0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
What other crypto can give their shareholders access to:Means of profit - as a shareholder you get a share of the profitsA store of value - if you think the value of BTS is going to go down, why sell shares when you can buy BTC USD EUR SILVER GOLD ..Short - if you think the value of BTS is going to go up, why sell shares when you can borrow and sell BTC USD EUR SILVER GOLD ... and buy back at a profit without reducing your shareholdings in BTSDid I mention, this can all be done internally without the need to trust any external exchanges. I have been exclusively trading on our exchange since the first bridges appeared (metaexchange and blocktrades). Now we have even more bridges in our wallet.There are winners and losers to every trade.Buy, sell or hold - All BitShares share holders can still profit using the light wallet or Openledger
what happened to that guy who was going to do his best to get into Philippine remittance market?there were pics all around the forum celebrating with mr Bytemaster and rest of his crew.what was his name?
Quote from: BunkerChain Labs on January 08, 2016, 04:48:05 pmSo there was a hangout today.Did you listen?I missed it. Anything good?
So there was a hangout today.Did you listen?
this summer
Quote from: clout on January 08, 2016, 03:27:37 amQuote from: Ander on January 08, 2016, 12:07:21 amQuote from: yvv on January 07, 2016, 11:51:17 pmQuoteSomeone Give Me a Reason To Keep Holding BTSYou shouldn't hold it unless you want to borrow bitAsset. It is a collateral token, nothing more.This is not true, and if it were true there would be no reason to hold BTS.BTS also represents a share in the value of profit made from services provided by the Bitshares blockchain, such as exchange, transfers, etc. Currently this profit doesnt exist because its speculative phase, but if it reached enough adoption to generate a profit, this profit would go to BTS holders by a dividend in the form of a reduction in the BTS supply, and thus an increase in the value of each individual BTS.That's not true. BTS does not give you a share in earnings. Burning BTS is not the same as distributing it. It's just not.I think the question is whether reducing supply of something that is in demand, increases the price. In general I think it does, supply and demand, so reducing supply acts as some form of return for holders imo though you could argue it is inferior.
Quote from: Ander on January 08, 2016, 12:07:21 amQuote from: yvv on January 07, 2016, 11:51:17 pmQuoteSomeone Give Me a Reason To Keep Holding BTSYou shouldn't hold it unless you want to borrow bitAsset. It is a collateral token, nothing more.This is not true, and if it were true there would be no reason to hold BTS.BTS also represents a share in the value of profit made from services provided by the Bitshares blockchain, such as exchange, transfers, etc. Currently this profit doesnt exist because its speculative phase, but if it reached enough adoption to generate a profit, this profit would go to BTS holders by a dividend in the form of a reduction in the BTS supply, and thus an increase in the value of each individual BTS.That's not true. BTS does not give you a share in earnings. Burning BTS is not the same as distributing it. It's just not.
Quote from: yvv on January 07, 2016, 11:51:17 pmQuoteSomeone Give Me a Reason To Keep Holding BTSYou shouldn't hold it unless you want to borrow bitAsset. It is a collateral token, nothing more.This is not true, and if it were true there would be no reason to hold BTS.BTS also represents a share in the value of profit made from services provided by the Bitshares blockchain, such as exchange, transfers, etc. Currently this profit doesnt exist because its speculative phase, but if it reached enough adoption to generate a profit, this profit would go to BTS holders by a dividend in the form of a reduction in the BTS supply, and thus an increase in the value of each individual BTS.
QuoteSomeone Give Me a Reason To Keep Holding BTSYou shouldn't hold it unless you want to borrow bitAsset. It is a collateral token, nothing more.
Someone Give Me a Reason To Keep Holding BTS
I honestly really started to lose confidence in this project when Dan suggested that CNX was not able to get VC funding. CNX is a blockchain development company that can't get funding in a year where the demand for industrial grade blockchains has surged. There's an issue with that picture.
The truth is that people keep leaving this project and this community for a reason and its not the BTS price.
