Potential new member for BitShares Exchange Network, if only...

[Empirical1.2]

What does the employer get out of this? I mean you must have pitched a way to save money increase efficiency..

Because its new tech and certainly not the easiest to understand im curious as to how a big company overcame the burden of technical complexity and fear of new technology by having been provided with what they will benefit from using the technology... Must have been something very lucrative to them to jump in.

What do you think $40 million a month in BitAsset demand would do to the price of BTS? That's lucrative.

So they would be a bts holder even if thats not their core business? Doesnt make business sense unless they are a startup looking for bleeding edge risk and tech to integrate. I dont think that is the case.

I wonder if this is a partner looking to invest in bts in that case or if its a standalone company with its own core business intact and profitable.

Even if it's not their core business, but they have an understanding of the space, I think the high probability that BTS gains 2000%+ would make the opportunity lucrative.

The referral programme could also come into play? It could offset payroll costs and even make it profitable while still being better & cheaper for employees than their current system.

No sane business of decent size would do that

Actually it seems quite common. While they say it was not their intention to convert their investors to clients, it looks like some of the investors in new payroll startup,  ZenPayroll, switched the payroll of their companies over...

"Right now we have a very strong focus on small businesses, and sub-100 person companies," Reeves says. "We did not take these investors to convert them to clients, it's about getting a chance to talk to these people who have been in our shoes."

http://uk.businessinsider.com/practically-every-notable-founder-in-silicon-valley-just-invested-in-this-startup-2014-11?r=US&IR=T

[Stan]

The touch point when it comes to ACH is the delay.

ACH is cheaper because its slower.

It's like attaching a Lamborghini Huracán to a horse and buggy. You can all figure out which one in my analogy is the Huracán.

The 'good news' is that only recently (like a few months ago) they have moved to some transactions being processed 'same day'. Still a bit of a contrast to our 1 second block time.

There are two elements to this.. you need an ODFI and an Operator.

What you want 'ideally' so we can wack the buggy, set the horse free, and put a Lamborghini Veneno along side the Huracán is to have the ODFI and Operator to be one and the same... because ultimately its the clearing house that will determine the speed it gets to the RDFI.

Currently there are only a few Operators used by everyone and thus impacts the timing.

This is going to put the ODFI/Operator to the the BitShares network in a liability position that needs to be handled correctly, not just for compliance, but for security. Keep in mind when the banks mess up, they just need to make some phone calls to whom ever was on the other end and reverse the mistake. In interfacing with BitShares though.. that's not an option.. and that creates a significantly higher risk profile. Which is why so many of the current solutions work with mega delay. HOWEVER... we are anticipating a solution that could be engineered to minimize this liability thanks in part to some 2.0 features coupled with a little more engineering on our part. We cannot confirm any of this of course until we got 2.0.

You also have to consider the costs. It will double up on the transaction charges since there will be BitShares charging and then the ACH processing.

Not saying it can't be done or it will be too expensive.. just depends what degree of service will be expected and how much it will take to deliver on it.

I only know all this because of the work we are doing in regards to what BunkerDEX is offering and our Rewards and another yet announced product.

I am not saying that we have the final solution 'now'... but I am working on it. There are some creative ways this can be accomplished.

This will be necessary in the mean time until we can close the loop (ie. all transactions in the DEX).

FYI ACH includes US, it's territories, and Canada.

I am sure you got lots of peeps to talk with now Stan... but I would be happy to help out however I can if the need arises.

@Shentist - Yes.. ACH is US own inter-bank transfer system.. while most of the rest of the world uses SWIFT. Kinda like how we all use metric and US still uses imperial Canadian banks use SWIFT also.. so Canada is uniquely positioned to be able to talk to both networks and provide BitShares on/off ramp for both... and nuclear bunker hardened security to boot if we have anything to do with it.

Oh and Holy Shanaynay this is awesome!

This is very helpful data, Data!  "The need has arisen!"

The first entrepreneur who figures out a practical way to facilitate this half billion worth of business will be rich, popular, and good looking!

(Well, two out of three ain't bad...)

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

I'm working hard on this deal people, we are talking over 500+ million in yearly funds being moved.

Imagine if it is all bitUSD they were using...

This is the one gamechanger we need. They said yes, provided this option can be made to happen.

Let's do this together and share the reward...before Dublin, when we walk in with the ink dry on it.

Egg and chicken question ?
If bitshares  doesn't have 500 million + * 2 market cap , it can't provide 500 million bitusd .
If bitshares doesn't  have 500 million bitusd , it can't have 500 million + *2 market cap .

Its not a chicken and egg problem.

