BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: xeroc on January 11, 2016, 02:21:23 pm
-
So,
BitShares is in great need for users, traders, and is currently failing to attract them.
Hence, I propose to have fees for the core features be drastically reduced and have it combined with a marketing campaign
for traders and users ...
This offer should be limited for a period of 3 to 6 months since we want a profitable DAC.
It is important to understand that a few users which are willing to pay high fees, could be as profitable as a high number of users paying a small fee.
-
I'm willing to support a limited time reduction of fees. It's a very typical strategy to entice new users. I don't think fees are really the big barrier to new users, but it does seem like it's become a "hot button" issue, so why not experiment and see if it makes a difference? Besides, we can price any feature that's not offered by other blockchains/exchanges at a higher rate, and still have the blockchain be profitable.
-
I prefer to lower fees step by step.
BTS is not consumer goods, it like assets for investment, people normally do a long term thinking when then decide whether to step into the BTS market. so a 3-6 fees discount is not so attractive as expected.
anyway, this campaign is much better than staying unchanged. +5%
-
I would like to see a cost to benefit analysis done before anything.
I don't think we are really in a position where the current fee structure is of any consequence with the value of BTS where it is currently.
Our fees are already at pennies.
I agree we need to attract more users and/or traders, I don't think you will find them on arguing over price.
If you make it all about price, then they will see no value in everything else the DEX has to offer.
-
I would like to see a cost to benefit analysis done before anything.
I don't think we are really in a position where the current fee structure is of any consequence with the value of BTS where it is currently.
Our fees are already at pennies.
I agree we need to attract more users and/or traders, I don't think you will find them on arguing over price.
If you make it all about price, then they will see no value in everything else the DEX has to offer.
+5%
-
"Everything must go!"
"Today, for one day only!"
"Buy now, it's never been a better time to buy!"
Price slashing, at least IMO, looks like something is wrong, like it's a "going out of business" sale or something. We should have started at free, or dirt cheap fees to begin with (like google did it).
I firmly agree that fees are too high, especially for the possibility of micro-transactions (like sending us a paltry 2 BTS donation with your mobile wallet use).
I like @jakub idea the best, using a percentage based fee structure.
I think @puppies had some cool ideas along these lines too.
-
I much much support reduce the fee,
we can set the fee according to TPS like the following module
we can select a term , such as 15 days as one months , adjust the fee according to TPS value
1. if TPS<=5. fee=2bts or $0.01
2. if 5<TPS<=10 , fee=4bts or $0.02
3. if 10<TPS<=20, fee=6bts or $0.03
4. if 20<TPS<=40 fee=8bts or $0.04
5. if 40<TPS<=80 fee=10 bts or $0.05
6. if 80<TPS<=160 fee=12bts or $0.06
7. if 160 <TPS<320 fee=14bts or $0.07
8. if 320<TPS<=640 fee=16bts or $0.08
9.if 640 <TPS<=1280 fee=18bts or $0.09
10. if 1280<TPS<=2560 fee=20bts or $0.10
11. if TPS>2560 fee=40bts or $0.20
1. there would been lower fee when TPS is lower ,the purpose is to get more user .
2.when the TPS increase ,the fee increase also , it is not influence profile of BTS chain and influence programs
-
I would support a temporary lowering of transfer fees.
I would support a permanent lowering of transfer fees.
I would support percentage based fees.
I would even support user defined transfer fees. If there were some incentive for paying higher fees.
(moving slightly off topic and shooting in the dark)
I haven't worked out what that looks like yet but if transfers were nearly free and there was good incentive to manually pay higher fees, the system would be more flexible and appealing to every conceivable use case(micro, trial, testing, etc), while also maintaining income for referrals. How to incentivize paying higher fees though? karma, reputation, tiered discounts, unlock features ??
-
I support this promotion.
-
I would support percentage based transfer fees (with a minimum to prevent Spam and a maximum to remain competitive).
I would not support any temporary lowering of fees or any reduction of fees other than moving to percentage based.
We do not want to get in to a race to the bottom.
-
I would support percentage based transfer fees (with a minimum to prevent Spam and a maximum to remain competitive).
I would not support any temporary lowering of fees or any reduction of fees other than moving to percentage based.
We do not want to get in to a race to the bottom.
This sounds best to me also. Lower fees alone are not going to attract a ton more users suddenly. Percentage-based fees make the most sense to me.