Quote from: clout on January 07, 2016, 09:10:44 pmI don't know why I expected this project to be further along. Maybe I thought it was an actual business that was being cultivated, but I realize now that is not the case. It doesn't matter what the underlying software can do or not, CNX can't get funding, they can't produce a competitive exchange and don't know the market they are entering into. Bitshares, if looked at as a company, can't be run by a community of individuals that do not know or entirely trust each other. I don't have the answers for how to turn things around, but I see the same mistakes continually being made and I don't have a reason to stay anymore. Complaining is easy, but if you put things in the right perspective you might have the reason to hold. You might not actually know how hard it is to bring something completely new to market and create a profitable business. Here are some brilliant people working and trying to make something sustainable and profitable, and it's still way too early to tell which crypto's will succeed in the end. No cryptocurrency is actually used (arguably) in the real world yet, other than for speculation, so there is no reason to be upset if bitshares isn't. When bitshares succeeds, you will make a profit too -by just holding. You could listen to the hangouts and Beyond Bitcoin and notice how smart the people working for you are.I my eyes the best things about bitshares are 1) It has the most sustainable long-term funding/incentive model of any crypto-project and 2) It has the most impressive technology. What a combination actually! Just think about NXT. What will be the long term incentive to keep developing the platform once the major stakeholders have made all the profit they can? Now it might seem good, but it will be interesting to see where it goes when it gets harder to make profit. The long-term funding model of Ethereum isn't clear either. They actually just hope for the best, like bitcoin. Bitshares has an actual plan.One more reason to hold bitshares is to concieve some business that utilizes cryptocurrencies. If I was to create a business today, which needed a cryptocurrency, I would try to implement it on bitshares first because it is the most efficient (cheapest, quickest), it has an internal exchange (broader market, less risk), and it has a long term plan (less risk again). Those are three crucial elements, which set bitshares apart from most other crypto's.
I don't know why I expected this project to be further along. Maybe I thought it was an actual business that was being cultivated, but I realize now that is not the case. It doesn't matter what the underlying software can do or not, CNX can't get funding, they can't produce a competitive exchange and don't know the market they are entering into. Bitshares, if looked at as a company, can't be run by a community of individuals that do not know or entirely trust each other. I don't have the answers for how to turn things around, but I see the same mistakes continually being made and I don't have a reason to stay anymore.
A currency lives and dies on micropayments. Micropayments are the only reason people will adopt cryptocurrency at all. It's not like people aren't already getting paid in their local currencies so why would they care about BitUSD or BitCNY or any of these strange niche currencies that can't even do micropayments?On the other hand once they can do micropayments and people gain some experience with them, the size of the community grows. Even if it grows bottom up, from the poorest on up, it's still able to grow. While now it's not growing very much because only rich people are being targeted and expected to buy BTS without anything they can do with it.If there is no yield you shouldn't expect to attract rich people to hold anything.
@clout You are being ridiculous for faulting Bitshares for not attracting large banking partners. No decentralized cryptocurrency has been able to do that, yet Bitshares should have been able to.... give me a break. Have you missed all of the recent articles that all of the large banks are all developing their own private blockchains? Sadly, Identabit is going nowhere. Banks want 100% of the pie and 100% control. It is the sad reality of the matter.
Quote from: oldmine on January 08, 2016, 12:17:15 pmBTS has never ever been profitableThis is not a true statement.. you must be new around here.You need to learn patience, it is a good skill to have in life. We can't build a billion dollar company without dilution to fund the development of our product. Ending dilution (and therefore development) this early in the game would be a death sentence to Bitshares. If you don't like it please sell your stake and let those that share the vision reap the rewards.Caring so much is a good indication you have not diversified your cryptocurrency portfolio sufficiently. The only coin I own more than 6% of my portfolio in is Bitcoin.
BTS has never ever been profitable
Quote from: clout on January 08, 2016, 03:31:46 amQuote from: Ander on January 08, 2016, 12:41:41 amQuote from: yvv on January 08, 2016, 12:19:22 amWOW! Hold the horse. There is only one correct form of dividend: putting real money into my wallet on regular schedule. All other forms of dividend is scam. BTS delivers no dividend. Zero. For this reason, it is nothing more than a collateral token. This is a good reason to keep it, but don't tell people that it is something more than it is.Warren Buffet would disagree with you, and the empirical evidence that this method can work is Berkshire Hathaway.You can't seriously mention WB in reference to crypto...WB said stay away from bitcoin in 2015. Bitcoin was the best performing currency in the world in 2015 up 39% against the $.http://www.businessinsider.com/warren-buffett-money-tips-for-2015-2014-12?utm_content=buffera0c03&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Quote from: Ander on January 08, 2016, 12:41:41 amQuote from: yvv on January 08, 2016, 12:19:22 amWOW! Hold the horse. There is only one correct form of dividend: putting real money into my wallet on regular schedule. All other forms of dividend is scam. BTS delivers no dividend. Zero. For this reason, it is nothing more than a collateral token. This is a good reason to keep it, but don't tell people that it is something more than it is.Warren Buffet would disagree with you, and the empirical evidence that this method can work is Berkshire Hathaway.You can't seriously mention WB in reference to crypto...
Quote from: yvv on January 08, 2016, 12:19:22 amWOW! Hold the horse. There is only one correct form of dividend: putting real money into my wallet on regular schedule. All other forms of dividend is scam. BTS delivers no dividend. Zero. For this reason, it is nothing more than a collateral token. This is a good reason to keep it, but don't tell people that it is something more than it is.Warren Buffet would disagree with you, and the empirical evidence that this method can work is Berkshire Hathaway.
