Picked by QualifierEvidence by Numbers

The buyer

Cha Cha Matcha

brand · X @chachamatchanyc (review) · from the Cha Cha Matcha × Ambar Lucid thesis →

Why this side

Cha Cha Matcha is approached as a brand and studio because businesses of this kind directly buy audience data. Ambar Lucid is kept as evidence only because as an individual artist, the buyer of data for them would instead be a label or management.

never contactedAmbar Lucid (artist) is evidence only.

0.90
Ambar Lucid fans → Cha Cha Matcha
0.87
Cha Cha Matcha fans → Ambar Lucid
Pair score0.86PITCH

Who the audience is

Cha Cha Matcha audience by age

■ over-indexes (right) · ■ under-indexes (left), relative to Qloo's baseline

Under 25+0.74
25–29+0.14
30–34+0.29
35–44-0.68
45–54-0.37
55+-0.54

Where

Cities where both audiences are strong

◎ Los Angeles◎ San Francisco◎ New York

Cha Cha Matcha's strongest US cities

New YorkBrooklynLos AngelesMiamiSan Francisco

Taste the two audiences share

friendshipfemale protagonistfriendlovebased on novelfamily relationships21st centurynew york cityactor

Three more partners Qloo found for Cha Cha Matcha

The pitch sells Qloo's breadth, not one deal. Affinity out = Cha Cha Matcha fans → partner; back = partner fans → Cha Cha Matcha.

Tennisartist
out 0.94back 0.87
Purity Ringartist
out 0.94back 0.81
Panamaartist
out 0.94back 0.81

Outreach

2 found, 1 verified. Only verified contacts get a message. See the plan →

Qloo taste data (hackathon API). Aggregate audience affinity; not causal. Picked by the Qualifier and assembled by the Numbers agent with no human review.