BitShares Forum

Other => Graveyard => Muse/SoundDAC => Topic started by: cob on September 29, 2014, 07:01:23 pm

Title: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: cob on September 29, 2014, 07:01:23 pm
The announcement made 15 hours ago got very positive feedback from most. The few that had criticisms brought up excellent points which made me think about it from different angles. What was not considered is the time we are living in. I believe there is a way to make the Music DAC better suited to the present which will consequently make it much MUCH more valuable down the line.

The model that was described in in yesterday's post https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9459.0 is a great model for avoiding regulatory problems and launching a DAC without significant funds backing up the founders. Just use the toolkit, launch, and then dilute as you go to pay for expenses.

This method comes at a cost though. No up front capital.
This means as soon as the DAC launches and price discovery of it's shares happens, the founders must start diluting the share supply and/or selling shares on the open market. So as soon as a baby DAC is born and needs an influx of people coming in and supporting it (cuz iz goin' to da mooonnn ,etc...) is when the value of it's shares go down and down.
People unaware of the workings of this DAC's model will think it's a crap coin. People that ARE aware of the workings of the DAC would still most likely sell justifying it like so: "a lot of dilution is going to happen without seeing any results for the first few months. I will sell and park my wealth elsewhere until I get news that they are about to launch a working product".
This can mean the entire project can grind to a halt. For the founders to generate enough capital to develop, they will need to sell massive amounts of almost worthless shares, dropping the price even lower, requiring even more dilution, meaning the PTS and AGS holders will be left with tiny slivers of what used to be a nice large slice of pie. This downward share price spiral all stems from the fact that the founders have no initial funds. The never got a first round of funding, they went straight to what should have been a second round of funding technique!

Another small disadvantage is the lack of a crowd-funding hype. Storj and ethereum got massive exposure from their pre-sales. It brought many new users to their communities.


We all know what the dot com bubble was. "You have an idea and a website? Shut up and take my money!"
The crypto space is in a similar boom and we will have another year or two of angel an VC funds coming in no doubt. The BitShares community should take advantage of this. The model proposed yesterday is great for when the capital dries up and VCs/Angel investors move on to a new sphere. That model is perfect for launching a DAC without start up funds.
BitShares Music on the other hand is launching in 2014. Meaning it should take advantage of the hype and publicity a pre-sale can bring. It should use the upfront capital to pay for big corporate attorney fees and regulations and all that fun stuff. We are in the age of the start up war chest. Let's not switch to a model best suited for times of austerity just yet!

We should capitalize on the fact that the crypto world is booming.
We should capitalize on the hype a pre-sale can bring.
We should welcome and introduce a whole new demographics to the world of BitShares and our DACs.
We should also avoid the risk of using new features (unlimited dilution) that can change the entire nature of a very important DAC.


Here is the revised model I would suggest we use.

We allocate 35% to PTS, 35% to AGS, 10% to the Foundation and 20% to a pre-sale.

This means we have a pre-sale, our DAC gets tons in funding in BTC, we get publicity and exposure, we get new members to our community, etc.

Now when we launch the DAC, we don't need to sell off any Notes(Music DAC Shares) until we run out of Bitcoin. This means the Notes on the exchanges don't spiral down in price. People that are ignorant of the DAC's workings will hold on to or buy Notes. People that know of the DACs working WILL keep their wealth parked within the BitShares ecosystem since they know we are not going to dump a ton of freshly minted Notes on the exchanges, collapsing the price and diluting their %. We will merely spend bitcoins during the most crucial time of the DACs existence, it's first few months.

This is a hybrid model, so I am not saying we drop yesterday's concept entirely, no! I'm saying we have a hybrid model. Delegates could dilute, but there would be a cap and it would be no where near as inflationary and potentially problem causing as before. BitShares Music will be billion dollar DAC, it's a bit risky IMO (and Arhag's! and Frodo's!) to test out the infinite dilution model on it. Although dilution is an EXCELLENT tool for a second or third round of funding, especially since it can be decentralized and done by the delegates rather than the foundation.



To compare both scenarios.

Suggested model:
PTS/AGS holders own 70% of a DAC that has Millions in it's coffers for making the product and value of their shares go higher and higher. They also have the capability to have multiple decentralized rounds of funding by voting for delegates that have a LIMITED capability to dilute. As Stan said: The one-two punch! (Pre-sale + dilution option)

Yesterday's model:
PTS/AGS holders own 90% of a DAC that is broke and must dilute and possibly cause a downward share price spiral while shrinking their percentage of ownership.


Suggested Model:
Create hype, get publicity and new members to the community.

Yesterday's model:
Once the chain launches, people that are already on the exchanges can buy the Notes sold just as anyone else would buy any other altcoin.


Suggested Model:
Capitalize on the time we are living through. We ARE in a crypto boom. Let's use this capital to change the world. We will be able to afford the lawyers + compliances. The capital is there, just waiting for a worthy project to fund.

Yesterday's model: Awesome model for removing the barriers to entry needed to start a business. No regulations or capital needed. Great to bring DACs to the entire world, no matter what the economy is like.



Discuss.

Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: xeroc on September 29, 2014, 07:16:18 pm
you should allow not only BTC but also PTS donations/investment (much like AGS) .. mabye even allow bitAssets!! The tech is here and works the same way as BTC!

besides that, I see it as a fair compromise between the proposal yesterday and the very first 10%ish proposal .. IF you have a marketing team already working on it by all means!
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: donkeypong on September 29, 2014, 07:20:29 pm
Sounds great. I agree that a pre-sale would generate some buzz and give people another chance to get in. This seems like a fair revised allocation.

My only added suggestion is to not have the pre-sale drag on and on. AGS lasted for too long. I'd go with 30-60 days maximum unless you need more time to develop the product.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: serejandmyself on September 29, 2014, 07:28:02 pm
 +5% for pre sale! Defenatly will bring more people in! Good to see you guys value your own opinion under the pressure of giving it all to pts/ags! But i will also agree that you should accept bitusd and bitbtc on presale, will make it more interesting.  (Ashame you cant only accept bitsassets, that would do some great liquidity for btsx market on the way) 
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: Shentist on September 29, 2014, 07:34:47 pm
new suggestion?

how do you restrict delution?
start with it in 6 month and restrict with a cap? for example

starting with 1 billion notes and after 6 month delegate can delute but the max delution will be 1 billion shares?

so in the future we will reach the max cap of 2 billion, but with burning fees you could alwas delute for funding bigger projects.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: tonyk on September 29, 2014, 07:44:28 pm
If you put say 1Mil  Notes and let the people bid for a week/month; X BTC (bitUSD whatever) for Y number of shares and the  best offers (totaling 1Mil Notes) are rewarded those Notes - great!

If you go with some form of convoluted nonsense (Ethereum or otherwise)  - NO!



 Storj and ethereum got massive exposure from their pre-sales. It brought many new users to their communities.

And that is WRONG - Storj and  end especially ethereum, got funds not because but despite their crazy IPO/(non IPOs) not because of them.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: roadscape on September 29, 2014, 07:45:22 pm
I was still struggling to grasp all the proposals from yesterday, but your rationale helped clear things up!

Your new model sounds spot-on.
 +5%
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: clayop on September 29, 2014, 07:57:24 pm
Presale will definitely bring more people in!  +5%
But we should consider the presale method to maximize its benefits and minimize side-effects, such as a huge dumping at just above the presale price, which harms the value of Bitshares Music.

IMHO, fixed price presale has more negative effects than positive ones. People will seek a little profit and will dump their shares in a short-run, regardless of the real value of the DAC.

I think AGS-like presale is a better way; the market will decide the price of the Note. And IMHO again, accepting only BTC is the better way too, because accessibility to PTS or BitAssets is quite low for common people, while people can get and send Bitcoin easily.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: cob on September 29, 2014, 08:00:39 pm
If we go for a pre-sale. It will be a Bitcoin only AGS style one. Only shorter, 30 to 60 days yes.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: oco101 on September 29, 2014, 08:02:39 pm
Pre sale is good, you need tons of money for the whole project to work, there's so much to do off the blockchain  that needs a lot of money like uploading/downloading the music, make it easy and fun for users(easier said than done) , mobile apps, marketing, etc. Hopefully the pre sale will bring enough funds for this project to reach full potential. I rather have fewer  more valuable share from a perfectly executed DAC then a lots of worthless shares in a slow moving DAC. Time is of the essence. I like this hybrid model !!!!
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: clayop on September 29, 2014, 08:03:09 pm
If we go for a pre-sale. It will be an AGS style one only shorter. 30 to 60 days yes.

Will it be day-by-day allocation? (exactly the same as AGS) Or the allocation will be calculated based on the whole period? (Like viacoin presale)
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: cob on September 29, 2014, 08:05:52 pm
If we go for a pre-sale. It will be an AGS style one only shorter. 30 to 60 days yes.

Will it be day-by-day allocation? (exactly the same as AGS) Or the allocation will be calculated based on the whole period? (Like viacoin presale)
Auction a day. Pure AGS style!
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: xeroc on September 29, 2014, 08:06:34 pm
If we go for a pre-sale. It will be a Bitcoin only AGS style one. Only shorter, 30 to 60 days yes.
So I guess the PTS/AGS snapshot will be INDEPENDENT of the presale? you launch the presale AFTER the snapshot?
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: tonyk on September 29, 2014, 08:08:07 pm
If we go for a pre-sale. It will be an AGS style one only shorter. 30 to 60 days yes.

Will it be day-by-day allocation? (exactly the same as AGS) Or the allocation will be calculated based on the whole period? (Like viacoin presale)
Auction a day. Pure AGS style!

Good! I was just about posting the following....



If we go for a pre-sale. It will be a Bitcoin only AGS style one. Only shorter, 30 to 60 days yes.

I hope you no longer consider Ethereum's IPO to be AGS style. Do you or do you not?
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: jaran on September 29, 2014, 08:21:18 pm
I think a lot of people don't know about PTS so a hyped presale of a very unique DAC would be good for the bitshare brand imo.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: clayop on September 29, 2014, 08:21:54 pm
Auction a day. Pure AGS style!

Good! But we should consider advantages and disadvantages of each presale style.

AGS style has no huge sell pressure because the presale price has variations. However, fairness issue can arise as like we have experienced in AGS (between late May and early July, AGS price was quite lower than other periods).

In contrast, auction a whole period (viacoin style) can resolve fairness problem because there is only one presale price. But if the presale price is lower than expected, a huge dump can happen in the near future.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: testz on September 29, 2014, 08:26:40 pm
As I can see the AGS style will be best choise, as example:
- Allocate 35% to PTS, 35% to AGS, 30% to a pre-sale
- As AGS: accept only BTC and PTS
- PTS which you will have after pre-sale will bring you Notes and can be counted as Foundation part
- Make pre-sale for 30 days, each day as auction 0.5% for BTC, 0.5% for PTS
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: mf-tzo on September 29, 2014, 08:28:46 pm
My initial thoughts are:

1. I don't feel that we are so much in a crypto booming. Especially with bitcoin price dropping from the beginning of the year

2. What happens if BTC drops in price much faster than notes? You will spend very fast all the bitcoins for future development and not raise so much money. Consider also the possibility that not many people learn or invest on the IPO so with few bitcoins, few people earn more shares and dilute PTS-AGS shareholders. This will create a bad image for the PTS and raise questions for their purpose in acquiring in advance shares for future DACs. I have already seen a lot of new members asking why to invest in PTS now and not wait when the DAC is launched.

3. You do give the opportunity to new people to participate through PTS. I don't understand why you think that an IPO will be different and will bring more members in our community. The same persons that are likely to invest through IPO might as well invest by buying PTS and keep them for the next DACs.

4. Definitely agree imposing a cap to the dilution from the delegates in order to avoid selling pressure.

5. Isn't the 10% of the Foundation sufficient for the development of the DAC especially if it is to be worth billions?

6. All in all I think that IPOs in crypto had their run. I read often in the news how IPOs scam investors etc etc so it might not be such a good publicity for the DAC as you intend but rather bounce against us.

All the above are just some initial thoughts so I may got many points wrong..
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: graffenwalder on September 29, 2014, 08:59:58 pm
As I can see the AGS style will be best choise, as example:
- Allocate 35% to PTS, 35% to AGS, 30% to a pre-sale
- As AGS: accept only BTC and PTS
- PTS which you will have after pre-sale will bring you Notes and can be counted as Foundation part
- Make pre-sale for 30 days, each day as auction 0.5% for BTC, 0.5% for PTS

Before saying a potential yes to PTS donations. Please consider what this would do to the PTS price.

AGS style would mean snapshot of PTS when donation period is over.
We have seen PTS plummeting on days that relatively low BTC was donated.

