Author Topic: BitShares Music non-technical paper. Updated.  (Read 23506 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline starspirit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 948
  • Financial markets pro over 20 years
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: starspirit
What determines the price of a song?

The artist.

What determines the price of an Iphone cover on ebay? The seller!
ebay has no say in how much a product sells for on their platform.

I think this decision could be a mistake. The market should determine the price of a product or service rather than the seller. I do understand why you would want artists to try and determine it but it's likely that if the artists get it wrong then it would encourage piracy or fans simply wont buy it at all.

Can we have a market based option for artists who want to let the market or the fans determine the price?


I believe each artist would make a realistic price. If he/she prices the song high, he/she will have less sales but higher margin (and getting high-spenders).  In the end, the market demand will influence the artist in his/her pricing decision. And the artists can select the market segment they like to serve.
And presumably the artist could change their price couldn't they? So if they are not getting the immediate result they want, they just move price to what the market will take. The market determines the result in the end anyway.

Offline cube

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1404
  • Bit by bit, we will get there!
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcube
What determines the price of a song?

The artist.

What determines the price of an Iphone cover on ebay? The seller!
ebay has no say in how much a product sells for on their platform.

I think this decision could be a mistake. The market should determine the price of a product or service rather than the seller. I do understand why you would want artists to try and determine it but it's likely that if the artists get it wrong then it would encourage piracy or fans simply wont buy it at all.

Can we have a market based option for artists who want to let the market or the fans determine the price?


I believe each artist would make a realistic price. If he/she prices the song high, he/she will have less sales but higher margin (and getting high-spenders).  In the end, the market demand will influence the artist in his/her pricing decision. And the artists can select the market segment they like to serve.
ID: bitcube
bitcube is a dedicated witness and committe member. Please vote for bitcube.

Offline joele

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
I personally hope that music stays separate from the super dac but figures out a way to use BitUSD from the super dac chain.
+5%

Offline matt608

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 878
    • View Profile
Should there be a maintain fee for artist coins like suggested by Alt here?
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=11316.0

Is there anything stopping an artist selling their artist coins directly to their fans on their own website and not using bitUSD, resulting in NOTE holders getting nothing?

Many artists would want to sell their artist coins to their fans this way, rather than having a new link to promote to a peertracks URL.

I have concerns about how NOTEs gain value.  Depending on a tiny fee when a track is bought on peertracks seems not enough. 

What if 1% of all artist coins were snapshotted to NOTE holders?  They could be vested, with a gradual release time.  That would be a much better source of income.  Note holders could get to log in with their steak to access their many artist coins. 

Also I would vote in favour of merging with BTS and using the BTS blockchain.  It's a bit of a shame this isn't what happened already.  Keeping up with another 101 delegates will be really annoying, and it creates the issue of peertracks bitUSD keeping to its peg and having to attract shorters to have that market functioning. 
« Last Edit: November 13, 2014, 07:09:34 pm by matt608 »

Offline fuzzy

Time for another dev hangout? We have an opening this Saturday!
WhaleShares==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits and WhaleShares = Love :D

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
What determines the price of a song?

The artist.

What determines the price of an Iphone cover on ebay? The seller!
ebay has no say in how much a product sells for on their platform.

I think this decision could be a mistake. The market should determine the price of a product or service rather than the seller. I do understand why you would want artists to try and determine it but it's likely that if the artists get it wrong then it would encourage piracy or fans simply wont buy it at all.

Can we have a market based option for artists who want to let the market or the fans determine the price?


We should create a ranking/tracking system like Billboards is to music in general. Would have create a ranking algorithm like google search that tracks, downloads, streams, votes, and other engagement metrics to rank the artist. This would create a good competition between the artist and their fans. This all leads up to some king of awards shows like the Grammy/AMAs.

I think having a scripting language would be better than hard coding something like this. It's a mere sort algorithm is what you're talking about and if you have scripting language capabilities then I could write a sort algorithm once and have them work on all the similar DACs.

What determines the price of a song?

The artist.

What determines the price of an Iphone cover on ebay? The seller!
ebay has no say in how much a product sells for on their platform.

Is there any other selling model? For example, Google Music has 'monthly subscription' that you can listen to whatever you want with $9.99/month. In Taiwan, east asia and many other places, people would prefer this model than paying for each song. Considering this mode does not mean to invest any specific artist, I think the fee for monthly subscription should charged as Notes, and then:
1. shared between artists.
2. or used to buy and burn artistcoins of songs that were listened.

It might be too ambitious to roll out all at once, but I do see potential for multiple streams of income.  In a subscription based (or free ad based) model, you can pay the artist in proportion to how many listens they received, while using a weighting system to increase the pay/airtime on artists who get voted up while decreasing the pay/airtime for those who get voted down.   

The subscription model doesn't make any money for artists. The ad model is the worst model you could go with if the idea is to attract artists.

The market based approaches are interesting but untested. I think for artists familiar with the way of altcoins will prefer the market based approaches. I think the traditional approaches would be great for industry artists who are more familiar with that.

I think flexibility and all kinds of payment approaches should be offered. One of the benefits of this technology is that you can do all kinds of different approaches and it's not one sized fits all. You can do micropayments in a fair way but you can also turn the music itself into a commodity.

I would suggest that we find a way to get a Turing complete scripting language set up so that you can do all sorts of different smart contracts between artist and fans. I would also suggest that the development team put in as many different options for artists as they can at launch and simply make the default options the most simple. This way artists feel like there is unlimited flexibility to try new ideas while also having the simple defaults which are familiar.

What determines the price of a song?

The artist.

What determines the price of an Iphone cover on ebay? The seller!
ebay has no say in how much a product sells for on their platform.

Is there any other selling model? For example, Google Music has 'monthly subscription' that you can listen to whatever you want with $9.99/month. In Taiwan, east asia and many other places, people would prefer this model than paying for each song. Considering this mode does not mean to invest any specific artist, I think the fee for monthly subscription should charged as Notes, and then:
1. shared between artists.
2. or used to buy and burn artistcoins of songs that were listened.

I think we need more flexibility by far. Some artists would rather trust the market and simply release their coin to the fans so the fans can use price discovery mechanisms. Other artists may want to go with more industry familiar models.

I think considering that you're presenting a very unorthodox market based technology why remove all the most innovative features and water it down? I'd like to see market based approaches to price discovery for artists who prefer this. Also for fans who would prefer to use market based approaches it should be there.

Subscription based approaches don't make any sense unless it's subscription to individual artist channels. Why would people come from the regular business models onto this technology only to go with a subscription? Having said that I'm not against the idea if it could be made to work. Maybe do it so that the fans automatically buy a certain amount of artist coin each month in the artists they really believe in.

This would be something like a recurring payment.
« Last Edit: October 10, 2014, 06:27:41 pm by luckybit »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline Pheonike


We should create a ranking/tracking system like Billboards is to music in general. Would have create a ranking algorithm like google search that tracks, downloads, streams, votes, and other engagement metrics to rank the artist. This would create a good competition between the artist and their fans. This all leads up to some king of awards shows like the Grammy/AMAs.

 

Offline Gentso1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 931
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: gentso
Will you be able to claim your ags stake without having to submit private keys?

Offline sschechter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 380
    • View Profile
What determines the price of a song?

The artist.

What determines the price of an Iphone cover on ebay? The seller!
ebay has no say in how much a product sells for on their platform.

Is there any other selling model? For example, Google Music has 'monthly subscription' that you can listen to whatever you want with $9.99/month. In Taiwan, east asia and many other places, people would prefer this model than paying for each song. Considering this mode does not mean to invest any specific artist, I think the fee for monthly subscription should charged as Notes, and then:
1. shared between artists.
2. or used to buy and burn artistcoins of songs that were listened.

It might be too ambitious to roll out all at once, but I do see potential for multiple streams of income.  In a subscription based (or free ad based) model, you can pay the artist in proportion to how many listens they received, while using a weighting system to increase the pay/airtime on artists who get voted up while decreasing the pay/airtime for those who get voted down.   
BTSX: sschechter
PTS: PvBUyPrDRkJLVXZfvWjdudRtQgv1Fcy5Qe

Offline 麥可貓

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 267
    • View Profile
What determines the price of a song?

The artist.

What determines the price of an Iphone cover on ebay? The seller!
ebay has no say in how much a product sells for on their platform.

Is there any other selling model? For example, Google Music has 'monthly subscription' that you can listen to whatever you want with $9.99/month. In Taiwan, east asia and many other places, people would prefer this model than paying for each song. Considering this mode does not mean to invest any specific artist, I think the fee for monthly subscription should charged as Notes, and then:
1. shared between artists.
2. or used to buy and burn artistcoins of songs that were listened.
« Last Edit: October 10, 2014, 09:08:41 am by 麥可貓 »
PTS: PmRVDPymZqSAZEXauHZSewrUrE66af7epT
BTSX: michaelcat
Delegate Team: x1.sun  x2.sun

Offline oco101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
    • View Profile
So peertracks never handles any funds.

