Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - biophil

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 ... 59
406
General Discussion / Re: Proposed Allocation for Merger
« on: October 21, 2014, 09:19:44 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on October 21, 2014, 09:09:28 pm
Quote from: vlight on October 21, 2014, 09:05:51 pm
DNS gets only 3% unfairly. VOTE didn't had a market cap so it would be hard to argue, but DNS was valued at 200 satoshis minimum and had ~$4M market cap.

But only $10K in liquidity.   We could have easily sold enough vote to push its price down to a value far lower than it is at today... and we would have done that had we chosen to simply compete rather than buy them out.   Buying out DNS was a gesture of good will that was mainly done because it was 90%+ AGS/PTS snapshot once we remove the developer funds from it.

BM, how close are we to this particular allocation being set in stone? My investment strategy is hanging in the balance.

407
General Discussion / Re: IMPORTANT: BTS Merger (Poll)
« on: October 21, 2014, 08:22:51 pm »
Quote from: D4vegee on October 21, 2014, 06:04:16 pm
I don't want a liquid AGS. That's why i don't hold anymore PTS. Can't AGS just remain part of the newer improved BTS with the same social consensus / future DAC honor rules? Surely this is not rocket science?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sounds pretty reasonable to me. I don't know why people aren't talking more about this.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2


408
General Discussion / Re: Proposed Allocation for Merger
« on: October 21, 2014, 08:04:51 pm »
Quote from: NewMine on October 21, 2014, 07:58:22 pm
One sentence on how VOTE will eclipse and Kill BTSX.  Just one sentence, no secrets, no slippery slope, no pie in the sky. One sentence with a fact or even a plausible theory.

Are you blindly following?

Here's a news flash, VOTE WILL NEVER ECLIPSE BTSX? VOTE has zero monetary potential. If Bytemaster wants to leave BTSX and devote all time to VOTE, so be it. Remember he and the I3 others have the largest stake to lose. Has I3 ever canvassed for a new Dev to help out? I certainly never saw a call. I am afraid something is going on behind science we are not privy to.

NewMine, we can always count on you for a good dose of bluster.

Nobody here knows what VOTE is all about. Nobody has anything other than vague hypotheses.

This is what happened, as far as I can guess: BM got really excited about VOTE the other day, and wouldn't tell us why. Then, behind the scenes, he started working on it, and his friends said "hey! stop it! BTSX isn't done yet!" And BM replied and said "But BTSX is boring! How about we figure out a way to roll the VOTE features into BTSX so that I don't have to split my time between what's boring and what's exciting?"

I bet dollars to donuts that's essentially what happened. Stan was exaggerating when he said VOTE would kill BTSX, but the idea was sound: if BM is going to work on both, everything would work better if he could work on them simultaneously.

Disclaimer: I have no idea what happened behind the scenes. I made all that up, but it's my story and I'm sticking to it.

409
General Discussion / Re: Proposed Allocation for Merger
« on: October 21, 2014, 08:00:30 pm »
Quote from: delulo on October 21, 2014, 07:55:42 pm
Quote from: emski on October 21, 2014, 06:49:17 pm
I'm 100% against this proposal. EDIT: I support the merge but not with these numbers
What AGS/PTS get is ridiculously low.
It is against the initial promise.
I fully agree with this. Agree with the merger but the allocation is so low for PTS/AGS after Feb28! Those were the ppl that donated most of the AGS dev fund...

disclaimer: I donated more to AGS after Feb28 than before.

There's nothing about this that makes it the actual end of AGS, right? The AGS donation list is still there, and we could still say the social consensus (in tatters though it may be) demands honoring it 10%. Or we could update the social consensus to say that you can honor PTS/AGS or the new BTS. Or we could say honor BTS and AGS or something like that.

However, it really does seem like post-Feb 28 AGS donators are getting shafted with this proposal.

Disclaimer: I donated almost nothing to AGS because I needed liquidity.

