Quote from: yvv on November 11, 2015, 09:24:44 pm

Quote from: Akado on November 11, 2015, 08:29:10 am

Quote from: yvv on November 11, 2015, 02:22:03 am

Quote from: luckybit on November 11, 2015, 01:56:42 am

People in the USA don't seem interested in buying altcoins or Bitcoin right now.

Of course we are interested. But this is a fucking painful process. While trying to bring funds to bitshares last week, I checked many options. I even found a bitcoin ATM in a grocery store next to my block. What a useless machine. Coinbase looks to be the only suitable way to buy bitcoins, but then you need to convert them to BTS on another exchange with almost zero liquidity. So, to deposit funds to exchange you need to go to another exchange and another exchange. Is not this ridiculous?

Thats what metaexchange and others are for. You can buy on coinbase, send to metaexchange and you get the funds in your wallet.youonly need to send them once. Try it and it Will feel much easier than doing what you do. I know cause thats what i did before

Yeah, right. Buying $50 worth of BTC on coinbase, I can get only $45 worth of BTS on metaexchange. Good deal for coinbase and metaexchange.

What do you mean? That's 10% spread. Are metaexchange's prices that off? And what do you mean good deal for metaexchange? Last time I knew it was coinbase who charged more each time you bought a btc, not metaexchange. You have other exchanges you can use to get into BTS.

If using coinbase because you're in NY is the problem, then that's the exact same thing if you want BTS or any other coin. You make it seem like it's BTS's problem

I don't see why anyone would buy BTS with a large sum of money unless there is something they can do on Bitshares 2.0. I think the USD direct purchase and withdraw stuff is interesting but expensive and not urgent. On the other hand I think prediction markets and margin trading are urgent.

You can be an all crypto exchange and do fine, and of course you should have ability to deposit and withdraw USD, but there is the possibility that everyone will immediately withdraw into USD the moment that feature is added and the price could drop like a rock unless there is some reason why they wouldn't.

Quote from: monsterer on November 11, 2015, 11:10:02 am

Quote from: luckybit on November 11, 2015, 11:03:34 am

Terrible idea. Let the individuals lend, not the blockchain. Do we need to mimic the central bank?

Individuals need to collect interest. The blockchain doesn't. If individuals compete then interest rates can go down, how does the blockchain compete?

Are you sure you don't want the blockchain to be profitable? The blockchain would provide a base level loan offer with a rate/loan size which would be another votable parameter.

That makes sense but it's much easier to sell something where the client can loan and get money than selling something that the client has to buy and wait for it to get more valuable, which since it's burning bts (i assume) will take years and years. People want to make money now and it's more complicated for them to understand. That way people can compete against each other, we can get services in, etc. If it's the blockchain who profits, people won't feel as interested to join.

  This ^

Quote from: luckybit on November 11, 2015, 11:03:34 am

Terrible idea. Let the individuals lend, not the blockchain. Do we need to mimic the central bank?

Individuals need to collect interest. The blockchain doesn't. If individuals compete then interest rates can go down, how does the blockchain compete?

Are you sure you don't want the blockchain to be profitable? The blockchain would provide a base level loan offer with a rate/loan size which would be another votable parameter.

Of course I want the DAC to be profitable but not at the expense of that which would actually attract the liquidity in the first place. Liquidity is attracted by people making a profit, and the transaction fees should be how the DAC makes a profit.

And DAC profit can be in the form of burning fees, but people have to profit in the form of interest, yield, etc. So you need a balanced economy where as many people as possible have an opportunity to profit and when you take opportunities to profit away you make Bitshares less attractive.

So I would say the bond market with individuals profiting is actually better for marketing than trying to market the blockchain profiting. How do you market your proposal to people who used to get dividends from stocks, yield, interest on centralized exchanges, or even yield from BitUSD etc?

Bitshares 1.0 offered profit opportunity to anyone who parked on it. Bitshares 2.0 does not. And then we wonder why Bitshares 2.0 has liquidity problems?

Quote from: luckybit on November 09, 2015, 09:13:11 pm

From the look at the price it's at the cheapest price it's ever been, even cheaper than it was at the Protoshares stage. Anyone buying now would be buying in at the early adopter prices.

And eventually the price is going to go way up again, just as it did with Bitcoin, Litecoin and any of the others. As long as the developers continue to add utility, improve UX, improve the UI, these low prices will not be sustainable.

At the same time Ethers are cheap also, but at $1 people might not get as much ROI as they could get in BTS. This makes BTS as underpriced as it is, a very good buy at this time. At the same time if anyone can earn it, it would be very wise to hold onto it.

I did some math, and Ethereum could someday be $50 or $100 each if the market cap gets high enough and it probably will. Bitshares on the other hand could someday reach 50cents to $1 each, with a reasonably high market cap. This would mean you could acquire potentially $200,000 worth of Bitshares for the price of 1 Bitcoin?

You would think every Bitcoin holder who has more than a few Bitcoins would put at least 1 BTC into Bitshares, but it is likely the Bitcoin distribution is extremely centralized, and this would explain why we don't see that. On the other hand with a fiat onramp you might not need BTC to acquire BTS and if people are willing to earn BTS you also don't need BTC to acquire BTS.

