BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: alt on November 13, 2014, 06:09:15 am
-
I suggest to pay fees to enable user define asset's market.
for example:
If I want to active market PAYALT/BTS, I must pay 100 BTS/ per week.
and all the fees about asset PAYALT should return a part to me, so I can use this fund to maintain the market active.
the return fees will attract more creative business based asset.
and the maintain fees will make BTS more profitable. 1 market we earn 10,000 BTS/year. 1000 market we earn 10,000,000 BTS,
maybe we can still make BTS defaltion
another reason for market maintain fees is to weed out useless asset.
another reason is because I think the market engine can't support too many market.
any Idea?
-
I thought the whole point of BitShares ME was to have a 'cheap' way to promote yourself?
Your proposal comes with a bad taste for out siders, as now the BTS shareholders get a cut of your profit ..
-
中文是怎么样的。。。。英语不好。中文社区发个帖让大伙讨论讨论,alt大师兄。
-
Fees can reduce bloat and spam. We are competing in emerging market, so it should be as low as possible.
-
I thought the whole point of BitShares ME was to have a 'cheap' way to promote yourself?
Your proposal comes with a bad taste for out siders, as now the BTS shareholders get a cut of your profit ..
without the market maintain fee, the asset also can trader offline, like:
I sent you 1 BTS, you send me 100 STOCK.
and If the asset is good to gain more transfer, more trade. the owner can get much return paid come from the transfer fee.
the paid is enough to pay for the market maintain fee.
-
中文是怎么样的。。。。英语不好。中文社区发个帖让大伙讨论讨论,alt大师兄。
我提了两个建议:
1. 所有个人用户创建的资产,默认是不启动市场交易功能的,想启动市场交易功能必须支付每周100BTS的市场维护费用。
2. 跟资产相关的所有转账、交易,收取到的手续费,部分返利给资产管理者。
基于以下几点原因:
1. 返利可以激励更多有创意的商业模式,吸引更多优质创业者,获取的利润可以用来支付市场维护费用或回馈股东。
2. 持续的市场维护费用可以在保持低的创建费用的同时,有效淘汰无用资产。
无用资产有几个麻烦:1)污染名字空间 2)可能会严重增加市场引擎负载,导致出现服务器性能问题。
3. 持续的市场维护费用为全体BTS股东带来了很大一笔收益。
-
I think this is what alt meant:
* very low fee to create an asset, but it can't be traded on bitshares market yet
* to enable the asset to actively trade on bitshares market, the creator has to pay something like 100 BTS/week
* but to reward the creator, he gets a percentage on all asset transfer/trade fee, so he has a chance to make the maintenance fee back or even make a profit if his asset is popular
* this will reduce the number of spam/low quality assets trading on bitshares market
* the creator still has the option to trade offline, (ie. send me 1 BTS, I send you 100 shares of my asset.)
-
I think this is what alt meant:
* very low fee to create an asset, but it can't be traded on bitshares market yet
* to enable the asset to actively trade on bitshares market, the creator has to pay something like 100 BTS/week
* but to reward the creator, he gets a percentage on all asset transfer/trade fee, so he has a chance to make the maintenance fee back or even make a profit if his asset is popular
* this will reduce the number of spam/low quality assets trading on bitshares market
* the creator still has the option to trade offline, (ie. send me 1 BTS, I send you 100 shares of my asset.)
thank you very much, this is what I want to say :)
need to clear: the maintain fee is just for one market, like STOCK/BTS, if you want another market like STOCK/USD, you need another maintain fee.
-
makes sense to me now ..
keeping STOCK/BTS open requires 100BTS/week
keeping STOCK/USD open requires 10USD(!!!!!!)/week ... would make more sense
ps. the numbers are also made up :)
-
I support this idea... Seems to solve many problems.
-
Yes, we need to wipe out the useless assets. I suggest we may go further---sort the asset by trade volume, instead of by date.
-
Ah, but the creator need not be one mortal?
-
makes sense to me now ..
keeping STOCK/BTS open requires 100BTS/week
keeping STOCK/USD open requires 10USD(!!!!!!)/week ... would make more sense
ps. the numbers are also made up :)
This + the sort by volume suggestion.
-
Yes, we need to wipe out the useless assets. I suggest we may go further---sort the asset by trade volume, instead of by date.
Somehow that stuck out to me... haha.
-
Yes, we need to wipe out the useless assets. I suggest we may go further---sort the asset by trade volume, instead of by date.
Yes, I support this. If we don't take some measures to rank these, then users must sort through increasing amounts of junk to find anything worthwhile.