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.


Messages - luckybit

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 [27] 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 ... 195
391
General Discussion / Re: Let's Lower Trading Fee
« on: October 22, 2015, 02:36:55 pm »
Quote from: bitsacer on October 22, 2015, 01:40:01 pm
Quote from: luckybit on October 22, 2015, 12:06:04 pm
Quote from: bitsacer on October 22, 2015, 11:32:27 am
Quote from: clayop on October 22, 2015, 10:36:21 am
Currently trading fee is 10 BTS for each order and 0 for cancellation. It is obviously lower than transfer fee, only 1/4 of it. However, I want to argue for lowering trading fee for several reasons.

First, we can attract more users from centralized exchanges. "Almost zero fee" can be a good catch phrase. Our most important product is the exchange platform and we need to advertise it. Luring new users with lower fees first, considering a profit then (Just curious, how many BTS are reduced from trading?)

Second, lowering trading fees can lead to much frequent orders. Unlike transfer, people are more likely to do order when the fee is low. That is, lowering trading

Third, most importantly, we need market makers. In the centralized exchanges, they place orders several thousands times a day or even more, because the exchanges do not charge for "unfilled" orders (but we do). 10 BTS per filled order is not that bad. But for every unfilled order is horrible.


Lowering trading fees can be a temporary option, like only 3 months. When we have enough user base, then we can calculate the real numbers.

Developing world will be the first to adopt this technology . You need to be appealing to the unbanked  for mass adoption . Start by replacing western union and trading will follow. Transfer fees should be minimal.

The way to market to the developing world is to allow them to earn enough Bitshares to pay the fee. The goal should be to attract big whales and big money to bring in liquidity. The developing world doesn't have much liquidity so why would we want to focus on lowering fees to appeal to the poorest in the room who have the least money to provide liquidity?

Bring in people who have money first, then lower fees later on when liquidity is there. Even if there are fewer people, if the fewer participants have millions of dollars each, its more liquidity than if you have many millions in the developing world.

Well big whales can always acquire their own blockchain , why do you think they will choose your platform. This is a race agains time , whoever appeals to the masses will grab a market share and more importantly brand recognition. Aspirin is a cheap and widely available product some even claim that better than some of the prescription drugs . It contributed Bayer to become what it is today . Utility will bring value .

Yeah ? How? They have to pay programmers, and they'd have no community. Their marketing would cost just as much or even more. Their programmers wouldn't be as talented. Their community wouldn't understand the technology.

Short of hiring people from this community I don't see anyone else being able to duplicate Bitshares 2.0. Even if they tried, they'd be so far behind that they'd probably never be able to catch up. It's ours to lose right now.

392
General Discussion / Re: Let's Lower Trading Fee
« on: October 22, 2015, 02:35:01 pm »
Quote from: Empirical1.2 on October 22, 2015, 12:41:12 pm


BTS has been in operation with exclusive assets like BitGold for over a year and many exchanges have failed in that time, including bter which did a lot of BTS volume,  how 'fast, real fast' did the liquidity come? BTS still doesn't rank in the top 50 exchanges on volume. 

The decentralized exchange which is the feature exclusive to Bitshares wasn't really availabel until Bitshares 2.0.. Yes you had Bitassets and stuff but you didn't have gateways. People required centralized exchanges because you didn't have gateways and other features plus the web wallet didn't look like this back then.

At this point as centralized exchanges get shut down or hacked the Bitshares web exchange network will keep gaining steam. I would say you're not going to attract users with lower fees. I've never chosen an exchange based on the fees. I choose exchanges based on whatever assets are on the exchange and for example in the case of MAID or Mastercoin you only had MasterXChange, you only have one exchange to choose from for certain assets so the way to bring people to your exchange is to offer Bitshares exchange exclusive assets.