Ergo such an announcement, would have a drastic effect on the current PTS price.

Also trolls would have fuel saying, that PTS was pumped on the initial proposal, just to be dumped after this.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: santaclause102 on September 29, 2014, 09:03:00 pm
Thanks cob for your open mind.

I don't know about the regulatory side of it. But in general: If there could be fatal problems regulatory wise then avoid them at all costs. If not a fund raiser is crucial to get starting capital.

I would do this:
- AGS stlye, daily auctions is great!
- 30% AGS, 30% PTS, 10% foundation, 30% presale. This reduces AGS/PTS only by 5% but gives the presale folks a better (subjective) feeling of equality. I could even live well with 25/25/10/50 if that helps to receive disproportionally more funds and new community members! New community members will likely also be attracted to BTSX.... Edit: I would reverse that a bit: New consideration: I don't know how aware people even are how much percent they get... (example maidsafe; I guess ppl just bought maidsafe; investors in safecoin get only 10% as far as I know). I'd still consider the 30/30/10/30 deal a balanced appraoch.
- I wouldn't allow PTS donations. This would be great for the community but it is price fixing (worked for AGS because the PTS price adapted (that also created a lot of criticism since PTS halved in price in January) to the its value in AGS donations) and will be received as "cheap recycling of PTS" outside of this community.
Another advantage: It would increase the commitment of the Bitshares foundation since there are a lot of PTS in the AGS fund.
Another disadvantage: It would reduce your initial working capital since PTS are not that liquid.
Maybe a solution would be to allow PTS donations but only reserve 20% of the presale to PTS. This would be a compromise of the ad/disadvantages above but still price fixing.   

Could you go into detail a bit how the notes of the BTS-Music-Foundation will be used? Or does "foundation" mean "bitshares foundation"?
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: Frodo on September 29, 2014, 09:15:12 pm
 +5% for new allocation. Fresh money from presale will definitely help.
Concerning the bitcoin volatility why not exchange for bitUSD afer the presale?
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: clayop on September 29, 2014, 09:27:52 pm
- 30% AGS, 30% PTS, 10% foundation, 30% presale. This reduces AGS/PTS only by 5% but gives the presale folks a better (subjective) feeling of equality. I could even live well with 25/25/10/50 if that helps to receive disproportionally more funds and new community members! New community members will likely also be attracted to BTSX....

I wouldn't allocate 30% to presale. It's too much imo. Investors who participate in presale basically seek to short-term profit; they are dumpers. In addition, if we allocate too many Notes to presale, the average price will be lowered, especially given the situation that crypto-market is experiencing recession, and then this will generate negative effects on AGS/PTS holders.

And it is not 'only 5%' because initial suggestion was 45%. 15 out of 45 is a quite big difference.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: mf-tzo on September 29, 2014, 09:34:47 pm
Quote
I wouldn't allocate 30% to presale. It's too much imo. Investors who participate in presale basically seek to short-term profit; they are dumpers. In addition, if we allocate too many Notes to presale, the average price will be lowered, especially given the situation that crypto-market is experiencing recession, and then this will generate negative effects on AGS/PTS holders.

And it is not 'only 5%' because initial suggestion was 45%. 15 out of 45 is a quite big difference.

I fully agree with that quote
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: tonyk on September 29, 2014, 09:39:57 pm
As I can see the AGS style will be best choise, as example:
- Allocate 35% to PTS, 35% to AGS, 30% to a pre-sale
- As AGS: accept only BTC and PTS
- PTS which you will have after pre-sale will bring you Notes and can be counted as Foundation part
- Make pre-sale for 30 days, each day as auction 0.5% for BTC, 0.5% for PTS

This proposal is pretty good with the exception of accepting PTS- for your own good and the reasons explained well in previous posts.
Now the next step is to mentally accept the 'Music Foundation' is not getting any free share allocations. (i.e. no 10% reserved share). Getting the hard cash should be good enough. ( if you want some Notes, feel free to buy some in the IPO)
The 3rd step is to accept bitUSD (in addition to BTC) - the positives are numerous let's name a few:
- Hedge against possible (likely in my mind) BTC price movement;
- Support for the whole Bitshares eco-system (which your Music DAC is a part of now, and we all hope grown part of it);
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: mf-tzo on September 29, 2014, 10:00:34 pm
well i am against the IPO. But I understand the need to raise capital for development. So if you do make an IPO I would like this to be in bitusd. This would be a very good chance to show to everyone how each DAC support the other.

Why raise any bitcoins or PTS? You want capital? Get it via Bitusd and convert that to usd when needed...
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: graffenwalder on September 29, 2014, 10:06:54 pm
well i am against the IPO. But I understand the need to raise capital for development. So if you do make an IPO I would like this to be in bitusd. This would be a very good chance to show to everyone how each DAC support the other.

Why raise any bitcoins or PTS? You want capital? Get it via Bitusd and convert that to usd when needed...

While this would be great, we shouldn't forget that we are still using test wallets, not a final product.
I think this would create a great barrier for new investors.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: luckybit on September 29, 2014, 10:10:52 pm
If we go for a pre-sale. It will be a Bitcoin only AGS style one. Only shorter, 30 to 60 days yes.
I think only 10% should go to pre-sale. 20% to pre-sale is too high.

Also at what price should the presale be? It has to be higher than what PTS and AGS paid for it otherwise it's at the expense of PTS and AGS. PTS and AGS was like the initial pre-sale. People donated and got shares.

If there is another round then the shares should be more expensive. But I don't see why this is necessary.


Do you have expenses that require both 10% to the foundation and then another 20%? Basically you're saying the foundation should get 30% up front? I'm skeptical of this plan because you haven't established where the money should go, why it is needed, and why you think Bitshares Music could raise enough money in a presale to have it be worth it.

Also the whole presale thing seems like a completely unnecessary ritual. If you just say 30% goes to the foundation then you can just sell that. I think the presale idea is bad.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: mf-tzo on September 29, 2014, 10:16:07 pm
New investors can just buy PTS if they want to get shares prior to launching.

AGS investors invested in all DACS and gave away their liquidity long time ago. That's why I always think that these are the strongest hands.

IPO with bitusd will attract people that really want to help the DAC to succeed by supporting it even more and will not dump their shares either.

I don't understand why you think that an IPO raising bicoins will attract new people. New people will get attracted by buying PTS in advance as long as this is well communicated to them. i.e. How many will be the total shares, calculate exactly how many shares they will get with each PTS, help people estimate clearly in advance their profits based on expected market cap upon launching in order to understand the benefits if owning PTS and they make proper investment decisions...

Anyway, I am sure that you guys will come up with a good plan as always..

I would go for 45/45/5/5==> AGS/PTS/Foundation/Bitusd IPO



Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: luckybit on September 29, 2014, 10:16:47 pm
well i am against the IPO. But I understand the need to raise capital for development. So if you do make an IPO I would like this to be in bitusd. This would be a very good chance to show to everyone how each DAC support the other.

Why raise any bitcoins or PTS? You want capital? Get it via Bitusd and convert that to usd when needed...

The IPO is pointless. If they just pre-allocate 30% to themselves it's the exact same effect. Once the shares hit the exchange they can sell off some of it.

So the question is why did they originally offer 45/45/10 and now they want to do 35/35/30?

They are asking for more money without justifying why it's necessary other than because they can.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: luckybit on September 29, 2014, 10:20:57 pm
Sounds great. I agree that a pre-sale would generate some buzz and give people another chance to get in. This seems like a fair revised allocation.

My only added suggestion is to not have the pre-sale drag on and on. AGS lasted for too long. I'd go with 30-60 days maximum unless you need more time to develop the product.

If people wanted to get in then what was AGS/PTS for? What about those people?

So now AGS/PTS has to compete with some presale operation? I can see the point that presales can generate hype but AGS/PTS already generated hype. Tell them to buy AGS/PTS.

Dilution is barely acceptable but I don't see any benefit to this idea. What exactly does it gain?
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: graffenwalder on September 29, 2014, 10:28:18 pm
well i am against the IPO. But I understand the need to raise capital for development. So if you do make an IPO I would like this to be in bitusd. This would be a very good chance to show to everyone how each DAC support the other.

Why raise any bitcoins or PTS? You want capital? Get it via Bitusd and convert that to usd when needed...

The IPO is pointless. If they just pre-allocate 30% to themselves it's the exact same effect. Once the shares hit the exchange they can sell off some of it.

So the question is why did they originally offer 45/45/10 and now they want to do 35/35/30?

They are asking for more money without justifying why it's necessary other than because they can.

No it's not pointless. The IPO sets an initial market cap. In the 20% case a 1:5 ratio of course.
Also after the IPO an sell off wouldn't be needed.
The devs wouldn't have to wait for buy support to be build, only to wreck it by dumping for development costs.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: santaclause102 on September 29, 2014, 10:30:16 pm
Quote
I wouldn't allocate 30% to presale. It's too much imo. Investors who participate in presale basically seek to short-term profit; they are dumpers. In addition, if we allocate too many Notes to presale, the average price will be lowered, especially given the situation that crypto-market is experiencing recession, and then this will generate negative effects on AGS/PTS holders.

And it is not 'only 5%' because initial suggestion was 45%. 15 out of 45 is a quite big difference.

I fully agree with that quote
I'd disagree because sufficient starting capital and new supporters (also for the whole bitshares ecosystem!) are so crucial. Thinking in terms of exponential growth and giving away first helps a lot in my experience! A balance has to be found...
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: mf-tzo on September 29, 2014, 10:42:34 pm
well I am still not convinced that you will attract more new supporters from an IPO. I believe that the same people buying into PTS will buy in the IPO. It will end up to be a game theory as to how many will buy through the IPO vs. through PTS.

That is why I would think that an IPO (small percentage) would make sense only if it was to be made in bitusd so it supports development if needed, but also BTSX ecosystem by showing more confidence in that system.

If I feel that I have a large % like the 45% announcement, I will not dump it because I would feel important in that DAC. I will not dump a single % at launch.. If I have a small % I would think, ooo fuck it why bother, let's sell it and buy some BTSX or whatever... I think psychology plays a very important role but maybe it is just me..



 
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: tonyk on September 29, 2014, 10:45:20 pm
Sounds great. I agree that a pre-sale would generate some buzz and give people another chance to get in. This seems like a fair revised allocation.

My only added suggestion is to not have the pre-sale drag on and on. AGS lasted for too long. I'd go with 30-60 days maximum unless you need more time to develop the product.

If people wanted to get in then what was AGS/PTS for? What about those people?

So now AGS/PTS has to compete with some presale operation? I can see the point that presales can generate hype but AGS/PTS already generated hype. Tell them to buy AGS/PTS.

Dilution is barely acceptable but I don't see any benefit to this idea. What exactly does it gain?
$$$$
You know, the oil that makes the world go round? The stuff that buys you bulldozers in order to make big holes instead of diggin' by hand... (in as per of one of BM's post's today)
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: amencon on September 29, 2014, 11:03:53 pm
If we go for a pre-sale. It will be a Bitcoin only AGS style one. Only shorter, 30 to 60 days yes.
Personally I agree, this would be my preferred way to handle a pre-sale.  No fixed price, long enough to generate sales and buzz but not too long where it drags on forever.

My initial reaction to any sort of dilution scheme is negative, but that's not necessarily fair.  I certainly agree that if there will be dilution it should happen later and only if needed.

I think the question will be if outside pre-sale participants are put off by how large a stake is being awarded to PTS/AGS holders.  Same for how they will feel for paying for shares that are planned to be diluted in the future.

Honestly though no matter what scheme you guys come up with, there will be some that like and some that won't.  All things considered I think the current strategy you've come up with is a pretty good one.  Thanks for taking community suggestions into account before making a final decision on this.

Good luck, hope the pre-sale, DAC and peertracks in general are successes.  I've already shared this idea with some of my friends and will share it to a larger audience when there is something concrete to point them at.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: Shentist on September 29, 2014, 11:04:27 pm
if you want buzz and more people in the boad, maybe accept some coins with good trading volume

1. BTC
2. LTC
3. DOGE

so far everyone else ignors the alt communities, maybe this would be the right move. If you get the doge community you will get a lot of good marketers on our side.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: amencon on September 29, 2014, 11:20:45 pm
If we go for a pre-sale. It will be a Bitcoin only AGS style one. Only shorter, 30 to 60 days yes.
I think only 10% should go to pre-sale. 20% to pre-sale is too high.

Also at what price should the presale be? It has to be higher than what PTS and AGS paid for it otherwise it's at the expense of PTS and AGS. PTS and AGS was like the initial pre-sale. People donated and got shares.
Why should the cost of Notes obtained by PTS cost less than those bought directly through a pre-sale? 

