31
General Discussion / Re: food for thought - raising fees
« on: March 31, 2015, 03:06:38 am »
This is the most powerful concept we have and we have only just started talking about it. Fees + Referrals = Paid Blockchain Marketing
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
32
General Discussion / Re: food for thought - raising fees
« on: March 31, 2015, 02:55:05 am »
Absolutely into this. 
33
General Discussion / Re: A BitCurrency Bank and a BitTradingAsset derivatives exchange
« on: March 29, 2015, 10:30:50 pm »
I believe I remember a post or mumble a while back from Dan saying that relative orders code had been written but not implemented due to the increased risks that relative orders create for average users in terms of attacks or manipulation because of the current price feed implementation.
As for strength of bitasset pegs, the more they depend on price feeds, the less independent the system can become; that is, if people depend solely on the internal price feeds, then the feeds can be manipulated and/or turned off by governments and other wealthy attackers. Better price feeds seem like an ideal solution now, especially with the low levels of liquidity, however, in the long run BitShares may be much more robust and resistant to tampering by governments and other forces the less it depends on external information.
I may be wrong, but as far as I understand, the idea for strengthening the pegs with infrequent feeds is that people will know the feeds are imperfect and as such will generally seek price information outside of the system. In the future, if all major liquidity providers are using data feeds outside of the bts exchange, then the pegs will tighten and bts will not compromise its robustness. It does seem to be a kind of chicken-or-the-egg problem, however, I forecast people taking the risk to increase liquidity and strengthen the peg with information other than the internal price feed implementation because a tighter peg is better for business and all of those who will be in the liquidity business will probably agree.
As for strength of bitasset pegs, the more they depend on price feeds, the less independent the system can become; that is, if people depend solely on the internal price feeds, then the feeds can be manipulated and/or turned off by governments and other wealthy attackers. Better price feeds seem like an ideal solution now, especially with the low levels of liquidity, however, in the long run BitShares may be much more robust and resistant to tampering by governments and other forces the less it depends on external information.
I may be wrong, but as far as I understand, the idea for strengthening the pegs with infrequent feeds is that people will know the feeds are imperfect and as such will generally seek price information outside of the system. In the future, if all major liquidity providers are using data feeds outside of the bts exchange, then the pegs will tighten and bts will not compromise its robustness. It does seem to be a kind of chicken-or-the-egg problem, however, I forecast people taking the risk to increase liquidity and strengthen the peg with information other than the internal price feed implementation because a tighter peg is better for business and all of those who will be in the liquidity business will probably agree.
34
General Discussion / Re: A marketing idea? Whitepaper? Strategy? request? Either way I think its is gold.
« on: March 28, 2015, 01:05:00 am »
Max I love your input and enthusiasm for this concept and this "brainstorming" session, led by you, has brought up many good points.
Are you now saying that under a 1 tiered system it would not motivate anyone? The big affiliate marketers that you wrote about would no longer be interested? As part of the "white paper" some more number crunching with realistic figures and examples needs to be done.
Yes number crunching is key. Can we make it enough to be motivating enough for people who dont care about bitshares to act? that is the question Multi tier or single tier does not change the payout. It not more or less attractive. Just more or less attractive to different people. As a business we would decide. eg: we could say lets 60% of the fees we are already collecting for referrals. We then design a compensation plan that incentivizes the best behavior. For example, we go just one tier. This appeals to internet marketer types I would imagine. Perhaps email your mailing list. But they will have little incentive to teach people about the business. Only the product. (of course the $12 compared to maybe money in the future is pretty big incentive but compared to...) A multi tier system, still paying out a total of 60% of fees, pays 50% to the first tier, 7% to the 2nd tier and 3% to the 3rd tier. Now an affiliate is motivated (moreso) to teach his underlings about the business opportunity. He is motivated to train them in the best approaches he has discovered, etc... It becomes a very nurturing environment. Once again I am not longer advocating multi tier. I just want to impress upon everybody that we get to incentivize whatever behavior we want. We design what gets rewarded and what does not.
Thanks to the TITAN system this is now possible. I am convinced that the first chain to include an internal compensation plan that is motivating enough for people to act will crush it. Can we come up with it or will someone else?
I hope to goodness gracious that Dan implements the capability for MLM. Don't get me wrong, I'm with Max that single layer is good, .. really good, but two layers would be astronomical.