We simply don't need to compete on fees. The technology is so superior to everything else and due to first mover advantage, the competition is on marketing not fees, and marketing is about exclusive profit making opportunities, not fees. Have the right assets which pay a nice dividend or ROI and you'll see whales on the exchange.
Quote from: Empirical1.2 on October 22, 2015, 12:41:12 pm

I think we'll get there very quick with 2.0 but we do need to listen to active traders and if possible fees for non filled trades should be less.

Listen to data, not propaganda, not politics. Data requires you to have some evidence. There is no evidence right now that the fees are too high. Give it a few months with the fees at current levels, gather evidence, and then find out how well the referral program is working.

But right now the main issue is UX and UI. UX and UI is the only thing missing for me, the fact that I cannot import my keys, or other little issues. But I do not think Bitshares 2.0 should market itself with "lowest fees of any exchange". The way to market it is an easy to use powerful exchange which has many Bitshares exclusive assets which you simply can't trade anywhere else.

It's like video game consoles. Those other consoles don't have the ability to create new assets within them, and cannot have exclusives. Cryptsy is just an exchange and nothing else while Bitshares is more than just an exchange. The fact is you can launch private assets, and there will sooner or later be profit opportunities where people can do loans, bonds, so they can get their 10% or 5% interest, and once that happens there will be nothing the centralized exchanges can do.

Focus on bringing exchanges in through unique, exclusive, Bitshares specific assets. Create assets which cannot be done on any other technology. If some other team wants to try to do it for cheaper, they wont be able to get the developers to do it, and a centralized exchange can't do it by design.


393
General Discussion / Re: Let's Lower Trading Fee
« on: October 22, 2015, 12:23:55 pm »
Quote from: Empirical1.2 on October 22, 2015, 12:08:37 pm
Quote from: luckybit on October 22, 2015, 11:59:50 am
Quote from: clayop on October 22, 2015, 10:36:21 am
Currently trading fee is 10 BTS for each order and 0 for cancellation. It is obviously lower than transfer fee, only 1/4 of it. However, I want to argue for lowering trading fee for several reasons.

First, we can attract more users from centralized exchanges. "Almost zero fee" can be a good catch phrase. Our most important product is the exchange platform and we need to advertise it. Luring new users with lower fees first, considering a profit then (Just curious, how many BTS are reduced from trading?)

Second, lowering trading fees can lead to much frequent orders. Unlike transfer, people are more likely to do order when the fee is low. That is, lowering trading

Third, most importantly, we need market makers. In the centralized exchanges, they place orders several thousands times a day or even more, because the exchanges do not charge for "unfilled" orders (but we do). 10 BTS per filled order is not that bad. But for every unfilled order is horrible.


Lowering trading fees can be a temporary option, like only 3 months. When we have enough user base, then we can calculate the real numbers.


The fee for using centralized exchanges is the risk of being goxxed. Bitshares isn't in competition with centralized exchanges and could get away with charging a higher fee because it's more secure.

I disagree. We are in competition with centralised exchanges until we have comparable volume & liquidity.

At that point Goxxproof could become a differentiating factor that could justify higher fees.

Prove it. Without an a/b test, without some data from our demographics, we have no way to know. It would seem to me that as centralized exchanges shut down, Bitshares will be marketed by bad news and disasters.

Also liquidity comes fast, real fast. I remember when Polo started as a place to buy BTS back when Cryptsy had the volume. To get the volume you just need to have exclusive assets on your exchange and nothing else. You don't need low fees, you just need assets which can only be accessed on Bitshares 2.0.

People wont have a choice but to make an account or they will not be in the crowdsale.

394
General Discussion / Re: Let's Lower Trading Fee
« on: October 22, 2015, 12:19:48 pm »
Quote from: xeroc on October 22, 2015, 12:14:01 pm
How about a timely limited offer ... get in now and trade for a 80% discount for the next 6 months?
It's easier to lower fees in the future than to raise them.
Just let people earn enough BTS to pay the fees or is it somehow impossible to do that?