In fact I think it makes sense to have some Notes for sale cheaper at the pre-sale, that way investors have a choice.  If they believe in I3 and the DAC toolkit being developed they can pay a bit more and get shares in all future DACs following the social consensus or if they are really only interested in the Music DAC specifically they can get shares for just that at a small discount rate.

I do agree that it will be a bit disappointing if direct sale Notes end up being orders of magnitude cheaper than what I paid for the PTS/AGS that grant me Notes, but considering that 70% are going to PTS/AGS investors I doubt that will be the case.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: clayop on September 29, 2014, 11:38:45 pm
I would suggest 40/40/20 allocation. PTS/AGS have 40% of the Notes each, and 20% will be sold in presale and consequently will go into dev fund.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: cob on September 29, 2014, 11:44:07 pm
So I guess the PTS/AGS snapshot will be INDEPENDENT of the presale? you launch the presale AFTER the snapshot?

Snapshot is Oct 10th. Pre-sale will be later than that. Need time to market it and hype it up OUTSIDE of the BitShares world. Let's get some outside capital in here.

My initial thoughts are:

1. I don't feel that we are so much in a crypto booming. Especially with bitcoin price dropping from the beginning of the year
Price is irrelevant. VCs and angel investors are looking for start ups with potential to put in their capital.

Quote
2. What happens if BTC drops in price much faster than notes? You will spend very fast all the bitcoins for future development and not raise so much money. Consider also the possibility that not many people learn or invest on the IPO so with few bitcoins, few people earn more shares and dilute PTS-AGS shareholders. This will create a bad image for the PTS and raise questions for their purpose in acquiring in advance shares for future DACs. I have already seen a lot of new members asking why to invest in PTS now and not wait when the DAC is launched.
Nothing is stopping the Foundation for hedging it's funds. If it want's to sell off EVERYTHING it has for fiat, it can. The pre-sale will be done in Bitcoin, but nothing is stopping it from selling some off for Euros, canadian dollars, DOGE lol

Quote
3. You do give the opportunity to new people to participate through PTS. I don't understand why you think that an IPO will be different and will bring more members in our community. The same persons that are likely to invest through IPO might as well invest by buying PTS and keep them for the next DACs.
People spending their money on PTS raises exactly ZERO dollars for the Music project. So why bring it up? Your goal is to own a DAC that has wealth behind it no?

Quote
4. Definitely agree imposing a cap to the dilution from the delegates in order to avoid selling pressure.
Yes and let's see what Bytemaster comes up with in his other thread.

Quote
5. Isn't the 10% of the Foundation sufficient for the development of the DAC especially if it is to be worth billions?
Please re-read the original post.
Summary:
-The foundation has zero dollars.
-at launch, it will have notes
-it will need to DUMP THEM ALL to fund development, marketing, partnerships, etc.
-Price crashes
-people sell off
-New people not interested
-people will park their wealth elsewhere
-everyone gets aids (seriously re-read the first post)


Now the next step is to mentally accept the 'Music Foundation' is not getting any free share allocations. (i.e. no 10% reserved share). Getting the hard cash should be good enough. ( if you want some Notes, feel free to buy some in the IPO)
You are saying that when a company goes public it should not be allowed to retain any stock?
The funds people sent them to develop the product should be used to buy up stock in order to have a say/votes in the project?

Quote
The 3rd step is to accept bitUSD (in addition to BTC) - the positives are numerous let's name a few:
- Hedge against possible (likely in my mind) BTC price movement;
- Support for the whole Bitshares eco-system (which your Music DAC is a part of now, and we all hope grown part of it);
If it can be implemented simply. But I remember Toast telling me we would not be ready for this yet. Will have to bring it up again.
While this would be great, we shouldn't forget that we are still using test wallets, not a final product.
I think this would create a great barrier for new investors.
Ah yes! That was the main reason why (:


Do you have expenses that require both 10% to the foundation and then another 20%? Basically you're saying the foundation should get 30% up front?
Do we have expenses!? haha hmm yes.
And I don't understand where you are getting that 30% from. The foundation gets 10%. The 20% is going to whoever buys the publicly available Notes in the pre-sale. They are never in control of the foundation. Genesis block means 35% to PTS, 35% to AGS and 20% to Pre-sale. Foundation gets 10%.

Quote
Also the whole presale thing seems like a completely unnecessary ritual. If you just say 30% goes to the foundation then you can just sell that. I think the presale idea is bad.
I think you also missed something in the original post. Of course we can dump Notes at launch. The point of this thread is that it's not a good idea to crash the price of a baby blockchain when instead you can just spend bitcoin to fund devs and marketing and lawyers.


New investors can just buy PTS if they want to get shares prior to launching.
Once again, how does buying PTS off of an exchange pay for a DAC exactly?

Quote
I don't understand why you think that an IPO raising bicoins will attract new people.
I speak from personal experience. I know many people that bought into Ethereum and maidsafe that where previously NOT fans. The IPO got them interested "hmmm am I missing out if I don't read up on this project?"

Quote
New people will get attracted by buying PTS in advance as long as this is well communicated to them.
Which helps no one except the PTS seller, whoever that may be.


The IPO is pointless. If they just pre-allocate 30% to themselves it's the exact same effect. Once the shares hit the exchange they can sell off some of it.

So the question is why did they originally offer 45/45/10 and now they want to do 35/35/30?

There is no way that is seriously still "the question" not if you've read the first post of this thread.


If people wanted to get in then what was AGS/PTS for? What about those people?

So now AGS/PTS has to compete with some presale operation? I can see the point that presales can generate hype but AGS/PTS already generated hype. Tell them to buy AGS/PTS.

Dilution is barely acceptable but I don't see any benefit to this idea. What exactly does it gain?

Ah! I see where the confusion may lie.
You seem to think there is a link between third party developers and PTS/AGS.
PTS and AGS were a way to donate to invictus innovations, now called BitShares. Whatever money was sent to them was to make a bitshares toolkit.
BitShares is not launching ANY products. They are merely developers writing software for corporations to launch.
Corporations can use their software under 1 condition and 1 condition only. You allocate 10% of whatever you launch to PTS holders and 10% to AGS. No other strings attached.
Somehow you seem to think Cédric Cobban and Eddie Corral received funds from AGS or PTS.

Let's do an exercise in empathy everyone. Say tomorrow you decide to launch a DAC. *close your eyes and imagine friends!*
You have a cool idea and decide to go forward with it. Good for you! What's your first step? Are you a lawyer? Can you code everything yourself? CAn you market it yourself? hmmm I know. I pay people with mad skills to do what I can't!
First stop, the bank. How much do I have in the bank?

*ok open your eyes now*

How many of you had over 200 000 USD in their bank accounts?

OK. start problem solving (:

I think more then a few of you will think up "Oh! what if I have a pre-sale!"
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: bitmeat on September 29, 2014, 11:51:14 pm
I can't possibly imagine that any further Bitshares DACs would not be using BTSX as a funding solution. Create an asset and fund it with BitUSD, jeesh, this should be part of the social contract going forward.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: tonyk on September 29, 2014, 11:52:16 pm

Quote
from: dat peg doe on Today at 09:39:57 PM

Now the next step is to mentally accept the 'Music Foundation' is not getting any free share allocations. (i.e. no 10% reserved share). Getting the hard cash should be good enough. ( if you want some Notes, feel free to buy some in the IPO)
You are saying that when a company goes public it should not be allowed to retain any stock?
The funds people sent them to develop the product should be used to buy up stock in order to have a say/votes in the project?


I do not say you "should not", I am just saying it is double dipping in my book. It is more clearer (i.e. perceived as more fair, the other way).
...At the end of the day, any one of those can result in the same final share allocation...

Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: Stan on September 30, 2014, 12:05:43 am
...

No it's not pointless. The IPO sets an initial market cap. In the 20% case a 1:5 ratio of course.
Also after the IPO an sell off wouldn't be needed.
The devs wouldn't have to wait for buy support to be build, only to wreck it by dumping for development costs.

This is about as succinctly as I've ever seen it said.  :)
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: arhag on September 30, 2014, 01:27:00 am
Ah! I see where the confusion may lie.
You seem to think there is a link between third party developers and PTS/AGS.
PTS and AGS were a way to donate to invictus innovations, now called BitShares. Whatever money was sent to them was to make a bitshares toolkit.
BitShares is not launching ANY products. They are merely developers writing software for corporations to launch.
Corporations can use their software under 1 condition and 1 condition only. You allocate 10% of whatever you launch to PTS holders and 10% to AGS. No other strings attached.
Somehow you seem to think Cédric Cobban and Eddie Corral received funds from AGS or PTS.

Well said. Personally, I was even fine with the 10% to AGS, 10% to PTS model. What I wasn't fine with was a small group of founders owning such a large share of the equity in the beginning of the DAC. I think 10% to the BitShares Music Foundation, x% to AGS, x% to PTS, and the rest (90 - 2*x)% for a pre-sale/IPO is great. Obviously, x >= 10, but I am not sure what the best number should be. It depends on what are people's initial valuation of the DAC, and what the expected expenses will be for development/marketing/legal for the DAC and supporting infrastructure (PeerTracks) during the early initial growth phase. For later phases, and for unexpected expenses that can turbocharge growth, a dilution mechanism, if necessary, will work well.

Whatever specific allocation you guys decide on, you need to provide justification for it. And kicking the can down the road by saying inflation will solve all of the funding needs doesn't help. People need to have some estimation of the inflation they can expect when deciding how to initially values NOTES at launch. We need to see a more detailed business plan (the posted whitepaper is not enough) explaining what exactly provides value to NOTES and how you intend to do it. We need some estimation of the expected costs (development, business relations, marketing, legal, etc.) needed to create an ecosystem that is large enough that it can sustain itself off profit or even some light dilution if necessary for strategic expenses. I think if people had a much better idea of what the grand vision is, the economics of the system that make the DAC profitable, the unique risks involved, and how expensive it really is to achieve all of this, they would be less likely to complain about not getting their 45%. Uncertainty is only going to hurt the public image of this project and also likely result in a lower initial market cap / IPO funding.




Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: oco101 on September 30, 2014, 01:28:13 am
if you want buzz and more people in the boad, maybe accept some coins with good trading volume

1. BTC
2. LTC
3. DOGE

so far everyone else ignors the alt communities, maybe this would be the right move. If you get the doge community you will get a lot of good marketers on our side.

Hmm I think this is could be a  good idea. It is true is easier to just accept bitcoin, but in the same time I think you'll bring a lot of new blood if you'll accept LTC  and dodge this will be a first. Almost every ICO has only used bitcoin so why not give it a try ? Also bitUSD I'm pretty sure will be ready by the time you start the pre sale.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: Stan on September 30, 2014, 01:45:18 am
less likely to complain about not getting their 45%.

It amazes me how quickly an entitlement mentality sets in.
The social consensus is for 10%.

Developers can allocate the remaining 80% however they think will allow them to outmaneuver their competition.

http://bitshares.org/10-natural-laws-of-the-crypto-asset-universe/ (http://bitshares.org/10-natural-laws-of-the-crypto-asset-universe/)

The music industry has Big Elephants stomping around.
BitShares music must be prepared to take them on head to head.
This will take a Big War Chest.
Let's not make the assumption that accumulating any amount of resources is too much.

In this doge-eat-doge world, the name of the game is to
leave no room for someone to clone your software and field a more competitive DAC.

Cob's job is to generate a massive fast-rolling stone that gathers all the moss in its path.

Period.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: amencon on September 30, 2014, 02:28:43 am
Ah! I see where the confusion may lie.
You seem to think there is a link between third party developers and PTS/AGS.
PTS and AGS were a way to donate to invictus innovations, now called BitShares. Whatever money was sent to them was to make a bitshares toolkit.
BitShares is not launching ANY products. They are merely developers writing software for corporations to launch.
Corporations can use their software under 1 condition and 1 condition only. You allocate 10% of whatever you launch to PTS holders and 10% to AGS. No other strings attached.
Somehow you seem to think Cédric Cobban and Eddie Corral received funds from AGS or PTS.

Well said. Personally, I was even fine with the 10% to AGS, 10% to PTS model. What I wasn't fine with was a small group of founders owning such a large share of the equity in the beginning of the DAC. I think 10% to the BitShares Music Foundation, x% to AGS, x% to PTS, and the rest (90 - 2*x)% for a pre-sale/IPO is great. Obviously, x >= 10, but I am not sure what the best number should be. It depends on what are people's initial valuation of the DAC, and what the expected expenses will be for development/marketing/legal for the DAC and supporting infrastructure (PeerTracks) during the early initial growth phase. For later phases, and for unexpected expenses that can turbocharge growth, a dilution mechanism, if necessary, will work well.

