Someone Give Me a Reason To Keep Holding BTS

[fuzzy]

What other crypto can give their shareholders access to:

Means of profit - as a shareholder you get a share of the profits

A store of value - if you think the value of BTS is going to go down, why sell shares when you can buy BTC USD EUR SILVER GOLD ..

Short - if you think the value of BTS is going to go up, why sell shares when you can borrow and sell BTC USD EUR SILVER GOLD ... and buy back at a profit without reducing your shareholdings in BTS

Did I mention, this can all be done internally without the need to trust any external exchanges. I have been exclusively trading on our exchange since the first bridges appeared (metaexchange and blocktrades). Now we have even more bridges in our wallet.

There are winners and losers to every trade.

Buy, sell or hold - All BitShares share holders can still profit using the light wallet or Openledger

well one thing i know is that we are one of the only projects out there with the sharebot or anything even similar.  if we could make it so people can send gateway versions of their coins (like OPENBTC, OPENLTC...ETC.), we can make it possible to being all cryptos here not only to be traded, but passed around to networks using twitter, reddit...and anywhere irls can be shared

[iHashFury]

What other crypto can give their shareholders access to:

Means of profit - as a shareholder you get a share of the profits

A store of value - if you think the value of BTS is going to go down, why sell shares when you can buy BTC USD EUR SILVER GOLD ..

Short - if you think the value of BTS is going to go up, why sell shares when you can borrow and sell BTC USD EUR SILVER GOLD ... and buy back at a profit without reducing your shareholdings in BTS

Did I mention, this can all be done internally without the need to trust any external exchanges. I have been exclusively trading on our exchange since the first bridges appeared (metaexchange and blocktrades). Now we have even more bridges in our wallet.

There are winners and losers to every trade.

Buy, sell or hold - All BitShares share holders can still profit using the light wallet or Openledger

[sittingduck]

Bm isn't good at networking and is overly transparent.  Those companies that get investment have connections.   You can't license block chain tech. It is all going to be open source.  That leaves CNX to be little more than contractors for hire.   Bm has a bigger vision than that. 

[Stan]

what happened to that guy who was going to do his best to get into Philippine remittance market?there were pics all around the forum celebrating with mr Bytemaster and rest of his crew.
what was his name?

identabit.com

[neo1344]

what happened to that guy who was going to do his best to get into Philippine remittance market?there were pics all around the forum celebrating with mr Bytemaster and rest of his crew.
what was his name?

[BitShares News]

So there was a hangout today.

Did you listen?

I missed it. Anything good?

http://bitsharesnews.info/post/136886532798/bitshares-dev-hangout-vision-episode-128

[nomoreheroes7]

So there was a hangout today.

Did you listen?

I missed it. Anything good?

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

So there was a hangout today.

Did you listen?

[wallace]

if a thing you think it has kinds of values normally it has no value. the problem is we need to catch the key points and just focus on it to make it happen.

if we want to be the unique blockchain based bank in the world to protect the peoples money we just focus on it first.
if we want to be the greatest exchanges in the world we just focus on it first.
if we want to be the most benefit blockchain based refrel system in the world we just focus on it first.

currently it seems we have a lot of useful features, but actually we have none of them.

[yvv]

Someone Give Me a Reason To Keep Holding BTS

You shouldn't hold it unless you want to borrow bitAsset. It is a collateral token, nothing more.

This is not true, and if it were true there would be no reason to hold BTS.

BTS also represents a share in the value of profit made from services provided by the Bitshares blockchain, such as exchange, transfers, etc.  Currently this profit doesnt exist because its speculative phase, but if it reached enough adoption to generate a profit, this profit would go to BTS holders by a dividend in the form of a reduction in the BTS supply, and thus an increase in the value of each individual BTS.

That's not true. BTS does not give you a share in earnings. Burning BTS is not the same as distributing it. It's just not.