WOW! Hold the horse. There is only one correct form of dividend: putting real money into my wallet on regular schedule. All other forms of dividend is scam. BTS delivers no dividend. Zero. For this reason, it is nothing more than a collateral token. This is a good reason to keep it, but don't tell people that it is something more than it is.
and has no prospect of ever becoming so with the current dilution rates. Bytemaster seems to have given up on achieving profitability. All he says now is "real companies go through rounds of dilution to grow", etc. Therefore BitShares is so far not a profitable company, its just a fundraising scheme for BM & CNX to pay their rent. Thats fine, but it cant go on forever.Give Me a Reason to Hold BTS - when are we going to stop dilution and become profitable?
Dan basically said 'dilute and pay a shitload for FMV otherwise i'm gone'.It owns the majority of the witness spots via inits or CNX minions.If CNX wants bts to survive, it needs to distribute it's knowledge monopoly. It needs to come up with features that it thinks need to be implemented, but give them to another developer to do and implement. This will at least distribute the knowledge centralization that CNX has.
Quote from: Ben Mason on January 07, 2016, 11:43:25 pmQuote from: clout on January 07, 2016, 11:11:49 pmAt this point the only reason to invest in BTS is Identabit, but even that is dubious. I love that no one mentioned that. The features aren't the problem, its the resources, connections and funding that are.If you have sold a month ago, what is the purpose of op? It seems disingenuous. Also you make statements like the one quoted as if it were fact. I am excited about Identabit and wish the project the very best, but it has not yet launched. I find it curious that you would claim it as the only reason to invest in BTS....which has an incredibly powerful product launched, active network, existing community, active funding and is being actively developed.How is it disingenuous if I actively manage a BTS position? I say that Identabit is the only reason I'd consider holding BTS because the product as it stands is useless. It doesn't matter if the tech is good no one is using. Bitshares has little to no connection to broader financial and payment system. If you can get money transmitters then theres a different story. If you can make the entire system regulatory compliant then there's a different story. If you can get venture capital backing then theres a different story. This is Identabits approach.The community is getting smaller and smaller by the day. I've been here from pretty much the beginning. This community is a lot smaller than you are suggesting and those that have faithfully believed in this project have lost a lot of their capital. The software development also is slow and the team is small, both in relation to other crypto projects and those business Bitshares is attempting to compete with.
Quote from: clout on January 07, 2016, 11:11:49 pmAt this point the only reason to invest in BTS is Identabit, but even that is dubious. I love that no one mentioned that. The features aren't the problem, its the resources, connections and funding that are.If you have sold a month ago, what is the purpose of op? It seems disingenuous. Also you make statements like the one quoted as if it were fact. I am excited about Identabit and wish the project the very best, but it has not yet launched. I find it curious that you would claim it as the only reason to invest in BTS....which has an incredibly powerful product launched, active network, existing community, active funding and is being actively developed.
At this point the only reason to invest in BTS is Identabit, but even that is dubious. I love that no one mentioned that. The features aren't the problem, its the resources, connections and funding that are.
Quote from: luckybit on January 07, 2016, 09:38:37 pmIf you have to ask this question then maybe it's time for you to sell.If you cannot find an objective and rational reason to hold, to stay, then perhaps you shouldn't.Quote from: luckybit on January 07, 2016, 09:43:09 pmQuote from: jaran on January 07, 2016, 09:27:15 pmI feel like bitshares is stuck between is it a platform for other businesses/developers to build on or is it an exchange company?In either case there are design issues. For example no way people are going to build on a platform where in order to get your app/business on you have to get people to vote for it etc.Alternatively look at ethereum...its clearly a platform that wants others to build on top of it. And many have already.We all have complains and concerns. I've complained about the lack of micropayment capability as being a main hindering factor. I've complained about the lack of bonds or similar functionality as being a limiting factor. Of course there is no place to collect yield in Bitshares 2.0, so of course there are a lot less people holding in Bitshares 2.0. What did anyone expect?And of course BitUSD isn't successful because without micropayments it never will be. People around the world and in poorer parts of the US are getting paid in what Silicon Valley developers would call micropayments. Without the ability to pay micropayments you miss the majority of payment types which take place online.Now it's time to be tough. You can either hold no matter what, even if BTS goes to 0.001 and lower, and wait the situation out, or you can sell now and get out before the next seemingly inevitable price drop. Until the exchange has bond markets, lots of unique assets, prediction markets, stealth, and we have micropayments, we can't really say Bitshares 2.0 is good enough to deserve a $100,0,000,000 marketcap or even a $50,000,000 marketcap. Bitshares is at a low price because that is where it's current utility is. Unless more utility is built around it, it's not supposed to be priced higher than it's worth. Ethereum is actually over priced due to hype and should be $20,000,000 or less, but it's Ethereum.Hahah i don't know why you're stuck on micropayments. That's simply not where the money is.I sold a month or so ago when Dan made the post about vision. I realized then that this going nowhere. Dan's too much of an idealist and this project has lived and died by that ethos.
