So there will be two chains? BTS1 AGS holders 50% PTS holders 50%
another one BTS2 AGS holders 10% PTS holders 10% delegate 80%
or maybe more? BTS 3\4\5\6………………………………
I feel quite doubtful about the whole thing, and I cannot see any promising future about the whole thing
First of all, with so many chains, if there is someone who wants to buy BTS, which one should he buy? he will be confused and he will be not sure which one to buy and will not want to buy because he will be not sure which one will be the final version.
second, before, all the people thought AGS\PTS would get 50%\50%, so they made the investment, but now they were told they might only get 10% or 10%? plus, if you said you would let the market decide, the fact woule be that, if PTS AGS holders only get 10% instead of 50%, the other people could get the rest 80%, of course people would like this plan. it is just like if the people who originally have a lot of money now have to spare their money to the poor people. of course this plan would be more welcome by the people, because poor people are much more.
sorry for my words, i am just very very XX right now.
The key point you are missing is that we do not control what variants others will make. Neither does Bitcoin.
What is different here, is you get ownership in all the honorable variations. You win if any one of them wins. Maybe more than one will be successful.
For anyone who bought in before the snapshot, having a share in each of many variants might not seem too bad.
BUT tianshi asked, "...with so many chains, if there is someone who wants to buy BTS, which one should he buy?".
Imagine you had been following Bitcoin for a while, but had not been following BitShares. You then start to hear a lot of talk about this bank & exchange which has been launched so you decide to look into it. If you discovered several variants, all competing with one another, would you not be deterred from using one out of fear of picking the wrong one?
I think this scenario could majorly hinder adoption by anyone not already invested into BitShares, at a time when an influx of new money is needed.
Ideally BitShares would launch a product good enough that it picks up a strong network effect so quickly that any competing chains would fall by the wayside. This would give people enough confidence to pour money in, seeing it as the REAL and ORIGINAL chain, like Bitcoin compared with flaky altcoins, (even if competitors come along with slight advantages).
How can this product be produced, though, when new ideas suggest that changes should be made, but historical agreements forbid these changes?
How much money would be needed in order to successfully invest in growth for Bitshares XT? Any ideas?
Could enough money be raised by alternative means (outside of the DAC fees), so that no dilution is necessary? (I don't suppose the AGS fund could/should cover this?)
Can BitShares raise money specifically to invest into the growth of their flagship DAC?
Sell merchandise?
Sell memberships to "BitShares Members Club", with some kind of perks?
Sell subscriptions to "BitShares Magazine"?
Create InvestCoin? - bought by the public by sending BTC to a purchase address. The BTC is used to actively invest in various crypto stuff (even including Bitshares XT?), and a percentage of any profits is periodically sent back to the senders bitcoin address. This would be the lazy way for people to speculate in the crypto world - they'd love to check the charts to see if their gamble is paying off etc.
I have to go to bed now, so sorry if this is garbled rubbish. It's all a bit half baked...