Author Topic: Liquid vs. Illiquid AGS  (Read 5076 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline alphaBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
PTS allocation should have no lockout period, then it is fair.

It will be priced in immediately. Liquidity has significant value. No rational person can deny this.

Offline alphaBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
It was stated on this forum that each dollar of AGS donated prior to Feb 28th was equal to $6.6 of PTS. I think we can all agree that this difference was SOLELY due to the fact that PTS is liquid and AGS is illiquid.

It stands to reason that any plan for converting AGS to a liquid asset should provide exactly 6.6X greater equity for each converted pre-snapshot PTS. In other words, pre-snapshot PTS should receive 6.6X greater equity in the new DAC to offset the "gift" of liquidity granted to AGS holders. 6.6X is in fact the quantifiable "value" of liquidity, as proven by the market price.

Let's ignore post-snapshot PTS for the time being and talk about why this does or does not make sense.
I already stated that it is impossible to have any distribution that will be 'fair' to everybody. In this regard I am content with any semi-fair, semi-reasonably distribution...
That said,  this is one of the most ridiculous and illogical arguments I have read.

Ok then, you tell me what the value should be. There is nothing "fair" or "semi-fair" about suddenly dropping a 16,000BTC liquidity bomb on PTS holders in exchange for literally nothing. That is what you're proposing, but I'm the one who is illogical?

Offline Ander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3506
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Ander
PTS allocation should have no lockout period, then it is fair.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline alphaBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
I think We missed the point.

It doesn't matter about donated PTS prices. It is about what PTS holders got for holding through FEb 28.

If the average PTS price was $15 and you held through feb28 you paid more.

$pre28PTS -$post28PTS is the amount a PTS paid for their BTSX shares/PTS.

Agreed on all counts. My point was not about how we determine the value of liquidity, that can be discussed. My main point was that liquidity surely does not have a value of ZERO, as is being proposed now.

Offline Empirical1.1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 886
    • View Profile
Whether there were 100 DACs or just BTSX, the point is that AGS was given 6X the equity of PTS solely because they chose to be "locked in". Now we're gifting them the liquidity of PTS and they get to keep the 6X? That is provably unfair... but I'm sure bytemaster will not bless us with his logic on this one other than saying, "it's the best we can do." Sad for a computer scientist to ignore simple logic in this way...

http://www1.agsexplorer.com/
5,625.02597337 BTC donated for 1,000,000.0 AGS
415,218.03087392 PTS donated for 1,000,000.0 AGS

177.7 AGS per BTC donated
2.408 AGS per PTS donated

Wheres the 6X

I am not sure.

You have to know the prices if BTC and PTS to figure it out realisticly.

Say BTC was $600 on average.

$600/177AGS = ~3.4 dollars per AGS

Say PTS was $12 on average

$12/2.4AGS = ~$5/AGS

By those calculations PTS about 30% more for an AGS based on those numbers.

Could be wrong though.

Useful analysis.

I would also say PTS has already gained some advantage from it's liquidity. I currently own 0 but I have bought and sold it as a trade & based on how I felt about snapshots, something I've been unable to do with AGS. How much that has already offset the discrepancy is subjective though.

I would also say the majority have an interest in seeing BTSX CAP which will become BTS respond positively to the decision.

The majority at this stage wants to have a seamless transition to getting a stake in a big pie as opposed to arguing to the point where they have a larger piece of a crumb. Time is of the essence.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8k8ETko16tQ


Offline NewMine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 552
    • View Profile
I think We missed the point.

It doesn't matter about donated PTS prices. It is about what PTS holders got for holding through FEb 28.

If the average PTS price was $15 and you held through feb28 you paid more.

$pre28PTS -$post28PTS is the amount a PTS paid for their BTSX shares/PTS.

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
It was stated on this forum that each dollar of AGS donated prior to Feb 28th was equal to $6.6 of PTS. I think we can all agree that this difference was SOLELY due to the fact that PTS is liquid and AGS is illiquid.