Whatever specific allocation you guys decide on, you need to provide justification for it. And kicking the can down the road by saying inflation will solve all of the funding needs doesn't help. People need to have some estimation of the inflation they can expect when deciding how to initially values NOTES at launch. We need to see a more detailed business plan (the posted whitepaper is not enough) explaining what exactly provides value to NOTES and how you intend to do it. We need some estimation of the expected costs (development, business relations, marketing, legal, etc.) needed to create an ecosystem that is large enough that it can sustain itself off profit or even some light dilution if necessary for strategic expenses. I think if people had a much better idea of what the grand vision is, the economics of the system that make the DAC profitable, the unique risks involved, and how expensive it really is to achieve all of this, they would be less likely to complain about not getting their 45%. Uncertainty is only going to hurt the public image of this project and also likely result in a lower initial market cap / IPO funding.
Agreed as well.  As a PTS and AGS holder I'm prefectly happy with 35%/35% but would even accept appreciably less if there was good justification to go along with it.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: arhag on September 30, 2014, 03:04:41 am
Developers can allocate the remaining 80% however they think will allow them to outmaneuver their competition.
...
This will take a Big War Chest.
Let's not make the assumption that accumulating any amount of resources is too much.

Hmm, so this is an interesting question for you. What do you think the balance is between pleasing AGS/PTS holders and raising funds by IPO (basically what is the ideal value of x in my previous post)? On one hand, pleasing AGS/PTS holders gives the DAC a strong initial community support which can pay off in terms of marketing. On the other hand, more capital can be used to fund development, legal costs, and also marketing. Furthermore, an IPO buys you a great community of initial supporters as well, and in fact, I would argue it is better support (stronger hands) than AGS/PTS holders because they are self-selected during the IPO. Should x = 0? I'm not being facetious, I'm genuinely wondering what the ideal distribution is for an economically rational (not altruistic) DAC creator.

That brings up another point: getting the blessing and support of I3 is a huge deal (especially in these early stages) and allocating the minimum 10% to AGS/PTS is a way of getting that, but what exactly is I3's gain in providing support to third-parties who do this, considering the fact that I3 is not holding a huge stake of AGS and PTS? Actually is that even correct? I know you guys converted BTC to BTSX, but are you still holding huge amounts of PTS, and if so, what is the advantage of doing that rather than dumping it for more BTSX and then optionally buying stake in only the interesting DACs through the IPO just like everyone else.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: onceuponatime on September 30, 2014, 03:07:00 am
I was a very early investor in everything bitshares (Keyhotee, PTS AGS, tips for articles, etc.).

Since I will be getting a stake in the Music DAC because of AGS holdings, I will be invested in this project.

For me to be a significant further investor, I suggest you do everything possible to include bitUSD as a funding method. I don't hold Bitcoin beyond what I need for spending (I can't spend btsx or bitUSD as of yet). I don't intend to adversely efffect my existing position by selling btsx or bitusd to buy bitcoin (thus creating downward pressure on my investments) in order to invest in Music DAC.


BitUSD also has volatility lessening advantages over BTC for Music DAC developers without the added hassle and expense of hedging, and demonstrates to the crypto world faith in DPOS over POW

As you understand already, I think, this would be win/win/win
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: Overthetop on September 30, 2014, 03:20:46 am

We allocate 35% to PTS, 35% to AGS, 10% to the Foundation and 20% to a pre-sale.

This means we have a pre-sale, our DAC gets tons in funding in BTC, we get publicity and exposure, we get new members to our community, etc.

Delegates could dilute, but there would be a cap and it would be no where near as inflationary and potentially problem causing as before. ... Although dilution is an EXCELLENT tool for a second or third round of funding, especially since it can be decentralized and done by the delegates rather than the foundation.


I think the new proposal is a good balance.
 +5%
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: muse-umum on September 30, 2014, 03:23:22 am
cob,

Thank you for your efforts. You know our concerns.

Here are my suggestions:

1. To have two kinds of delegates.  The normal delegates like the ones we have in BTSX, and the delegates who are going to launch projects (dilute, the so called business delegates).

2. The pay fee per block for the normal ones can’t be more than 2*average.

3. Only after getting at least X% ( X= 50 or 30...) of all the votes should a business delegate be able to produce blocks.  He should burn Y * pay fee per block (Y = 100 or 300…..) to register.

4. The total number of all the active delegates is 101. The number of active business delegates can’t be more than Z (Z= 10 or 5…).

5. Set upper bound for the inflation. Suppose initial supply of Notes is 2 billion, 35% are allocated to PTS holders, 35% are allocated to AGS holders, which means 700 million for each.  Then the upper bound of Notes that all the delegates can get paid together is 5 billion, which means P/A holders eventually are allocated by at least 10% of all the supply (2 + 5 = 7 billion). Each year at most A% (A = 5, or 10) of 5 billion Notes can be produced by delegates.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: amencon on September 30, 2014, 03:25:52 am
For me to be a significant further investor, I suggest you do everything possible to include bitUSD as a funding method. I don't hold Bitcoin beyond what I need for spending (I can't spend btsx or bitUSD as of yet). I don't intend to adversely efffect my existing position by selling btsx or bitusd to buy bitcoin (thus creating downward pressure on my investments) in order to invest in Music DAC.
Isn't it safe to assume that at least a large portion of whatever is used to purchase pre-sale shares will be liquidated into a form that is spendable (at this point USD or maybe BTC to some degree)?  Based on this assumption what is the difference between selling your BTSX or bitUSD for BTC and directly purchasing shares with BTSX or bitUSD and having peertracks sell it for marketing and development use?
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: onceuponatime on September 30, 2014, 03:33:04 am
For me to be a significant further investor, I suggest you do everything possible to include bitUSD as a funding method. I don't hold Bitcoin beyond what I need for spending (I can't spend btsx or bitUSD as of yet). I don't intend to adversely efffect my existing position by selling btsx or bitusd to buy bitcoin (thus creating downward pressure on my investments) in order to invest in Music DAC.


Isn't it safe to assume that at least a large portion of whatever is used to purchase pre-sale shares will be liquidated into a form that is spendable (at this point USD or maybe BTC to some degree)?  Based on this assumption what is the difference between selling your BTSX or bitUSD for BTC and directly purchasing shares with BTSX or bitUSD and having peertracks sell it for marketing and development use?

Hopefully the developers would endeavor to pay as many expenses  as possible using BitUSD instead of converting to BTC or fiat, and this should become increasingly easy, quite possibly before a significant amount of the development funds have been used.

One hand washes the other.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: amencon on September 30, 2014, 03:43:20 am
For me to be a significant further investor, I suggest you do everything possible to include bitUSD as a funding method. I don't hold Bitcoin beyond what I need for spending (I can't spend btsx or bitUSD as of yet). I don't intend to adversely efffect my existing position by selling btsx or bitusd to buy bitcoin (thus creating downward pressure on my investments) in order to invest in Music DAC.


Isn't it safe to assume that at least a large portion of whatever is used to purchase pre-sale shares will be liquidated into a form that is spendable (at this point USD or maybe BTC to some degree)?  Based on this assumption what is the difference between selling your BTSX or bitUSD for BTC and directly purchasing shares with BTSX or bitUSD and having peertracks sell it for marketing and development use?

Hopefully the developers would endeavor to pay as many expenses  as possible using BitUSD instead of converting to BTC or fiat, and this should become increasingly easy, quite possibly before a significant amount of the development funds have been used.

One hand washes the other.
Hmm I agree that would be ideal, however realistically how many resources that peertracks will need to purchase are available in bitUSD?  It feels to me like we are months or years away from gaining appreciable bitUSD adoption and I think a majority of the costs borne by peertracks will come shortly after IPO.

Maybe I'm just being pessimistic or I'm not aware of current vendor, suppliers or services already accepting bitUSD.  I support them accepting bitUSD regardless, however I just don't think it'll matter much in the long run considering the IPO will be short and coming soon.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: Stan on September 30, 2014, 03:57:31 am
Developers can allocate the remaining 80% however they think will allow them to outmaneuver their competition.
...
This will take a Big War Chest.
Let's not make the assumption that accumulating any amount of resources is too much.

Hmm, so this is an interesting question for you. What do you think the balance is between pleasing AGS/PTS holders and raising funds by IPO (basically what is the ideal value of x in my previous post)? On one hand, pleasing AGS/PTS holders gives the DAC a strong initial community support which can pay off in terms of marketing. On the other hand, more capital can be used to fund development, legal costs, and also marketing. Furthermore, an IPO buys you a great community of initial supporters as well, and in fact, I would argue it is better support (stronger hands) than AGS/PTS holders because they are self-selected during the IPO. Should x = 0? I'm not being facetious, I'm genuinely wondering what the ideal distribution is for an economically rational (not altruistic) DAC creator.

That brings up another point: getting the blessing and support of I3 is a huge deal (especially in these early stages) and allocating the minimum 10% to AGS/PTS is a way of getting that, but what exactly is I3's gain in providing support to third-parties who do this, considering the fact that I3 is not holding a huge stake of AGS and PTS? Actually is that even correct? I know you guys converted BTC to BTSX, but are you still holding huge amounts of PTS, and if so, what is the advantage of doing that rather than dumping it for more BTSX and then optionally buying stake in only the interesting DACs through the IPO just like everyone else.

Now these are the kinds of questions I like to see people asking!

Each developer has to ask herself, "when I make this move, what move does that leave my competitor."

In the absence of any other factors, if I do 40/40/20 will my competitor do 48/48/4? 

So let's look at COB's latest breakdown:  35/35/20/10

What will a competitor do to make a clone competitive?   Will doing 45/45/0/10 win over all the support from this community?  Will promising not to do further rounds of dilution help?

Let's suppose a competitor tries that.  Now there are BitShares Music and ACME Music competing.  Everybody here has shares in both.  Some will sell their ACME to buy more BitShares and some will do the opposite.  Depends on who they think has the stronger hand (or, sadly, depends on some non-economic philosophical bias.)

Let the games begin.

Now Cob deploys his weapons:

He has the BitShares brand (shows you who's business model we believe in)  :o)
He has the funds he was able to raise via pre-sale which keeps him ahead on innovation and marketing.
He has the ability to make teaming deals with potential partners and artists using some of those funds.
He has the ability to attract Big Elephants via dilution-based mergers.
And he has Eddie and his experience, contacts, and vision.

Now, the question for Cob is, is it worth giving one or two of those advantages over to his competitors by not including them himself?

Remember, whatever he doesn't do is left for his competitor to beat him with.  He gets to pick first.

All in all, I think Cob has dealt himself a winning hand.  Should he give up pre-sale bitcoins to increase the loyalty of our members from 35 to 45?  Will his competitor team with Apple while he keeps an unwise promise not to dilute?

Leave that hand for his struggling competitors to play.

 :)


Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: donkeypong on September 30, 2014, 04:04:09 am
less likely to complain about not getting their 45%.

It amazes me how quickly an entitlement mentality sets in.
The social consensus is for 10%.

Developers can allocate the remaining 80% however they think will allow them to outmaneuver their competition.

http://bitshares.org/10-natural-laws-of-the-crypto-asset-universe/ (http://bitshares.org/10-natural-laws-of-the-crypto-asset-universe/)

The music industry has Big Elephants stomping around.
BitShares music must be prepared to take them on head to head.
This will take a Big War Chest.
Let's not make the assumption that accumulating any amount of resources is too much.

In this doge-eat-doge world, the name of the game is to
leave no room for someone to clone your software and field a more competitive DAC.

Cob's job is to generate a massive fast-rolling stone that gathers all the moss in its path.

Period.

I fully agree with you, Stan. However, you did mention that the BitShares Music developer was giving PTS/AGS 50%, so that was the promise that all of us have been hanging onto these last few months as we continued to donate to AGS and acquire more PTS. Then we heard it would be the minimal 20%, so you can see where that angst came from. Now 90% or 80% or 70% are very generous numbers; I am thrilled with any of these suggested allocations and I strongly agree with Cob that an initial fundraiser would generate some buzz + bring in some new money + make it harder for a forker to catch up. That is well worth the cost of a slightly smaller share.

Keep this in perspective, folks. A few days ago, we were looking at a minimal share allocation of 20% to PTS/AGS. Now we are looking at significantly more than the 50% we were once promised. Stop splitting hairs and thank these generous developers for increasing the allocation for the BitShares community...and for all their great work on this DAC.

I, for one, am more than satisfied with Cob's latest proposal.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: clayop on September 30, 2014, 04:13:11 am
I agree with Stan. If cob will attract musicians and labels with presale funds, he now has a powerful weapon against competitors. This will be win-win game both for community, devs, and presale participators.
I'm satisfied with 35/35/20/10 allocation and looking forward to cob and Eddie's further steps.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: Stan on September 30, 2014, 04:15:30 am
less likely to complain about not getting their 45%.

