I've thought more about this and talked to several BTS stakeholders. Many have the view that integration of BitUSD should be free, because it's beneficial for your business, as a stable crypto that's useful for gamers. BitShares should not have to pay to add a feature to your service, unless its open sourced (as a marketer I can't evaluate the value of that). This is by no means an official view as there is no such thing as 'official' in BitShares, just a view that I have encountered from a number of people.
The advertising on the other hand, that is a separate proposition. Ideally BitShares would have an advertising budget ready and it could then be discussed among the marketers whether we want to attack the gaming industry with BitUSD and build a BitUSD brand among gamers. A decision would then be able to be decisively made and we could start a test campaign, or not, depending on the decision.
What we've got though, is a far less elegant system. If you do get those delegates up and running, by the time they get voted in and accumulate funds months will have passed, and there never would have been a co-ordinated decision by BitShares to attack the gaming industry, just this one random foray, which if it did have a successful immediate return, is likely to fizzle out and require lots more in expenses to maintain the BitUSD brand among gamers (my initial opinion as a marketer). I'm not convinced that stable crypto is of high enough utility among gamers to go viral from one insertion point. I would be glad to test that though with a small campaign after integration.
If you did the integration for free and came back, I would fight for one of the other funds (we do have a couple) to do a test ad campaign on freebieservers, perhaps $500. If it went well I would fight for more, and more if that went well. Generally I don't think advertising budget should go directly to the company BitShares is paying to advertise with, it should come from a fund held by a marketing delegate.
Could you please break down costs of everything in your proposal into dollar amounts so we can evaluate more accurately?
And consider the following question:
Would you integrate BitUSD regardless of getting voted in because it's usefulness brings value to freebieservers?
One thing to keep in mind (I'm talking to everyone here) is that BitShares doesn't have the budget to build a strong brand around it's BitAssets. They have to have enough utility in the given niche to go viral by themselves after insertion. For gaming, I'd imagine integration with popular gaming chat like xfire (do people still use that?) combined with this kind of sponsorship is the way to go. A one-pronged attack isn't enough.
Are those 3 100% delegates already registered?
Well thought out and said matt608
Personally I think it makes more sense for Freebieservers to consider creating it's own bitasset token which it can then sell to its users as a type of currency within their gamersphere. They would take the upfront cost in getting it all setup.. but the money they can make on the transaction charges alone would be awesome. Not to mention complete control over their own asset.
The delegate position doesn't make much sense.. and the reason for open source is make sure everything being done is above board and can be audited by others vs. just a company saying 'trust us'. It also allows for peer review that can help find potential security issues. Just a few benefits of open source vs. closed.
Love the whole idea of Freebieservers joining in the cryto revolution taking place through Bitshares so they can offer next generation payment option to their users.. just think the execution strategy needs refining.
They are welcome to PM if they like to do a case analysis together to better determine a more optimal approach.
Show Posts