If This partner was to have demand for 500M in bitusd, then they would be buying bts like crazy and cause the price to become high enough to support that much bitusd.

It IS a chicken and egg problem.. you would be asking this partner to lockup $1B real dollars to collateralize the bitUSD market. The peg at that point would move to fractions of a % I think.. and for the partner.. thats a HUGE chuck of capital that effectively in lost opportunity depending on how you look at it. From their perspective it would be... they will seek out cheaper alternatives in a heartbeat if that was required of them.

Unless we can get enough people in the market to move in and do the collateral for the market at that level.. I think they will likely end up going private smartcoin.

[jsidhu]

What does the employer get out of this? I mean you must have pitched a way to save money increase efficiency..

Because its new tech and certainly not the easiest to understand im curious as to how a big company overcame the burden of technical complexity and fear of new technology by having been provided with what they will benefit from using the technology... Must have been something very lucrative to them to jump in.

What do you think $40 million a month in BitAsset demand would do to the price of BTS? That's lucrative.

So they would be a bts holder even if thats not their core business? Doesnt make business sense unless they are a startup looking for bleeding edge risk and tech to integrate. I dont think that is the case.

I wonder if this is a partner looking to invest in bts in that case or if its a standalone company with its own core business intact and profitable.

Even if it's not their core business, but they have an understanding of the space, I think the high probability that BTS gains 2000%+ would make the opportunity lucrative.

The referral programme could also come into play? It could offset payroll costs and even make it profitable while still being better & cheaper for employees than their current system.

No sane business of decent size would do that

[emailtooaj]

I would think the CCEDK and Identibit partners would have the most expertise on this, since they have dealt with banks and compliance. That expertise is probably not elsewhere on this forum, but worth checking. More likely, you may need to draw in another third party partner. It's a matter of time, people. Just a matter of time until we get these pieces in place.

The fact that the father of Bitshares ponders this and supposed partners haven't, says a lot into something. I'll let you decide what.

Hmm. Didn't realize donkeypong became our new father.  If that's the case, hey donkeypong can I have $20 please!!!!

[Ander]

I'm working hard on this deal people, we are talking over 500+ million in yearly funds being moved.

Imagine if it is all bitUSD they were using...

This is the one gamechanger we need. They said yes, provided this option can be made to happen.

Let's do this together and share the reward...before Dublin, when we walk in with the ink dry on it.

Egg and chicken question ?
If bitshares  doesn't have 500 million + * 2 market cap , it can't provide 500 million bitusd .
If bitshares doesn't  have 500 million bitusd , it can't have 500 million + *2 market cap .

Its not a chicken and egg problem.

If This partner was to have demand for 500M in bitusd, then they would be buying bts like crazy and cause the price to become high enough to support that much bitusd.

[Empirical1.2]

What does the employer get out of this? I mean you must have pitched a way to save money increase efficiency..

Because its new tech and certainly not the easiest to understand im curious as to how a big company overcame the burden of technical complexity and fear of new technology by having been provided with what they will benefit from using the technology... Must have been something very lucrative to them to jump in.

What do you think $40 million a month in BitAsset demand would do to the price of BTS? That's lucrative.

So they would be a bts holder even if thats not their core business? Doesnt make business sense unless they are a startup looking for bleeding edge risk and tech to integrate. I dont think that is the case.

I wonder if this is a partner looking to invest in bts in that case or if its a standalone company with its own core business intact and profitable.

Even if it's not their core business, but they have an understanding of the space, I think the high probability that BTS gains 2000%+ would make the opportunity lucrative.

The referral programme could also come into play? It could offset payroll costs and even make it profitable while still being better & cheaper for employees than their current system.

[Akado]

Obvious answers that were probably already considered... coinbase, circle, itbit maybe paypal.  Circle would be the best since they are now allowed to hold USD.

Stripe supports bitcoin and ACH
http://www.totalpayments.org/2014/03/31/stripe-now-supports-bitcoin-ach/

Knox Payments too
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/changetip-enables-bitcoin-transactions-via-ach/
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/vogogo-secures-partnership-knox-payments/

Stripe would be awesome, my only problem is all those companies might be too Bitcoin-centric and dismiss the rest, but Stripe would be awesome indeed. The best option would be to consult with CCEDK and Identabit first, they probably have more contacts and knowledge on that area.

[NewMine]

I would think the CCEDK and Identibit partners would have the most expertise on this, since they have dealt with banks and compliance. That expertise is probably not elsewhere on this forum, but worth checking. More likely, you may need to draw in another third party partner. It's a matter of time, people. Just a matter of time until we get these pieces in place.