It amazes me how quickly an entitlement mentality sets in.
The social consensus is for 10%.

Developers can allocate the remaining 80% however they think will allow them to outmaneuver their competition.

http://bitshares.org/10-natural-laws-of-the-crypto-asset-universe/ (http://bitshares.org/10-natural-laws-of-the-crypto-asset-universe/)

The music industry has Big Elephants stomping around.
BitShares music must be prepared to take them on head to head.
This will take a Big War Chest.
Let's not make the assumption that accumulating any amount of resources is too much.

In this doge-eat-doge world, the name of the game is to
leave no room for someone to clone your software and field a more competitive DAC.

Cob's job is to generate a massive fast-rolling stone that gathers all the moss in its path.

Period.

I fully agree with you, Stan. However, you did mention that the BitShares Music developer was giving PTS/AGS 50%, so that was the promise that all of us have been hanging onto these last few months as we continued to donate to AGS and acquire more PTS. Then we heard it would be the minimal 20%, so you can see where that angst came from. Now 90% or 80% or 70% are very generous numbers; I am thrilled with any of these suggested allocations and I strongly agree with Cob that an initial fundraiser would generate some buzz + bring in some new money + make it harder for a forker to catch up. That is well worth the cost of a slightly smaller share.

Keep this in perspective, folks. A few days ago, we were looking at a minimal share allocation of 20% to PTS/AGS. Now we are looking at significantly more than the 50% we were once promised. Stop splitting hairs and thank these generous developers for increasing the allocation for the BitShares community...and for all their great work on this DAC.

I, for one, am more than satisfied with Cob's latest proposal.

Well said.

For the record:

1.  The original concept was 50% to be split 25/25 while Eddie's company got the other half.
2.  That was an awesomely fair deal given that it is Eddie's expertise and contacts that make the company.
3.  Developers need to be free to explore different business models and should not be held to their first draft strawman.  Everything should be on the table until the genesis block is poured.
4.  By giving Eddie and Cob the freedom to explore all business models we are now at 35/35 up from 25/25 and way up from the 10/10 minimums.


Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: arhag on September 30, 2014, 04:48:23 am
4.  By giving Eddie and Cob the freedom to explore all business models we are now at 35/35 up from 25/25 and way up from the 10/10 minimums.

Yeah, that seems nice but they still need to justify the 20% IPO in the 35/35 model. What are the challenges and expenses going to be in the growth phase? Is 20% large enough for the IPO to raise enough funds or will it be too small that BitShares Music will be dead on arrival? Or does it end up requiring doubling the share supply through inflation to raise the remaining necessary funds just to survive the initial phase (meaning we would have been better off even doing a 20/20 model to begin with)? Investors need to have some sense of this stuff before putting money into an IPO. Obviously no one can predict the future, but I don't think it is too much to ask the team for a better explanation of the economics behind this DAC and the challenges it faces (the current information publicly available is too vague and limited). These allocation details are meaningless to me when I haven't seen a clear explanation of how the mechanics of the DAC provide value to NOTES, or what kind of additional costs this particular DAC faces due to unique challenges such as copyright, dealing with the incumbent music industry, DRM, etc.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: muse-umum on September 30, 2014, 04:49:49 am
4.  By giving Eddie and Cob the freedom to explore all business models we are now at 35/35 up from 25/25 and way up from the 10/10 minimums.

And we should also make it clear that how many more Notes at most will be brought to this DAC by delegates. Otherwise investors may have doubts “is it possible for me to buy 5% of the shares which may become just 0.005% in two years due to the inflation?"

Bitcoin POW is bad but at least the investors clearly know that a certain amount of coins are mined each ten minutes. You make your choise.

We should tell the investors “no, we have restrictions, your 5% would at least worth 1%, no less."
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: donkeypong on September 30, 2014, 05:04:36 am
4.  By giving Eddie and Cob the freedom to explore all business models we are now at 35/35 up from 25/25 and way up from the 10/10 minimums.

And we should also make it clear that how many more Notes at most will be brought to this DAC by delegates. Otherwise investors may have doubts “is it possible for me to buy 5% of the shares which may become just 0.005% in two years due to the inflation?"

Bitcoin POW is bad but at least the investors clearly know that a certain amount of coins are mined each ten minutes. You make your choise.

We should tell the investors “no, we have restrictions, your 5% would at least worth 1%, no less."

I think that's a fair request to make of them. And of the BitShares X folks as well.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: Shentist on September 30, 2014, 05:33:52 am
1. presale is fine - but communicate clear what will the max. shares available via dellution.  Initial 1 Billion max 2 Billion or so. Maybe in the future you can increase the 2 Billion via voting with support of 51% of avitve shares.

2. consider to accept BTC, LTC and Doge - with with 3 coins you will get buzz in 3 big communities and the trading volume in 24h is big enough to cash out

3. the direction ist good now, but it would better to state not anything new all the time (45/45/10) and one day later (35/35/20/10)

4. keep in mind Stan and Cob you both spoke of 50% 25/25 and this is the reason i expect this as the allocation for PTS/AGS, so if you want to delution it is fine with me, but you could not fall under this allocation after delution. You will loose support here and you should have many reasons to stick to this community.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: luckybit on September 30, 2014, 11:24:43 am
Quote
I wouldn't allocate 30% to presale. It's too much imo. Investors who participate in presale basically seek to short-term profit; they are dumpers. In addition, if we allocate too many Notes to presale, the average price will be lowered, especially given the situation that crypto-market is experiencing recession, and then this will generate negative effects on AGS/PTS holders.

And it is not 'only 5%' because initial suggestion was 45%. 15 out of 45 is a quite big difference.

I fully agree with that quote
I'd disagree because sufficient starting capital and new supporters (also for the whole bitshares ecosystem!) are so crucial. Thinking in terms of exponential growth and giving away first helps a lot in my experience! A balance has to be found...

Where are your numbers to back this? How do we know they aren't just trying to line their pockets?

Show an adoption graph which proves that adoption is going at a certain rate and then make a roadmap of features that are being paid for.

Asking for money without any math, charts, strategy or business plan is not fair to investors. What are we going to learn in the IPO that we don't already know to make the IPO worth doing?

4.  By giving Eddie and Cob the freedom to explore all business models we are now at 35/35 up from 25/25 and way up from the 10/10 minimums.

And we should also make it clear that how many more Notes at most will be brought to this DAC by delegates. Otherwise investors may have doubts “is it possible for me to buy 5% of the shares which may become just 0.005% in two years due to the inflation?"

Bitcoin POW is bad but at least the investors clearly know that a certain amount of coins are mined each ten minutes. You make your choise.

We should tell the investors “no, we have restrictions, your 5% would at least worth 1%, no less."

I think that's a fair request to make of them. And of the BitShares X folks as well.

They need to think very carefully about their incentives. The DAC needs participants and the wrong incentives will make us move our attention elsewhere. If PTS/AGS owners feel like they'll lose in the long term then they aren't going to have a reason to hold or stay in right now.

Why wouldn't it be rational to immediately sell before the presale buyers who got even cheaper notes can sell theirs and then buy back in a year or two later after other DACs with better incentives and no inflation have made profit?

Inflation is not a very competitive incentive unless you have an audience or group of participants who truly believe in the success of your DAC. Not many people at this time believe in Bitshares Music being a success enough to deal with inflation early on.

Also Bitcoiners aren't going to hold either when the price of Bitcoin is crashing due to inflation. Bitcoiners will pump and dump and since AGS/PTS holders know this is coming why wouldn't the AGS/PTS holders immediately sell too? AGS/PTS holders aren't going to want to be bag holders.

Tell me why the scenario would play out different?
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: luckybit on September 30, 2014, 11:30:38 am
If we go for a pre-sale. It will be a Bitcoin only AGS style one. Only shorter, 30 to 60 days yes.
I think only 10% should go to pre-sale. 20% to pre-sale is too high.

Also at what price should the presale be? It has to be higher than what PTS and AGS paid for it otherwise it's at the expense of PTS and AGS. PTS and AGS was like the initial pre-sale. People donated and got shares.
Because PTS owners will probably dump and go into another DAC. It's a gamble not worth taking but honestly why would you hold shares in a DAC which is going to dilute from the top and bottom?

As much as I like the Music DAC I'm not so confident in it that I would stay in it if they give a better deal to late comers than to the original pre-sale owners (PTS/AGS). If they want PTS/AGS holders to hold then they have to provide an incentive and the best way of preventing a dramatic sell off is to make sure the tokens sold in the pre-sale are more expensive than the deal people got purchasing PTS/AGS.

Otherwise what exactly is the point of continuing with the PTS/AGS ritual for this DAC or future DACs? Why not just scrap PTS/AGS and do presales from this point on?
Why should the cost of Notes obtained by PTS cost less than those bought directly through a pre-sale? 

In fact I think it makes sense to have some Notes for sale cheaper at the pre-sale, that way investors have a choice.  If they believe in I3 and the DAC toolkit being developed they can pay a bit more and get shares in all future DACs following the social consensus or if they are really only interested in the Music DAC specifically they can get shares for just that at a small discount rate.

I do agree that it will be a bit disappointing if direct sale Notes end up being orders of magnitude cheaper than what I paid for the PTS/AGS that grant me Notes, but considering that 70% are going to PTS/AGS investors I doubt that will be the case.

I was a very early investor in everything bitshares (Keyhotee, PTS AGS, tips for articles, etc.).

Since I will be getting a stake in the Music DAC because of AGS holdings, I will be invested in this project.

For me to be a significant further investor, I suggest you do everything possible to include bitUSD as a funding method. I don't hold Bitcoin beyond what I need for spending (I can't spend btsx or bitUSD as of yet). I don't intend to adversely efffect my existing position by selling btsx or bitusd to buy bitcoin (thus creating downward pressure on my investments) in order to invest in Music DAC.


BitUSD also has volatility lessening advantages over BTC for Music DAC developers without the added hassle and expense of hedging, and demonstrates to the crypto world faith in DPOS over POW

As you understand already, I think, this would be win/win/win

 +5% +5%

I agree with what you say. The IPO/Presale if there is one should be in BitUSD.

Why not make it in BitUSD exclusively? I don't see why it has to be in Bitcoin when the price of Bitcoin is falling anyway.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: Stan on September 30, 2014, 12:54:20 pm
Quote
I wouldn't allocate 30% to presale. It's too much imo. Investors who participate in presale basically seek to short-term profit; they are dumpers. In addition, if we allocate too many Notes to presale, the average price will be lowered, especially given the situation that crypto-market is experiencing recession, and then this will generate negative effects on AGS/PTS holders.

And it is not 'only 5%' because initial suggestion was 45%. 15 out of 45 is a quite big difference.

I fully agree with that quote
I'd disagree because sufficient starting capital and new supporters (also for the whole bitshares ecosystem!) are so crucial. Thinking in terms of exponential growth and giving away first helps a lot in my experience! A balance has to be found...

Where are your numbers to back this? How do we know they aren't just trying to line their pockets?

Show an adoption graph which proves that adoption is going at a certain rate and then make a roadmap of features that are being paid for.

Asking for money without any math, charts, strategy or business plan is not fair to investors. What are we going to learn in the IPO that we don't already know to make the IPO worth doing?

4.  By giving Eddie and Cob the freedom to explore all business models we are now at 35/35 up from 25/25 and way up from the 10/10 minimums.

And we should also make it clear that how many more Notes at most will be brought to this DAC by delegates. Otherwise investors may have doubts “is it possible for me to buy 5% of the shares which may become just 0.005% in two years due to the inflation?"

Bitcoin POW is bad but at least the investors clearly know that a certain amount of coins are mined each ten minutes. You make your choise.

We should tell the investors “no, we have restrictions, your 5% would at least worth 1%, no less."

I think that's a fair request to make of them. And of the BitShares X folks as well.

They need to think very carefully about their incentives. The DAC needs participants and the wrong incentives will make us move our attention elsewhere. If PTS/AGS owners feel like they'll lose in the long term then they aren't going to have a reason to hold or stay in right now.

Why wouldn't it be rational to immediately sell before the presale buyers who got even cheaper notes can sell theirs and then buy back in a year or two later after other DACs with better incentives and no inflation have made profit?

Inflation is not a very competitive incentive unless you have an audience or group of participants who truly believe in the success of your DAC. Not many people at this time believe in Bitshares Music being a success enough to deal with inflation early on.

Also Bitcoiners aren't going to hold either when the price of Bitcoin is crashing due to inflation. Bitcoiners will pump and dump and since AGS/PTS holders know this is coming why wouldn't the AGS/PTS holders immediately sell too? AGS/PTS holders aren't going to want to be bag holders.

