return, these investors are promised a generous return plus the promise of commissions on their sales.
Corbet, S., B. Lucey, and L. Yarovaya (2018), “Datestamping the Bitcoin and Ethereum bubbles”, Finance Research Letters 26, 81–88.

More importantly, we find that the ACP and ANET factors can price cryptocurrency returns. In particular, all of our five cryptocurrencies have positive and significant exposures to the fundamental factors. The explanatory power of ACP and ANET is over and above any effects related to the Bitcoin and momentum factors. This finding is non-trivial given that the five cryptocurrencies in our sample have consistently accounted for between 80% to 95% of the total cryptocurrency market capitalisation. Furthermore, we extend our factor analysis to an out-of-sample set of 33 cryptocurrencies obtained from the Bittrex exchange. We find that the aggregate computing power and network factors also price cryptocurrencies in this large out-of-sample data set.
One example is the negative correlation that occurs between Ethereum and its associated factors around June 2016 (left facing arrows at the top and just left of the horizontal middle of the Ethereum scalograms). During this time interval, one of the most well-known applications at the time, the DAO, built on top of the Ethereum environment, was hacked. It can be seen that all factors are negatively correlated in the short term with the price during this time interval. As a result of the uncertainty generated by the hack, price dropped sharply, but activity on social media and interest increased (causing the negative correlation). The negative relationship can be seen during the 2–4 day band for all factors.