And people who have $20,000 to trade aren't going to care if the fee is 10 cents or $10.

395
General Discussion / Re: Use optional ad revenue to lower fees.
« on: October 22, 2015, 12:11:04 pm »
Quote from: r0ach on October 22, 2015, 12:05:06 pm
Quote from: luckybit on October 22, 2015, 11:50:05 am
Quote from: r0ach on October 22, 2015, 11:33:40 am
You guys cannot be serious.  This idea and the referral system are both bad ideas.  The platform isn't supposed to be profitable with 0 users, stop pretending it should be.  Just like any new business, you run in the negative until you attract lots of users, THEN you profit afterwards.
In other words you want an all volunteer staff that works for free, like Bitcoin.

Okay if you want that, organize it. Find the volunteers.

It has nothing to do with Bitcoin.  That's the way normal businesses work.  Why do you think Bitshares gets to defy gravity and be profitable with 0 users?  A restaurant isn't profitable with 0 customers.

How do you think Google works? Tell them they should get rid of all their annoying ads.
What about Windows 10? How do you think they can afford to let people download it?

Those "free" apps you use aren't free. You're paying for it by viewing ads. It's the same model we should incorporate into Bitshares for the "Lite" version. If you don't like the fees then go use a centralized exchange like Bter, Cryptsy or some other where you don't know if your money will be safe.

Bitshares has no competition in the decentralized exchange space. Added security can be used to explain the higher than average fees. People will pay for security especially if they have a lot of money.

396
General Discussion / Re: Let's Lower Trading Fee
« on: October 22, 2015, 12:06:04 pm »
Quote from: bitsacer on October 22, 2015, 11:32:27 am
Quote from: clayop on October 22, 2015, 10:36:21 am
Currently trading fee is 10 BTS for each order and 0 for cancellation. It is obviously lower than transfer fee, only 1/4 of it. However, I want to argue for lowering trading fee for several reasons.

First, we can attract more users from centralized exchanges. "Almost zero fee" can be a good catch phrase. Our most important product is the exchange platform and we need to advertise it. Luring new users with lower fees first, considering a profit then (Just curious, how many BTS are reduced from trading?)

Second, lowering trading fees can lead to much frequent orders. Unlike transfer, people are more likely to do order when the fee is low. That is, lowering trading

Third, most importantly, we need market makers. In the centralized exchanges, they place orders several thousands times a day or even more, because the exchanges do not charge for "unfilled" orders (but we do). 10 BTS per filled order is not that bad. But for every unfilled order is horrible.


Lowering trading fees can be a temporary option, like only 3 months. When we have enough user base, then we can calculate the real numbers.

Developing world will be the first to adopt this technology . You need to be appealing to the unbanked  for mass adoption . Start by replacing western union and trading will follow. Transfer fees should be minimal.

The way to market to the developing world is to allow them to earn enough Bitshares to pay the fee. The goal should be to attract big whales and big money to bring in liquidity. The developing world doesn't have much liquidity so why would we want to focus on lowering fees to appeal to the poorest in the room who have the least money to provide liquidity?

Bring in people who have money first, then lower fees later on when liquidity is there. Even if there are fewer people, if the fewer participants have millions of dollars each, its more liquidity than if you have many millions in the developing world.

397
General Discussion / Re: Let's Lower Trading Fee
« on: October 22, 2015, 11:59:50 am »
Quote from: clayop on October 22, 2015, 10:36:21 am
Currently trading fee is 10 BTS for each order and 0 for cancellation. It is obviously lower than transfer fee, only 1/4 of it. However, I want to argue for lowering trading fee for several reasons.

First, we can attract more users from centralized exchanges. "Almost zero fee" can be a good catch phrase. Our most important product is the exchange platform and we need to advertise it. Luring new users with lower fees first, considering a profit then (Just curious, how many BTS are reduced from trading?)