410
General Discussion / Re: So, how to deal with the snapshoted shares of DNS VOTE & Music？
« on: October 21, 2014, 07:50:02 pm »
Quote from: xeroc on October 21, 2014, 07:39:19 pm
Quote from: biophil on October 21, 2014, 07:35:30 pm
One thing that is always sure in the bitshares world is that nothing is ever sure...
Always adopting towards the best!

I sure hope so! All this seems to be happening awfully fast.

411
General Discussion / Re: So, how to deal with the snapshoted shares of DNS VOTE & Music？
« on: October 21, 2014, 07:35:30 pm »
Quote from: Rune on October 21, 2014, 04:22:31 pm
No matter what, if one DAC wants to absorb another, stakeholders of the absorbed DAC will get to vote on it, and only if they choose to do it will it go ahead. They will then get awarded a proportional stake so their holdings will continue at the exact same value as before.

One would hope this is the case, but no such vote occurred in the DNS DAC and as of now it's being merged with the mega-DAC at less than half its market value.

One thing that is always sure in the bitshares world is that nothing is ever sure...

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2


412
General Discussion / Re: Proposed Allocation for Merger
« on: October 21, 2014, 07:12:46 pm »
Quote from: kokojie on October 21, 2014, 07:10:59 pm
2 years vesting period is too long. Rather than reducing stakes for early withdrawal, just make 25% available at 6 month mark, 50% at 1 year mark, 100% available at 2 year mark etc... gradual vesting

I'm pretty sure that's what BM meant when he called it "linear."

413
General Discussion / Re: Proposed Allocation for Merger
« on: October 21, 2014, 06:35:39 pm »
Quote from: Ander on October 21, 2014, 06:33:28 pm
Quote from: biophil on October 21, 2014, 06:27:02 pm
I calculate that DNS needs to be about 75 satoshis.  (Unless BTSX goes up).


You are correct.  I did it wrong, multiplying by .03 for DNS and .07 for PTS.  But I needed to multiply by .03/.80 and .07/.80, because BTSX is getting 80%.


New numbers:
DNS should be 95 satoshis (at BTSX 6300 sat).
PTS should be 6600 satoshis (at BTSX 6300 sat).


PTS is already there, and has been for the past day.
DNS drops a bit more.

And none of those numbers account for liquidity premium, which for a 2 year vesting period should be significant. If the current plan is finalized, we could easily see both PTS and DNS drop by another 25% to 50%. IMO.

414
General Discussion / Re: Proposed Allocation for Merger
« on: October 21, 2014, 06:27:02 pm »
Quote from: Ander on October 21, 2014, 06:22:26 pm
Quote from: sumantso on October 21, 2014, 06:15:36 pm
Quote from: Chuckone on October 21, 2014, 06:08:37 pm
Well, if irational panic selling continue to drop the price, I'll be happy to buy and get a discount on BTS (taking into account I don't mind the vesting period)

If I understand correctly, even after 50% drop, you will still get more BTS by selling DNS for BTSX.

I calculate that DNS needs to be about 75 satoshis.  (Unless BTSX goes up).

I'm getting that 95 would do it (BTSX price changing fast, though).

In other words, the selling is not irrational; it is not a panic; it is a market movement I told you to expect earlier in this thread :)

415
General Discussion / Re: Proposed Allocation for Merger
« on: October 21, 2014, 06:21:37 pm »
Quote from: tonyk on October 21, 2014, 05:56:39 pm
Quote from: biophil on October 21, 2014, 05:43:41 pm
The above allocation grants this many BTS to each of the stakeholder DACs:

99 BTS per PTS
87.5 BTS per AGS
0.015 BTS per DNS (i.e.: sell now before your stake is worthless)

7%*2.5Bil/1.648Mil  is ~ 106 per PTS

Quote from: biophil on October 21, 2014, 05:32:31 pm
Questions: Vesting period is for who? PTS/AGS/DNS/VOTE? Or just PTS/AGS? Or... other?