I think the question is whether reducing supply of something that is in demand, increases the price.

In general I think it does, supply and demand, so reducing supply acts as some form of return for holders imo though you could argue it is inferior.

What about reducing the supply of something that is not in demand?

[Empirical1.2]

Someone Give Me a Reason To Keep Holding BTS

You shouldn't hold it unless you want to borrow bitAsset. It is a collateral token, nothing more.

This is not true, and if it were true there would be no reason to hold BTS.

BTS also represents a share in the value of profit made from services provided by the Bitshares blockchain, such as exchange, transfers, etc.  Currently this profit doesnt exist because its speculative phase, but if it reached enough adoption to generate a profit, this profit would go to BTS holders by a dividend in the form of a reduction in the BTS supply, and thus an increase in the value of each individual BTS.

That's not true. BTS does not give you a share in earnings. Burning BTS is not the same as distributing it. It's just not.

I think the question is whether reducing supply of something that is in demand, increases the price.

In general I think it does, supply and demand, so reducing supply acts as some form of return for holders imo though you could argue it is inferior.

[Empirical1.2]

While Clout explained that he is a custodian for other investors, I still think he got caught out a bit titling a thread 'Give me a reason to keep holding BTS' and then revealing later that he sold his personal position over a month ago 

What I do think is interesting is that a lot of people are making the argument that forum negativity is a key reason BTS is struggling to gain momentum. I counter that here https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20913.msg270908.html#msg270908

But Clout also brings up a good point.

I honestly really started to lose confidence in this project when Dan suggested that CNX was not able to get VC funding. CNX is a blockchain development company that can't get funding in a year where the demand for industrial grade blockchains has surged. There's an issue with that picture.

If a big part of the problem is the attitude of some BTS shareholders, forum posters & difficulty bringing on new investors then why is CNX who have the same talent without those problems not exploding in market value & receiving millions in VC investments given that private blockchain investments have surged? http://money.cnn.com/2015/11/02/technology/bitcoin-1-billion-invested/

It's also pity that BTS DAC gave up being a currency but still doesn't seem to have a product or service that would make a compelling addition to BAAS which has recently added Ethereum, Emercoin, Ripple, Factom among others... https://azure.microsoft.com/en-gb/blog/azure-blockchain-as-a-service-update-3/

So personally I don't think if BTS was more of an echo chamber or just generally more positive and supportive when shareholders didn't believe that was warranted would make BTS more successful.

[Ben Mason]

The truth is that people keep leaving this project and this community for a reason and its not the BTS price.

Balderdash. It certainly is the price that is generating the anxiety and frustration. Dan is a convenient scape-goat. That's not to say he's infallible, but who is?

It's so easy to look for someone to blame, the truth is BitShares needs more work and the means of growing the network needs some further adjustments.

Did we all think we were going to be rich within a couple of years.....is that it? And it looks like a great deal more work is required so it tantrums instead of facing facts and getting on with it?

There are many who exemplify the attitude that will bring the results....it should be obvious who they are.  Let's try to unify behind their efforts or try something ourselves. If someone is struggling, let's not accuse them and hang them out to dry, let's ask if we can help. If someone fails, well that's life, let's learn from it and move on with the next effort.

[clout]

I don't know why I expected this project to be further along. Maybe I thought it was an actual business that was being cultivated, but I realize now that is not the case. It doesn't matter what the underlying software can do or not, CNX can't get funding, they can't produce a competitive exchange and don't know the market they are entering into. Bitshares, if looked at as a company, can't be run by a community of individuals that do not know or entirely trust each other. I don't have the answers for how to turn things around, but I see the same mistakes continually being made and I don't have a reason to stay anymore.