Cob, does that mean that Peertracks definitely wont be accepting any fiat for music purchases? I thought the plan was to accept fiat which is use to buy BitUSD for music purchases on the blockchain.

If peertracks wont take any fiat, that means the only avenue for sales is from existing Notes holders correct? If I want to promote an artist an pump his artistcoins, I need friends to put in their fiat into his songs.

No the opposite is true....This is the main idea, music lovers put there credit card and they get bitUSD. From the user point of view they don't bother with crypto stuff at all. Yeah so your friends they don't even need to know about Notes. Whatever they wanna buy artistcoin or music they simply use their Credit Card that's it. Anyway that's my understanding so far.

Offline roadscape

Cob, does that mean that Peertracks definitely wont be accepting any fiat for music purchases? I thought the plan was to accept fiat which is use to buy BitUSD for music purchases on the blockchain.

If peertracks wont take any fiat, that means the only avenue for sales is from existing Notes holders correct? If I want to promote an artist an pump his artistcoins, I need friends to put in their fiat into his songs.

BTSX is getting fiat onramps and I imagine PeerShares will piggyback off their efforts. You would probably just transfer bitUSD from BTSX to Music through cross-chain trading. (Is cross-chain trading implemented yet?)

Edit: bytemaster said a long long time ago that bitGLD would be used for cross-chain trading. Interesting topic!
« Last Edit: October 10, 2014, 03:51:59 am by roadkill »
http://cryptofresh.com  |  witness: roadscape

Offline robrigo

So peertracks never handles any funds.

Cob, does that mean that Peertracks definitely wont be accepting any fiat for music purchases? I thought the plan was to accept fiat which is use to buy BitUSD for music purchases on the blockchain.

If peertracks wont take any fiat, that means the only avenue for sales is from existing Notes holders correct? If I want to promote an artist an pump his artistcoins, I need friends to put in their fiat into his songs.

Maybe a fiat on ramp that has a seamless experience could facilitate this on behalf of PeerTracks. I wonder if that is the plan for the on ramp "funnels"? Imagine a checkout plugin that would automatically, securely convert your credit / debit card into bitUSD that could be used to buy the artistcoin programmatically. To the user the transaction would be like any other online purchase, peertracks would not handle the PCI compliance, they would just be given bitUSD as per the arrangement with the on ramp to programmatically buy the artistcoin.

Offline speedy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1160
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: speedy
So peertracks never handles any funds.

Cob, does that mean that Peertracks definitely wont be accepting any fiat for music purchases? I thought the plan was to accept fiat which is use to buy BitUSD for music purchases on the blockchain.

If peertracks wont take any fiat, that means the only avenue for sales is from existing Notes holders correct? If I want to promote an artist an pump his artistcoins, I need friends to put in their fiat into his songs.
« Last Edit: October 09, 2014, 10:22:26 pm by trader »

Offline sschechter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 380
    • View Profile
cob, will the artist only be able to sell songs (mp3?) on this platform?  What about producers who want to release products like loops and sample packs?  If this can't or wont be done in PeerTracks, will there be tools available that an artist can use to cryptographically verify a users coins on their own website (ie, automatic sample clearance / misc freebies for any holder of X amount of coins)?

Also, I belong to the Propellerhead Reason members forum (for licensed users).  I plan on writing up a post on BitShares Music and PeerTracks in order to gain some feedback from our target audience.  I will share any useful feedback I get.
BTSX: sschechter
PTS: PvBUyPrDRkJLVXZfvWjdudRtQgv1Fcy5Qe

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Mppph [frustrated]  then they should go with "artist cards." Coin is not an intuitive term for DACs
If you wouldn't think about crypto coins and instead imaging a collectible coin such as

everything is fine :)

it's just not a "coin" in the "traditional" crypto coin sense

Offline carpet ride

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 544
    • View Profile


Can you please refer to artist coin as artist shares?  It would be many times more sensible
they can't .. for legal reasons if I recall correctly ... shares have a legal implication while "coins" are much like baseball collection cards (citing cob here :) )

if we it wasn't for regulations I would totally agree!

Mppph [frustrated]  then they should go with "artist cards." Coin is not an intuitive term for DACs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
All opinions are my own. Anything said on this forum does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation between myself and anyone else.
Check out my blog: http://CertainAssets.com
Buy the ticket, take the ride.

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Can you please refer to artist coin as artist shares?  It would be many times more sensible
they can't .. for legal reasons if I recall correctly ... shares have a legal implication while "coins" are much like baseball collection cards (citing cob here :) )

if we it wasn't for regulations I would totally agree!

Offline carpet ride

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 544
    • View Profile
Can you please refer to artist coin as artist shares?  It would be many times more sensible


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
All opinions are my own. Anything said on this forum does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation between myself and anyone else.
Check out my blog: http://CertainAssets.com
Buy the ticket, take the ride.

Offline cob

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: cobb
What determines the price of a song?

The artist.

What determines the price of an Iphone cover on ebay? The seller!
ebay has no say in how much a product sells for on their platform.
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 cob

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: cobb
As it is now  PeerTracks does not make any money for sales of the artist coin or songs. So the only way to make money it is to buy NOTES and hope to make enough profit to cover bandwidth cost and development. This model can't work, i.e  if a company in China want's to make  PeerTrackChina I will have 0 incentive to go all this trouble to build it. It is much easier to just buy the NOTES and make a profit and not bother with all trouble building the website bandwidth etc. Or even better they will clone Bitshare Music and they will lunch on a different chain.
So if we want Bitshares  Music to become the music DAC that everybody will use, then others company needs to have the incentive to build on top of it. I think the best way will be that each company should be able to set a percentage of the sales that is going as profit.
Agreed. Each company will set their own fee. Some companies might set their fee to 0% if they can cover costs some other way and attract more artists/users to their platform because of that low fee.
PeerTracks would like to be that 0% fee website right out the gates if possible.
Quote

..whether the Notes PeerTracks will hold will be enough to repay the bandwidth costs..  But you are saying that PeerTrack does't hold  any NOTES or funds ??
No PeerTracks will definitely have some Notes. But it's impossible to calculate just how much revenue those will generate. Maybe those Notes will cover costs, maybe not. If not, then we will have no choice but to charge a extra % for the service.

Quote
( If it's not enough then a fee will be charged for that) The fee that PeerTrack will charge will be coded in the front(PeerTrack website) or it will be integrated in the back end( Bitshare Music Dac) ?
It would be front end of course.
The backend fee is to ANYONE that has Notes. So any DAC "share"holders benefit from this fee. PeerTracks will be a Noteholder as well. Compared to most noteholders PeerTracks will have expenses, since as you said it's cheaper to just buy Notes and sit on them then to build a site.
In that sense it makes total sense for PeerTracks to charge a fee on top of this. But remember websites have other means of monetization. If having low (no) fees help PeerTracks draw traffic then we are good.
Facebook is free for example.

Basically. The plan is for PeerTracks to see if holding notes + traditional monetization are enough to cover costs and make a profit.
A front end fee can be added if need be.
Simple enough (:

Quote
One more think. Why you don't take a small fee that goes directly to Bisthares Music Foundation in that way there will a continuous flow of founds that will be use by the Foundation for the development and other project of the DAC, so there will be  less need to inflate the Notes supply. I.E. 80% goes to the artist, 17% goes to buy back, 2%  you burn that goes to Notes holders and 1% you don't burn you put in the Foundation account .

The foundation will loose it's power as the project goes from start-up to established DAC.
Foundation = centralization

Once the DAC is mature, it will be hard to justify dilution and the only way dilution could happen is if Noteholders vote for a delegate that can convince them there is a project/idea that would greatlly benefit the DAC's ecosystem.

So no, there will be no hardcoded fee going to the foundation. It will all be done through delegates.
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 oco101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
    • View Profile
So peertracks never handles any funds. We just see that BOB the user that has an account with PeerTracks paid Britney and we let him take the file. PeerTracks should have made up the cost of the bandwidth by the transaction fees (whether the Notes PeerTracks will hold will be enough to repay the bandwidth costs, we don't know yet. If it's not enough then a fee will be charged for that)

Cob, I think this raise a very interesting  question. There is one think that is not clear at all:  How PeerTracks makes money ?  In my opinion  the businesses model that  will be use  is essential to the future of Bitshare Music DAC.

As it is now  PeerTracks does not make any money for sales of the artist coin or songs. So the only way to make money it is to buy NOTES and hope to make enough profit to cover bandwidth cost and development. This model can't work, i.e  if a company in China want's to make  PeerTrackChina I will have 0 incentive to go all this trouble to build it. It is much easier to just buy the NOTES and make a profit and not bother with all trouble building the website bandwidth etc. Or even better they will clone Bitshare Music and they will lunch on a different chain.
So if we want Bitshares  Music to become the music DAC that everybody will use, then others company needs to have the incentive to build on top of it. I think the best way will be that each company should be able to set a percentage of the sales that is going as profit.

