Quote from: amencon on September 29, 2014, 11:20:45 pm

Quote from: luckybit on September 29, 2014, 10:10:52 pm

Quote from: 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.

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.

Quote from: 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

 

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.

Quote from: mf-tzo on September 27, 2014, 06:37:24 pm

That looks very nice!!

Will we be able to claim securely shares from 3rd party DACs that honor PTS-AGS using this wallet or I am again out of topic?

The wallet is not intended for this purpose (though it could be used it PTS gets converted to DPOS). This is simply a wallet designed specifically for the general population. The wallet can be used and adapted freely by any DAC project out there.

Looks really good.

Am I understanding correctly then that this is an open source front-end design that can be easily integrated with any DAC using the Bitshares toolkit on the back end?

Meaning a new DAC developer could clone the Bitshares toolkit and tweak as necessary and then create a site using this and have a DAC with a web GUI using very little relative development time?

Quote from: cob on September 29, 2014, 11:44:07 pm

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.

Quote from: 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.

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.

Nice additions svk, thanks.

Hmm I've been using it with my name twice after the command ("wallet_publish_version alecmenconi alecmenconi"), guess it works the same either way, no problems for me yet with it though.  Looking at help I assume the variables in brackets are optional and if left blank in this case default to the first variable entered?

Thanks for the warning about accidentally changing the pay rate though Coinhoarder.  Definitely something to avoid as it's permanent.

My delegate also mysteriously missed a couple chunks of blocks while I was sleeping last night.  The connection was fine and it started producing on main chain again on it's own so I'm not sure what the problem was exactly.