Why BitShares isn't Taking off and What we are doing about it.

[Troglodactyl]

Extending expiries would mean that when bitAsset demand is relatively low compared to short demand, bitAssets would trade at larger discounts to the feed price. Its important to have the right balance for both longs and shorts.

Right now bitusd is trading at an 8.5% premium to the feed price.  It goes both ways.  I'm sure the right formula can be found but shorts are dis advantaged with the 30 day rule.

Any thoughts on this alternative to the short expiration?

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,14336.msg186635.html#msg186635

[Helikopterben]

Extending expiries would mean that when bitAsset demand is relatively low compared to short demand, bitAssets would trade at larger discounts to the feed price. Its important to have the right balance for both longs and shorts.

Right now bitusd is trading at an 8.5% premium to the feed price.  It goes both ways.  I'm sure the right formula can be found but shorts are dis advantaged with the 30 day rule.

[zerosum]

Extending expiries would mean that when bitAsset demand is relatively low compared to short demand, bitAssets would trade at larger discounts to the feed price. Its important to have the right balance for both longs and shorts.

I agree. Actually blaming the 30 days cover rule for anything negative going on is misplacing the blame/problem. Unfortunately people way high on this project share this misconception. Unfortunately no one want's to listen what the real problem is (aside from current bugs and sever bear market) - The real problem is the 200% collateral from shorts. With that collateral only real bulls (should I add unwise one at that) are ready to short. 100% collateral will bring tons of more shorts .Even neutral on the BTS price market participants will be willing to short some % of their holdings, just to help the market or for market making.. As a side effect the yield will also increase dramatically.

[starspirit]

Extending expiries would mean that when bitAsset demand is relatively low compared to short demand, bitAssets would trade at larger discounts to the feed price. Its important to have the right balance for both longs and shorts.

[Helikopterben]

I also think if the effect on liquidity won't be dire, making the 30 day cover rule much longer would be better.   

We all need to come up with a new, better idea for how to ensure that shorts cannot short eternally to 0 and never cover, because the 30 day rule isnt working well and is hurting people. 

But we cannot simply remove the rule and replace it with nothing. 

Of course, if all the market making bugs were fixed it might not be a big issue anymore, so perhaps that is the solution.

We need to look at how supply is introduced on centralized exchanges.  Supply is introduced on centralized exchanges when users deposit coins and supply is reduced on centralized exchanges when users withdraw coins.  When supply is introduced, an IOU token is issued to the user for trading and the exchange becomes custodian of the actual asset.  If coins are not deposited, then order books are thin - just take a look at some of the order books for some of the lesser alts on centralized exchanges.  In some cases, such as the gold and silver ETFs, shares are created when the exchange purchases the underlying asset for the user. 

Supply is introduced in bitshares when units are shorted into existence.  If a user wants to deposit bitcoin, they will be buying BitBTC from an existing seller or short seller.  Supply is reduced when existing shorts cover.  Forced covering forces a reduction in supply.  Would a centralized exchange have forced withdrawal?  Futures contracts, for example,  have expiration dates (mainly to generate fees) but expiration may not work well with units that are intended to also act as currency.

Users won't eternally short to 0, especially with the price feed.  In fact the opposite is occurring right now.  Look at the btc, gold, and silver markets.  There is very little on the ask side.  I, for one, have refrained from shorting because of the 30 day rule and I have been prevented from buying assets because of a thin ask book.  It's like a double-edged sword.  I think we should at least scale back this requirement to maybe 90 days, then 180 days, ect and see how that goes... and maybe eliminate the rule entirely eventually.  I know the rule was meant to increase liquidity but it didn't work.  Mores users will be required to increase liquidity and we may attract more users by removing the forced covering rule.

[Ander]

I also think if the effect on liquidity won't be dire, making the 30 day cover rule much longer would be better.   

We all need to come up with a new, better idea for how to ensure that shorts cannot short eternally to 0 and never cover, because the 30 day rule isnt working well and is hurting people. 

But we cannot simply remove the rule and replace it with nothing. 

Of course, if all the market making bugs were fixed it might not be a big issue anymore, so perhaps that is the solution.