If you have to ask this question then maybe it's time for you to sell.If you cannot find an objective and rational reason to hold, to stay, then perhaps you shouldn't.
Quote from: jaran on January 07, 2016, 09:27:15 pmI feel like bitshares is stuck between is it a platform for other businesses/developers to build on or is it an exchange company?In either case there are design issues. For example no way people are going to build on a platform where in order to get your app/business on you have to get people to vote for it etc.Alternatively look at ethereum...its clearly a platform that wants others to build on top of it. And many have already.We all have complains and concerns. I've complained about the lack of micropayment capability as being a main hindering factor. I've complained about the lack of bonds or similar functionality as being a limiting factor. Of course there is no place to collect yield in Bitshares 2.0, so of course there are a lot less people holding in Bitshares 2.0. What did anyone expect?And of course BitUSD isn't successful because without micropayments it never will be. People around the world and in poorer parts of the US are getting paid in what Silicon Valley developers would call micropayments. Without the ability to pay micropayments you miss the majority of payment types which take place online.Now it's time to be tough. You can either hold no matter what, even if BTS goes to 0.001 and lower, and wait the situation out, or you can sell now and get out before the next seemingly inevitable price drop. Until the exchange has bond markets, lots of unique assets, prediction markets, stealth, and we have micropayments, we can't really say Bitshares 2.0 is good enough to deserve a $100,0,000,000 marketcap or even a $50,000,000 marketcap. Bitshares is at a low price because that is where it's current utility is. Unless more utility is built around it, it's not supposed to be priced higher than it's worth. Ethereum is actually over priced due to hype and should be $20,000,000 or less, but it's Ethereum.
I feel like bitshares is stuck between is it a platform for other businesses/developers to build on or is it an exchange company?In either case there are design issues. For example no way people are going to build on a platform where in order to get your app/business on you have to get people to vote for it etc.Alternatively look at ethereum...its clearly a platform that wants others to build on top of it. And many have already.
Quote from: Stan on January 07, 2016, 09:54:20 pmQuote from: lil_jay890 on January 07, 2016, 09:26:48 pmYou can expect further abuse of shareholders, while changing the rules so frequently that no business can start much less survive... All while staying financially and intellectually centralized by CNX. Todays whale slaying just gives more concentrated power to CNX.But remember... this whole price drop is because of negative people on the forum who scare away investors...lolPlease give the name and date of the last unnecessary 5 rule changes (outside the batch upgrade to 2.0 which implemented all the lessons learned from the previous year).Please give one thing CNX has done to prevent decentralization.No concentration in power distribution, since for every seller there was a buyer.And yes, price is a function of supply and demand and pessimistic, negative vibs on this forum can't help but cut into demand from people we refer here for the first time. It's called negative marketing. It's what trolls do.The upgrade to 2.0 killed or critically damaged several companies trying to build on bts (moonstone, metaexchange says its one of the hardest API's to integrate, all the sqr and arbitrarily implemented shorting rules that smoked many shorts, improperly communicated hardforks with exchanges). Not counting the merger which started the price crushing, in which Dan basically said 'dilute and pay a shitload for FMV otherwise i'm gone'.BTS is centralized because CNX can push through anything it wants... It owns the majority of the witness spots via inits or CNX minions. CNX has control over by far the largest proxies. People are afraid Dan is going to do what he did during the merger again (via MAS) and he has the ability to do it right now.If CNX wants bts to survive, it needs to distribute it's knowledge monopoly. It needs to come up with features that it thinks need to be implemented, but give them to another developer to do and implement. This will at least distribute the knowledge centralization that CNX has.
Quote from: lil_jay890 on January 07, 2016, 09:26:48 pmYou can expect further abuse of shareholders, while changing the rules so frequently that no business can start much less survive... All while staying financially and intellectually centralized by CNX. Todays whale slaying just gives more concentrated power to CNX.But remember... this whole price drop is because of negative people on the forum who scare away investors...lolPlease give the name and date of the last unnecessary 5 rule changes (outside the batch upgrade to 2.0 which implemented all the lessons learned from the previous year).Please give one thing CNX has done to prevent decentralization.No concentration in power distribution, since for every seller there was a buyer.And yes, price is a function of supply and demand and pessimistic, negative vibs on this forum can't help but cut into demand from people we refer here for the first time. It's called negative marketing. It's what trolls do.