-
I don't think fees play that much of an important role atm but I think this is a good idea to test the market. We can see it how it reacts. If we see more transactions and filled orders then it's worth it and we could continue with it, if not, we can go back to how we are atm. It's a good idea to see how the market reacts.
-
I don't think fees play that much of an important role atm but I think this is a good idea to test the market. We can see it how it reacts. If we see more transactions and filled orders then it's worth it and we could continue with it, if not, we can go back to how we are atm. It's a good idea to see how the market reacts.
I asked for a cost to benefit analysis.
However given the idea to 'test'.. what is an even better idea is to research the market.. rather than taking a black eye of being 'unstable' in 'tests'.
I would propose if we really want to know what the market thinks of our fees or fees in the market place in general some market research should be done that provides us with real data from end users.
This should be among the first steps we take when we make decisions like this in order to work on real data instead of feelings.
I could get a researcher to undertake this work if you guys would support a worker proposal to gather such data. We are probably taking about 2 weeks and about $1500 to get the job done considering the data points and market size available.
Otherwise we can just keep playing roulette with Bitshares pricing that thus far as not landed on anything that resulted in significantly good results. Then again, we can keep spinning and may get lucky.
-
I would support percentage based transfer fees (with a minimum to prevent Spam and a maximum to remain competitive).
I would not support any temporary lowering of fees or any reduction of fees other than moving to percentage based.
We do not want to get in to a race to the bottom.
This sounds best to me also. Lower fees alone are not going to attract a ton more users suddenly. Percentage-based fees make the most sense to me.
It is right that lower fees do not attract significantly more users. But I think lower fees are attractive for business runners who will bring many users accompanied by.
-
I would support a temporary lowering of transfer fees.
I would support a permanent lowering of transfer fees.
+1
I would support percentage based transfer fees (with a minimum to prevent Spam and a maximum to remain competitive).
+1
-
I agree with lower fees/%based.
I wouldn`t promote it as limited or temporary, especially not with a date or number of months.
Don`t promise what you cannot guarantee because you cannot foresee what the fees will be in the future.
-
Who controls fees for functionality funded with fee-based assets?
committee/voters or the issuer of the asset?
-
I would support percentage based transfer fees (with a minimum to prevent Spam and a maximum to remain competitive).
I would not support any temporary lowering of fees or any reduction of fees other than moving to percentage based.
We do not want to get in to a race to the bottom.
If I understand correctly, are you saying that you want to pay for this feature? ;)
-
I don't think fees play that much of an important role atm but I think this is a good idea to test the market. We can see it how it reacts. If we see more transactions and filled orders then it's worth it and we could continue with it, if not, we can go back to how we are atm. It's a good idea to see how the market reacts.
I asked for a cost to benefit analysis.
However given the idea to 'test'.. what is an even better idea is to research the market.. rather than taking a black eye of being 'unstable' in 'tests'.
I would propose if we really want to know what the market thinks of our fees or fees in the market place in general some market research should be done that provides us with real data from end users.
This should be among the first steps we take when we make decisions like this in order to work on real data instead of feelings.
I could get a researcher to undertake this work if you guys would support a worker proposal to gather such data. We are probably taking about 2 weeks and about $1500 to get the job done considering the data points and market size available.
Otherwise we can just keep playing roulette with Bitshares pricing that thus far as not landed on anything that resulted in significantly good results. Then again, we can keep spinning and may get lucky.
To be honest I support your idea. Thinking in the entrepreneur's way.
I wonder whether it's possible that the block chain hire you as the CEO?
-
Put it to a vote
Voting is not useful for everything. Most people are not entrepreneur, or say not good at running businesses.
-
Who controls fees for functionality funded with fee-based assets?
committee/voters or the issuer of the asset?
That is a design variable left up to the developer.
-
I would support percentage based transfer fees (with a minimum to prevent Spam and a maximum to remain competitive).
I would not support any temporary lowering of fees or any reduction of fees other than moving to percentage based.
We do not want to get in to a race to the bottom.
If I understand correctly, are you saying that you want to pay for this feature? ;)
I was hoping that you were going to pay for it.
-
I would support percentage based transfer fees (with a minimum to prevent Spam and a maximum to remain competitive).
I would not support any temporary lowering of fees or any reduction of fees other than moving to percentage based.
We do not want to get in to a race to the bottom.
If I understand correctly, are you saying that you want to pay for this feature? ;)
I was hoping that you were going to pay for it.
I will. In some conditions.
-
ok. imo this is important !
