Are you saying BTS will receive transaction fees from IDentabit and other projects Graphene is licensed too?
If you're saying BTS could be independently successful because BTS transaction fees will fund development and incentivise marketing then yes that's the aim and business model. It doesn't effect/change any of my above statements though?
No, only CNX would receive any kind of transactions if there is such an arrangement with identabit.
I am saying that trading, markets, futures, bonds, refer transactions, bitassets, exchanges like CCEDK and BANX and BunkerDEX all will be running transactions that require BTS.
The narrative coming out of this thread is beginning to lean towards making BTS out as though its just a one trick pony coin to compare to things like a brownie UIA and identibit putting its value in a sharedrop? This outlook is extremely tunnel visioned and flawed if this is where these theories are coming from.
Come the introduction of 2.0 there is no more speculation as to the utility of BTS.. it's the supporting currency for an entire decentralized marketplace. It's what powers bitassets.. it's what makes multi-sigs possible.. it's what pays out refer bonuses.. the list goes on and on and on.
These theories on the price to me seem to just ignore the reality of what BTS value proposition will provide in 2.0.
I say it again though.. if you are looking for a reason why it's so low.. I say its because the big money players see all that I just stated and are driving the price/market down as much as possible as the release of 2.0 approaches so that they will realize 4X multiples inside of a very short period.
That's my take anyways.