You can expect further abuse of shareholders, while changing the rules so frequently that no business can start much less survive... All while staying financially and intellectually centralized by CNX. Todays whale slaying just gives more concentrated power to CNX.But remember... this whole price drop is because of negative people on the forum who scare away investors...lol
Quote from: donkeypong on January 08, 2016, 04:45:48 amQuote from: CoinHoarder on January 08, 2016, 04:41:19 am@clout You are being ridiculous for faulting Bitshares for not attracting large banking partners. No decentralized cryptocurrency has been able to do that, yet Bitshares should have been able to.... give me a break. Have you missed all of the recent articles that all of the large banks are all developing their own private blockchains? Sadly, Identabit is going nowhere. Banks want 100% of the pie and 100% control. It is the sad reality of the matter.You're talking about the big banks. And largely, I agree. They'll take one look at our DPOS proposal debates and say 'no thanks'. They sure as hell won't put their back end on this blockchain while it's under decentralized control. BUT if enough smaller and mid-sized businesses give it a try, recognizing how much money it saves them and all the advantages it holds, there is a real chance that: (a) we add sufficient scale to start growing, and (b) that stability, which must be longer term in terms of governance (and not just one change after another, as we've seen in recent years/months), then that may attract some larger organizations. Our witnesses and committees and whoever the hoo-ha's are will be a lot less inclined to make changes on a whim when all of us have a vested interest in letting the system grow and prosper, which can only happen with stability and predictability. In my mind, there's a big difference between those BIG banks and everyone else.Same with venture capitalists... they are only investing in Bitcoin companies, or brand new cryptocurrencies/side chains with which they can have a large part of the pie. I haven't seen any VC money going into any established alternative cryptocurrencies which have been around for a while. Again, how can you fault Bitshares for this when no established alternative cryptocurrencies are succeeding in this department..
Quote from: CoinHoarder on January 08, 2016, 04:41:19 am@clout You are being ridiculous for faulting Bitshares for not attracting large banking partners. No decentralized cryptocurrency has been able to do that, yet Bitshares should have been able to.... give me a break. Have you missed all of the recent articles that all of the large banks are all developing their own private blockchains? Sadly, Identabit is going nowhere. Banks want 100% of the pie and 100% control. It is the sad reality of the matter.You're talking about the big banks. And largely, I agree. They'll take one look at our DPOS proposal debates and say 'no thanks'. They sure as hell won't put their back end on this blockchain while it's under decentralized control. BUT if enough smaller and mid-sized businesses give it a try, recognizing how much money it saves them and all the advantages it holds, there is a real chance that: (a) we add sufficient scale to start growing, and (b) that stability, which must be longer term in terms of governance (and not just one change after another, as we've seen in recent years/months), then that may attract some larger organizations. Our witnesses and committees and whoever the hoo-ha's are will be a lot less inclined to make changes on a whim when all of us have a vested interest in letting the system grow and prosper, which can only happen with stability and predictability. In my mind, there's a big difference between those BIG banks and everyone else.
Quote from: neo1344 on January 08, 2016, 12:26:49 amhttp://prestonbyrne.com/2014/08/17/dont-walk-away-run/Bts has lost 90% 0f its value since above article was published.That guy wasn't too bright imo, I think he was mostly attacking the pegging system and that it would fail with a 50% price drop but actually it's held up very well.
http://prestonbyrne.com/2014/08/17/dont-walk-away-run/Bts has lost 90% 0f its value since above article was published.
Quote from: clout on January 07, 2016, 09:59:59 pmI sold a month or so ago when Dan made the post about vision. I realized then that this going nowhere. Dan's too much of an idealist and this project has lived and died by that ethos.So, if you sold "a month ago" does the title you gave to this thread make you some kind of troll or just an ignoramus?
I sold a month or so ago when Dan made the post about vision. I realized then that this going nowhere. Dan's too much of an idealist and this project has lived and died by that ethos.
Quote from: luckybit on January 07, 2016, 09:38:37 pmIf you have to ask this question then maybe it's time for you to sell.If you cannot find an objective and rational reason to hold, to stay, then perhaps you shouldn't. I hate to agree but it isn't necessarily a bad thing..
Quote from: Riverhead on January 08, 2016, 02:17:27 amQuote from: yvv on January 08, 2016, 01:46:19 amAnd who is going to buy back my BTS shares? At which prise?It's in the docs under reserve pool and refund workers.https://bitshares.org/technology/stakeholder-approved-project-funding/I've read it. This does not answer my question. This buy back argument is a bull shit. Your BTS is a collateral token, no more.
Quote from: yvv on January 08, 2016, 01:46:19 amAnd who is going to buy back my BTS shares? At which prise?It's in the docs under reserve pool and refund workers.https://bitshares.org/technology/stakeholder-approved-project-funding/
And who is going to buy back my BTS shares? At which prise?