[bytemaster]

I think the built in referral program is a great idea and will result in more marketing success than is currently achieved via the delegate system as marketers and third parties will be paid for results they actually achieve. 

However BTS has a product problem rather than a marketing problem at this stage as most have said.

We've actually already acquired enough users imo in the form of BTS shareholders to drive the BitAsset CAP to the $5-10 million range and hence a much stronger BTS valuation and it will grow easily from there.

I also think if the effect on liquidity won't be dire, making the 30 day cover rule much longer would be better.   

I really liked helikoperben's analysis https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,15692.msg201882.html#msg201882

The referral system would motivate companies like moonstone to solve the wallet / user facing issues.   Meanwhile we are actively solving blockchain/market level issues. 

[Empirical1.2]

I think the built in referral program is a great idea and will result in more marketing success than is currently achieved via the delegate system as marketers and third parties will be paid for results they actually achieve. 

However BTS has a product problem rather than a marketing problem at this stage as most have said.

We've actually already acquired enough users imo in the form of BTS shareholders to drive the BitAsset CAP to the $5-10 million range and hence a much stronger BTS valuation and it will grow easily from there.

I also think if the effect on liquidity won't be dire, making the 30 day cover rule much longer would be better.   

I really liked helikoperben's analysis https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,15692.msg201882.html#msg201882

[bitmarket]

Chiming in late here, but just wanted to let everyone know that I think a built in referral program is a great idea.    A killer idea if you will under the heading of marketing.  But as StarSpirit pointed out the needs of bitshares in priority are below.  Userbillity and UX are orders of magnitude more important than marketing right now for the exact reason BM named in his OP.

The reason users cost so much to acquire is because so many prospects once in introduced give up before making or using an account.

It is important to talk about all of these topics including marketing even though it is not the highest priority is so hopefully everything comes together all at once and we dont get somewhere and realize we missed a piece of the puzzle.

(i) Product usability (ii) Business model (iii) Marketing.

[Stan]

So what exactly is happening right now?  Is bitshares once again pivoting in a completely new direction?  Has 1.0 been delayed?  I see no milestones have been updated or achieved recently.

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,15576.msg200373.html#msg200373

[davidpbrown]

Before this thread becomes charades, can I just suggest another hurdle to adoption? For Linux users having a repository would be a big positive and save them the worry and time building it. I wonder perhaps 20% of Linux users know how to build from source and follow instructions but perhaps there's then an untapped 80% just waiting in the wings? Bitcoin has a PPA, I'm not sure of any others though some are java download but still having that would be an advantage welcoming all levels of user. Yes, it's a hassle to get it working but then it'll save an order of magnitude more users that time.

[xh3]

Traders want



and




and



businesses want



and


and




Everybody wants



and

[Helikopterben]

I think this is good, but are you suggesting the core devs focus on the front end too or mainly be the backend blockchain & market engine and provide an SDK for other companies to build various UI/UX (ie. Etrade/Think or Swim/Tradestation/Bitfinex/Kraken etc.)?

Delegates can be hired to work on both the front end and back end.  Of course anyone could utilize the back end as a market engine for their platform. 

[nz]

I totally agree with Helicopter Ben's analysis. The reason its not taking off is because the product is incomplete (but its getting close). A referral scheme is not going to help if we dont fix that first.

wallet.bitshares.org:

• Has no easy deposit page - integration with metaexchange and blocktrades needs to be seamless, not just a link
• Still feels kinda slow
• Needs its own brand identity
• Logging in as a guest and the dashboard is totally empty - needs to be buzzing with activity.

Btw there is a fun video game where you can play as helicopter ben: http://projects.wsj.com/games/thefederator/

good suggestion speedy

[speedy]

I totally agree with Helicopter Ben's analysis. The reason its not taking off is because the product is incomplete (but its getting close). A referral scheme is not going to help if we dont fix that first.

wallet.bitshares.org:

• Has no easy deposit page - integration with metaexchange and blocktrades needs to be seamless, not just a link
• Still feels kinda slow
• Needs its own brand identity
• Logging in as a guest and the dashboard is totally empty - needs to be buzzing with activity, e.g. trollbox

Btw there is a fun video game where you can play as helicopter ben: http://projects.wsj.com/games/thefederator/