..whether the Notes PeerTracks will hold will be enough to repay the bandwidth costs..  But you are saying that PeerTrack does't hold  any NOTES or funds ??

( If it's not enough then a fee will be charged for that) The fee that PeerTrack will charge will be coded in the front(PeerTrack website) or it will be integrated in the back end( Bitshare Music Dac) ?


One more think. Why you don't take a small fee that goes directly to Bisthares Music Foundation in that way there will a continuous flow of founds that will be use by the Foundation for the development and other project of the DAC, so there will be  less need to inflate the Notes supply. I.E. 80% goes to the artist, 17% goes to buy back, 2%  you burn that goes to Notes holders and 1% you don't burn you put in the Foundation account .
« Last Edit: October 07, 2014, 03:03:39 am by oco101 »

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
So the DAC will allow flexibility is amount of artistcoins issued, and the % of income going to artist and artistcoin holders.

Is that necessary? Why not just have all of the income go to the artistcoin holders and have the artist decide the percentage they get by holding on to the appropriate percentage of the artistcoin? So an artist can issue an artistcoin with some supply, keep 50% for themselves, sell the other 50% on the open market. Now when the income from the music sales buys the artistcoin, the artist should get 50% of the effective dividends from the buyback. To realize these gains as BitUSD, they simply sell the appropriate amount of artistcoins on the exchange (they sell only enough to maintain 50% ownership of the new reduced supply of artistcoins). Maybe they can even get away with paying long-term capital gains taxes on some of their earnings instead of income taxes if they can hold off selling some of the artistcoins for over a year (I don't really know for sure, I am not a tax attorney).


I second that. The knowledge that the artists will actually receive their income through the same artistic coins that the investors are buying will lead to much more interest by investors/sponsors and much higher price, than if they buy some artistcoin that will be producing some unclear returns and the artists' interest how big such returns are is pretty uncertain (and even potentially opposite if % of music sales goes to artistcoins' holders and the rest to him/her).

Well the artist will have some of his own coin as well.

So far, when a song sells for say 1BitUSD.
0.8 bitUSD could go to the artist's wallet paying him in a liquid form. Without him having to liquidate anything.
say 0.05BitUSD was the fee
And 0.15 BitUSD goes to the buy back mechanism.

I know you understand this already.
Now the thing to realize is that the artist might have kept say, 50% of the artistcoins. So he still has a stake in it's value.

As an analogy, we can look at the artist profile as a company.

You have income = 1 BitUSD
You then have 2 expenses
1. the 0.05 BitUSD in fees (service/network/bandwidth)
2. The artists salary 0.80 BitUSD

The "company" is left with 0.15 BitUSD of PROFIT

This profit is what is distributed to the "shareholders" (Artistcoin holders).

Now in a company, say Apple, Steve jobs has a CEO salary. A liquid form of weekly spendable income. But he also held shares in the company, incentivizing him to make the shares worth more and more.

This is the approach we are taking SO FAR.

I do like the simplicity of having 100% going to the coin, and nothing as an artist salary. I can see some band's cashing out and selling off all their coins accidently. There is no Undo button for that. The band basically just gave up 100% of stake in their own profile "company".

To introduce the non-trader world to this tech, we are taking baby steps. User experience first. That can change over time when people WANT to go into the "advanced settings"

What determines the price of a song?
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile

Is that necessary? Why not just have all of the income go to the artistcoin holders and have the artist decide the percentage they get by holding on to the appropriate percentage of the artistcoin? So an artist can issue an artistcoin with some supply, keep 50% for themselves, sell the other 50% on the open market. Now when the income from the music sales buys the artistcoin, the artist should get 50% of the effective dividends from the buyback. To realize these gains as BitUSD, they simply sell the appropriate amount of artistcoins on the exchange (they sell only enough to maintain 50% ownership of the new reduced supply of artistcoins). Maybe they can even get away with paying long-term capital gains taxes on some of their earnings instead of income taxes if they can hold off selling some of the artistcoins for over a year (I don't really know for sure, I am not a tax attorney).
We thought of that too. One thing we want to avoid is for artists to have to do anything manually. Artists and bands are solicited by a hundred different music websites that'll do X or Y for them. Having to learn the intricate details of each can be a big deal. We wanted a way for an artist to just put up his music, set his price, sell his coin. Go away! and collect BitUSD.

What you suggest is excellent in my opinion, but we might at first launch it with the pre determined split. Without the artist having to sell off some coins to cash out.

Are you trying to just destroy my wonderful day, cob, with this lame excuse?
If they do not have agents to do that part of the job for them I can set up a service to do it for them.... They will just have 'sold' all/part of their artist coins at the end of the day... no brain power extended on their part...

It is just as easy as " How much do you want for this song/album upfront? It is currently probably valued at 50K. Do you want $25,000 now and 50% of all sales or probably $12,500 now and probably (hopefully) 75% of 50 Mil sales?"
« Last Edit: October 03, 2014, 04:28:10 am by tonyk »
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline cob

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: cobb
So the DAC will allow flexibility is amount of artistcoins issued, and the % of income going to artist and artistcoin holders.

Is that necessary? Why not just have all of the income go to the artistcoin holders and have the artist decide the percentage they get by holding on to the appropriate percentage of the artistcoin? So an artist can issue an artistcoin with some supply, keep 50% for themselves, sell the other 50% on the open market. Now when the income from the music sales buys the artistcoin, the artist should get 50% of the effective dividends from the buyback. To realize these gains as BitUSD, they simply sell the appropriate amount of artistcoins on the exchange (they sell only enough to maintain 50% ownership of the new reduced supply of artistcoins). Maybe they can even get away with paying long-term capital gains taxes on some of their earnings instead of income taxes if they can hold off selling some of the artistcoins for over a year (I don't really know for sure, I am not a tax attorney).


I second that. The knowledge that the artists will actually receive their income through the same artistic coins that the investors are buying will lead to much more interest by investors/sponsors and much higher price, than if they buy some artistcoin that will be producing some unclear returns and the artists' interest how big such returns are is pretty uncertain (and even potentially opposite if % of music sales goes to artistcoins' holders and the rest to him/her).

Well the artist will have some of his own coin as well.

So far, when a song sells for say 1BitUSD.
0.8 bitUSD could go to the artist's wallet paying him in a liquid form. Without him having to liquidate anything.
say 0.05BitUSD was the fee
And 0.15 BitUSD goes to the buy back mechanism.

I know you understand this already.
Now the thing to realize is that the artist might have kept say, 50% of the artistcoins. So he still has a stake in it's value.

As an analogy, we can look at the artist profile as a company.

You have income = 1 BitUSD
You then have 2 expenses
1. the 0.05 BitUSD in fees (service/network/bandwidth)
2. The artists salary 0.80 BitUSD

The "company" is left with 0.15 BitUSD of PROFIT

This profit is what is distributed to the "shareholders" (Artistcoin holders).

Now in a company, say Apple, Steve jobs has a CEO salary. A liquid form of weekly spendable income. But he also held shares in the company, incentivizing him to make the shares worth more and more.

This is the approach we are taking SO FAR.

I do like the simplicity of having 100% going to the coin, and nothing as an artist salary. I can see some band's cashing out and selling off all their coins accidently. There is no Undo button for that. The band basically just gave up 100% of stake in their own profile "company".

To introduce the non-trader world to this tech, we are taking baby steps. User experience first. That can change over time when people WANT to go into the "advanced settings"
« Last Edit: October 03, 2014, 03:35:28 am by cob »
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 cob

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: cobb

Is that necessary? Why not just have all of the income go to the artistcoin holders and have the artist decide the percentage they get by holding on to the appropriate percentage of the artistcoin? So an artist can issue an artistcoin with some supply, keep 50% for themselves, sell the other 50% on the open market. Now when the income from the music sales buys the artistcoin, the artist should get 50% of the effective dividends from the buyback. To realize these gains as BitUSD, they simply sell the appropriate amount of artistcoins on the exchange (they sell only enough to maintain 50% ownership of the new reduced supply of artistcoins). Maybe they can even get away with paying long-term capital gains taxes on some of their earnings instead of income taxes if they can hold off selling some of the artistcoins for over a year (I don't really know for sure, I am not a tax attorney).
We thought of that too. One thing we want to avoid is for artists to have to do anything manually. Artists and bands are solicited by a hundred different music websites that'll do X or Y for them. Having to learn the intricate details of each can be a big deal. We wanted a way for an artist to just put up his music, set his price, sell his coin. Go away! and collect BitUSD.

What you suggest is excellent in my opinion, but we might at first launch it with the pre determined split. Without the artist having to sell off some coins to cash out.