Quote from: yvv on January 08, 2016, 12:44:24 amQuote from: Ander on January 08, 2016, 12:41:41 amQuote from: yvv on January 08, 2016, 12:19:22 amWOW! Hold the horse. There is only one correct form of dividend: putting real money into my wallet on regular schedule. All other forms of dividend is scam. BTS delivers no dividend. Zero. For this reason, it is nothing more than a collateral token. This is a good reason to keep it, but don't tell people that it is something more than it is.Warren Buffet would disagree with you, and the empirical evidence that this method can work is Berkshire Hathaway.Go tell about how your method can work to your clients. Cheers.Its not 'my method', its a perfectly valid method of returning value to shareholders.You can return value in two ways: A Dividend, or a Share Buyback. Many tech companies for example have stated a preference for share buyback over dividends.BTS uses the share buyback model, not the dividend model. Its a perfectly valid model, used by many large companies.
Quote from: Ander on January 08, 2016, 12:41:41 amQuote from: yvv on January 08, 2016, 12:19:22 amWOW! Hold the horse. There is only one correct form of dividend: putting real money into my wallet on regular schedule. All other forms of dividend is scam. BTS delivers no dividend. Zero. For this reason, it is nothing more than a collateral token. This is a good reason to keep it, but don't tell people that it is something more than it is.Warren Buffet would disagree with you, and the empirical evidence that this method can work is Berkshire Hathaway.Go tell about how your method can work to your clients. Cheers.
That gives an incentive to BTS holders to hold. Because just by lending it on the market they can get a return. Simple as that.
Quote from: Akado on January 08, 2016, 12:23:59 amQuote from: Ander on January 08, 2016, 12:12:13 amIf the focus is going to be stealth, then the development of gambling features should probably be right behind it or in parallel. Then at least you can combine stealth and gambling and provide something potentially useful. Bonds, combined with a margin trading service similar to poloniex should be a priority.Prediction markets (which is sort of like gambling but different) should be a priority.While I have mostly given up, if BTS is going to make a recovery at some point, how it will happen is that at least one of these things is implemented and starts to get some use. And then another of them, etc. At this point I am beyond caring what order they are implemented but it would be nice to see at least one of them implemented ever.Sad thing is it seems they aren't considered as a priority...I am 100% with you guys. Bond market should be the highest priority, even if it has to be done through worker proposal. I was almost going to sell out when I saw bm's vision post also. In hindsight maybe I should have. I don't care if mas is a personal pet project. Bm is the leader of this project and if his attention is on something that is in direct conflict with what shareholders want, then it won't fly. We are a team and we need bm to be a part of this team and share the same vision and goals as the rest of us shareholders: to change the world for the better through a decentralized bank and exchange - that is what we all signed up for. If you don't believe me, then put it to shareholder vote. Most of us did not sign up for an all-purpose chain or mas, we signed up for a dex, plain and simple and bm's vision seemed to go off on a tangent. We need bm and we need cnx and we all need to be focused in the same direction and stay the course. Shareholders have done our market research also. If done right, we will all have 10-baggers to invest in: metafees, obits, maker, bond, stealth, and perhaps the biggest payoff of all: bts. Forget mas for now. If I see it proposed, then I will vote it down. My proxy is with bm right now, but that can change and I'm sure it will change with others too.
Quote from: Ander on January 08, 2016, 12:12:13 amIf the focus is going to be stealth, then the development of gambling features should probably be right behind it or in parallel. Then at least you can combine stealth and gambling and provide something potentially useful. Bonds, combined with a margin trading service similar to poloniex should be a priority.Prediction markets (which is sort of like gambling but different) should be a priority.While I have mostly given up, if BTS is going to make a recovery at some point, how it will happen is that at least one of these things is implemented and starts to get some use. And then another of them, etc. At this point I am beyond caring what order they are implemented but it would be nice to see at least one of them implemented ever.Sad thing is it seems they aren't considered as a priority...
If the focus is going to be stealth, then the development of gambling features should probably be right behind it or in parallel. Then at least you can combine stealth and gambling and provide something potentially useful. Bonds, combined with a margin trading service similar to poloniex should be a priority.Prediction markets (which is sort of like gambling but different) should be a priority.While I have mostly given up, if BTS is going to make a recovery at some point, how it will happen is that at least one of these things is implemented and starts to get some use. And then another of them, etc. At this point I am beyond caring what order they are implemented but it would be nice to see at least one of them implemented ever.
Quote from: neo1344 on January 08, 2016, 12:26:49 amhttp://prestonbyrne.com/2014/08/17/dont-walk-away-run/Bts has lost 90% 0f its value since above article was published.Correlation is not causation. We had a marketing director, we had a merger, things got a little ugly.