Complaining is easy, but if you put things in the right perspective you might have the reason to hold. You might not actually know how hard it is to bring something completely new to market and create a profitable business. Here are some brilliant people working and trying to make something sustainable and profitable, and it's still way too early to tell which crypto's will succeed in the end. No cryptocurrency is actually used (arguably) in the real world yet, other than for speculation, so there is no reason to be upset if bitshares isn't. When bitshares succeeds, you will make a profit too -by just holding. You could listen to the hangouts and Beyond Bitcoin and notice how smart the people working for you are.
I my eyes the best things about bitshares are 1) It has the most sustainable long-term funding/incentive model of any crypto-project and 2) It has the most impressive technology. What a combination actually! Just think about NXT. What will be the long term incentive to keep developing the platform once the major stakeholders have made all the profit they can? Now it might seem good, but it will be interesting to see where it goes when it gets harder to make profit. The long-term funding model of Ethereum isn't clear either. They actually just hope for the best, like bitcoin. Bitshares has an actual plan.
One more reason to hold bitshares is to concieve some business that utilizes cryptocurrencies. If I was to create a business today, which needed a cryptocurrency, I would try to implement it on bitshares first because it is the most efficient (cheapest, quickest), it has an internal exchange (broader market, less risk), and it has a long term plan (less risk again). Those are three crucial elements, which set bitshares apart from most other crypto's.

Thank you for actually taking a stab at answering my question.

I agree that if I ever wanted to do anything that required a cryptocurrency, I would use bitshares. I'll probably get back into when that time comes. At the moment however I see this forum going the way of bitcointalk. I think that the devs have done a remarkable job creating a innovative solution for financial services. I just don't have any faith in their ability to establish and most importantly maintain the necessary connections to give this platform actual utility.

I have heard many people complain about Dan for a variety of reasons and I did not heed their warnings because I felt he was genuine and highly intelligent (all of which I still believe). The truth is that people keep leaving this project and this community for a reason and its not the BTS price.

[clout]

A currency lives and dies on micropayments. Micropayments are the only reason people will adopt cryptocurrency at all. It's not like people aren't already getting paid in their local currencies so why would they care about BitUSD or BitCNY or any of these strange niche currencies that can't even do micropayments?

On the other hand once they can do micropayments and people gain some experience with them, the size of the community grows. Even if it grows bottom up, from the poorest on up, it's still able to grow. While now it's not growing very much because only rich people are being targeted and expected to buy BTS without anything they can do with it.

If there is no yield you shouldn't expect to attract rich people to hold anything.

Whatever you say...

[clout]

@clout
You are being ridiculous for faulting Bitshares for not attracting large banking partners. No decentralized cryptocurrency has been able to do that, yet Bitshares should have been able to.... give me a break. Have you missed all of the recent articles that all of the large banks are all developing their own private blockchains? Sadly, Identabit is going nowhere. Banks want 100% of the pie and 100% control. It is the sad reality of the matter.

I said nothing about large Banks using bitshares...Why do you think BM created CNX? Because he realized that people wanted to build their own private blockchains and figured the bitshares devs could make money through building private blockchains and consulting on blockchain tech. The werent able to do that, which tells me that they will never be able to get the connections necessary to get CNX off the ground let alone BTS.

[oldmine]

BTS has never ever been profitable

This is not a true statement.. you must be new around here.

You need to learn patience, it is a good skill to have in life. We can't build a billion dollar company without dilution to fund the development of our product. Ending dilution (and therefore development) this early in the game would be a death sentence to Bitshares. If you don't like it please sell your stake and let those that share the vision reap the rewards.

Caring so much is a good indication you have not diversified your cryptocurrency portfolio sufficiently. The only coin I own more than 6% of my portfolio in is Bitcoin.

Let me correct myself - BitShares hasnt been profitable ever since we started diluting.

We should stop diluting soon, i.e. give it 1 more year of development. How much longer can holders continue subsidizing?

[clout]

WOW! Hold the horse. There is only one correct form of dividend: putting real money into my wallet on regular schedule. All other forms of dividend is scam. BTS delivers no dividend. Zero. For this reason, it is nothing more than a collateral token. This is a good reason to keep it, but don't tell people that it is something more than it is.