Quote
By the way, you make a clear distinction between PeerTracks and the BitShares Music DAC, which is great. But I don't understand the mechanics of how the BitUSD to pay for the music and buy the artistcoin works. The whitepaper is not clear on this. The only reason people are paying money for the music download is because PeerTracks is providing the download in exchange for the money. Does the DAC itself provide a mechanism to set song prices and keep track of payments and license rights of those songs on the blockchain, which then PeerTracks monitors and gives the payer the download? Or does the music buyer pay the BitUSD to PeerTracks in exchange for the music download which PeerTracks then uses to buy up the appropriate artistcoin and pay the artist? If PeerTracks really is just a frontend to the DAC, shouldn't that mean that an artist should in theory be able to use the DAC (with other open source clients) to sell music to their fans directly without PeerTracks involved at all (even though this obviously will not be as convenient as using the PeerTracks interface)?
Good question Arhag. PeerTracks holds no funds.. ever. The blockchain takes care of everything. CUE THE MUSIC!  "Can't be stopped, can't be touched, can't be..."
sorry.
back now
When BOB sends 0.99 BitUSD to Britney Spears' Oops I did it again wallet, PeerTracks see that on the blockchain and allows BOB's PeerTracks account to download Oops_I_did_it_again.mp3 from the peertracks server.

So peertracks never handles any funds. We just see that BOB the user that has an account with PeerTracks paid Britney and we let him take the file. PeerTracks should have made up the cost of the bandwidth by the transaction fees (whether the Notes PeerTracks will hold will be enough to repay the bandwidth costs, we don't know yet. If it's not enough then a fee will be charged for that)

Quote
Are you increasing the fixed fee of BitUSD transfers for music purchases or is there a percentage fee as well? If you are able to distinguish between a regular BitUSD transfer between addresses and a music purchase with BitUSD (which I assume you have to be able to do in order to use a percentage of the BitUSD for music purchases to buy the appropriate artistcoins), then you have a lot of flexibility in how you charge fees. Keep fixed fee transfers of Notes, BitAssets, and user-issued assets (artistcoins) low just like BitShares X, but then add a small percentage fee (maybe 2%?) in addition to the tiny fixed transaction fee on music purchase transactions.

Once BitSharesX is done and is relatively "final". Then we will see just how much flexibility we have with this. For now, I can't answer since we are still unsure ourselves. Once BitSharesX is done and settled, we will have a better idea of what we can work with to charge a fee for song sales.
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 tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
So the DAC will allow flexibility is amount of artistcoins issued, and the % of income going to artist and artistcoin holders.

Is that necessary? Why not just have all of the income go to the artistcoin holders and have the artist decide the percentage they get by holding on to the appropriate percentage of the artistcoin? So an artist can issue an artistcoin with some supply, keep 50% for themselves, sell the other 50% on the open market. Now when the income from the music sales buys the artistcoin, the artist should get 50% of the effective dividends from the buyback. To realize these gains as BitUSD, they simply sell the appropriate amount of artistcoins on the exchange (they sell only enough to maintain 50% ownership of the new reduced supply of artistcoins). Maybe they can even get away with paying long-term capital gains taxes on some of their earnings instead of income taxes if they can hold off selling some of the artistcoins for over a year (I don't really know for sure, I am not a tax attorney).


I second that. The knowledge that the artists will actually receive their income through the same artistic coins that the investors are buying will lead to much more interest by investors/sponsors and much higher price, than if they buy some artistcoin that will be producing some unclear returns and the artists' interest how big such returns are is pretty uncertain (and even potentially opposite if % of music sales goes to artistcoins' holders and the rest to him/her).
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline emski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1282
    • View Profile
    • http://lnkd.in/nPbhxG
This is exemplary explanation of original and much-needed DAC. Good Job!

I'll just throw in some questions and ideas:
How will this be spoken in the words of law. Who will protect the artist(s) if someone uses their work without permission. Should everyone hire a lawyer? Can the lawyers be hired by blockchain under certain conditions (additional insurance for example)?


[Somewhat Unrelated]What I was thinking about as a possible use of current technology:
What if each license/song purchased are recorded in the blockchain with info of buyer (location, intended usage etc).
What if we have a free app that recognizes the song being played (similar to shazam, soundhound ) in the user's vicinity and check if it is registered on the blockchain and if the current location (Bar, Shop, ) has the right to use it.

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1214
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BitShares: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag
So the DAC will allow flexibility is amount of artistcoins issued, and the % of income going to artist and artistcoin holders.

Is that necessary? Why not just have all of the income go to the artistcoin holders and have the artist decide the percentage they get by holding on to the appropriate percentage of the artistcoin? So an artist can issue an artistcoin with some supply, keep 50% for themselves, sell the other 50% on the open market. Now when the income from the music sales buys the artistcoin, the artist should get 50% of the effective dividends from the buyback. To realize these gains as BitUSD, they simply sell the appropriate amount of artistcoins on the exchange (they sell only enough to maintain 50% ownership of the new reduced supply of artistcoins). Maybe they can even get away with paying long-term capital gains taxes on some of their earnings instead of income taxes if they can hold off selling some of the artistcoins for over a year (I don't really know for sure, I am not a tax attorney).

By the way, you make a clear distinction between PeerTracks and the BitShares Music DAC, which is great. But I don't understand the mechanics of how the BitUSD to pay for the music and buy the artistcoin works. The whitepaper is not clear on this. The only reason people are paying money for the music download is because PeerTracks is providing the download in exchange for the money. Does the DAC itself provide a mechanism to set song prices and keep track of payments and license rights of those songs on the blockchain, which then PeerTracks monitors and gives the payer the download? Or does the music buyer pay the BitUSD to PeerTracks in exchange for the music download which PeerTracks then uses to buy up the appropriate artistcoin and pay the artist? If PeerTracks really is just a frontend to the DAC, shouldn't that mean that an artist should in theory be able to use the DAC (with other open source clients) to sell music to their fans directly without PeerTracks involved at all (even though this obviously will not be as convenient as using the PeerTracks interface)?

Imagine if someone issued 700 billion artistcoins and the buy back was 0.1% and some guy makes 4 artistcoins with a 50% buy back.
One will be in decimal world, the other in Zimbabwe land, one coin willl be worth 5 million BitUSD and the other 0.0007 pennies.

Just avoid this issue by denominating everything as a percentage of the share supply in the user interface.

Yes it is exactly like BitSharesX, only we are isolating a certain type of transaction and making that transaction fee higher.

We want everything to stay low cost of course, but the DAC must generate revenue on song sales.
This means that BitUSD transfers will be slightly more expensive.

So people trading around artistcoins (say 2 kids swaping coins in the school yard) should not be charged a big fee. This fee is cheap. But someone sending BitUSD from his wallet to an artist's wallet (upon song purchase) will see a higher transaction fee.
The goal is for the DAC to make money when music is sold basically.

Are you increasing the fixed fee of BitUSD transfers for music purchases or is there a percentage fee as well? If you are able to distinguish between a regular BitUSD transfer between addresses and a music purchase with BitUSD (which I assume you have to be able to do in order to use a percentage of the BitUSD for music purchases to buy the appropriate artistcoins), then you have a lot of flexibility in how you charge fees. Keep fixed fee transfers of Notes, BitAssets, and user-issued assets (artistcoins) low just like BitShares X, but then add a small percentage fee (maybe 2%?) in addition to the tiny fixed transaction fee on music purchase transactions.
« Last Edit: September 29, 2014, 04:19:32 am by arhag »

Offline cob

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: cobb
Your PTS will give you shares in this DAC, or do you mean something else?
Yes but how do the shares make money? In other words how does the DAC make a profit to pass on to the shareholders.

just read the first post in this thread.

Quote
2.2.2 Artistcoins
An artist can decide to create his own coin and start selling them to his fans to fund his career. The artist sets the price of his coin and sells it just as he would sell a baseball card. A limited edition digital token with his name and/or his face on it. These newly created, limited edition artistcoins are now distributed throughout the artist’s fanbase and himself. The income generated by his fans buying up the artistcoins will go straight to his wallet, directly funding his career just like kickstarter would. Only, as we will see below, this type of kickstarter is superior in many ways.
Every time a song is sold on PeerTracks.com, a certain % of that income goes into the market and buys up the lowest ask of that artistcoin, effectively cashing out the seller. That artistcoin is “burned” (taken out of circulation). This mechanism achieves the following:
pays the artist for his content
increases liquidity in that artistcoin (paying off the artistcoin seller)
increases demand in that artistcoin
reduces supply of that limited edition artistcoin
The last three points are what can cause a price increase in that artistcoin.
The more music an artist sells on PeerTracks, the more liquid his artistcoin is. Since every song sale is actually a buy order on the books.
If a user purchased a certain artist’s coin and the artist starts selling songs and albums on PeerTracks, that coin is now worth more than when it was purchased. It is in that user’s self-interest to share and promote this artist’s music in order to reap maximum benefit from the holding of that artistcoin. In other words, the fans are incentivized to generate more music sales for the artists they hold artistcoins of.

That describes how the artistcoin will make money not the DAC.
So will PTS holders be given 10% of all artistcoins? Or will the DAC charge a fee for creating an artistcoin?
Like BitSharesX the revenue streams for the Dac :

1) Transaction fees
2) bid/ask overlap
3) Asset creation
4) Shorting related fees
5) Feel like I'm missing some...