Quote from: Empirical1.2 on December 16, 2015, 03:16:58 pmIn terms of easiest way for BTS to increase market value, profit & adoption right now...1. Crypto-currency (Remove dilution & commit to being sound money - highly unlikely.)2. Gambling (Blockchain based Dice) 3. Liquid Smartcoins (Liquidity incentives & lower fees) 4. DEX features (Bond Market)5. Sports Betting (Prediction Market) 6. Blue Chip Stocks (Derivatives of world's most popular stocks.) 7. STEALTH (More valuable when you have a popular product any of 1-5 above to apply STEALTH too.)8. Referral Programme (Need sellable product for referral programme to work.) 9. UIA's (Counterparty and NXT currently dominate UIA's and demonstrate they don't add significantly to market value)
In terms of easiest way for BTS to increase market value, profit & adoption right now...1. Crypto-currency (Remove dilution & commit to being sound money - highly unlikely.)2. Gambling (Blockchain based Dice) 3. Liquid Smartcoins (Liquidity incentives & lower fees) 4. DEX features (Bond Market)5. Sports Betting (Prediction Market) 6. Blue Chip Stocks (Derivatives of world's most popular stocks.) 7. STEALTH (More valuable when you have a popular product any of 1-5 above to apply STEALTH too.)8. Referral Programme (Need sellable product for referral programme to work.) 9. UIA's (Counterparty and NXT currently dominate UIA's and demonstrate they don't add significantly to market value)
Cass the ruthless speculator did well though Quote from: cass on August 10, 2015, 08:11:51 amI just want to say ... i've investet 2 BTC --> 4000 ETH during the IPO sale last year!And did sell them for approx. 19 BTC! So from the investment point of view ... ETH was a really good investment!But i've also learned from BTS ... If i had sell my BTS last year when high .. it would be the same ...With this revenue i can fund my next 3 month working for BTS/CNX ... so IMO good deal
I just want to say ... i've investet 2 BTC --> 4000 ETH during the IPO sale last year!And did sell them for approx. 19 BTC! So from the investment point of view ... ETH was a really good investment!But i've also learned from BTS ... If i had sell my BTS last year when high .. it would be the same ...With this revenue i can fund my next 3 month working for BTS/CNX ... so IMO good deal
Empirical not using empirical data. https://www.quandl.com/data/CRYPTOCHART/ETC-Ethercoin-BITCOIN-PriceOn average before the spike up ether coin was worth .004 per btc. At 350 dollars per btc this equates to a value of $1.4 on average for ether coin. You have to remove the spike up datapoints because augur is not in that behavior pattern in the least bit (eg. It has not announced launch date or is even in beta testing). Therefore it fits the former pattern and hypothesis that excludes all the run up in value due to launch date.
Quote from: Empirical1.2 on January 07, 2016, 09:55:51 pmQuote from: topcandle on January 07, 2016, 09:43:53 pmQuote from: Empirical1.2 on January 07, 2016, 09:40:11 pmWhile I think Augur in particular could have a great deal of success, a lot of businesses building on your platform doesn't necessarily translate to increased value...Did you invest in Augur?Nope There's some REP IOUs trading on Gatecoin though which already values Augur at $20 million on $5 million raised. I'll probably be buying but will wait for it to properly start trading though, the limited supply could be inflating the price/valuation like the small amount of pre-traded ETH IOU did.If I remember correctly. For most of the time IOU ethereum was less than laugh date ethereum...
Quote from: topcandle on January 07, 2016, 09:43:53 pmQuote from: Empirical1.2 on January 07, 2016, 09:40:11 pmWhile I think Augur in particular could have a great deal of success, a lot of businesses building on your platform doesn't necessarily translate to increased value...Did you invest in Augur?Nope There's some REP IOUs trading on Gatecoin though which already values Augur at $20 million on $5 million raised. I'll probably be buying but will wait for it to properly start trading though, the limited supply could be inflating the price/valuation like the small amount of pre-traded ETH IOU did.
Quote from: Empirical1.2 on January 07, 2016, 09:40:11 pmWhile I think Augur in particular could have a great deal of success, a lot of businesses building on your platform doesn't necessarily translate to increased value...Did you invest in Augur?
While I think Augur in particular could have a great deal of success, a lot of businesses building on your platform doesn't necessarily translate to increased value...
Quote from: CLains on August 08, 2015, 12:26:11 pmFrom 160 to 80 million in 12 hours T_TUnder 50M now, still falling. The initial buyers were idiots, buying at 20x the IPO.
From 160 to 80 million in 12 hours T_T
]Can't wait for Augur to start trading on Poloniex so I can short it.
