Well done!

Funny how some of the most groundbreaking news can be so understated.

Quote from: OldMan on November 23, 2014, 02:50:28 pm

Quote from: luckybit on November 23, 2014, 03:23:13 am

Quote from: toast on November 22, 2014, 06:01:32 pm

I think this would really help people understand how to make long-term valuations for BTS. We pursue things that help us burn BTS so that we can eventually start getting paid for owning stake in a profitable autonomous system.

The mechanics of the dividend are not important except that it should be in bitUSD or bitGOLD.

For tax reasons I would prefer not to receive any BitUSD dividends. It makes things complicated legally. Just burn the BTS and you have a capital gains tax to pay if the price goes up which is lower than an income tax in some cases.

I prefer burning and I think it's also politically inappropriate to promote BitUSD over all other currencies. BitGOLD might be okay but GOLD is volatile and isn't BTS so it's not actual stake in the system. I do see that it might encourage people to hold BitUSD or BitGold and it has some strong points but I think deflation works for everyone without favoring any political currencies, specific BitAssets, or legal possibilities.

There is a lot of merit in this.

But eventually BTS is going to have to reset the share supply.

So just reset on a monthly basis to maintain a 2bn share supply.

BTS holders recieve BTS deposit on the first of the month; no need for bitUSD/GOLD etc.

I don't see why the share supply has to be reset. In fact I think developers need to stop messing with the share supply. Stability in the protocol for BTS token holders come from there being predictability in the share supply. Stop diluting, inflating, or otherwise adding insecurity to the mix when it's not necessary.

If you want to do cash dividends then set up a legal cooperative and distribute dividends to all who are members. If you're not going to do this then just burn the transaction fees and by increasing the burn rate when people sell their BTS they'll pay either capital gains or income tax.

Burn means eventually the share supply will reach zero.

If/when BTS experiences large scale adoption the burn rate might surprise folks - BTS may become the most lucrative 'company' in existence.

As the share supply shrinks usability will be adversely impacted.

So rather than one massive share reset 10 years down the road, just program in monthly BTS distributions to maintain the 2bn supply.

Tax implications would need to be understood, but I think most folks would just consider it as taxable income.

Client should make it easy to track BTS distributions for tax purposes.

I think this would really help people understand how to make long-term valuations for BTS. We pursue things that help us burn BTS so that we can eventually start getting paid for owning stake in a profitable autonomous system.

The mechanics of the dividend are not important except that it should be in bitUSD or bitGOLD.

Yes, excellent idea.

When total share supply is burned down to 2bn the burn ends and all fees etc. are distributed on the 1st of the month to BTS holders.

Instant monthly income. Would be huge!

Quote from: OldMan on November 20, 2014, 10:26:39 am

One would think the largest investors, by definition, would have the best grasp of the potential of BTS.

It does seem odd that someone with a substantial stake would be heavily divesting at this point... prior to any real marketing.

Or perhaps they are speculating and attempting to grow their stake by causing a run and then buying back in.

It is interesting to watch the price fall clear back to launch prices. 

The good news is that after a dry spell of no one being willing to short BitUSD there is now huge demand to short the dollar.   I suspect someone is selling down external exchanges so they can get a good short entry point on the internal exchange.

Possible and plausible.

I suspect the buying back in will be an interesting exercise - interesting to see sell side depth on the first leg up, post marketing push.

How does forcing an uninformed voter to make an uninformed vote produce any value for anyone?

The idea would be to force the uniformed to become informed, or at minimum more informed than they would otherwise be.

Imagine if US citizens were taxed at a higher rate if they elected not to vote; the general population would be orders of magnitude more informed on the political process.

Really, do folks have a right to the benefits of a democratic society if they cannot be bothered to vote?

Do BTS shareholders have a right to yield if they cannot be bothered to vote?

"Hey, use the system to transfer and store value. But if you want the benefits (yield) you need to participate (vote)."

People use BTC right now without voting and receive no yield.

Is it so unreasonable to say "Using BTS gives you all the benefits of BTC and then some. In addition, if you want to take the time, you can vote and be compensated by earning yield."

I think the mindset needs to change from 'yield is an entitlement' to 'yield is a privilege that is earned'.

I'll be convinced it can reach 100$/BTS the day I'll see BTS talked about on every financial channels on TV as the new way to do smart banking, and when traditional banks try to shut BTS down with some lobbying to legislators because they feel threatened.

We're a long way to even get 1$/BTS, which is 50 times more than the current value.

We need to start crawling before running.

We should manage our expectations a little...

Agree completely! The ride to $1 is going to be interesting.

This trillion-dollar-pie-in-the sky speculation can provide useful perspective.

To the crypto community a market cap in the billions or tens of billions seems enormous.

In the fiat world billions are nearly trivial when it comes to asset classes and investment vehicles.

I believe folks are going to be stunned when a crypto really catches on; there is just so much liquid wealth sloshing around right now, looking for yield. Give it a place to park and look out.

Quote from: OldMan on November 12, 2014, 11:33:51 pm

My guess is that hedge fund money is accumulating and positioning for a drive to $10k/BTC once the ETFs are live.

You will see the log charts all over the media guaranteeing $10k per coin based on previous bubbles.

Retail investors will throw a few bucks into the ETFs and it will become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Next leg up to $100k will be retail + institutional + sovereign wealth trying to jump on the train, say 2-3 years.

By then BTS will be mature, investors will have gotten a taste of crypto-riches and the moon rocket will launch.

5 years BTC could be $100k and BTS could be $100.

That's too good to be true 
Historically, all financial bubbles didn't live for longer than a few years. Bitcoin doesn't have enough utility to justify such valuations, it's basically a ZX Spectrum computer in a growing PC market. If the price goes high enough, it will be easier for speculators to profit from shorting than from pumping it further. Actually, I do want BTC to go to ATH again, it would indeed spread the "taste of crypto-riches" and helped other crypto projects, including Bitshares. I just don't see it happening...

BTC has brand recognition, network effect and momentum.

You are absolutely correct on the utility aspect, but its good enough to move value around the globe quickly, cheaply and reliably.

DPOS/BTS is superior in every way, but PoW will die a slow death.

Quote from: OldMan on November 12, 2014, 03:02:32 pm

With stable tech and good marketing BTS will attract billions of investment over the next two or three years.

If the tech is not superseded by something better, which DPOS kinda makes impossible, global adoption could conceivably push BTS to become the first trillion-dollar crypto.

A trillion dollar market cap for BTS is not so far flung as it sounds.

I like how you said stable tech.  The newest whiz bang features aren't as important as solving a problem, proper marketing, stability and making sure it's easy for different segments to intuitively understand their specific client.

Couldn't agree more.

With financial tools folks just need simple and reliable; nothing should inform the design and code more than ease of use and uptime.