Second, lowering trading fees can lead to much frequent orders. Unlike transfer, people are more likely to do order when the fee is low. That is, lowering trading

Third, most importantly, we need market makers. In the centralized exchanges, they place orders several thousands times a day or even more, because the exchanges do not charge for "unfilled" orders (but we do). 10 BTS per filled order is not that bad. But for every unfilled order is horrible.


Lowering trading fees can be a temporary option, like only 3 months. When we have enough user base, then we can calculate the real numbers.


The fee for using centralized exchanges is the risk of being goxxed. Bitshares isn't in competition with centralized exchanges and could get away with charging a higher fee because it's more secure.

398
General Discussion / Re: Use optional ad revenue to lower fees.
« on: October 22, 2015, 11:50:05 am »
Quote from: r0ach on October 22, 2015, 11:33:40 am
You guys cannot be serious.  This idea and the referral system are both bad ideas.  The platform isn't supposed to be profitable with 0 users, stop pretending it should be.  Just like any new business, you run in the negative until you attract lots of users, THEN you profit afterwards.
In other words you want an all volunteer staff that works for free, like Bitcoin.

Okay if you want that, organize it. Find the volunteers.

Honestly if you could do that then you'd already have millions of users. And I don't think we lose anything with the high fees. Market to the demographics that can pay the high fees and don't worry so much about developing countries unless they like watching ads and then let them do that.

Sacrificing profit is not an option though. No profit = no labor.

399
General Discussion / Re: Added balance as portion of total supply
« on: October 22, 2015, 11:42:40 am »
Quote from: fav on October 22, 2015, 11:39:26 am
+5%

can you add a "bitshares burned since start" or something. initial supply - current supply ?

Burn rate is more important. Like the rate per day of burning, if it can be made into a metric (avg bts burned per day).

400
General Discussion / Re: Added balance as portion of total supply
« on: October 22, 2015, 11:37:33 am »
Quote from: Troglodactyl on October 22, 2015, 03:47:27 am
I saw people talking about this, so I added it to play with the ui code a bit.  It displays in your account overview as a new updating "PPM" (Parts Per Million) column for each balance.  So the new column is just (balance/current_supply*1,000,000).  Showing it as a straight percentage would just be depressing for anyone who isn't a whale.

https://github.com/Troglodactyl/graphene-ui

Not sure I want to pull request it since 4 columns may be a bit messy there, but it's there for anyone who wants it.

EDIT: https://imgur.com/jyyHF8j
Excellent!  +5%

To expand on this, some people might want to publicly broadcast that they have a certain minimum percentage of the total supply without actually revealing the exact number. It should be possible to reveal that they are over that threshold while keeping their precise balance secret.

This way we can use that threshold as a metric. I still prefer the percentage even if it is depressing to some people because the goal isn't to make people feel like they hold more than they do but to give them the most accurate representation of what they hold.

401
General Discussion / Re: Use optional ad revenue to lower fees.
« on: October 22, 2015, 11:32:53 am »
Quote from: fuzzy on October 22, 2015, 02:48:48 am
Quote from: CoinHoarder on October 22, 2015, 02:24:14 am
Scratch that... I'm not sure how useful this would be. Most people would rather go with an ad-free option that is low cost (or free) rather than a low cost (or free) version with ads. Surveys seem like a non-starter.. no way would I take the time to fill out a survey to save $0.05 when another service performs the same function for free.
Shouldnt be too bad if it is only required to do something like a weekly survey to "unlock" the free version...
Hell it could even give people brownies to complete them as a bonus...

Gamification is possible for these things. It doesn't have to be annoying if done right. It could even be that people play a game, get paid from playing the game, and use that to fund a transaction. Some games already pay people to play them so just let either play for pay, or watch ads for pay.


When they get enough points in the game, they get a fee token redeemable for the amount of BTS to pay the fee.