-
I asked for a cost to benefit analysis.
However given the idea to 'test'.. what is an even better idea is to research the market.. rather than taking a black eye of being 'unstable' in 'tests'.
I would propose if we really want to know what the market thinks of our fees or fees in the market place in general some market research should be done that provides us with real data from end users.
This should be among the first steps we take when we make decisions like this in order to work on real data instead of feelings.
I could get a researcher to undertake this work if you guys would support a worker proposal to gather such data. We are probably taking about 2 weeks and about $1500 to get the job done considering the data points and market size available.
Otherwise we can just keep playing roulette with Bitshares pricing that thus far as not landed on anything that resulted in significantly good results. Then again, we can keep spinning and may get lucky.
This is a very good, scientific approach, worth to undertake. Would be very interesting to look at results. Also, what is a cost of bitshares transaction in current conditions? According to blockchain.info, a cost of bitcoin transaction is $6. What about bitshares?
-
So .. another idea came up to reduce the create/cancel order to the spare minimum to prevent spam and instead raise the market fee (at least for bitassets) from 0% to something higher than 0% (capped by some number) .. Committee is currently evaluating the options and tries to come up with reasonable numbers ..
-
So .. another idea came up to reduce the create/cancel order to the spare minimum to prevent spam and instead raise the market fee (at least for bitassets) from 0% to something higher than 0% (capped by some number) .. Committee is currently evaluating the options and tries to come up with reasonable numbers ..
+5% +5% +5%
-
I prefer to lower fees step by step.
I think that the opposite would attract more buzz.
The sudden shock to the heart to wake the corpse:
(http://www.harunyahya.com/image/the_miracle_of_electricity/electric_shock_hearth.jpg)
We should have launched with low fees (limited time offer to induce panic buying)
-
We should have launched with low fees (limited time offer to induce panic buying)
+5% Yep, exactly. Google did the same thing. Start out dirt cheap or free, and get the masses sucked in first.
-
Yeah, Ken, like how the dopeman always gives you the first hit for free, then you become addicted, and can't stop trading, and before you know it, the prices go up!
Why does Google and Dopemen always get to do the tried and true, preying on human emotion marketing strategy, while we get stuck promoting the confused 180 degree U-Turn launch:
(on launch day with the world watching)
"Today, we are launching a semi-closed sourced blockchain that can do 100,000 TPS sometime in the future hopefully"
Then a month later (with nobody watching, and everyone disgusted):
"Today we are changing our semi-closed source blockchain to open source and lowering fees"
Maybe next month, we can sharedrop some BTS on BTC/DOGE/ETH like ClamClone did (Clams are a generic BTC clone whose only claim to fame is stealing our brilliant sharedrop on arbitrary random (non- mega whale) wallets idea that we never used to land a $1.5 million community)
I know, I know, "Human psychology" sounds gay and all but remember bro:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRTdzGtu3yA
(those empty cans on the floor are cash wads in your pocket)
In case you want another Lava Lesson about uncontrollable human marketing money making emotions that can only make you rich if you allow them to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlO8pN8HIA8
Marketing Marketing Marketing
BitShares - quenching your uncontrollable urge to make money
Why?
What were you trying to sell them?
-
I would support a temporary lowering of transfer fees.
I would support a permanent lowering of transfer fees.
+1
I would support percentage based transfer fees (with a minimum to prevent Spam and a maximum to remain competitive).
+1
+5% Logic prevails
Where a crypto-company will make it's money is on the products, services & purchases. (Even PayPal doesn't charge for basic transfers)
If BitShares doesn't yet have any useful products and services then the potential is limited. The solution for the referral programme is to fast track a product (if you can't artificially stimulate BitAsset liquidity) But charging high transfer fees won't aid adoption or the referral programme imo.
-
I would support a temporary lowering of transfer fees.
I would support a permanent lowering of transfer fees.
+1
I would support percentage based transfer fees (with a minimum to prevent Spam and a maximum to remain competitive).
+1
+5% Logic prevails
+5% +5% +5%
Percentage based fees please.
If someone wants to send us a 2 BTS donation in the mobile wallet, it actually ends up costing them 34 BTS with the network fee. That's just dumb.
Here's another example: http://cryptofresh.com/u/announce
We could have a wicked awesome troll box, but not too many people will want to use it if it costs them their donation PLUS the 32 BTS network fee.. That's just dumb.
How can we ever bring in the third world (hmm, a couple billion people?) if none of them can afford it?