The fact that the father of Bitshares ponders this and supposed partners haven't, says a lot into something. I'll let you decide what.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

The touch point when it comes to ACH is the delay.

ACH is cheaper because its slower.

It's like attaching a Lamborghini Huracán to a horse and buggy. You can all figure out which one in my analogy is the Huracán.

The 'good news' is that only recently (like a few months ago) they have moved to some transactions being processed 'same day'. Still a bit of a contrast to our 1 second block time.

There are two elements to this.. you need an ODFI and an Operator.

What you want 'ideally' so we can wack the buggy, set the horse free, and put a Lamborghini Veneno along side the Huracán is to have the ODFI and Operator to be one and the same... because ultimately its the clearing house that will determine the speed it gets to the RDFI.

Currently there are only a few Operators used by everyone and thus impacts the timing.

This is going to put the ODFI/Operator to the the BitShares network in a liability position that needs to be handled correctly, not just for compliance, but for security. Keep in mind when the banks mess up, they just need to make some phone calls to whom ever was on the other end and reverse the mistake. In interfacing with BitShares though.. that's not an option.. and that creates a significantly higher risk profile. Which is why so many of the current solutions work with mega delay. HOWEVER... we are anticipating a solution that could be engineered to minimize this liability thanks in part to some 2.0 features coupled with a little more engineering on our part. We cannot confirm any of this of course until we got 2.0.

You also have to consider the costs. It will double up on the transaction charges since there will be BitShares charging and then the ACH processing.

Not saying it can't be done or it will be too expensive.. just depends what degree of service will be expected and how much it will take to deliver on it.

I only know all this because of the work we are doing in regards to what BunkerDEX is offering and our Rewards and another yet announced product.

I am not saying that we have the final solution 'now'... but I am working on it. There are some creative ways this can be accomplished.

This will be necessary in the mean time until we can close the loop (ie. all transactions in the DEX).

FYI ACH includes US, it's territories, and Canada.

I am sure you got lots of peeps to talk with now Stan... but I would be happy to help out however I can if the need arises.

@Shentist - Yes.. ACH is US own inter-bank transfer system.. while most of the rest of the world uses SWIFT. Kinda like how we all use metric and US still uses imperial Canadian banks use SWIFT also.. so Canada is uniquely positioned to be able to talk to both networks and provide BitShares on/off ramp for both... and nuclear bunker hardened security to boot if we have anything to do with it.

Oh and Holy Shanaynay this is awesome!

[Shentist]

Do i understand it correct it is the same like SWIFT in Europe?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_Clearing_House

https://www.nacha.org/ach-network

so the question is, which already existing partner of ACH do you take into our system?

https://www.theclearinghouse.org/payments/ach

so, we are looking for a partner, who does ACH transfers?

[donkeypong]

I would think the CCEDK and Identibit partners would have the most expertise on this, since they have dealt with banks and compliance. That expertise is probably not elsewhere on this forum, but worth checking. More likely, you may need to draw in another third party partner. It's a matter of time, people. Just a matter of time until we get these pieces in place.

[unreadPostsSinceLastVisit]

If im reading this correctly, I'm not quite sure the OP question is clear enough for a specific answer imo.  Are we looking to find a new payroll processor that will accept bit assets from the company and then that processor splits out the payroll to Individual employees who wants to get paid via ach, bit assets or a combo of each?
Or are we in search of a bank that'll be willing to integrate directly to BTS as a checking and savings off ramp?

Is it a bank we're in search of? Who owns the ACH system? Who do banks talk to when they want to plug into it? Is there a special API you have to pay for? would Bitshares have to integrate the option for identity verification?

[emailtooaj]

If im reading this correctly, I'm not quite sure the OP question is clear enough for a specific answer imo.  Are we looking to find a new payroll processor that will accept bit assets from the company and then that processor splits out the payroll to Individual employees who wants to get paid via ach, bit assets or a combo of each?
Or are we in search of a bank that'll be willing to integrate directly to BTS as a checking and savings off ramp?

[jsidhu]

What does the employer get out of this? I mean you must have pitched a way to save money increase efficiency..

Because its new tech and certainly not the easiest to understand im curious as to how a big company overcame the burden of technical complexity and fear of new technology by having been provided with what they will benefit from using the technology... Must have been something very lucrative to them to jump in.

What do you think $40 million a month in BitAsset demand would do to the price of BTS? That's lucrative.

So they would be a bts holder even if thats not their core business? Doesnt make business sense unless they are a startup looking for bleeding edge risk and tech to integrate. I dont think that is the case.

I wonder if this is a partner looking to invest in bts in that case or if its a standalone company with its own core business intact and profitable.