35
General Discussion / Re: A marketing idea? Whitepaper? Strategy? request? Either way I think its is gold.
« on: March 26, 2015, 11:18:26 pm »
Bitcoin grew without MLM help. Don't forget the world is about to go through a cataclysmic economic implosion.....BitShares simply needs to be there with its products when it does
Hopefully having maintained it's core principals and unblemished trust.
Bingo.
Mining was basically redistributed MLM, now not so much as the barriers to entry are too high
36
General Discussion / Re: A marketing idea? Whitepaper? Strategy? request? Either way I think its is gold.
« on: March 26, 2015, 10:49:43 pm »
The referral program would be wildly successful if it were incentivized by transaction fees. This is key to harnessing both multi level and single level referrals. And on top of that, it is very analogous to mining, although, immensely more useful.
Sorry this made the idea click for myself, so I repeated it
Sorry this made the idea click for myself, so I repeated it
37
General Discussion / Re: A marketing idea? Whitepaper? Strategy? request? Either way I think its is gold.
« on: March 26, 2015, 10:43:46 pm »
One point to consider is that MLM also allows for single tier marketing and a % of transaction fees goes to the referrer. Because transaction fees also produce a payout to the referrer, a bitshares marketer has incentive to attract all types of users, including merchants and consumers. And because MLM is enabled, the salesperson is also incentivized to be a recruiter for other BTS salespeople. With a dual MLM and Single Tier Referral Program based on transaction fees, we would attract an army of educators, recruiters and salespeople. The $20 fee for becoming an MLMer (let's call them Blockchain Marketers) is an added bonus to the network, and the quality marketing for merchants and consumers happens more because of the added recruiting element of MLM.
The key is understanding that transaction fees can be the payout. It helps both the Single Tier and MLM (Blockchain Marketer) models. And on top of that, it is very analogous to mining, although, immensely more useful.
The key is understanding that transaction fees can be the payout. It helps both the Single Tier and MLM (Blockchain Marketer) models. And on top of that, it is very analogous to mining, although, immensely more useful.
38
General Discussion / Re: A marketing idea? Whitepaper? Strategy? request? Either way I think its is gold.
« on: March 26, 2015, 05:48:34 pm »
Also anyone using the term Ponzi to describe the OP does not really seem to understand ponzi schemes IMO, and maybe they just don't see how MLM works with value-creating products
39
General Discussion / Re: A marketing idea? Whitepaper? Strategy? request? Either way I think its is gold.
« on: March 26, 2015, 05:46:27 pm »This referal program would make it so easy to earn money in a way so different from the original idea of BitShares, that its ponziness would defeat BitShares' original purpose. Yes, it would probably bring many new people to the system. But what kind of people? People, who will suddenly realize how good BitShares are, or people who just want to get rich on the referal program?
From wikipedia:QuotePonzi schemes occasionally begin as legitimate businesses, until the business fails to achieve the returns expected. The business becomes a Ponzi scheme if it then continues under fraudulent terms. Whatever the initial situation, the perpetuation of the high returns requires an ever-increasing flow of money from new investors to sustain the scheme.
I would prefer to stick to the original values we wanted to promote, not the "get rich fast" values. Once the original ideas get implemented, we will earn profit from the right thing instead of this obscure mechanism.
Ever used Venmo? When they started if I signed up via my friend's link, then my friend got $5. Then the app asked me to send a link to all my friends. Every friend of mine that signed up via my link earned me $5. The app has so much utility now because all my friends are signed up and we can send each other money instantly.
An MLM program should work the same way for bitshares except that bitshares will not only grab the global peer to peer payments network effect for bitusd, it will also encourage merchant adoption, and employer to employee payments, which an app like Venmo will never be able to do.
My point being ... Venmo never seemed like a pyramid scheme because the app is solid gold in terms of utility. BitUSD will eventually be solid gold in terms of utility, so any users brought in by a referral/rewards/MLM program would likely use the app IMO.
40
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: NOTE Price discussion
« on: March 26, 2015, 04:35:39 pm »i cant find in bitshares exchange, only see bitNotes and not show chart or nothing.
how total notes are?
not going to be day 28 release of notes?
Search lower in the UIA search bar instead of the market search bar. Then, once you've clicked into it, you'll be able to click "enter BTS/NOTE" market.