Tell me why the scenario would play out different?

None of this takes place in a vacuum.  The people making the decisions about whether to add value to the DAC in exchange for new notes are the existing noteholders who are not likely to approve anything that is not expected to increase their net worth.

The 10% allocated to the BitShares Music Foundation is also your assurance that the Foundation will be properly motivated to act in a way to protect the net worth of all noteholders.

To summarize:

There is downward pressure on price for issuing new notes.
There is upward pressure on price from the benefit of what those notes are buying.

You don't approve the deal unless the latter pressure is greater than the former.

Net result - all such deals should increase the value of your shares over time.

That's why flesh and blood and brick and mortar companies do this routinely.

It is the time-proven way to grow a company for the benefit of all its stakeholders.    :)
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: amencon on September 30, 2014, 03:56:43 pm
If we go for a pre-sale. It will be a Bitcoin only AGS style one. Only shorter, 30 to 60 days yes.
I think only 10% should go to pre-sale. 20% to pre-sale is too high.

Also at what price should the presale be? It has to be higher than what PTS and AGS paid for it otherwise it's at the expense of PTS and AGS. PTS and AGS was like the initial pre-sale. People donated and got shares.
Why should the cost of Notes obtained by PTS cost less than those bought directly through a pre-sale? 

In fact I think it makes sense to have some Notes for sale cheaper at the pre-sale, that way investors have a choice.  If they believe in I3 and the DAC toolkit being developed they can pay a bit more and get shares in all future DACs following the social consensus or if they are really only interested in the Music DAC specifically they can get shares for just that at a small discount rate.

I do agree that it will be a bit disappointing if direct sale Notes end up being orders of magnitude cheaper than what I paid for the PTS/AGS that grant me Notes, but considering that 70% are going to PTS/AGS investors I doubt that will be the case.
Because PTS owners will probably dump and go into another DAC. It's a gamble not worth taking but honestly why would you hold shares in a DAC which is going to dilute from the top and bottom?

As much as I like the Music DAC I'm not so confident in it that I would stay in it if they give a better deal to late comers than to the original pre-sale owners (PTS/AGS). If they want PTS/AGS holders to hold then they have to provide an incentive and the best way of preventing a dramatic sell off is to make sure the tokens sold in the pre-sale are more expensive than the deal people got purchasing PTS/AGS.

Otherwise what exactly is the point of continuing with the PTS/AGS ritual for this DAC or future DACs? Why not just scrap PTS/AGS and do presales from this point on?


I'm not following.  If I'm a PTS holder and I'm interested in the Music DAC why would I dump the shares I get?  I've already made my cost plus some for PTS and AGS back on the BTSX I was awarded for my stake in PTS/AGS.  From that perspective the Notes I receive from Oct 10th snapshot are essentially free for me.  I think the Music DAC sounds very intriguing and so I will be keeping my "free" Notes and if excellent new information comes out about it I might even purchase a few more in the pre-sale.  I don't see where the incentive is for me to dump my Notes or why other PTS/AGS holders would do the same unless this was a DAC they just didn't see much potential in.

Regardless of a small amount of dilution, if you believe the DAC has potential then you will be selling your Notes for less than you should be able to in the future.  If you don't believe it has potential then you can cash out and use that money elsewhere, maybe even for a future DAC with a pre-sale that you have more confidence in.  Either way you are getting value from your PTS/AGS as was originally intended.

I was a very early investor in everything bitshares (Keyhotee, PTS AGS, tips for articles, etc.).

Since I will be getting a stake in the Music DAC because of AGS holdings, I will be invested in this project.

For me to be a significant further investor, I suggest you do everything possible to include bitUSD as a funding method. I don't hold Bitcoin beyond what I need for spending (I can't spend btsx or bitUSD as of yet). I don't intend to adversely efffect my existing position by selling btsx or bitusd to buy bitcoin (thus creating downward pressure on my investments) in order to invest in Music DAC.


BitUSD also has volatility lessening advantages over BTC for Music DAC developers without the added hassle and expense of hedging, and demonstrates to the crypto world faith in DPOS over POW

As you understand already, I think, this would be win/win/win

 +5% +5%

I agree with what you say. The IPO/Presale if there is one should be in BitUSD.

Why not make it in BitUSD exclusively? I don't see why it has to be in Bitcoin when the price of Bitcoin is falling anyway.

Why make the pre-sale exclusively in a currency peertracks can't use?  There aren't even that many people that hold bitUSD with which to purchase Notes with.  Nobody has it and nobody can use it.  If you did convince them to accept bitUSD only you might get some people to purchase bitUSD to use for the pre-sale, artificially inflating the share supply temporarily, only for it to all be dumped at once when peertracks needed to actually pay for it's initial startup expenses.  I don't see how short term supply pump and dump is all that desirable, especially at the expense of a much less successful pre-sale.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: Empirical1.1 on September 30, 2014, 04:25:04 pm
Quote
I wouldn't allocate 30% to presale. It's too much imo. Investors who participate in presale basically seek to short-term profit; they are dumpers. In addition, if we allocate too many Notes to presale, the average price will be lowered, especially given the situation that crypto-market is experiencing recession, and then this will generate negative effects on AGS/PTS holders.

And it is not 'only 5%' because initial suggestion was 45%. 15 out of 45 is a quite big difference.

I fully agree with that quote
I'd disagree because sufficient starting capital and new supporters (also for the whole bitshares ecosystem!) are so crucial. Thinking in terms of exponential growth and giving away first helps a lot in my experience! A balance has to be found...

Where are your numbers to back this? How do we know they aren't just trying to line their pockets?

Show an adoption graph which proves that adoption is going at a certain rate and then make a roadmap of features that are being paid for.

Asking for money without any math, charts, strategy or business plan is not fair to investors. What are we going to learn in the IPO that we don't already know to make the IPO worth doing?

4.  By giving Eddie and Cob the freedom to explore all business models we are now at 35/35 up from 25/25 and way up from the 10/10 minimums.

And we should also make it clear that how many more Notes at most will be brought to this DAC by delegates. Otherwise investors may have doubts “is it possible for me to buy 5% of the shares which may become just 0.005% in two years due to the inflation?"

Bitcoin POW is bad but at least the investors clearly know that a certain amount of coins are mined each ten minutes. You make your choise.

We should tell the investors “no, we have restrictions, your 5% would at least worth 1%, no less."

I think that's a fair request to make of them. And of the BitShares X folks as well.

They need to think very carefully about their incentives. The DAC needs participants and the wrong incentives will make us move our attention elsewhere. If PTS/AGS owners feel like they'll lose in the long term then they aren't going to have a reason to hold or stay in right now.

Why wouldn't it be rational to immediately sell before the presale buyers who got even cheaper notes can sell theirs and then buy back in a year or two later after other DACs with better incentives and no inflation have made profit?

Inflation is not a very competitive incentive unless you have an audience or group of participants who truly believe in the success of your DAC. Not many people at this time believe in Bitshares Music being a success enough to deal with inflation early on.

Also Bitcoiners aren't going to hold either when the price of Bitcoin is crashing due to inflation. Bitcoiners will pump and dump and since AGS/PTS holders know this is coming why wouldn't the AGS/PTS holders immediately sell too? AGS/PTS holders aren't going to want to be bag holders.

Tell me why the scenario would play out different?

None of this takes place in a vacuum.  The people making the decisions about whether to add value to the DAC in exchange for new notes are the existing noteholders who are not likely to approve anything that is not expected to increase their net worth.

The 10% allocated to the BitShares Music Foundation is also your assurance that the Foundation will be properly motivated to act in a way to protect the net worth of all noteholders.

To summarize:

There is downward pressure on price for issuing new notes.
There is upward pressure on price from the benefit of what those notes are buying.

You don't approve the deal unless the latter pressure is greater than the former.

Net result - all such deals should increase the value of your shares over time.

That's why flesh and blood and brick and mortar companies do this routinely.

It is the time-proven way to grow a company for the benefit of all its stakeholders.    :)

Sometimes not all the stakeholders...  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOMUe26X3mo

Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: Pheonike on September 30, 2014, 05:18:14 pm

I dont see anything wrong with the pre-sale. It's a good way to create a buzz a get new more people involve. If you are worried about Notes being cheaper during pre-sale, then sell your PTS right before the snapshot(when they should be worth the most)  and buy more more in the pre-sale.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: Empirical1.1 on September 30, 2014, 05:37:39 pm

I dont see anything wrong with the pre-sale. It's a good way to create a buzz a get new more people involve. If you are worried about Notes being cheaper during pre-sale, then sell your PTS right before the snapshot(when they should be worth the most)  and buy more more in the pre-sale.

I'm personally not against the pre-sale though I haven't looked into it.
I also think the AGS & PTS allocation is very good and I'll certainly give the music DAC more attention and input now.

I currently think I'm against the ability for constant dilution. I prefer raising funds and also setting aside a specific amount of shares to fund development. Then only when there is a significant business deal on the table, may dilution occur when the majority of shareholders are giving it their full attention, not as a routine everyday occurrence. https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9452.msg123051#msg123051
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: mf-tzo on September 30, 2014, 06:03:21 pm
After reading all your posts and cob's reply my new thoughts are as follows:

1. A total balance between IPO-Foundation of no more than 20% is very acceptable

1. An IPO including bitusd and bitcoins would be good. Although there is no much liquidity in bitusd it will help the ecosystem. People will actually have to buy bitusd and give them to the IPO so even the devs exchange all the bitusd for usd I don't think that this will have any negative result in dumping bitusd on the market. It will just create more liquidity for bitusd.

2. I am more than happy with anything more than 35/35 for AGS/PTS.

3. In the end of the day it is up to the devs how to allocate the shares. As Stan said, if they did not choose wisely another competitor will overtake them.

4. Well done cob. You have already created a lot of interest in your DAC within the community within a couple of days.
 
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: Empirical1.1 on September 30, 2014, 06:24:22 pm
After reading all your posts and cob's reply my new thoughts are as follows:

1. A total balance between IPO-Foundation of no more than 20% is very acceptable

1. An IPO including bitusd and bitcoins would be good. Although there is no much liquidity in bitusd it will help the ecosystem. People will actually have to buy bitusd and give them to the IPO so even the devs exchange all the bitusd for usd I don't think that this will have any negative result in dumping bitusd on the market. It will just create more liquidity for bitusd.

2. I am more than happy with anything more than 35/35 for AGS/PTS.

3. In the end of the day it is up to the devs how to allocate the shares. As Stan said, if they did not choose wisely another competitor will overtake them.

4. Well done cob. You have already created a lot of interest in your DAC within the community within a couple of days.

 +5% I'm also in favour of offering BitAssets as a donation option.

I think a 20% pre-sale AGS style over 30 days sounds good :)

Does the 10% earmarked for the foundation go to Eddie & Cob or is it designed to fund the DAC?

I'm fine with either, but if it that 10% isn't designed to fund the DAC then I'd suggest a 10% pre-sale and 10% shares set aside.

Because imo, people will undervalue BitShares Music right now, so rather than say raising circa $4 million of BTC for 20% of the shares to fund BitShares Music. I bet 12 months from now we'd rather have raised $2 million for 10% and have 10% of the shares to fund the DAC remaining as they will be worth much more than > $2 million.

I'm still against the other strategy of constant, undefined, additional dilution. (Only in the case of a merger/other business deal/pre-planned funding round/emergency would dilution be needed not as a method of financing the DAC day to day. At least not till DAC's & delegate systems are more established.)
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: Pheonike on September 30, 2014, 07:03:09 pm


If the BTSX client was more stable i would be in favor of bitUSD. But since it's still in Beta I think it would cause more confusion and harm to the IPO than benefit. When the client is more mature the bitUSD would be great for this type of thing.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: mf-tzo on September 30, 2014, 07:28:41 pm
But I would like to use my bitusd to further invest in the IPO. I do not have any bitcoins.

Why should I bother convert my bitusd, to btsx, to btc to send btc to the IPO?

The devs accepting bitusd in their IPO, and then convert them to usd, btc, doge or whatever will only enhance the liquidity of bitusd and the confidence...

People not familiar with bitusd, people outside of this community, can always participate with btc

Anyway...The devs are more appropriate to judge how to handle that..just my 2bitcents..
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: Shentist on September 30, 2014, 07:50:13 pm
dilution is not a problem, but the dilution via delegates!

just assume i run a delegate and earn everyblock i produce x Notes.

how will anybody prevent my to use it for my self?

especially if i am a major shareholder and can easy hold me in power?

if we see the BTSX votes as normal, not many will vote. so the Music Foundation will hold a big stake and I3.
i would like to have here some promises upfront how they will vote or only after approval will change.