Yes it is exactly like BitSharesX, only we are isolating a certain type of transaction and making that transaction fee higher.

We want everything to stay low cost of course, but the DAC must generate revenue on song sales.
This means that BitUSD transfers will be slightly more expensive.

So people trading around artistcoins (say 2 kids swaping coins in the school yard) should not be charged a big fee. This fee is cheap. But someone sending BitUSD from his wallet to an artist's wallet (upon song purchase) will see a higher transaction fee.
The goal is for the DAC to make money when music is sold basically.
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 cob

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: cobb
Awesome introduction. Really explains the key benefits in an easy to understand way.  +5%

The % for the coin buy back can be set by the artist? If so is it ensured that the rate can't be decreased after the coin was issued?

The DAC will most likely allow that rate to be decided by the issuer, but on PeerTracks, we are planning on having a set rate for better user experience. We don't want to overload the user with a million different moving parts to account for.

So the DAC will allow flexibility is amount of artistcoins issued, and the % of income going to artist and artistcoin holders.

On PeerTracks though, since it is kind of a stepping stone to introduce the masses to this entirely new concept, we want to make it a set # of artistcoins and a fixe % for the buy back mechanism.

This way when you look at the top 100 charts, even a 10 year old will be able to get it.

Imagine if someone issued 700 billion artistcoins and the buy back was 0.1% and some guy makes 4 artistcoins with a 50% buy back.
One will be in decimal world, the other in Zimbabwe land, one coin willl be worth 5 million BitUSD and the other 0.0007 pennies.

We want to avoid that AT LEAST at first, while we want to ensure a good user experience.
The DAC will allow anything though. Front end sites / apps can choose the model they want.
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 oco101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
    • View Profile
the way i see it as that i can buy with my notes certain peertracks which, if or when, become popular i make money. Also the notes themselve might go up in price just like btsx
You buy artistcoin and songs with bitUSD, notes will be backing your bitUSD in Bitshare Music.

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
the way i see it as that i can buy with my notes certain peertracks which, if or when, become popular i make money. Also the notes themselve might go up in price just like btsx
no .. peertracks is the dacsunlimited or I3 .. for bitsharesX .. there are no peertracks on the blockchain .. only NOTES and ARTISTCOINS! .. and bitassets of course

NOTES is the equivalent to BTSX in the bitshares-X chain

Offline serejandmyself

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 358
    • View Profile
the way i see it as that i can buy with my notes certain peertracks which, if or when, become popular i make money. Also the notes themselve might go up in price just like btsx
btsx - bitsharesrussia

Offline Mysto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile

Offline oco101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
    • View Profile
Your PTS will give you shares in this DAC, or do you mean something else?
Yes but how do the shares make money? In other words how does the DAC make a profit to pass on to the shareholders.

just read the first post in this thread.

Quote
2.2.2 Artistcoins
An artist can decide to create his own coin and start selling them to his fans to fund his career. The artist sets the price of his coin and sells it just as he would sell a baseball card. A limited edition digital token with his name and/or his face on it. These newly created, limited edition artistcoins are now distributed throughout the artist’s fanbase and himself. The income generated by his fans buying up the artistcoins will go straight to his wallet, directly funding his career just like kickstarter would. Only, as we will see below, this type of kickstarter is superior in many ways.
Every time a song is sold on PeerTracks.com, a certain % of that income goes into the market and buys up the lowest ask of that artistcoin, effectively cashing out the seller. That artistcoin is “burned” (taken out of circulation). This mechanism achieves the following:
pays the artist for his content
increases liquidity in that artistcoin (paying off the artistcoin seller)
increases demand in that artistcoin
reduces supply of that limited edition artistcoin
The last three points are what can cause a price increase in that artistcoin.
The more music an artist sells on PeerTracks, the more liquid his artistcoin is. Since every song sale is actually a buy order on the books.
If a user purchased a certain artist’s coin and the artist starts selling songs and albums on PeerTracks, that coin is now worth more than when it was purchased. It is in that user’s self-interest to share and promote this artist’s music in order to reap maximum benefit from the holding of that artistcoin. In other words, the fans are incentivized to generate more music sales for the artists they hold artistcoins of.

That describes how the artistcoin will make money not the DAC.
So will PTS holders be given 10% of all artistcoins? Or will the DAC charge a fee for creating an artistcoin?

No you'll not get artiscoins as a PTS holder, you'll get Notes, how many notes we don't know yet.  Notes will make money to shareholders in the same way as BTSX makes money to shareholder right now. But let's wait on Cob final distribution and plan.
« Last Edit: September 28, 2014, 06:15:18 pm by oco101 »

Offline Riverhead

Your PTS will give you shares in this DAC, or do you mean something else?
Yes but how do the shares make money? In other words how does the DAC make a profit to pass on to the shareholders.

just read the first post in this thread.

Quote
2.2.2 Artistcoins
An artist can decide to create his own coin and start selling them to his fans to fund his career. The artist sets the price of his coin and sells it just as he would sell a baseball card. A limited edition digital token with his name and/or his face on it. These newly created, limited edition artistcoins are now distributed throughout the artist’s fanbase and himself. The income generated by his fans buying up the artistcoins will go straight to his wallet, directly funding his career just like kickstarter would. Only, as we will see below, this type of kickstarter is superior in many ways.
Every time a song is sold on PeerTracks.com, a certain % of that income goes into the market and buys up the lowest ask of that artistcoin, effectively cashing out the seller. That artistcoin is “burned” (taken out of circulation). This mechanism achieves the following:
pays the artist for his content
increases liquidity in that artistcoin (paying off the artistcoin seller)
increases demand in that artistcoin
reduces supply of that limited edition artistcoin
The last three points are what can cause a price increase in that artistcoin.
The more music an artist sells on PeerTracks, the more liquid his artistcoin is. Since every song sale is actually a buy order on the books.
If a user purchased a certain artist’s coin and the artist starts selling songs and albums on PeerTracks, that coin is now worth more than when it was purchased. It is in that user’s self-interest to share and promote this artist’s music in order to reap maximum benefit from the holding of that artistcoin. In other words, the fans are incentivized to generate more music sales for the artists they hold artistcoins of.

That describes how the artistcoin will make money not the DAC.
So will PTS holders be given 10% of all artistcoins? Or will the DAC charge a fee for creating an artistcoin?
Like BitSharesX the revenue streams for the Dac :

1) Transaction fees
2) bid/ask overlap
3) Asset creation
4) Shorting related fees
5) Feel like I'm missing some...

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
That describes how the artistcoin will make money not the DAC.
So will PTS holders be given 10% of all artistcoins? Or will the DAC charge a fee for creating an artistcoin?
Yet to be revealed ... cob mentioned he wanted to tell us the weekend .. let's see

Offline Mysto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
Your PTS will give you shares in this DAC, or do you mean something else?
Yes but how do the shares make money? In other words how does the DAC make a profit to pass on to the shareholders.

just read the first post in this thread.

Quote
2.2.2 Artistcoins
An artist can decide to create his own coin and start selling them to his fans to fund his career. The artist sets the price of his coin and sells it just as he would sell a baseball card. A limited edition digital token with his name and/or his face on it. These newly created, limited edition artistcoins are now distributed throughout the artist’s fanbase and himself. The income generated by his fans buying up the artistcoins will go straight to his wallet, directly funding his career just like kickstarter would. Only, as we will see below, this type of kickstarter is superior in many ways.
Every time a song is sold on PeerTracks.com, a certain % of that income goes into the market and buys up the lowest ask of that artistcoin, effectively cashing out the seller. That artistcoin is “burned” (taken out of circulation). This mechanism achieves the following:
pays the artist for his content
increases liquidity in that artistcoin (paying off the artistcoin seller)
increases demand in that artistcoin
reduces supply of that limited edition artistcoin
The last three points are what can cause a price increase in that artistcoin.
The more music an artist sells on PeerTracks, the more liquid his artistcoin is. Since every song sale is actually a buy order on the books.
If a user purchased a certain artist’s coin and the artist starts selling songs and albums on PeerTracks, that coin is now worth more than when it was purchased. It is in that user’s self-interest to share and promote this artist’s music in order to reap maximum benefit from the holding of that artistcoin. In other words, the fans are incentivized to generate more music sales for the artists they hold artistcoins of.

That describes how the artistcoin will make money not the DAC.
So will PTS holders be given 10% of all artistcoins? Or will the DAC charge a fee for creating an artistcoin?

38PTSWarrior

  • Guest
And the more popular it becomes the more value a Note will have?

E: I see, like with BTSX, the Notes will back the coins or something..
« Last Edit: September 28, 2014, 05:38:16 pm by 38PTSWarrior »

Offline Shentist

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1601
    • View Profile
    • metaexchange
  • BitShares: shentist
Your PTS will give you shares in this DAC, or do you mean something else?
Yes but how do the shares make money? In other words how does the DAC make a profit to pass on to the shareholders.

just read the first post in this thread.