41
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: NOTE Price discussion
« on: March 26, 2015, 03:44:05 pm »
Hey where are you seeing notes being traded? Internal or 3rd party exchange?
42
General Discussion / Re: A marketing idea? Whitepaper? Strategy? request? Either way I think its is gold.
« on: March 26, 2015, 02:44:52 pm »I think the entire idea, overall, is a great one. Ultimately, I think that companies should be the ones running delegates too....providing services and, indirectly, marketing efforts.
The idea of marketing delegates is confusing to me (this is even considering that the beyond bitcoin delegate is considered to be a marketing delegate by many). As far as earning a small % off of every referral for 20 years...that is way too much. I can see, perhaps 3-5 years. Otherwise you end up with a bunch of monopolies coming in and using bitshares to continue being monopolies, with very little chance anyone will hold them accountable. They will collude with others to ensure only the delegates of their choice get into power and then you can see how that entire cycle will go. And before someone says "people can just exit the system"...just look at the US Dollar and how long it is taking people to exit that system.
Just some thoughts on both the positives and negatives, or at least what I perceive them to be
Fuzzy, I agree with you. However, I don't think Max is suggesting more marketing delegates. He's proposing a system where each TITAN name has two identifiers ... MLM Participator and non-MLM Participator, and on top of that an incentivized MLM system driving bitAsset adoption. It would not add to dilution, btw.
Edit ... new thought .. Talk about creating millions of jobs ... Yes Max!
43
General Discussion / Re: A marketing idea? Whitepaper? Strategy? request? Either way I think its is gold.
« on: March 26, 2015, 02:16:41 pm »ignore my post. I missunderstood the OP!I don't like to be pessimistic about this, but the bigger goal of a DAC is to be profitable for shareholders. With this change you either need to raise the transaction fee or accept higher delution (because less fees are burned)
However, I see this make sense if it was a timely limited action or there was some kind of mechanism that allows users to opt-out for 2xtransaction fee ..
Anyway, I like this idea, and I thing there is a old thread about something similar somewhere in the forums.
Can you elaborate? I can't see how this requires us to raise transaction fees ... how are less fees burned? It would require a new mechanism to pay the $20 out to the network, upline 1 and upline 2, but we would still take the 0.5 bts fee on each $20 sign up.
Wait ... My apologies ... maybe I misunderstood the OP!
I did not see that fees get transferred to upline 1 and 2 for 20 years. And I think that you may be right .. we can't deliver the fees to them in the current state without doubling the fee. ... To your point, there may be a way around this if we put our heads together.
*Edit* This is very exciting, Max... BitShares MLM is like a DAC in itself.
44
General Discussion / Re: A marketing idea? Whitepaper? Strategy? request? Either way I think its is gold.
« on: March 26, 2015, 01:57:50 pm »I don't like to be pessimistic about this, but the bigger goal of a DAC is to be profitable for shareholders. With this change you either need to raise the transaction fee or accept higher delution (because less fees are burned)
However, I see this make sense if it was a timely limited action or there was some kind of mechanism that allows users to opt-out for 2xtransaction fee ..
Anyway, I like this idea, and I thing there is a old thread about something similar somewhere in the forums.
Can you elaborate? I can't see how this requires us to raise transaction fees ... how are less fees burned? It would require a new mechanism to pay the $20 out to the network, upline 1 and upline 2, but we would still take the 0.5 bts fee on each $20 sign up.
45
General Discussion / Re: Strengthening other people's understanding of why BitShares exists
« on: March 22, 2015, 07:57:36 pm »Some people don't need to understand why, they just need what. You are a what-er which is also why you had the incredible vision to come to BitShares in the first place. The masses are not what-ers, they are why-ers. When they feel a why they are more likely to take action than if they just hear a what.
Saying shit doesn't make it true.
Most people do not aspire to why, they just want to know what they can a product can do for them. They aspiration to why is a luxury. When it comes to money, mainstream will be looking for function not form. Useability and useful capability will win. Political aspiration et al, are a secondary consideration for most people most of the time.
The only point you could argue is that PR/Marketing or whatever we're calling it now, needs multiple threads of efforts on multiple fronts.. but do it right!
I agree on all fronts. Especially that why is a luxury - a luxury, which luckily, all except those starving to death can afford.
