Author Topic: What is the Profit model of BTSx ?  (Read 5224 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
The profit model is apparently that there will be no "profits."

Once dilution is implemented, I venture to say BTS will never be "profitable" on its original goals of creating a profitable company out of a cryptocurrency by not diluting its shareholders and burning fees. No amount of marketing and development will ever be enough, shareholders will always want more no matter the value of the BTS tokens.

Now the model closely resembles how any other cryptocurrency would be "profitable" by its tokens' value rising. Whether this is a good thing or not is yet to be seen, but if I see someone say "they just don't see the big picture" one more time I'm going to flip shit. Apparently there are people that can tell the future, and the debate is not a debate at all as it is an objective matter and not a subjective one.  ::)

Just out of curiosity, I pose this question:

If 3% dilution is used to fund growth this year while the share price grows by 100%, what would your recommended investment rate be for the following year?

Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline Rune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
    • View Profile
Buy at low adoption, raise funds to dramatically increase adoption through innovation and marketing, sell (or hold) after adoption explosion = PROFIT.

Offline bytemaster

We have set a hard cap of 50 bts per block max.

We profit by network effect. 

It is entirely possible that future fees will be in excess of approved dilution rates.

For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline Empirical1.1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 886
    • View Profile
+5% +5% +5%
Dilution  is absolutely the nightmare for btsx!!! Originally I firmly kept resisting the merging with dilution!3I should use the btsx shares of its own to buy back ags/pts!Not diluting!

Putting my own opinions on dilution aside for a moment, I'm not necessarily saying dilution is a bad thing, whether it is good or bad remains to be seen. I am just getting annoyed with the "anti-dilution crowd doesn't see the big picture" speak, as it is a subjective matter not an objective one. Also, it pretty much completely changes the original concept of making a profitable company on a block chain.

I think once people are able to quantify how profitable BitAssets & BitAsset growth is for BTS, I fully believe BTS will be & be seen as a profitable company on a blockchain.

There's still a good chance, 70%+, BTS as is will be huge. Unbelievable product, best talent & a lot of stuff going behind the scenes.

BTS may have less than 5% of shares set aside for development so it would be tough to stay a hard cap. I think a minimum of 10% set aside for a 5 year development plan would be required and even then that may not be enough for a pioneering SuperDAC.

So for BitSharesX becoming BitShares and aiming for network effect & single focus, which I kind of agree with, some dilution is a given probably. For BitShares personally I'd like defined, unchangeable dilution and I may also hedge in a credible hard cap competitor.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2014, 04:10:19 pm by Empirical1.1 »

Offline BTSdac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1219
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: K1
peg is the product of BTS system. 
github.com :pureland
BTS2.0 API :ws://139.196.37.179:8091
BTS2.0 API 数据源ws://139.196.37.179:8091

Offline CoinHoarder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 660
  • In Cryptocoins I Trust
    • View Profile
+5% +5% +5%
Dilution  is absolutely the nightmare for btsx!!! Originally I firmly kept resisting the merging with dilution!3I should use the btsx shares of its own to buy back ags/pts!Not diluting!

Putting my own opinions on dilution aside for a moment, I'm not necessarily saying dilution is a bad thing, whether it is good or bad remains to be seen. I am just getting annoyed with the "anti-dilution crowd doesn't see the big picture" speak, as it is a subjective matter not an objective one. Also, it pretty much completely changes the original concept of making a profitable company on a block chain.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2014, 03:37:06 pm by CoinHoarder »
https://www.decentralized.tech/ -> Market Data, Portfolios, Information, Links, Reviews, Forums, Blogs, Etc.
https://www.cryptohun.ch/ -> Tradable Blockchain Asset PvP Card Game

Offline Empirical1.1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 886
    • View Profile
The profit model is apparently that there will be no "profits."

Once dilution is implemented, I venture to say BTS will never be "profitable" on its original goals of creating a profitable company out of a cryptocurrency by not diluting its shareholders and burning fees. No amount of marketing and development will ever be enough, shareholders will always want more no matter the value of the BTS tokens.

Now the model closely resembles how any other cryptocurrency would be "profitable" by its tokens' value rising. Whether this is a good thing or not is yet to be seen, but if I see someone say "they just don't see the big picture" one more time I'm going to flip shit. Apparently there are people that can tell the future, and the debate is not a debate at all as it is an objective matter and not a subjective one.  ::)

 +5%

Yeah there's many issues with especially undefined dilution, I would agree to anything not to lose the key talent but I think it's fundamentally flawed.

In regular companies key shareholders have to disclose their stake and disclose sales. In BTS we already know a few voting blocks have a potentially controlling  stake. So with TITAN + undefined dilution + no legal recourse, we've invented the impossible &  created something that requires MORE  trust than a company.  It's very hard to imagine new shareholders ever trusting that.

Also unlike a real company, everything a pure DAC spends a fortune developing is open source, no intellectual property, so development spending has very limited medium term value.

The company metaphor is also exactly what crypto, libertarian and mainstream is growing to distrust, especially in banking. Give them a DAC  with no dilution or at the very least defined limits and values, & you can own the world.

So something that requires MORE trust than a company, gets little development benefit & negative marketing especially vs. a limited competitor, makes the value proposition of undefined dilution questionable.

There were other factors at play, but BTSX has also lost 50% already since dilution discussions started and we we're on an uptrend before, with the world's greatest product and so many good things in the pipeline. So one could argue we may be 80%+ lower than where we would have been.

I agree with you. I wish there was some intelligent debate and discussion of the issues, so many people try censor discussion or just label it as FUD.