Warren Buffet would disagree with you, and the empirical evidence that this method can work is Berkshire Hathaway.

You can't seriously mention WB in reference to crypto...

WB said stay away from bitcoin in 2015.  Bitcoin was the best performing currency in the world in 2015 up 39% against the $.

http://www.businessinsider.com/warren-buffett-money-tips-for-2015-2014-12?utm_content=buffera0c03&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

WB buys shares of companies because it gives him a stake in the cash flow and other s will be willing to purchase that stake in the future given the fundamentals of the company. BTS and other cryptos do not give you a stake in earnings so WB would not have anything to positive to say about them. WB also said not to invest in internet based companies, many of which have outperformed Berkshire. Its not that he's wrong, its just not his strategy. I was just pointing out that crypto isn't something WB would be confident about so why invoke him in reference to crypto. Doesnt make sense

[CoinHoarder]

BTS has never ever been profitable

This is not a true statement.. you must be new around here.

and has no prospect of ever becoming so with the current dilution rates. Bytemaster seems to have given up on achieving profitability. All he says now is "real companies go through rounds of dilution to grow", etc. Therefore BitShares is so far not a profitable company, its just a fundraising scheme for BM & CNX to pay their rent. Thats fine, but it cant go on forever.

Give Me a Reason to Hold BTS - when are we going to stop dilution and become profitable?

You need to learn patience, it is a good skill to have in life. We can't build a billion dollar company without dilution to fund the development of our product. Ending dilution (and therefore development) this early in the game would be a death sentence to Bitshares. If you don't like it please sell your stake and let those that share the vision reap the rewards.

Caring so much is a good indication you have not diversified your cryptocurrency portfolio sufficiently. The only coin I own more than 6% of my portfolio in is Bitcoin.

[oldmine]

I agree that share buyback can be a legitimate source of dividends, which is why Im holding on to my bts.

BUT (huge fat but)

BTS has never ever been profitable, and has no prospect of ever becoming so with the current dilution rates. Bytemaster seems to have given up on achieving profitability. All he says now is "real companies go through rounds of dilution to grow", etc. Therefore BitShares is so far not a profitable company, its just a fundraising scheme for BM & CNX to pay their rent. Thats fine, but it cant go on forever.

Give Me a Reason to Hold BTS - when are we going to stop dilution and become profitable?

[kenCode]

Dan basically said 'dilute and pay a shitload for FMV otherwise i'm gone'.

It owns the majority of the witness spots via inits or CNX minions.

If CNX wants bts to survive, it needs to distribute it's knowledge monopoly.  It needs to come up with features that it thinks need to be implemented, but give them to another developer to do and implement.  This will at least distribute the knowledge centralization that CNX has.

My teams are distributed all over the world (Latvia, Ukraine, Turkey, etc) but I just don't have the income yet to pay any more of them to take over some of the graphene core jobs. I have them laser focused on the mobile wallets (try out the alpha7 download!) and POS systems (if OPENPOS is funded, these will be done by March). I can tell you that at least 2 companies that have worked with cxn have contacted me recently to get them out of their predicament.
 
Please do not call Dan's co-workers minions, those guys are outstanding at what they do and what they have accomplished in a very short amount of time. I would be proud to work with them any day.
 
I have 5 people right now who are getting pretty damn graphene savvy. The more docs @xeroc puts out there, the easier it is for me to get new devs up to speed. It takes me a couple weeks to get their crosstraining rolling, but once they are in our skype group, the knowledge really flows, it's a beautiful thing. It's what I'm good at, building DAC's.
 
So, please @clout keep holding your BTS, there is hope.
With your support, there's nothing I can't build, always on time and on budget. I need you, we ALL need you.

[Ben Mason]

At this point the only reason to invest in BTS is Identabit, but even that is dubious. I love that no one mentioned that. The features aren't the problem, its the resources, connections and funding that are.