402
General Discussion / Re: Use optional ad revenue to lower fees.
« on: October 22, 2015, 11:29:38 am »
Quote from: CoinHoarder on October 22, 2015, 02:24:14 am
Scratch that... I'm not sure how useful this would be. Most people would rather go with an ad-free option that is low cost (or free) rather than a low cost (or free) version with ads. Surveys seem like a non-starter.. no way would I take the time to fill out a survey to save $0.05 when another service performs the same function for free.

The only way to lower fees while raising profits is with ads. You cannot lower fees and raise profits without losing revenue unless you replace the revenue from the lost fees.

This means you will have to do more like a survey every day, and watch ads around the clock, just like every other website online. Just like Coinmarketcap. Interupt the user experience to play a video before a transaction, a survey at random several times a week or several times a day depending on how active they are and how much need for surveys there are.

If people dont like the annoying ads, lifetime membership.

403
General Discussion / Re: Use optional ad revenue to lower fees.
« on: October 22, 2015, 02:12:05 am »
Quote from: CoinHoarder on October 22, 2015, 02:01:52 am
If the ads are optional, then yes please.

As to how it could be done...



I think the freemium model is good for lowering the barrier to entry but also it provides useful metrics for the industry as a whole. Surveys for example could allow developers from many different projects to know where the demand is and better meet it. Ads for everything from Muse, to Indentabit, to various altcoin companies, all could be used.

But one way or another we have to build the economy and if people cannot pay the fees because they don't have the money then they can pay with attention. Someone mentioned gateways, I don't know if that is the way to do it, but I don't think it's impossible to collect data directly from the interface, anonymous use statistics, surveys so we can know what our demographics are and what they tend to buy, ways for new projects to get clicks other than the forum, but for it all to work the Bitshares interface has to be more sticky.

Gamification is a great idea. And since anyone can host a wallet, maybe a Chinese entrepreneur can host a freemium wallet where people watch ads and take surveys to pay the fees.

404
General Discussion / Re: Use optional ad revenue to lower fees.
« on: October 22, 2015, 01:53:12 am »
Quote from: alt on October 22, 2015, 01:45:36 am
Chinese don't want to pay for high transfer fee,
also don't need to see the damn ad.
they have  alipay and a lots of  bank can tranfer for free.
Then let them use Alipay. If they need the unique exclusive features of Bitshares then let them use Bitshares. Alipay is rumored to by backed by the state so of course it can run without any fees and without being profitable.

But in capitalism, nothing is free. Chinese don't have to want to pay the fee, they have to. We all have to pay the fees as the cost of service just like with Bitcoin or anything else.
Quote from: alt on October 22, 2015, 01:45:36 am
the simple logic is: BTS set high transfer fee, BTS lose the payment business at Chinese market.
so let's just focus on exchange business, forget about the payment.

In capitalism you can't get something for nothing. Either pay the fees or watch the ad to pay the fee. To do neither is to ask Bitshares to somehow let Chinese users use the network at a loss to the network while everyone else subsidizes it. It's not sustainable, it's not fair, and even Google and Facebook pay for themselves with ads.

Freemium is really the only way you can have the feeling of free and freemium isn't actually free. It costs money to run Google and you pay for it with your eyeballs, your attention, which means Google is an advertising company because you're not paying the monthly fee to use Gmail and other services.

Pay the fees or watch the ads. I will not be supporting lower fees. If you think Alipay can do everything Bitshares can do, then go use Alipay.


405
General Discussion / Re: Fee Adjustments
« on: October 21, 2015, 06:05:03 pm »
Quote from: alt on October 21, 2015, 03:43:03 pm
Ok, if we must keep high fee, I'll look Bts as an exchange.
Hope OL, CCEDK, DACX, TRANSWISER, BLOCKTRADE can do their best.

Fees should remain high enough for Bitshares to have enough revenue to fuel it's components. If you want cheaper fees, use ad revenue to pay for it and go with a freemium model.

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 [27] 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 ... 195

Page created in 0.024 seconds with 22 queries.