Offline Troglodactyl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 960
    • View Profile
The profit model is apparently that there will be no "profits."

Once dilution is implemented, I venture to say BTS will never be "profitable" on its original goals of creating a profitable company out of a cryptocurrency by not diluting its shareholders and burning fees. No amount of marketing and development will ever be enough, shareholders will always want more no matter the value of the BTS tokens.

Now the model closely resembles how any other cryptocurrency would be "profitable" by its tokens' value rising. Whether this is a good thing or not is yet to be seen, but if I see someone say "they just don't see the big picture" one more time I'm going to flip shit. Apparently there are people that can tell the future, and the debate is not a debate at all as it is an objective matter and not a subjective one.  ::)

I think the issue here is the fear that stakeholders will be dumb and see dilution as free money, rather than as a real expense.  The goal should always be to minimize dilution (expenses) while maximizing share value growth (profits).  While most centralized companies use cash on hand as a buffer to protect shareholders from most expenses and occasionally pay dividends from it, or dilute for large expenses, this model requires a central trusted entity to manage the money.  The BitShares model with dilution allows all assets to be decentralized, with profits and expenses flowing to and from shareholders dynamically.

Offline matt608

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 878
    • View Profile
The profit model is apparently that there will be no "profits."

Once dilution is implemented, I venture to say BTS will never be "profitable" on its original goals of creating a profitable company out of a cryptocurrency by not diluting its shareholders and burning fees. No amount of marketing and development will ever be enough, shareholders will always want more no matter the value of the BTS tokens.

Now the model closely resembles how any other cryptocurrency would be "profitable" by its tokens' value rising. Whether this is a good thing or not is yet to be seen, but if I see someone say "they just don't see the big picture" one more time I'm going to flip shit. Apparently there are people that can tell the future, and the debate is not a debate at all as it is an objective matter and not a subjective one.  ::)

 +5% +5% +5%
Dilution  is absolutely the nightmare for btsx!!! Originally I firmly kept resisting the merging with dilution!3I should use the btsx shares of its own to buy back ags/pts!Not diluting!

There may well come a time when no dilution is needed to pay for any features/marketing.  If Bitassets use is high enough the fees will be enough to pay delegates for any work they may do.  Once that is the case the stakeholders would not vote for any dilution as the delegates would already be being paid plenty for their work.

The dilution is to bootstap the DAC up to self-sustaining size, where the fees are enough.

People who don't want dilution can vote against it for every delegate if they wish.  Maybe a hard time-cap so that after say 2 years its impossible for more dilution.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2014, 03:48:20 pm by matt608 »

Offline Felix

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 87
    • View Profile
The profit model is apparently that there will be no "profits."

Once dilution is implemented, I venture to say BTS will never be "profitable" on its original goals of creating a profitable company out of a cryptocurrency by not diluting its shareholders and burning fees. No amount of marketing and development will ever be enough, shareholders will always want more no matter the value of the BTS tokens.

Now the model closely resembles how any other cryptocurrency would be "profitable" by its tokens' value rising. Whether this is a good thing or not is yet to be seen, but if I see someone say "they just don't see the big picture" one more time I'm going to flip shit. Apparently there are people that can tell the future, and the debate is not a debate at all as it is an objective matter and not a subjective one.  ::)

 +5% +5% +5%
Dilution  is absolutely the nightmare for btsx!!! Originally I firmly kept resisting the merging with dilution!3I should use the btsx shares of its own to buy back ags/pts!Not diluting!

Offline CoinHoarder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 660
  • In Cryptocoins I Trust
    • View Profile
The profit model is apparently that there will be no "profits."

Once dilution is implemented, I venture to say BTS will never be "profitable" on its original goals of creating a profitable company out of a cryptocurrency by not diluting its shareholders and burning fees. No amount of marketing and development will ever be enough, shareholders will always want more no matter the value of the BTS tokens.

Now the model closely resembles how any other cryptocurrency would be "profitable" by its tokens' value rising. Whether this is a good thing or not is yet to be seen, but if I see someone say "they just don't see the big picture" one more time I'm going to flip shit. Apparently there are people that can tell the future, and the debate is not a debate at all as it is an objective matter and not a subjective one.  ::)
« Last Edit: November 02, 2014, 03:04:33 pm by CoinHoarder »
https://www.decentralized.tech/ -> Market Data, Portfolios, Information, Links, Reviews, Forums, Blogs, Etc.
https://www.cryptohun.ch/ -> Tradable Blockchain Asset PvP Card Game

Offline Empirical1.1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 886
    • View Profile
Imo the thing that will make BTS holders rich far more than the various fees is more people using BitAssets and their rate of growth.

There is some debate on this https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10690.0  but I believe demand for BitAssets increases demand for BTS in a similar way gold jewellry demand increases demand for gold. https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10690.msg141364#msg141364

More importantly I think we benefit from anticipation of future BitAsset demand  :)

So depending on how fast BitAsset demand is growing & how far forward people value BTS, the BTS price can rise very high, very quick imo  8)

This is one of the main arguments in favour of dilution imo. You can dilute to maximise BitAsset development, utility, incentives and marketing.

I'm firmly in the no dilution for as long as possible or strictly defined dilution camp though.

Offline Troglodactyl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 960
    • View Profile
Yes. Trading fees and transfer fees primarily. The network design is very efficient and scales well, so it can still be profitable with low fees.

Right now I think a lot of delegates are unprofitable because they're running higher end nodes than currently necessary in anticipation of growth.

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Depends ... for asset holder its the the yield ... for delwgates its the inflation .. for shareholders its the burned fees

Offline sudo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2255
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ags
bank& exchange   trading fees?