The rise of Ethereum, SAFE Network, NXT and others will also have interesting implications for BTS. Altcoin holders might be more likely to diversify, and individuals who feel that Bitcoin is too expensive might be more likely to diversify as they have in the past.

A prediction I'll make is that December-Janurary will be the best months to acquire large stakes in BTS. Save your money for those months.

is it realy good time to tell ppl abut BTS?
yeah will tell ppl that bts could make 1 m transactions but has lost its value significantly.
please just show me a perfectly working product that l could be convinced to tell ppl about bts?
by the way l have convinced two friends of mine they have lost a lot with buying bts.
Regards

You don't know how investing works. You're supposed to tell your friends to buy a stock when the price is low, when it's under it's true value. The way it works is you buy low and sell high, it's not an emotion based skill, your feelings and intuitions are almost always going to be wrong, rely on a spreadsheet.

The utility of Bitshares is increasing, the price of Bitshares is decreasing and is now below what it was prior to launch, so anyone getting in now will probably in at some of the the cheapest possible prices and the greatest potential to profit over a long period of time. It's no different than telling people to buy Bitcoin right after the crash to $3 when everyone was saying Bitcoin was dead.

Now you're saying Bitshares is dead and that is the time when people should be telling their friends to buy it. Buy when people are in despair, and sell when people are in bubble thinking or when you think Bitshares is at a reasonable value in terms of market cap.

The 8 million market cap is low and unreasonable for what Bitshares will offer in terms of utility. If you look at even the average chat startup a 200 million to 2 billion market cap is not unreasonable at all. This means for what Bitshares will be able to offer the current value is just extremely good.

But that is just my opinion, and you can sell all your BTS if you've lost faith. I encourage you to sell all your BTS for what you think it's worth so that someone with faith can hold them.

I believe it could take years before things turn around, and that is okay because Bitshares as a community and it's codebase shouldn't go away just as Bitcoin shouldn't. If Bitcoin catches on and goes mainstream then Bitshares will easily be in the billions of market cap.

Even another crypto bubble could put Bitshares up and you'll have sold yours during the recession.

Quote from: Method-X on November 11, 2015, 05:34:19 pm

Focusing on a million different projects at once is what killed bitshares. It would be very unwise to go back in that direction.

absolutely agreed - stay focused .. and go step by step .. not get overhelmed of all possibilites, ideas and so on ...

Bitshares isn't "killed'. It's that kind of talk that is killing Bitshares.

Just because the price is down it doesn't mean it's "killed". The incomplete products isn't what killed anything, in fact it is that kind of innovation which kept me and others interested enough to stick around. Ethereum also has a lot of stuff going on and is mostly vaporware but no one is saying it's a dead project.

I would say the fact that Bytemaster and others have a grand vision is the reason to stick with this project long term. The lack of vision is a sign for when it's time to leave.

Quote from: xeroc on November 11, 2015, 10:28:10 am

Not clear to me .. do you propose to use bit USD as collateral for BTS then?

I think we had this discussion already some time ago and agreed that shareholders do not want to have BTS inflated like that .. Besides that, it would be pretty much possible (although, I am not sure about "guaranteed" profits)

If you want to go long USD, you borrow BTS from the bond market, buy it, pay interest on the loan, sell it, give back the BTS + interest, or get margin called. Either way the blockchain gets its BTS back 100% plus profits.

edit: shorts are more tricky, though.

The blockchain doesn't need to profit, people do.
The blockchain needs to facilitate people profiting, or do all the people exist to serve the profit of the blockchain?

Why would people lend if they can't get any interest? If they have to compete with the blockchain itself then they'll just lend on Poloniex. Where will people get 5 or 10% yield from to bring liquidity?

The blockchain could bring liquidity but it would only be temporary, it would be unnatural, and unsustainable.

when you go to bitshares.org it's not explaining simply enough what bitshares is. It currently says: 

BitShares 2.0 is an industrial-grade financial smart contract platform.
Built using the latest in industry research, BitShares 2.0 delivers
a decentralized financial platform with speeds approaching** NASDAQ.

its to long winded and trying to sound clever.  simple is best. we should say what we are.

"Bitshares: The Decentralised Exchange"

I have a small stake in Synereo and I follow their progress.  I very much like the sound of what they are trying to accomplish.  Anyway, they are looking for exchanges to be able to develop a market for their native token, the AMP.  What are the chances of launching AMP trading onto the Bitshares DEX or one of the other exchanges, Openledger, Bunkerchain Labs or CCEDK?

http://www.synereo.com/

Can we target other interesting projects that are struggling to get their token onto an exchange?  Obviously some due diligence is required to assess the overhead in maintenance.  Will reaching out to these other projects for that purpose afford some additional prospects for transitioning whole alts into UIA's?

I've been trying to do exactly this but not with much success. Omni is already used by some people and perhaps for certain projects Omni is a better choice.

But if they aren't Omni exclusive then we should get them on Bitshares also.