What has to cleared. how will the fees structured? peertracks is not part of the bitshares music DAC and will be a seperated entity? So do you use the raised funds from the presales to pay for the peertrack side development? would like to read more about the plans.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: sschechter on September 30, 2014, 08:56:18 pm
You can raise the funds in any coin you want, but you would need to pick a point where all your coins are converted to a common metric (USD).

IE: You've got an AGS style fundraiser that runs every day for a month.  After the first day, you've recieved 500 bitUSD and 2 BTC.  At midnight GMT (the donation cutoff for the day), you use a predetermined price feed to do your conversion.  500 bitUSD is $500, and 2 BTC @ $400 = $800.  Total donations = $1300.  Give the bitUSD donators  5/13ths of the shares, and give BTC donators 8/13ths of the shares. This will avoid selling pressure on one coin in order to exchange for the other coin that gets the better deal.  Now you can accept BTC, BTSX and BitUSD for donations, and we get to keep our fees.  Am I missing something?
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: CLains on October 01, 2014, 02:32:36 pm
Sounds like a good plan, if you can handle the hassle. There is likely diminishing returns on percent stake put up in the pre-sale, so more than 20% would likely be a waste.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: fuzzy on October 01, 2014, 04:01:30 pm
you should allow not only BTC but also PTS donations/investment (much like AGS) .. mabye even allow bitAssets!! The tech is here and works the same way as BTC!

besides that, I see it as a fair compromise between the proposal yesterday and the very first 10%ish proposal .. IF you have a marketing team already working on it by all means!

Definitely...instead of accepting BTC ...accept bitUSD and BTC, but give bitUSD donations a small (maybe 1%) increase in snapshot allocation to incentivize the purchase of bitUSD (which would increase the value of the entire btsx ecosystem).
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: liondani on October 01, 2014, 06:20:51 pm
you should allow not only BTC but also PTS donations/investment (much like AGS) .. mabye even allow bitAssets!! The tech is here and works the same way as BTC!

besides that, I see it as a fair compromise between the proposal yesterday and the very first 10%ish proposal .. IF you have a marketing team already working on it by all means!

Definitely...instead of accepting BTC ...accept bitUSD and BTC, but give bitUSD donations a small (maybe 1%) increase in snapshot allocation to incentivize the purchase of bitUSD (which would increase the value of the entire btsx ecosystem).
+5

Sent from my ALCATEL ONE TOUCH 997D

Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: Pheonike on October 01, 2014, 07:36:35 pm


I don't think accepting bitusd at stage is going to increase liquidity for bitusd in the short run. If anything, it's gonna suck bitusd out of btsx. The only people at this stage that are donating bitsud are people who already have bitusd. I dont see someone new going through the trouble btc->bitsx->bitusd->music dac when they can just go btc->music directly. After going to the music DAC directly, then they may be inclined to learn more about btsx and bitusd.

Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: mf-tzo on October 01, 2014, 07:40:39 pm
the only reason I mainly support the bitusd ipo is that this gives an utility to bitusd. You can now use your bitusd to invest. Their utility so far is that you can change them for real usd at peg..Plus it increases the confidence in the whole system...
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: clayop on October 01, 2014, 07:45:44 pm


I don't think accepting bitusd at stage is going to increase liquidity for bitusd in the short run. If anything, it's gonna suck bitusd out of btsx. The only people at this stage that are donating bitsud are people who already have bitusd. I dont see someone new going through the trouble btc->bitsx->bitusd->music dac when they can just go btc->music directly. After going to the music DAC directly, then they may be inclined to learn more about btsx and bitusd.

I totally agree with this statement. btc -> music is much easier than btc -> btsx -> bitusd -> music, especially for non-bitshares people.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: JoeyD on October 01, 2014, 09:06:21 pm
The IPO plus marketing is probably the most important aspect to get this DAC of the ground. There are some experienced and nasty behemots in this field and those will not just roll over and die.

So for the funding, I'm mostly with arhag on this and I agree with his formula with any amount for x (Provided the end result is above the 10% social contract of course).

But, I also agree that not everything has been cleared up and we need more information. Maybe a dev-hangout might be faster but of the top of my head here are some of my main questions and concerns:

How will the funds be managed? (Left pocket of the trusted old duster)
What value does the DAC have outside of peertracks? Do the notes have value outside of peertracks or is peertracks the end all be all?
Can an effective media/marketing campaign be launched for the IPO or is a multistage attempt required, to get the funds for the IPO marketing?
Are artists involved/aware of this project and do they have any ideas on the matter? (This might be bigger at pulling in a crowd than even a presale/ipo, if one or more big names show their public support for this)
Are there any dangers with brandnames, right of authorship and such?
Is it legal for the I assume predominantly non-adult target group to join in on this IPO? (Would not be a good start imo if the target audience feels left out right from the start)
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: gnarl on October 02, 2014, 05:52:18 am


I don't think accepting bitusd at stage is going to increase liquidity for bitusd in the short run. If anything, it's gonna suck bitusd out of btsx. The only people at this stage that are donating bitsud are people who already have bitusd. I dont see someone new going through the trouble btc->bitsx->bitusd->music dac when they can just go btc->music directly. After going to the music DAC directly, then they may be inclined to learn more about btsx and bitusd.

I totally agree with this statement. btc -> music is much easier than btc -> btsx -> bitusd -> music, especially for non-bitshares people.

Are Notes going be tradeable in the BitsharesX client?
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: xeroc on October 02, 2014, 07:07:43 am
Are Notes going be tradeable in the BitsharesX client?
Nop ... NOTES are the basis token in the BitShares MUSIC Blockchain ... like BTSX in BitShares-X

You "could" have a bitAsset for NOTES .. but what for ..
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: scatha on October 02, 2014, 09:59:07 am
I think 30/30/10/30 or 25/25/10/40 allocation is good.

And since the pre-sale will be built into the genesis block of a blockchain, It has to be a rather stable satoshi-style coin with large market cap - such as BTC or perhaps LTC - everything else (BitUSD / DOGE / etc.) will create unnecessary trouble - so let's stick with Bitcoin here.

I suppose, late investors can still buy Notes on BTER after the launch.

Disclaimer: I'm PTS holder but plan to join the pre-sale, too.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: JoeyD on October 02, 2014, 11:47:52 am
Well first of, cancel the 10 October snapshot. 8 days is no longer enough time to react, without having made clear how this thing will work and what people are buying into, this is BS and a very bad start.

First work out your plan and funding model, make those plans very clear to everyone, so there is no doubt what people will be buying, and make sure you advertize everywhere so everyone can get in on it and only then start the snapshot countdown. Only then can people take their position in this. Seriously cancel the snapshot date and do a better announcement on more channels than just this obscure forum post.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: xeroc on October 02, 2014, 11:58:38 am
Well first of, cancel the 10 October snapshot. 8 days is no longer enough time to react, without having made clear how this thing will work and what people are buying into, this is BS and a very bad start.

First work out your plan and funding model, make those plans very clear to everyone, so there is no doubt what people will be buying, and make sure you advertize everywhere so everyone can get in on it and only then start the snapshot countdown. Only then can people take their position in this. Seriously cancel the snapshot date and do a better announcement on more channels than just this obscure forum post.
I hear rumors that a page will be launched before vegas conference .. and my hope is that the bitshares music/peertracks people are around to market their upcoming DAC/business
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: santaclause102 on October 02, 2014, 12:30:11 pm
Quote
and make sure you advertize everywhere so everyone can get in on it and only then start the snapshot countdown. Only then can people take their position in this. Seriously cancel the snapshot date and do a better announcement on more channels than just this obscure forum post.
+5% +5% This seems reasonable to me in order to not get hate for not making it public and just distributing it "among existing PTS/AGS holders". PTS holders would not even be at a disadvantage, they dont have to sell their PTS. Advertising before the Snapshot would also bring more supporters in.
Any legal issues with this? I think not...
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: robrigo on October 02, 2014, 12:42:35 pm
Well first of, cancel the 10 October snapshot. 8 days is no longer enough time to react, without having made clear how this thing will work and what people are buying into, this is BS and a very bad start.

First work out your plan and funding model, make those plans very clear to everyone, so there is no doubt what people will be buying, and make sure you advertize everywhere so everyone can get in on it and only then start the snapshot countdown. Only then can people take their position in this. Seriously cancel the snapshot date and do a better announcement on more channels than just this obscure forum post.

+5% +5% This seems reasonable to me in order to not get hate for not making it public and just distributing it "among existing PTS/AGS holders". PTS holders would not even be at a disadvantage, they dont have to sell their PTS. Advertising before the Snapshot would also bring more supporters in.
Any legal issues with this? I think not...

I tend to agree with this. Provide more information, hype the Music DAC more, and launch a BitShares Music Foundation website with the snapshot countdown on it. This will give more opportunity to garner initial support from investors and should stymy any perceived unfairness due to lack of publicity / rapid snapshot.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: liondani on October 02, 2014, 01:50:05 pm
Well first of, cancel the 10 October snapshot. 8 days is no longer enough time to react, without having made clear how this thing will work and what people are buying into, this is BS and a very bad start.

First work out your plan and funding model, make those plans very clear to everyone, so there is no doubt what people will be buying, and make sure you advertize everywhere so everyone can get in on it and only then start the snapshot countdown. Only then can people take their position in this. Seriously cancel the snapshot date and do a better announcement on more channels than just this obscure forum post.
sorry but I must agree...
its like an IPO only for insiders right now!

Sent from my ALCATEL ONE TOUCH 997D

Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: donkeypong on October 02, 2014, 05:54:24 pm
Well first of, cancel the 10 October snapshot. 8 days is no longer enough time to react, without having made clear how this thing will work and what people are buying into, this is BS and a very bad start.

First work out your plan and funding model, make those plans very clear to everyone, so there is no doubt what people will be buying, and make sure you advertize everywhere so everyone can get in on it and only then start the snapshot countdown. Only then can people take their position in this. Seriously cancel the snapshot date and do a better announcement on more channels than just this obscure forum post.

I would NOT cancel this. People have purchased PTS on the basis of this announcement. All any of us need to know is that there will be a fundraiser also, for a limited percentage of the total shares, so PTS is not the only way for new people to get in. It's still very, very important to keep this date and maintain that credibility.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: fuzzy on October 02, 2014, 06:10:23 pm
Cob will be there tomorrow for the Dev Hangout so I am sure it would be a good place to answer questions in depth.  Some of these points are very well made...and we are still learning best practices with each DAC kind of "testing the waters".  The community has a very important role to play in telling DAC developers/delegates what is expected of them so I say we should definitely consider giving it time to talk about. 
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: xeroc on October 02, 2014, 06:12:49 pm
Cob will be there tomorrow for the Dev Hangout so I am sure it would be a good place to answer questions in depth.  Some of these points are very well made...and we are still learning best practices with each DAC kind of "testing the waters".  The community has a very important role to play in telling DAC developers/delegates what is expected of them so I say we should definitely consider giving it time to talk about.
shit .. and I will again miss it .. damnit ..
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: fuzzy on October 02, 2014, 06:16:40 pm
Cob will be there tomorrow for the Dev Hangout so I am sure it would be a good place to answer questions in depth.  Some of these points are very well made...and we are still learning best practices with each DAC kind of "testing the waters".  The community has a very important role to play in telling DAC developers/delegates what is expected of them so I say we should definitely consider giving it time to talk about.
shit .. and I will again miss it .. damnit ..

You can always download Plumble for mobile access...or listen from the website ;)
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: JoeyD on October 02, 2014, 06:29:20 pm
I would NOT cancel this. People have purchased PTS on the basis of this announcement. All any of us need to know is that there will be a fundraiser also, for a limited percentage of the total shares, so PTS is not the only way for new people to get in. It's still very, very important to keep this date and maintain that credibility.

No.

PTS buyers should have collectively reacted to this before I did, we are not too late to fix this. But to leave it like this will be a far bigger blow to credibility, for the entire community as well. Because they will be held accountible for letting this go on, without contention. We are talking about a 35% stake here and this is like a backroom premine now. Honestly I don't give a rats behind about what the tiny market of PTS holders think when their goal is to make this into their own invite only private music trading platform just for pts-members, because that is not a DAC that will succeed.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: cryptillionaire on October 02, 2014, 08:12:15 pm
Shouldn't we take snapshots of new DACs like btsx for the sharedrop, not just pts/ags?
Hell.. wouldn't it make sense to take snapshots of multiple cryptocurrencies/dacs so that the music dac got more exposure?
PTS isn't DPOS, has a centralized gpu mining distribution and everyone dumps it the day after a snapshot.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: JoeyD on October 02, 2014, 10:08:51 pm
PTS predates dpos, the mining is a relic of the past that needs to be fixed.