It stands to reason that any plan for converting AGS to a liquid asset should provide exactly 6.6X greater equity for each converted pre-snapshot PTS. In other words, pre-snapshot PTS should receive 6.6X greater equity in the new DAC to offset the "gift" of liquidity granted to AGS holders. 6.6X is in fact the quantifiable "value" of liquidity, as proven by the market price.

Let's ignore post-snapshot PTS for the time being and talk about why this does or does not make sense.
I already stated that it is impossible to have any distribution that will be 'fair' to everybody. In this regard I am content with any semi-fair, semi-reasonably distribution...
That said,  this is one of the most ridiculous and illogical arguments I have read.
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline alphaBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
Whether there were 100 DACs or just BTSX, the point is that AGS was given 6X the equity of PTS solely because they chose to be "locked in". Now we're gifting them the liquidity of PTS and they get to keep the 6X? That is provably unfair... but I'm sure bytemaster will not bless us with his logic on this one other than saying, "it's the best we can do." Sad for a computer scientist to ignore simple logic in this way...

http://www1.agsexplorer.com/
5,625.02597337 BTC donated for 1,000,000.0 AGS
415,218.03087392 PTS donated for 1,000,000.0 AGS

177.7 AGS per BTC donated
2.408 AGS per PTS donated

Wheres the 6X

I am not sure.

You have to know the prices if BTC and PTS to figure it out realisticly.

Say BTC was $600 on average.

$600/177AGS = ~3.4 dollars per AGS

Say PTS was $12 on average

$12/2.4AGS = ~$5/AGS

By those calculations PTS about 30% more for an AGS based on those numbers.

Could be wrong though.

Yes, you are way off. I just did a rough estimate and it was more than double, but less than 6X. Irrelevant to the point I'm making though. We all agree AGS received a bigger stake for greater risk. If you want to take away their risk, the stake must be adjusted accordingly.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2014, 04:46:53 pm by alphaBar »

Offline alphaBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
Whether there were 100 DACs or just BTSX, the point is that AGS was given 6X the equity of PTS solely because they chose to be "locked in". Now we're gifting them the liquidity of PTS and they get to keep the 6X? That is provably unfair... but I'm sure bytemaster will not bless us with his logic on this one other than saying, "it's the best we can do." Sad for a computer scientist to ignore simple logic in this way...

http://www1.agsexplorer.com/
5,625.02597337 BTC donated for 1,000,000.0 AGS
415,218.03087392 PTS donated for 1,000,000.0 AGS

177.7 AGS per BTC donated
2.408 AGS per PTS donated

Wheres the 6X

Somebody posted that number in another thread, not confirming it's accuracy. The point is that they received a bigger stake in exchange for taking the risk of perpetual illiquidity. If you want to gift them the liquidity, their stake should be adjusted accordingly. These were the terms of the social contract. There is no logic in doing it any other way.




Offline NewMine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 552
    • View Profile
Whether there were 100 DACs or just BTSX, the point is that AGS was given 6X the equity of PTS solely because they chose to be "locked in". Now we're gifting them the liquidity of PTS and they get to keep the 6X? That is provably unfair... but I'm sure bytemaster will not bless us with his logic on this one other than saying, "it's the best we can do." Sad for a computer scientist to ignore simple logic in this way...

http://www1.agsexplorer.com/
5,625.02597337 BTC donated for 1,000,000.0 AGS
415,218.03087392 PTS donated for 1,000,000.0 AGS

177.7 AGS per BTC donated
2.408 AGS per PTS donated

Wheres the 6X

I am not sure.

You have to know the prices if BTC and PTS to figure it out realisticly.

Say BTC was $600 on average.

$600/177AGS = ~3.4 dollars per AGS

Say PTS was $12 on average

$12/2.4AGS = ~$5/AGS

By those calculations PTS about 30% more for an AGS based on those numbers.

Could be wrong though.