Quote from: clout on January 07, 2016, 10:05:32 pmQuote from: onceuponatime on January 07, 2016, 10:03:19 pmSo, if you sold "a month ago" does the title of this thread make you some kind of troll or just an ignoramus?I had others invest a substantial amount in BTS early on. I sold my personal stake, because I saw more opportunity in day trading on Poloniex. I haven't told the other investors to pull out yet, but I will be...Have you downloaded and are you testing the android bitshares wallet? Linking to the POS with 50,000 users expected by March? Do you know that Privacy Mode GUI development has been paid for and is under development with a defined time table, implementation expected around the end of February?No problem with telling those people that you recommended to buy BTS to now sell because I'll be buying. Well, actually, there is an ethical problem. Perhaps you should have told those others that you brought in that you were selling before you sold out and put downward pressure on the market price.
Quote from: onceuponatime on January 07, 2016, 10:03:19 pmSo, if you sold "a month ago" does the title of this thread make you some kind of troll or just an ignoramus?I had others invest a substantial amount in BTS early on. I sold my personal stake, because I saw more opportunity in day trading on Poloniex. I haven't told the other investors to pull out yet, but I will be...
So, if you sold "a month ago" does the title of this thread make you some kind of troll or just an ignoramus?
Dan's use case is ideological but the platform isn't.
Quote from: TravelsAsia on January 07, 2016, 09:49:13 pmQuote from: luckybit on January 07, 2016, 09:43:09 pmAnd of course BitUSD isn't successful because without micropayments it never will be. People around the world and in poorer parts of the US are getting paid in what Silicon Valley developers would call micropayments. Without the ability to pay micropayments you miss the majority of payment types which take place online. all day long, all day long. I've purchased another 70k bts today, when it drops to the 500s, I'll probably do the same. Dan might find lightning in a bottle again down the road, so I'm willing to buy at these falling prices. I'm more interested in the success of Peertracks, so it's important to me that Bitshares at least continues to mature. Like with Augur, I have more faith in the value of the services using the technology than the technology value itself.Don't buy bts because of Peertracks. That would be a terrible mistake.
Quote from: luckybit on January 07, 2016, 09:43:09 pmAnd of course BitUSD isn't successful because without micropayments it never will be. People around the world and in poorer parts of the US are getting paid in what Silicon Valley developers would call micropayments. Without the ability to pay micropayments you miss the majority of payment types which take place online. all day long, all day long. I've purchased another 70k bts today, when it drops to the 500s, I'll probably do the same. Dan might find lightning in a bottle again down the road, so I'm willing to buy at these falling prices. I'm more interested in the success of Peertracks, so it's important to me that Bitshares at least continues to mature. Like with Augur, I have more faith in the value of the services using the technology than the technology value itself.
And of course BitUSD isn't successful because without micropayments it never will be. People around the world and in poorer parts of the US are getting paid in what Silicon Valley developers would call micropayments. Without the ability to pay micropayments you miss the majority of payment types which take place online.
Quote from: jaran on January 07, 2016, 09:27:15 pm For example no way people are going to build on a platform where in order to get your app/business on you have to get people to vote for it etc.Alternatively look at ethereum...its clearly a platform that wants others to build on top of it. And many have already.This is incorrect. The only time a business needs votes is if they require a protocol change or expect the blockchain to pay for something.To contrast with Ethereum, which also freely allows anyone to build on top of it, there is no mechanism for shareholders to vote for features, forks, etc. A problem they are currently struggling with.I don't mean to say one is better than the other but there is a bit of "grass is always greener" going on.
For example no way people are going to build on a platform where in order to get your app/business on you have to get people to vote for it etc.Alternatively look at ethereum...its clearly a platform that wants others to build on top of it. And many have already.
Quote from: TravelsAsia on January 07, 2016, 09:49:13 pm Like with Augur, I have more faith in the value of the services using the technology than the technology value itself.Wait your bullish on Augur? Did you invest? I am the only one left out?
Like with Augur, I have more faith in the value of the services using the technology than the technology value itself.
Quote from: jaran on January 07, 2016, 09:27:15 pm For example no way people are going to build on a platform where in order to get your app/business on you have to get people to vote for it etc.Alternatively look at ethereum...its clearly a platform that wants others to build on top of it. And many have already.This is incorrect. The only time a business needs votes is if they require a protocol change or expect the blockchain to pay for something.To contrast with Ethereum, which also freely allows anyone to build on top of it, there is not mechanism for shareholders to vote for features, forks, etc. A problem they are currently struggling with.
But remember... this whole price drop is because of negative people on the forum who scare away investors...lol
Look at the amount of businesses on NXT, XCP & MSC (17 of top 20) and their combined valuations http://coinmarketcap.com/assets/BitShares still has a long way to go before it catches up/overtakes the existing market leaders in this area. Worse, even when it does... XCP + NXT + MSC = < $10 million