Quote from: bytemaster on September 16, 2015, 05:19:19 PM

QuoteWell I just learned that all upgrade fees form 1.0 to 2.0 go to the network now and so I have lost my revenue model and thus my incentive to create such a funnel

Max,  if your revenue model depended upon getting upgrade fees from EXISTING users then that would be a relatively small market.   If every forum member who has posted in the
past 3 months were to sign up through your funnel it would only represent a one-time revenue of perhaps $100,000 that will vest over a year.  That is not a long-term business play. 

All NEW users who signup and then upgrade will be paid to you.    So if you signup a new account (pay the account registration fee) and then they upgrade to LTM then you get $80. 

I hope that clarifies things for you.  After all, we designed the referral program based upon your ideas.  I would hate to think that we did something with the design that undermines your plans.

With that said... Max I don't see any reason why you can't just roll out as planned, since the only objection was initially to capture the conversion of all existing members here. Clearly the opportunity to create new users is far far far greater and will yield the multiples you are seeking.

Or is there something I missed in your OP on the reasoning behind changing the plan?

Quote from: bytemaster on September 16, 2015, 05:19:19 PM

QuoteWell I just learned that all upgrade fees form 1.0 to 2.0 go to the network now and so I have lost my revenue model and thus my incentive to create such a funnel

Max,  if your revenue model depended upon getting upgrade fees from EXISTING users then that would be a relatively small market.   If every forum member who has posted in the
past 3 months were to sign up through your funnel it would only represent a one-time revenue of perhaps $100,000 that will vest over a year.  That is not a long-term business play. 

All NEW users who signup and then upgrade will be paid to you.    So if you signup a new account (pay the account registration fee) and then they upgrade to LTM then you get $80. 

I hope that clarifies things for you.  After all, we designed the referral program based upon your ideas.  I would hate to think that we did something with the design that undermines your plans.

There are two costs I must cover. 
1. Upfront costs (relatively large) - Time, energy, video production, opportunity cost
2. Ongoing (relatively small) -  Just hosting fees and a little split testing. I like giving as much to the referrer as possible so I don't want to take anymore than 10% from that.  (The theory/hope is that higher incentives brings volume which makes up for it.)

Btw, 3 months is a lot more exciting for the referrer which is obviously good.  I hope it is enough to preserve the referral system.

Quote from: mint chocolate chip on September 16, 2015, 06:02:20 AM
Where is the wallet access, because doesn't the wallet provider take a cut? For example, if it is on bitshares.org, would you be funneling to bitshares.org and thus we would end up with only the 50/50 commission?

No commissions split others.   BM/Cryptonomex will host wallets and not take a cut.

Quote from: tonyk on September 16, 2015, 05:47:00 PM

Quote from: bytemaster on September 16, 2015, 05:19:19 PM

QuoteWell I just learned that all upgrade fees form 1.0 to 2.0 go to the network now and so I have lost my revenue model and thus my incentive to create such a funnel

Max,  if your revenue model depended upon getting upgrade fees from EXISTING users then that would be a relatively small market.   If every forum member who has posted in the
past 3 months were to sign up through your funnel it would only represent a one-time revenue of perhaps $100,000 that will vest over a year.  That is not a long-term business play. 

All NEW users who signup and then upgrade will be paid to you.    So if you signup a new account (pay the account registration fee) and then they upgrade to LTM then you get $80. 

I hope that clarifies things for you.  After all, we designed the referral program based upon your ideas.  I would hate to think that we did something with the design that undermines your plans.

1y vesting will be the starting number?
Slightly disappointed - I remember talks about 3 mo. Hope this is a vote-able parameter as well.

I thought it was lowered to 3 or 2 months? wasn't that part of a hangout recently?

Quote from: tonyk on September 16, 2015, 05:47:00 PM

Quote from: bytemaster on September 16, 2015, 05:19:19 PM

QuoteWell I just learned that all upgrade fees form 1.0 to 2.0 go to the network now and so I have lost my revenue model and thus my incentive to create such a funnel

Max,  if your revenue model depended upon getting upgrade fees from EXISTING users then that would be a relatively small market.   If every forum member who has posted in the
past 3 months were to sign up through your funnel it would only represent a one-time revenue of perhaps $100,000 that will vest over a year.  That is not a long-term business play. 

All NEW users who signup and then upgrade will be paid to you.    So if you signup a new account (pay the account registration fee) and then they upgrade to LTM then you get $80. 

I hope that clarifies things for you.  After all, we designed the referral program based upon your ideas.  I would hate to think that we did something with the design that undermines your plans.

1y vesting will be the starting number?
Slightly disappointed - I remember talks about 3 mo. Hope this is a vote-able parameter as well.