Here's how I see PTS. It now has become an auditing and investors voting DAC. When launching a new DAC you give enough percentage stake to PTS that people will bother to make a decision and because buying and selling PTS takes actual money, the votes are not free and have value. This means it is both a marketing tool, it generates a little hype (later on this might get bigger), but it also works as a stamp of distributed community approval and gauge on what the crowd mind thinks of your project.

However people seem to forget that the musicDAC is NOT an Invictus project. At least that's what Dan Larimer said in the last Mumble hangout that I listened in on. Invictus/bitshares apparently has only occasional contact in an advisory role, but are not part of the MusicDAC team. Inversely that also means that the musicdac is not getting any financial benefit out of the AGS or PTS funds at all.

For all short term Invictus projects PTS/AGS can expect a large part of the stake, because those projects were actually paid for by PTS and AGS. Also if Bytemaster and team play their cards right, their cut of the pie could grow with the ecosystem and offer a sustained funding pool for their operations. So it makes sense for them to honour PTS/AGS for a larger amount, seeing as those are their investors.

But for this team outside of Invictus/bitshares this is a different matter. They need funds and that means getting the most hype and people. Trying to sell to newcomers that they will be providing the funds for the new project and in return for forking over the cash they'll get 20%, might not be the best marketing strategy in history. Also keep in mind, the musicDAC will gain jack all from honoring PTS/AGS in terms of funding.

So from my perspective,a split like  10%PTS - 10%AGS - 10%Foundation- 70%IPO (This is the polar opposite of the current plan btw) would be totally acceptable and might have the best chance of succesfully getting of the ground. Provided their concepts and design are actually sound and they do the marketing right. I also wouldn't mind if it was 10/10/80 with the promise of using 60/70 or whatever for future IPOs.

BUT and yes that is a big BUT, the PTS investing voters need to know what they are taking a position in and giving their stamp of approval. For now I can't find any clear answers on how the DAC part of the project will actually work. So I can't actually give any sound argument about a proper share split, because I have no clue about what is being split up in the first place, or how funding is planned for the project or anything. Keep in mind I'm not calling this a scam, but I do think you should regroup and do this snapshot plus the launch in a better way. And stop the current one.

So far nobody seems to know the answer to this next question.
Will this be a ecosystem where everybody can start up shop and issue their Brand/Songs whatever on the blockchain (without peertracks) and where peertracks just so happens to be first to market in this new specialized artist-blockchain ecosystem? Or is this a new ITunes style centralized website concept, but just with a more public database in the form of a blockchain?

Not only should the answer to the above be clear without a doubt, but even this pts-snapshot should be marketed and clearly announced on all appropriate channels and be part of the pre-hyping. Is there even a website with a countdown or the completed whitepaper, or something?

I'm not trying to destroy this project, I really want stuff like this to succeed, but this is not the right way to do it in my honest opinion.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: oco101 on October 03, 2014, 12:26:07 am
So far nobody seems to know the answer to this next question.
Will this be a ecosystem where everybody can start up shop and issue their Brand/Songs whatever on the blockchain (without peertracks) and where peertracks just so happens to be first to market in this new specialized artist-blockchain ecosystem? Or is this a new ITunes style centralized website concept, but just with a more public database in the form of a blockchain?

The blockchain is used to issue artistcoin and where all the trading takes place,also is use for minting bitUSD collateralize  by notes .
 PeerTracks is the centralize  website where the song will be uploaded and downloaded and artist and user will register.  That's one of the reason they need lot's of money from the beginning , there is a lot of tech involved to pull this thing off,  a ton of work to be done off blockchain.
I like the hybrid system proposed by Cob, so they will have money at the beginning and then they can raise more as need it. I really thing this thing could really be huge but the execution must be perfect.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: svk on October 03, 2014, 09:05:40 am
I agree with Joeyd on the distribution, I'd much rather have 10% for AGS/PTS with a big presale/IPO giving major financial backing to the developers. Look at Ethereum, they've got something like 15 million dollars in funding so far, imagine what cob et al could do with that kind of backing.

Presales also serve the very useful purpose of bringing in fresh blood. While PTS/AGS are already far better distributed than your average altcoin, I feel there is a need to get more people into the system, and a well publicised IPO will help with that. Yes there might be legal costs, but you should also discount them by the marketing that you get through the IPO. I think Bitshares MUSIC is something a lot of people will get very excited about, so it's a shame to not try to capitalise on that through an IPO. Just my 0.02 bitUSD...
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: mf-tzo on October 03, 2014, 09:21:08 am
Quote
I agree with Joeyd on the distribution, I'd much rather have 10% for AGS/PTS with a big presale/IPO giving major financial backing to the developers. Look at Ethereum, they've got something like 15 million dollars in funding so far, imagine what cob et al could do with that kind of backing.

What will they do exactly? That is the question...

BTSX already had a lot of funds from AGS. If they use the funds to boost hugely BTSX, Music and all other DPOS DACs will experience automatically a huge boost as well. If BTSX fails hugely no matter how much funding Music and the other DACs have for further development I don't think anyone will invest or care about them.

BTSX is the 1 product that needs to be boosted and all others will follow the same pattern. No need for huge IPOs imho. Just some small percentage to cover basic costs, marketing and development. 10%-20% IPO is fine I think.. Anything more than this will make PTS-AGS shareholders diluted and selling pressure from them will increase and drive the respective DACs shares down..

Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: JoeyD on October 03, 2014, 11:16:36 am
Quote
I agree with Joeyd on the distribution, I'd much rather have 10% for AGS/PTS with a big presale/IPO giving major financial backing to the developers. Look at Ethereum, they've got something like 15 million dollars in funding so far, imagine what cob et al could do with that kind of backing.

What will they do exactly? That is the question...

BTSX already had a lot of funds from AGS. If they use the funds to boost hugely BTSX, Music and all other DPOS DACs will experience automatically a huge boost as well. If BTSX fails hugely no matter how much funding Music and the other DACs have for further development I don't think anyone will invest or care about them.

BTSX is the 1 product that needs to be boosted and all others will follow the same pattern. No need for huge IPOs imho. Just some small percentage to cover basic costs, marketing and development. 10%-20% IPO is fine I think.. Anything more than this will make PTS-AGS shareholders diluted and selling pressure from them will increase and drive the respective DACs shares down..

Peertracks is not a project funded by ags/pts or btsx, so how do you come to the conclusion that they need just some small percentage to cover basic costs? How are they going to even host and build the website, bandwidth and storage then? How are they going to pay for marketing? How do people even see this project getting of the ground with just the PTS/AGS-airdrop and nothing else?

I might be missing something, so feel free to correct me where I'm wrong, but if they do not get enough funds from their IPO your undiluted shares are worth nothing. Come on people 20% (combined pts/ags) in a project that might actually work, is a lot better deal than getting 70% of a project starting out bankrupt that hopes to defeat Apple, google and Valve and the like.

Even a 30,30,10,30 split might be a hard sell, because to outsiders it will look like 60% going to privileged investors and the people actually paying for it getting a measly 30%. How would you feel about crowdfunding a project like that, where you pay all development and startup costs for 30% of the stake. Just see the bitching about not getting 70% for providing no funds at all and talking about dilution and all that, if anything that only proves the validity of my point of view.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: oco101 on October 03, 2014, 11:38:27 am
Even a 30,30,10,30 split might be a hard sell, because to outsiders it will look like 60% going to privileged investors and the people actually paying for it getting a measly 30%. How would you feel about crowdfunding a project like that, where you pay all development and startup costs for 30% of the stake. Just see the bitching about not getting 70% for providing no funds at all and talking about dilution and all that, if anything that only proves the validity of my point of view.

I agree completely.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: mf-tzo on October 03, 2014, 01:48:28 pm
@ JoeyD, I completely agree with you and others regarding the need for money to pay for all the future development and costs so even if I was completely against an IPO in the beginning I have re instated my position in previous posts.

All I am saying though is that most people have linked BTSX to all the other DACs (DNS, Music, Lotto etc...). If BTSX fails completely the confidence will significantly drop and all the other DACs will be doomed as well, no matter how much capital they raise through IPO. PTS-AGS shareholders are the most believers in the success of the DACs so awarding them more shares, which essentially don't give up easily creates appreciation of the company.

If the IPO is not a success and doesn't get much funding as intended (no new money are injected) there will be additional selling pressure and the DAC will not succeed. IMHO it is more likely to succeed from people who own shares and bought at $3.5 - $4.5 (PTS-AGS) and give more initial value to the DAC from the beginning rather than risk a big portion of the shares to a unsuccessful IPO.

Having said all that a hydrid model is more likely to succeed.
PTS/AGS/Foundation/ IPO1 30%/30%/10%/10% and the remaining shares in reserve for future distribution or for IPO2 maybe?







Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: joele on October 03, 2014, 02:17:19 pm
@ JoeyD, I completely agree with you and others regarding the need for money to pay for all the future development and costs so even if I was completely against an IPO in the beginning I have re instated my position in previous posts.

All I am saying though is that most people have linked BTSX to all the other DACs (DNS, Music, Lotto etc...). If BTSX fails completely the confidence will significantly drop and all the other DACs will be doomed as well, no matter how much capital they raise through IPO. PTS-AGS shareholders are the most believers in the success of the DACs so awarding them more shares, which essentially don't give up easily creates appreciation of the company.

If the IPO is not a success and doesn't get much funding as intended (no new money are injected) there will be additional selling pressure and the DAC will not succeed. IMHO it is more likely to succeed from people who own shares and bought at $3.5 - $4.5 (PTS-AGS) and give more initial value to the DAC from the beginning rather than risk a big portion of the shares to a unsuccessful IPO.

Having said all that a hydrid model is more likely to succeed.
PTS/AGS/Foundation/ IPO1 30%/30%/10%/10% and the remaining shares in reserve for future distribution or for IPO2 maybe?

 +5%
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: hammyburger on October 03, 2014, 04:28:04 pm
My opinion:

First of all: I've been in PTS, Keyhottee (a founder), BitsharesX all from the beginning. I am not heavily involved on this forum but I do download everything right away, test things out, give feedback directly to Stan on occasion, etc. etc I do participate on reddit. <---------- Those are my creds.

I think it doesn't make sense to try to pull an ethereum for this DAC. Nor do I think you would pull off anywhere near that large of a fundraiser. I would look to Storj's underwhelming fundraiser as that is more likely how a BTSMUSIC fundraiser might go.

What's more, there has already been a public announcement about what PTS/AGS holders will get. Folks acted on that public information. It would be a significant hit to the community in going back on that. Is somebody alleging that 1) the individual responsible for that public announcement didn't have the authority do so OR 2) we now realize they are incompetent and wish repeal it?

As much as this is an out of the way forum - it is a public forum.

If you ask me, with Invictus's leadership a fantastic, faithful community has been built and continues to grow. The community is dedicated which means less speculating and more holding, testing, evangelizing, etc. It would seem better to get the protoype going and get some music changing hands on peershares and the music blockchain.

And yes, let folks who invested and continue to invest their hard earned dollars in PTS/AGS get paid for having the sense to spot a solid vision and putting their faith in some great visionaries.

But, then again, I'm highly biased by my meager holdings.


EDIT: Insert "Invictus" instead of just Dan and Stan.
Title: Re: Best MUSIC DAC launch model for 2014?
Post by: pendragon3 on October 04, 2014, 07:04:55 pm
In my opinion, the current proposed allocation and hybrid model has got it just about right. It strikes a good balance between short-term capital needs and the flexibility to raise funds in the future.

There will certainly be publicity benefits to a pre-sale, and I hope/expect the marketing to ramp up before and during this event. However, those who call for a bigger pre-sale are not looking at the whole picture. Imagine that you were able to get $20 million from an initial sale of 80% of the shares now. The problem is that this doesn't leave much room for future fundraising. It would be selling for cheap at a time when few people understand the potential of the DAC. What if, sometime in the near future--a year or two or three from now--the DAC has a multi-billion $ capitalization, and it becomes apparent that, to really compete on a global scale with big players, Peertracks needs $200 million capital. If they already sold 80% up front, then they will have used up all their ammo, so to speak, and left themselves with few options. They'd be effectively hamstrung. With the hybrid model, though, the DAC could easily raise the needed funds via a prudent amount of dilution.

Since no one can predict the future with total accuracy, it's best to limit the size of the pre-sale to preserve the option of substantial fundraising in the future. The reasoning for this is similar to that for traditional equity IPOs. Ask yourself why traditional companies don't sell 80% of their shares in an IPO. Why do companies going public usually sell only a fraction, like between 10% to 15%? It's because they don't want to let go of too many shares at the beginning. Later, when they have grown and when (if) more funds are needed, they can sell shares at a higher price and gain more "bang for the buck."