Shentist also mentioned this - why the incredibly low valuation for DNS? Anybody who's smart should go sell all their DNS right now because if this proposal goes through, the price of DNS will crash by almost two-thirds, or much more than that if DNS is included in the vesting thing.

Edit: People can argue about the length of the vesting period; but like Ander said, 2 years is forever in crypto. A 2-year period will utterly crush the price of PTS because people can trade them for BTSX and get liquidity, and currently BTSX and PTS give equal amounts of BTS for the value. I'd expect a 50% drop in PTS price would be mild.

0.00006*106 ~ 0.00636
 so no 50% drop expected for PTS ,IMHO.

The drop would be because of liquidity premium for BTSX versus PTS. Pre Feb 28 snapshot, PTS (the liquid one) had something like a 3x liquidity premium over AGS. Never underestimate the market value of liquidity...

416
General Discussion / Re: Proposed Allocation for Merger
« on: October 21, 2014, 05:43:41 pm »
The above allocation grants this many BTS to each of the stakeholder DACs:

99 BTS per PTS
87.5 BTS per AGS
0.015 BTS per DNS (i.e.: sell now before your stake is worthless)

417
General Discussion / Re: Proposed Allocation for Merger
« on: October 21, 2014, 05:32:31 pm »
Questions: Vesting period is for who? PTS/AGS/DNS/VOTE? Or just PTS/AGS? Or... other?

Shentist also mentioned this - why the incredibly low valuation for DNS? Anybody who's smart should go sell all their DNS right now because if this proposal goes through, the price of DNS will crash by almost two-thirds, or much more than that if DNS is included in the vesting thing.

Edit: People can argue about the length of the vesting period; but like Ander said, 2 years is forever in crypto. A 2-year period will utterly crush the price of PTS because people can trade them for BTSX and get liquidity, and currently BTSX and PTS give equal amounts of BTS for the value. I'd expect a 50% drop in PTS price would be mild.

418
General Discussion / Re: Snapshots of BTS in a system with BitAssets
« on: October 20, 2014, 06:08:58 pm »
Quote from: fluxer555 on October 20, 2014, 05:54:21 pm
Everyone knows that when a snapshot of PTS takes place, the value of that snapshot splits off from PTS into the new DAC. With BTSX, couldn't the system be gamed by purchasing BitUSD before the end on the snapshot? What sort of game-theory scenarios are there?

It's been discussed that bitAsset holders should not be included in the snapshot, which (I think) would prevent the scenario you described. It's a fair solution in the sense that if I hold bitUSD, I'm not a shareholder of BTSX, so I shouldn't expect to participate in the snapshot.

I think on the surface it solves the problem, but I've wondered if it could cause some peg instability at the moment of the snapshot, and it could also cause big fluctuations in the market cap of bitUSD as people divest to participate in the snapshot.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2


419
General Discussion / Re: Should we continue to funding mining of PTS?
« on: October 17, 2014, 11:47:45 pm »
Quote from: Pheonike on October 17, 2014, 10:11:49 pm
Could we do a AGS style donation for the remaining PTS?

I normally hate it when people talk about "the remaining PTS", but I actually like this idea. This or simply scaling existing balances to reach some convenient round number total.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2


420
General Discussion / Re: Should we continue to funding mining of PTS?
« on: October 17, 2014, 11:44:31 pm »
Quote from: donkeypong on October 17, 2014, 11:23:33 pm
Quote from: Ander on October 17, 2014, 10:54:14 pm
FounderShares sounds exactly like some "unfair" thing that a new person cannot buy into anymore.  ;)


Bitshares Seed is a good name, imo.  Or possibly Bitshares Genesis?  Because it gives you a stake in the Genesis block of future DACs?

BitShares Genesis is good.

Ooh, I really like that. Can we please call it Genesis?

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2


Pages: 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 ... 59

Page created in 0.021 seconds with 17 queries.