Quote
2.2.2 Artistcoins
An artist can decide to create his own coin and start selling them to his fans to fund his career. The artist sets the price of his coin and sells it just as he would sell a baseball card. A limited edition digital token with his name and/or his face on it. These newly created, limited edition artistcoins are now distributed throughout the artist’s fanbase and himself. The income generated by his fans buying up the artistcoins will go straight to his wallet, directly funding his career just like kickstarter would. Only, as we will see below, this type of kickstarter is superior in many ways.
Every time a song is sold on PeerTracks.com, a certain % of that income goes into the market and buys up the lowest ask of that artistcoin, effectively cashing out the seller. That artistcoin is “burned” (taken out of circulation). This mechanism achieves the following:
pays the artist for his content
increases liquidity in that artistcoin (paying off the artistcoin seller)
increases demand in that artistcoin
reduces supply of that limited edition artistcoin
The last three points are what can cause a price increase in that artistcoin.
The more music an artist sells on PeerTracks, the more liquid his artistcoin is. Since every song sale is actually a buy order on the books.
If a user purchased a certain artist’s coin and the artist starts selling songs and albums on PeerTracks, that coin is now worth more than when it was purchased. It is in that user’s self-interest to share and promote this artist’s music in order to reap maximum benefit from the holding of that artistcoin. In other words, the fans are incentivized to generate more music sales for the artists they hold artistcoins of.

Offline Mysto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
Your PTS will give you shares in this DAC, or do you mean something else?
Yes but how do the shares make money? In other words how does the DAC make a profit to pass on to the shareholders.

38PTSWarrior

  • Guest

Offline nomoreheroes7

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 756
  • King of all the land
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nomoreheroes7
Glad I grabbed a small chunk of AGS 2 days prior to close. Just in case something like this were to come along...

 +5%

38PTSWarrior

  • Guest
Your PTS will give you shares in this DAC, or do you mean something else?

Offline Mysto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
I'm still confused as to how the person who owns PTS will profit?

Offline Shentist

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1601
    • View Profile
    • metaexchange
  • BitShares: shentist
business model sounds solid now!

Snapshot is October 10th

Do you release the allocation, so i can decide if i increase my PTS amount.

Offline Frodo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: frodo
Awesome introduction. Really explains the key benefits in an easy to understand way.  +5%

The % for the coin buy back can be set by the artist? If so is it ensured that the rate can't be decreased after the coin was issued?

38PTSWarrior

  • Guest
Some celebrities tweeted about BitShares Music already:

"BitShares Music is a hell of a dac" - Rick Shames
"The real" - 2Pak
"Buying PTS right now" - Robin Herjacek
"Good for the ghetto" Elvis Presley

:D

Offline cob

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: cobb
3.2.3 is something I never thought about (perks for coin holders) and is absolutely brilliant! Imagine the spike in One Direction coin price when they announce that the top 50 coin holders get a backstage pass. O. M. G.

Yes! And the fun thing is that it's not a centrally planned feature. It's success does not depend on a couple dev brains. It's a tool that allows every band and artist and label, and promo team to think up how they can get value from that artistcoin... working for us, the Note holders!
« Last Edit: September 28, 2014, 09:03:02 pm by cob »
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 cob

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: cobb
Looks good cob!

Sorry, but I'm at it again with spotting typos. In part three it says, "Every time the song is or purchased".

Edit:

cob, I'd like to ask you something. There is an established band which I love. I think they may be interested in PeerTracks. When do you think would be a good time to try to get them interested? If they are interested will there be a special channel set up whereby PeerTracks work with artists to educate, assist and bring them onboard?

Thanks for the typo! edited from the actual paper. Thanks.

And for now, the peertracks newsletter is a way for us to keep track of who to contact when there is relevant news.
http://peertracks.com/#8

It's still a bit to early to really reach out to them. It will be clear when BitShares Music is ready.

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 cob

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: cobb
Solid job Cob,

I really see the potential growth there.

The artistcoin buy back from song selling revenues is very nice, there's going to be a great appeal to create artistcoins for niche artists as well as established money making machines (the likes of U2, Rolling Stones, etc.).

How do you plan on making sure there won't be any "scammers" that will create an artistcoin without being the real artist and try to sell them to others that believe they buy the coins from the real band? I mean it might take a while before some artists get to hear about Bitshares music, and  nothing (that I know of) is preventing early scammers to upload existing music for which they don't have the rights and sell artistcoins as well.

There will be a few mechanisms is place.
Reputation for one.
The front end sites will have a report/flag button so that people finding out someone is selling someone elses music can report it. The Front end website could always refuse service to these people, they would have to do their scams from somewhere else.
Once you have a mechanism that detects a scammer, people will not want to invest in that user's fake artistcoin since that's very risky business. Especially if he keeps getting barred from the big sites. Imagine getting banned from ebay. Sure you can still sell on you own site/app, but soooo much less traffic will even see your product now. Ostracism is the name of the game.

PeerTracks also intends to have a "verified" artist green check feature.

Any other ideas are welcome!
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 cob

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: cobb
This project has me so excited I can hardly sit still, it's absolutely revolutionary and the paper does a good job of exposing the potential, well done Cob! :)

One thing I'm still unsure about is how exactly being on a playlist will generate income for the artist, or rather why the artistcoin value will increase? Just from popularity and the fact that people will want to buy their songs or is there an actual mechanism in place?

Quote
You can see your artistcoins rise in value if the artist starts selling albums or gets their song played on one of the more popular playlists.

I'm no expert but I imagine that if an artist get's played regularly on the radio, he gets compensated according to how often his songs get played. Will you implement a similar concept for the playlists? If so, where will the money come from to pay for this compensation, ads?

The MVP will not incorporate streaming. It is one thing we want to do of course, but it would require WAY longer dev time and we want the proof of concept out as soon as possible.

But eventually, just the fact that you are in one of the playlist that was 2000 people currently listening (like you see on grooveshark) means a few people are clicking through to purchasing the song (other sites link to the itunes store).

So being included in a popular playlist means exposure + possible click through conversions to purchase song or album.

We have look a bit into having each play be a micro-transaction, but since we are not doing the streaming thing just yet, it's on the back-burner for now.
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 xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
something I discussed with cob also and should be mentioned here too is the ability to

cryptographically verifiable auto grams!

Imagine:
Code: [Select]
You've been a visitor of the greate Rock concert in L.A. 2014

---signed Beatles!
..... crypto-signature ....

Offline serejandmyself

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 358
    • View Profile
well done for that "short" paper! Looking forward to that
btsx - bitsharesrussia

Offline svk

3.2.3 is something I never thought about (perks for coin holders) and is absolutely brilliant! Imagine the spike in One Direction coin price when they announce that the top 50 coin holders get a backstage pass. O. M. G.

One thing I'm still unsure about is how exactly being on a playlist will generate income for the artist, or rather why the artistcoin value will increase? Just from popularity and the fact that people will want to buy their songs or is there an actual mechanism in place?

One of the biggest hurdles for new artists is exposure. Getting on a popular playlist would be the same as getting on a popular music station. As people buy the song a portion of those sales goes to burning that artistcoin. Combine that with 3.2.3 and you have a resource that is both becoming more scarce and more desirable.
Agree on 3.2.3, genius :)

And you may be right that getting exposure is enough, can't wait to see it in action.
Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks

Offline Riverhead

3.2.3 is something I never thought about (perks for coin holders) and is absolutely brilliant! Imagine the spike in One Direction coin price when they announce that the top 50 coin holders get a backstage pass. O. M. G.

One thing I'm still unsure about is how exactly being on a playlist will generate income for the artist, or rather why the artistcoin value will increase? Just from popularity and the fact that people will want to buy their songs or is there an actual mechanism in place?

One of the biggest hurdles for new artists is exposure. Getting on a popular playlist would be the same as getting on a popular music station. As people buy the song a portion of those sales goes to burning that artistcoin. Combine that with 3.2.3 and you have a resource that is both becoming more scarce and more desirable.

Offline hadrian

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: hadrian
Looks good cob!

Sorry, but I'm at it again with spotting typos. In part three it says, "Every time the song is or purchased".

Edit:

cob, I'd like to ask you something. There is an established band which I love. I think they may be interested in PeerTracks. When do you think would be a good time to try to get them interested? If they are interested will there be a special channel set up whereby PeerTracks work with artists to educate, assist and bring them onboard?
« Last Edit: September 26, 2014, 04:40:17 pm by hadrian »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline GaltReport

Yep, great job.  Very clear and concise.

 +5%

Offline oco101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
    • View Profile
Brilliant !!!!  That's music revolution !!!! Great job !!!

Offline Chuckone

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
    • View Profile
Solid job Cob,

I really see the potential growth there.

The artistcoin buy back from song selling revenues is very nice, there's going to be a great appeal to create artistcoins for niche artists as well as established money making machines (the likes of U2, Rolling Stones, etc.).

