Lets vote for lower fees!

[pal]

It would be better to raise fees on BTS transfers to allow the network to benefit from all those transfers to/from poloniex.

Lets face it all transfers at this point are just to/from an exchange by people who either want out of BitShares altogether or are transferring to their own wallet for the long term. Its not facilitating any real merchant activity at the moment. Either way they wont mind paying a fee of around 50 BTS.

Fees getting higher with growth of the system, so lowering the fees will be temporary. Eventually BTS will be profitable, but right now there is not enough users to get this profit from.

[MarketingMonk]

Price is never really the issue. The real issue in marketing is the perception of value.

That comes from correctly educating the prospective users.

I vote to keep fees the same and focus on the product.

This idea that every business starts off losing money is a limiting belief.

It is a self fulfilling prophesy.

As an online entrepreneur I'm always asking this question when launching a new business:

"How can we be profitable from day 1?"

How differently do you think things pan out with that mindset?

As opposed to:

"We are going to lose money for the first year anyway so we need to think how are we going to survive?"

And the example of Twitter and Facebook relates to BitShares only in as much as the focus at the beginning was getting as many people using the system as possible.

That's where the similarities end.

The problem for Twitter and Facebook in the early years was the lack of a business model and hence no idea how they were going to generate revenue.

We already have a business model and a revenue stream with BitShares so the real question becomes:

"How do we attract more users to what we've got?"

[Empirical1.2]

It would be better to raise fees on BTS transfers to allow the network to benefit from all those transfers to/from poloniex.

Lets face it all transfers at this point are just to/from an exchange by people who either want out of BitShares altogether or are transferring to their own wallet for the long term. Its not facilitating any real merchant activity at the moment. Either way they wont mind paying a fee of around 50 BTS.

Fees getting higher with growth of the system, so lowering the fees will be temporary. Eventually BTS will be profitable, but right now there is not enough users to get this profit from.

What size transactions do you think the average Polish/Chinese person will be making?

I'm in favour of the current fees but don't mind decreasing them for lower value transactions..

With a flat fee system people at the lower end are possibly paying an unfair amount.

(It doesn't make sense if US users are on average sending $500 for $0.10 and our say African users are sending an average of $4 and paying $0.10 per transaction too. We could potentially get better value from both markets with a sliding scale.)

What about 0.1% fee with a minimum fee of $0.01 and a maximum of say $0.10

That way if you send/receive <$10 you only pay $0.01. $25 is $0.025 etc..

 

[pal]

@MarketingMonk

You try to attract new users from countries there already good financial system (USA, Western Europe), while we could provide free banking for the world. Current fees isolate system in one region. This cutting off China, Eastern Europe, Russia, Greece, Argentina, Africa and others.

[noisy]

"How can we be profitable from day 1?"

That is good approach, but somehow bitcoin do not earn money... and most of people don't care about that. Why? Because they believe in the massive adoption of bitcoin in the future, and then all people will earn money every day, just by not spending so huge transaction fees to the banks.

"How can we be profitable from day 1?"

One more time... this is good approach if you want to create a company which will sell ice creams on the street. But if you want to lunch a rocket and land on the mars... you just cannot think about the profit in the short term. INNOVATION NEED INVESTMENTS - simple as that.

"How do we attract more users to what we've got?"

And this is another misunderstanding. 99% of people are consumers... so we should allow them consume cheap. I don't understand an idea, that suddenly we want to only attract people which want to be a "referral entrepreneur" at the expense of average user.

[pal]

What about 0.1% fee with a minimum fee of $0.01 and a maximum of say $0.10

That way if you send/receive <$10 you only pay $0.01. $25 is $0.025 etc..

What would be great! Is it easily doable? What we need for this? Let's start casting votes! 

[noisy]

What about 0.1% fee with a minimum fee of $0.01 and a maximum of say $0.10

That way if you send/receive <$10 you only pay $0.01. $25 is $0.025 etc..

I think, that would be fair.

[Empirical1.2]

What about 0.1% fee with a minimum fee of $0.01 and a maximum of say $0.10

That way if you send/receive <$10 you only pay $0.01. $25 is $0.025 etc..

What would be great! Is it easily doable? What we need for this? Let's start casting votes! 

I don't know if it's easily doable. We would have to ask Bytemaster and also see what are the negatives.

[bobmaloney]

What about 0.1% fee with a minimum fee of $0.01 and a maximum of say $0.10

That way if you send/receive <$10 you only pay $0.01. $25 is $0.025 etc..

What would be great! Is it easily doable? What we need for this? Let's start casting votes! 

I don't know if it's easily doable. We would have to ask Bytemaster and also see what are the negatives.

A switch to a percentage-based fee system would require a hard fork (according to bytemaster in this mornings mumble session)

[noisy]

Suddenly I understood the power of no truly requirenment of fee in bitcoin. As far as I know, you do not have to pay a large fee, but you have to remember, that this will mean, that miners will authorize more profitable transactions first. If I want to have a proper speed, I need to pay more - fair enough.

This also mean, that miners are greedy, what is good in that case, because in that case miners are just workers of the network, and they should work as hard as they can, to process all data.

I think the best idea should be to:
- lower the cost of the network. If you want to make a profit, maybe we should not spend so much at the first place? Are miners really need to earn so much? As far as I know, they earn much more that then need to cover the expenses.
- fees should be dynamic. If the there is a lot of transactions in the network, then fee should be higher. If processing is cheap because there is not much transactions to process, fees should be very low.

[donkeypong]

Keep it and let's see this baby grow.

[noisy]

Keep it and let's see this baby grow.

You are kidding me!? You prefer to step back rather than fix the issue? People really complains about that:



This kind of fees really makes bitshares useless for all people in my country. This could be the reason why I could stop using bitshares.

[julian1]

I'd much rather vote for lower dilution and background sell-pressure.

[xiahui135]

we should lower the transacion , place/cancel order fee.

Lower the transaction fee, fee for place/cancel orders. This makes strong and deep order book. I have plenty of experience trade in nxt DEX. Because the market is not deep and my order may not make a deal, I feel lost something to place an order. So I am willing to pay tens times of fee to trade on centered exchange.

We should increase the fee when trade success.
Increase trade fee rate to 0.05%(more or less). So a average 20000 bts order will create 20 bts profit.
Why? Because of a simple research result: both side of a trade feel themself is winner, when they trade totally freely. In this situation, people are willing to pay more.
(I have many experice in this, that i am willing to pay hundreds of bts to central exchanges as fee, when i feel making a good deal. Even 0.5% fee rate is not high for me in this case)

[xeroc]

It seems there are way more people in this community that solve multi-dimensional optimization problems than I thought .. :-P