My bad, we did discuss making it 3 months.  1 year was the initial design, but we will launch with 3 months.

Quote from: bytemaster on September 16, 2015, 05:19:19 PM

QuoteWell I just learned that all upgrade fees form 1.0 to 2.0 go to the network now and so I have lost my revenue model and thus my incentive to create such a funnel

Max,  if your revenue model depended upon getting upgrade fees from EXISTING users then that would be a relatively small market.   If every forum member who has posted in the
past 3 months were to sign up through your funnel it would only represent a one-time revenue of perhaps $100,000 that will vest over a year.  That is not a long-term business play. 

All NEW users who signup and then upgrade will be paid to you.    So if you signup a new account (pay the account registration fee) and then they upgrade to LTM then you get $80. 

I hope that clarifies things for you.  After all, we designed the referral program based upon your ideas.  I would hate to think that we did something with the design that undermines your plans.

1y vesting will be the starting number?
Slightly disappointed - I remember talks about 3 mo. Hope this is a vote-able parameter as well.

QuoteWell I just learned that all upgrade fees form 1.0 to 2.0 go to the network now and so I have lost my revenue model and thus my incentive to create such a funnel

Max,  if your revenue model depended upon getting upgrade fees from EXISTING users then that would be a relatively small market.   If every forum member who has posted in the
past 3 months were to sign up through your funnel it would only represent a one-time revenue of perhaps $100,000 that will vest over a year.  That is not a long-term business play. 

All NEW users who signup and then upgrade will be paid to you.    So if you signup a new account (pay the account registration fee) and then they upgrade to LTM then you get $80. 

I hope that clarifies things for you.  After all, we designed the referral program based upon your ideas.  I would hate to think that we did something with the design that undermines your plans.

Where is the wallet access, because doesn't the wallet provider take a cut? For example, if it is on bitshares.org, would you be funneling to bitshares.org and thus we would end up with only the 50/50 commission?

To answer your question in its current form.

No, I would not pay for that.

Quote from: Shentist on September 16, 2015, 05:35:04 AM

Quote from: fav on September 16, 2015, 05:20:27 AM
why don't you just offer a referral split? should be possible, right?

i think he wants to get something in advance, because you will never know if this will work.

Max, what about this

- create an asset for your referrer business in bitshares
- sell the asset to people, hold the rest for yourself
- make a comitment that this asset will get xx% of all the collected fees like fee sharing etc.

this will give you money upfront ; you can set the value you think this is worth by yourself ; you can use the service for the marketers for free so the hurdle for everyone will be lower

i am not sure if we have so many profis here, but i think with this way you will find many people who will use and invest in this service.

great idea too... pay like 5-10% dividends on your networks net income every month, and take a cut from marketers as your profit. I'd be fine with 70% refshare for my work (bitshares.org only offers 50% through faucet for example)

Quote from: fav on September 16, 2015, 05:20:27 AM
why don't you just offer a referral split? should be possible, right?

i think he wants to get something in advance, because you will never know if this will work.

Max, what about this

- create an asset for your referrer business in bitshares
- sell the asset to people, hold the rest for yourself
- make a comitment that this asset will get xx% of all the collected fees like fee sharing etc.

this will give you money upfront ; you can set the value you think this is worth by yourself ; you can use the service for the marketers for free so the hurdle for everyone will be lower

i am not sure if we have so many profis here, but i think with this way you will find many people who will use and invest in this service.

why don't you just offer a referral split? should be possible, right?

Edit: if my own funnel fails, I'd totally buy in (for BitUSD)

Yes, I like the sound of it Max.
Count me in.

I might pay it. But I'm not clear on how it would work for you financially. First of all, your post title asks about a small monthly fee, but in the post itself you seem to focus on the $97. I think you might get more business if you let people do either one. The small monthly fee would be a pain in the ass to administer, but I'm thinking you might get more takers if the threshold is lower than $97. Then there are people like me who would rather just pay the full amount and be done with it.

Presumably, someone would pay the $97 because they see a chance of earning much more from the referrals. Does that work out for you financially, given the referral fees? I guess my real question there is, do you need some greater scale (lots of people paying in) or is each user essentially self-supporting?

You could call it a membership fee (or something similarly plain) just so that no one in government believes you are running a Ponzi type scheme. I actually have a healthy respect for pyramid structures when it comes to referral fees; to my knowledge, no one has come up with a more powerful marketing reward system, as all the Amways of the world figured out and many Fortune 1000 companies emulated long ago. But you have to be careful that no one thinks you're running an unsustainable Ponzi scheme.

Could there be any play as far as creating a UIA or doing some crowdfunding to kick this off, to the point where you had a big enough pool of money to fund/incentivize x number of participants?

So this is for driving consumers to the bitshares webwallet, could the offer potentially include other apps too?