Offline roadscape

Whether there were 100 DACs or just BTSX, the point is that AGS was given 6X the equity of PTS solely because they chose to be "locked in". Now we're gifting them the liquidity of PTS and they get to keep the 6X? That is provably unfair... but I'm sure bytemaster will not bless us with his logic on this one other than saying, "it's the best we can do." Sad for a computer scientist to ignore simple logic in this way...

http://www1.agsexplorer.com/
5,625.02597337 BTC donated for 1,000,000.0 AGS
415,218.03087392 PTS donated for 1,000,000.0 AGS

177.7 AGS per BTC donated
2.408 AGS per PTS donated

Wheres the 6X
http://cryptofresh.com  |  witness: roadscape

Offline alphaBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
AGSers already received 6X more in every issued DAC, including BTSX.

What others DACs ?

DNS is merge and what left is Music. Music does't change the deal for PTS holder or AGS holders so it does not count.

Whether there were 100 DACs or just BTSX, the point is that AGS was given 6X the equity of PTS solely because they chose to be "locked in". Now we're gifting them the liquidity of PTS and they get to keep the 6X? That is provably unfair... but I'm sure bytemaster will not bless us with his logic on this one other than saying, "it's the best we can do." Sad for a computer scientist to ignore simple logic in this way...

Offline oco101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
    • View Profile
AGSers already received 6X more in every issued DAC, including BTSX.

What others DACs ?

DNS is merge and what left is Music. Music does't change the deal for PTS holder or AGS holders so it does not count.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2014, 03:23:04 am by oco101 »

Offline roadscape

My point in making this thread is that a 50/50 split between AGS and PTS is provably unfair. AGSers already received 6X more in every issued DAC, including BTSX. The 6X multiplier was due solely to the fact that AGS is illiquid and that AGS "donation" was perpetual and non-transferable. Now that people are proposing that we "gift" them all of the benefits of PTS (ie, liquidity), the 6X multiplier should also be retracted.

This is truly one of the failures of democracy at work. Redistribution of wealth at the expense of the less-vocal minority. The people who are checking these forums with enough consistency to "catch" this scheme in progress are those who are, most likely, heavily invested in AGS. Meanwhile, new users, later adopters, and less invested individuals (PTS users, those who are more objective AND more likely to affect our reputation outside of this closed circle) are shafted by the circle jerk that this has turned into. I'm mostly entertained by the whole thing, although I hate to see a wasted opportunity.

Devil's advocate:

AGS earned any such bias; BTSX is where it is today only because of the earliest adopters.

3i went out of their way to guarantee nothing for AGS/PTS holders.
They could have just as easily merged their DACs and left the "free sample" concept for 3rd party DACs.
They're throwing us a bone before shunning this "community coin" forever.
http://cryptofresh.com  |  witness: roadscape

Offline alphaBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
Yeah as I said above you could potentially give them less or make them wait longer. The AGSers are the real long term believers and supporters of DACs with a lot of faith in BM so on the one hand they deserve more on the other hand you can err on the side of giving them less as we're the most likely to not quibble over a few % and support BTS regardless.

However looking at PTS price it's holding at round 10% of BTSX price so you could argue that's the region the market is expecting.

So somewhere in that region 8-10% each, 50/50 is simplest & is going to be generally acceptable imo.

(I have equalish BTSX & AGS % but no PTS)

My point in making this thread is that a 50/50 split between AGS and PTS is provably unfair. AGSers already received 6X more in every issued DAC, including BTSX. The 6X multiplier was due solely to the fact that AGS is illiquid and that AGS "donation" was perpetual and non-transferable. Now that people are proposing that we "gift" them all of the benefits of PTS (ie, liquidity), the 6X multiplier should also be retracted.

This is truly one of the failures of democracy at work. Redistribution of wealth at the expense of the less-vocal minority. The people who are checking these forums with enough consistency to "catch" this scheme in progress are those who are, most likely, heavily invested in AGS. Meanwhile, new users, later adopters, and less invested individuals (PTS users, those who are more objective AND more likely to affect our reputation outside of this closed circle) are shafted by the circle jerk that this has turned into. I'm mostly entertained by the whole thing, although I hate to see a wasted opportunity.