How do you plan on making sure there won't be any "scammers" that will create an artistcoin without being the real artist and try to sell them to others that believe they buy the coins from the real band? I mean it might take a while before some artists get to hear about Bitshares music, and  nothing (that I know of) is preventing early scammers to upload existing music for which they don't have the rights and sell artistcoins as well.

« Last Edit: September 26, 2014, 03:45:01 pm by Chuckone »

Offline svk

This project has me so excited I can hardly sit still, it's absolutely revolutionary and the paper does a good job of exposing the potential, well done Cob! :)

One thing I'm still unsure about is how exactly being on a playlist will generate income for the artist, or rather why the artistcoin value will increase? Just from popularity and the fact that people will want to buy their songs or is there an actual mechanism in place?

Quote
You can see your artistcoins rise in value if the artist starts selling albums or gets their song played on one of the more popular playlists.

I'm no expert but I imagine that if an artist get's played regularly on the radio, he gets compensated according to how often his songs get played. Will you implement a similar concept for the playlists? If so, where will the money come from to pay for this compensation, ads?

« Last Edit: September 26, 2014, 07:20:57 pm by cob »
Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks

Offline cgafeng

BTC:1EYwcZ9cYVj6C9LMLafdcjK9wicVMDV376

Offline Ben Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
  • Integrity & Innovation, powered by Bitshares
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: benjojo
Well done Cob, absolutely excellent summary. I'm so excited about bitshares music and peertracks......the potential is mind-blowing.  Music will be free to evolve, who knows where it will lead!?   +5%

Your model could work for digital art that could then be 3d printed....

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
That sounds pretty good! +5%

August 16th, 2014

Why didn't you start with that to begin with?

Now on the IPO,
 the '3.2.2 Crowd-funding' does not explain the proposed IPO model for the DAC itself - hope you have equally good news in that regard too!

The IPO model for the DAC itself will be announced very soon. I want to make sure all our ducks are in a row before saying anything.
Eddie and I had a long Skype call with Stan, Daniel and Nikolai and they introduced us to the "IPO" model they would have used in 2013 had they had the knowledge and experience they have now (and not to mention they would have needed DPOS to do it!) .

The new proposed method came out of left field but once I got my head around it, realized it solves so many problems. regulations for starters and all the attorney fees tied to that. It will be more democratic (Notes holders have a say in where the funds are going), no up front cost for "investors", meaning it will be pay as you go (if we produce results then the funding comes in).

Anyway I won't spend too much time talking about it yet. It'll be cleared up much better in an upcoming blog post / article. Which will be shared on the forums of course.

I can deduct what you are talking about. Good direction. Do not hurry up with any announcements, then.
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline cob

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: cobb
That sounds pretty good! +5%

August 16th, 2014

Why didn't you start with that to begin with?

Now on the IPO,
 the '3.2.2 Crowd-funding' does not explain the proposed IPO model for the DAC itself - hope you have equally good news in that regard too!

The IPO model for the DAC itself will be announced very soon. I want to make sure all our ducks are in a row before saying anything.
Eddie and I had a long Skype call with Stan, Daniel and Nikolai and they introduced us to the "IPO" model they would have used in 2013 had they had the knowledge and experience they have now (and not to mention they would have needed DPOS to do it!) .

The new proposed method came out of left field but once I got my head around it, realized it solves so many problems. regulations for starters and all the attorney fees tied to that. It will be more democratic (Notes holders have a say in where the funds are going), no up front cost for "investors", meaning it will be pay as you go (if we produce results then the funding comes in).

Anyway I won't spend too much time talking about it yet. It'll be cleared up much better in an upcoming blog post / article. Which will be shared on the forums of course.
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 roadscape

Solid read, thanks.

A decentralized record label, hell yea  +5%
http://cryptofresh.com  |  witness: roadscape

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
 That sounds pretty good! +5%

August 16th, 2014

Why didn't you start with that to begin with?

Now on the IPO,
 the '3.2.2 Crowd-funding' does not explain the proposed IPO model for the DAC itself - hope you have equally good news in that regard too!
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline cob

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: cobb
This should give everyone a better idea of what is being developed.

Bitshares Music
and
PeerTracks
Non-technical Paper
By Cédric Cobban
cedric@peertracks.com

August 16th, 2014

Abstract
Napster introduced people to peer to peer (P2P) file sharing. It sparked what changed the entertainment industry forever. Crypto-currencies such as Bitcoin have opened the door to an economic revolution in the information age as significant as the industrial revolution before it. BitShares Music is the first experiment in taking the ideas introduced by Bitcoin and Napster to the next level by issuing trust-free digital assets that have the potential to fluctuate in value with the sales of music, fund the artist and reward the buyer. In this paper we share the details of how BitShares Music can change the music world, affecting the majority of the online population rather than strictly the financial sector.

1.0 Background
BitShares Music does not seek to reinvent the wheel. It simply aims to take what is made possible with the advent of a blockchain (a decentralized public ledger) and apply this new technology to some already proven concepts.

1.1 Napster and P2P
Napster introduced many of us to the concept of P2P. It revolutionized the music industry, even its downfall led to the gradual decentralization of file sharing services like FastTrack, Donkey2000, and Bittorrent. File sharing is great for most, but it has left many content creators feeling short handed.

1.2 Pandora, 8tracks, Grooveshark, Last.fm and similar music APIs
Music APIs have proven that there is huge demand for music discovery playlists. Although most people's music libraries are enormous compared to just a few decades ago, choosing what to listen to can be quite a task and the shuffle option can sometimes be the worst DJ imaginable. More importantly, big personal playlists do not quench our thirst for something new to listen to.

1.3. iTunes and paying for music
The iTunes store has shown that people are willing to pay for music if it can be made convenient enough. People want a fast, easy and virus/trojan/malware free way to get ahold of an audio file. If these criteria are met and the price is low enough, many will find it worth while to hand over a small sum for the desired songs. Although those that lack the funds will, for self-interested reasons, have no choice but to take the time and go through the hassle of pirating a song.

1.4 Crowdfunding with Kickstarter
Crowdfunding websites have demonstrated the willingness of the people to support an idea or a cause without getting much (if anything) in return, as long as they know the funds are going to the desired cause.

1.5 Bitcoin, the DAC concept and publicity
Bitcoin is what some consider the first Decentralized Autonomous Company (DAC). Where the Bitcoin protocol is the company, each bitcoin is a share of that company and each bitcoin owner is a shareholder. Bitcoin has no marketing branch and yet Bitcoin got worldwide recognition in 2013. How is that? Well, every single "shareholder" was effectively a PR representative for Bitcoin. Every bitcoin owner had an economic incentive for it to catch on and be globally accepted. And it worked. Bitcoin is a great example of a DAC's grassroot publicity strategy.

1.6. Initial Public Offerings
Initial Public Offerings (IPOs) aren't new. They are a great way for a company to raise capital while getting exposure at the same time. Unfortunately, IPOs are a complicated and costly process only well established businesses can afford. There is a need for a simpler process which would be easily available to regular people which isn’t currently addressed.


2.1.0 Introduction to BitShares Music
BitShares Music, a slight variant of BitSharesX, is an experiment to test the economic theory behind a new kind of music market. It creates a decentralized exchange that uses a decentralized transaction ledger secured by DPOS (Delegated Proof Of Stake) to create fungible digital tokens that are tied to an artist’s profile. Like all DACs, BitShares Music has units that can be transferred between users in the same way bitcoins can. For the purpose of this paper, units in BitShares Music will be referred to as Notes and we will be using artistcoin, a token of a specific artist, as the example asset.     

A musician using BitShares Music can create, say, 10000 artistcoins into existence. He can sell or give away the newly created artistcoins to his fans to fund his or her career. Every single artistcoin is recorded and kept track of in the ledger that is the BitShares Music blockchain.

2.2.0 PeerTracks
The first front end to use the BitShares Music technology will be the PeerTracks website. Allowing for a user friendly way for artists to harness the true power of their fans through incentivized, peer 2 peer, talent discovery. Hence, BitShares Music and PeerTracks are two separate, independent entities. PeerTracks uses the BitShares Music blockchain and adds value to the network just as Bitpay uses the Bitcoin blockchain and adds value to that. One does not own the other. If PeerTracks were to disappear, or get shut down, this would not affect the BitShares Music blockchain anymore than Bitcoin would be affected if Bitpay was shut down. It would go on as long as transactions are processed. Other front ends could pop up, whether it be websites, apps, desktop clients, etc. PeerTracks does not have a monopoly on who gets to be the front end for the blockchain. There could be dozens or hundreds of websites all bringing in value and volume to BitShares Music.

2.2.1 Music Retail website
PeerTracks will allow an artist to create a profile and upload his music song by song, album by album and set the price for each piece of audio. The flow of music goes directly from artist to fan and the flow of income goes directly from fan to artist. PeerTracks does not hold any funds.

2.2.2 Artistcoins
An artist can decide to create his own coin and start selling them to his fans to fund his career. The artist sets the price of his coin and sells it just as he would sell a baseball card. A limited edition digital token with his name and/or his face on it. These newly created, limited edition artistcoins are now distributed throughout the artist’s fanbase and himself. The income generated by his fans buying up the artistcoins will go straight to his wallet, directly funding his career just like kickstarter would. Only, as we will see below, this type of kickstarter is superior in many ways.
Every time a song is sold on PeerTracks.com, a certain % of that income goes into the market and buys up the lowest ask of that artistcoin, effectively cashing out the seller. That artistcoin is “burned” (taken out of circulation). This mechanism achieves the following:
pays the artist for his content
increases liquidity in that artistcoin (paying off the artistcoin seller)
increases demand in that artistcoin
reduces supply of that limited edition artistcoin
The last three points are what can cause a price increase in that artistcoin.
The more music an artist sells on PeerTracks, the more liquid his artistcoin is. Since every song sale is actually a buy order on the books.
If a user purchased a certain artist’s coin and the artist starts selling songs and albums on PeerTracks, that coin is now worth more than when it was purchased. It is in that user’s self-interest to share and promote this artist’s music in order to reap maximum benefit from the holding of that artistcoin. In other words, the fans are incentivized to generate more music sales for the artists they hold artistcoins of.


3.0 Incentives and advantages
The current economic model for buying music gives the listener two choices: one free, and one paying. People getting their music for free are the majority. People that pay for music do so for a variety of reasons but none of them involve self-interest. Our new model favours everyone's self-interests. Unlike the current one where artists hesitate before putting their music online for fear of file sharing / pirating, PeerTracks now makes it profitable for the artist to upload and share everything he has.

What Bitshares Music offers is to take the majority of people that normally just torrent music and turn them into music buyers. How so? By switching the incentives around. Buying music through the blockchain is now an action that promotes self-interest. If a user likes a song so much that he is willing to download it with the varying levels of hassle it entails (trojans / malware / viruses and the time required to find the files online), he most likely sees the value of that song. By buying an artistcoin of that artist, he is invested in the artist’s success. Every time the song is or purchased, the new artistcoin holder now sees the value of his portfolio rise and can cash out at any time.

A buyer can purchase an artistcoin, compensating the band in the process, for the sole reason that he will make money off it in the future. BitShares Music is harnessing the power of greed and putting it at the service of good.

As for people already paying for their music, they will keep doing so, but will now know that the funds are going directly to that artist and, to a smaller degree, those that helped that artist out (by sending them money for artistcoins).

3.1.0 The user
Apart from the obvious benefits of having a website generate quality playlists, the user's role is to make sure new talent gets recognized and rises to the top.
Buying an artistcoin is not a private donation done behind closed doors. The user contributes financially to the artist’s career and this is reflected publicly in the price of the specific artistcoin. Other users / listeners notice rising coin value, get curious and look into it by either listening or buying artistcoins themselves.
This is not pure charity either. You can see your artistcoins rise in value if the artist starts selling albums or gets their song played on one of the more popular playlists.

3.1.1 Freed market in music genres
Money can now go straight from the fan to the artist and the music from the artist directly to the fan, eliminating the need for a middleman. Talent is also discovered and shared peer-2-peer. This removes some of the influence big record labels have on picking who rises to the top. Those corporations often change a band to what they think will please the public. Trying to please the most amount of people at once, creating a bland, one size fits all type of music. Well this is the internet and BitShares Music now allows for the fans to decide what they like and want to hear before any corporate meddling. The artist can be as specific and niche orientated as the internet allows him to be. How many more genres would we have without the bottlenecking effect of the current system? How many artists gave up from lack of financial support because they thought what they did would never catch on and instead found another line of work? Had they had just a bit of financial support they would have refined their musical skills just little longer before giving it up.
Some bands also never get signed because they are offered horrible deals by the big record label companies. BitShares Music bypasses this inefficient way of getting talent to rise to the top.

3.1.2 Borderless careers
A user could spend hours looking for something new/good/genuine to listen to. This could now be a productive activity. The user could now make revenue from finding new talent and buying into their career before the masses do. Anyone with an internet connection, no matter what his country's economic situation, could generate income by finding talent early and in the process, helping it rise to the top.

3.2.0 The artist
The artist can be himself, no need to sell out to what a record label thinks would please the masses. He can now generate revenue immediately without signing with any company. All he would be doing is putting his music out there, and letting the internet see if they like it.

3.2.1 Global grassroots marketing
The band gets to have people doing the marketing for them, because of these new economic incentives. It no longer has to rely on friends and family to spread the word, and it can now have a varied fan base spread out across the world that thinks their music has potential. Those diverse fans have an economic incentive to share the band's music out to the world. When they do, the band gets more and more funds to pursue their career.
This is a win/win/win situation where the artist, wins, the fans win and the world wins by hearing new music that might have never broke out of the band's hometown or closed circle of Facebook friends.

3.2.2 Crowd-funding
PeerTracks replaces existing models of crowd-funding via sales of artistcoins. Only in this situation the contributors are not doing it as a donation but because they can profit from that purchase. The people who currently contribute to crowd-funding projects (like kickstarter and indigogo) will continue to do so, what this new system adds on top of that capital, are the funds of all the new contributors doing so for reasons of personal gain.
PeerTracks offers to outperform the existing crowd-funding competition and do it while cutting out the middlemen:   
The fees taken by the services themselves (5% for Kickstarter)   
Payment processing fees (3% to 5% + $0.20 per pledge for Kickstarter)

3.2.3 Token Controlled Access
Bands can even offer special treats to their artistcoin holders. For example a band could announce that anyone with over 100 of their coins can just show up at any of their concerts, as long as they have their balance on their smartphone for the bouncer to see before letting them in. Another example could be to grant the 10 largest coin holders access backstage to meet / hang out with the band or something as simple as "Artistcoin holders get a free t-shirt and a picture with the band". This process can be automated too. A user logging into his PeerTracks account might see different files available for download and at different prices on music, concert tickets and merchandise depending on how many of that artist’s coin he holds. Some artists might allow large coin holders to download anything they have for free, maybe even allow private messaging. Whatever the band decides really. It's a way to:
Show appreciation for the support
Make the value of the band's coin appreciate.
An artistcoin that goes up in value is great, but one that also comes with all kinds of perks can be worth way more to diehard fans. All at negligible cost to the band itself.


4.0 Room for growth
We are not talking about just propping up another music API website to simply compete with the current ones. We are proposing a system to revolutionize the way media is shared by the artist and the fans, which now has stake in the content as well. This has the potential to reshape industries and create thousands of DOGEcoin like ecosystems in the process. All residing on the BitShares Music blockchain.

4.1 Undercutting the competition
The PeerTracks website uses the BitShares Music blockchain as back-end. Using this new technology allows us to undercut the current music API models that must deal with credit card fees and any other overhead. Using PeerTracks, the income generated goes directly to the artist/label.
With the reduction of fees and middlemen, there is more wiggle room for prices to come down. Compared to other music retail options, the artist/label can either:
Sell at the same price as before but now actually receive all the income
Lower his price and still make the same amount per song. Although keep in mind lower prices can mean more sales. So in this scenario the artist ends up with more total income.
A combination of both. So he could still be cheaper on PeerTracks than most other sites and yet still make more per song.
That being said, PeerTracks will not be limited to new musicians that have not yet signed a record deal. It can also incorporate all existing music as well. The model still allows artists that are already signed under a record label to upload their music. A record company could create a profile with the name of one of their bands, upload all their songs and distribute the coins to the fans the way they see fit. The income generated by these coin sales would be split between the record label and the artist whichever way their original legal contract stipulates.

4.2 BitShares Media
Once the model proves successful, nothing would stop us from applying the concept to video, thus competing with YouTube, Vimeo, etc.

4.3 Grassroots marketing for crypto in general
Every band, every singer in every town (and every newsfeed!) from Vancouver to Buenos Aires to Moscow will be telling their fans to support them by jumping on PeerTracks or the BitShares Music blockchain directly. Thus introducing the masses to the world of crypto assets. This is grassroots advertising that can benefit BitShares, Bitcoin and all the others.


5.0 Revolutions
What popularized Peer-2-Peer networks was the arrival of Napster. Before Napster, only a select few knew what P2P stood for. Napster took the technology and applied it to a sector of the economy nearly everyone was involved in, music. Without even knowing what it was or how it worked, millions of people started using P2P technology. This is what educated the public and got them comfortable with the P2P concept. We believe BitShares Music and the PeerTracks is what can change the zeitgeist regarding crypto-currency, equity, accessible crowdfunding, etc.
PeerTracks is what will take Bitcoin, BitShares and the like, out of the specialized niche area of investors, economists, gold bugs, libertarians and cipher-punks and into the mainstream and everyday use. We aim to do for the crypto world what Napster did for the P2P world, bringing it to billions.



« Last Edit: September 30, 2014, 05:19:15 pm by cob »
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.