If you have sold a month ago, what is the purpose of op? It seems disingenuous. Also you make statements like the one quoted as if it were fact. I am excited about Identabit and wish the project the very best, but it has not yet launched. I find it curious that you would claim it as the only reason to invest in BTS....which has an incredibly powerful product launched, active network, existing community, active funding and is being actively developed.

How is it disingenuous if I actively manage a BTS position?

I say that Identabit is the only reason I'd consider holding BTS because the product as it stands is useless. It doesn't matter if the tech is good no one is using. Bitshares has little to no connection to broader financial and payment system. If you can get money transmitters then theres a different story. If you can make the entire system regulatory compliant then there's a different story. If you can get venture capital backing then theres a different story. This is Identabits approach.

The community is getting smaller and smaller by the day. I've been here from pretty much the beginning. This community is a lot smaller than you are suggesting and those that have faithfully believed in this project have lost a lot of their capital.

The software development also is slow and the team is small, both in relation to other crypto projects and those business Bitshares is attempting to compete with.

Connection to the old, corrupt, falling apart legacy financial system is of dubious longterm value. The real value of BitShares is in being an alternative with integrity. There is no way the incumbent financial system is going to empower a replacement that they don't have direct control over.

I haven't referenced the size of the community at all. I don't know if it's bigger or smaller, though the composition is undoubtedly changing....I see it as a forging process. For every sell there is a buy.
From my perspective, the development process has been fast but more important is the quality.  There is nothing like BitShares in the whole world, we are simply in competition for the hearts and minds of people everywhere. The idea that success or failure can be measured in a couple of years for a platform this ambitious and disruptive is absolutely ludicrous. Had you held your BTS, would you be happy if in 5 years they had increased significantly in value? We will get there, we simply need to work harder and smarter for longer.

[luckybit]

If you have to ask this question then maybe it's time for you to sell.

If you cannot find an objective and rational reason to hold, to stay, then perhaps you shouldn't.

I feel like bitshares is stuck between is it a platform for other businesses/developers to build on or is it an exchange company?

In either case there are design issues.  For example no way people are going to build on a platform where in order to get your app/business on you have to get people to vote for it etc.

Alternatively look at ethereum...its clearly a platform that wants others to build on top of it.  And many have already.

We all have complains and concerns. I've complained about the lack of micropayment capability as being a main hindering factor. I've complained about the lack of bonds or similar functionality as being a limiting factor. Of course there is no place to collect yield in Bitshares 2.0, so of course there are a lot less people holding in Bitshares 2.0. What did anyone expect?

And of course BitUSD isn't successful because without micropayments it never will be. People around the world and in poorer parts of the US are getting paid in what Silicon Valley developers would call micropayments. Without the ability to pay micropayments you miss the majority of payment types which take place online.

Now it's time to be tough. You can either hold no matter what, even if BTS goes to  0.001 and lower, and wait the situation out, or you can sell now and get out before the next seemingly inevitable price drop. Until the exchange has bond markets, lots of unique assets, prediction markets, stealth, and we have micropayments, we can't really say Bitshares 2.0 is good enough to deserve a $100,0,000,000 marketcap or even a $50,000,000 marketcap.

Bitshares is at a low price because that is where it's current utility is. Unless more utility is built around it, it's not supposed to be priced higher than it's worth. Ethereum is actually over priced due to hype and should be $20,000,000 or less, but it's Ethereum.

Hahah i don't know why you're stuck on micropayments. That's simply not where the money is.

I sold a month or so ago when Dan made the post about vision. I realized then that this going nowhere. Dan's too much of an idealist and this project has lived and died by that ethos.

A currency lives and dies on micropayments. Micropayments are the only reason people will adopt cryptocurrency at all. It's not like people aren't already getting paid in their local currencies so why would they care about BitUSD or BitCNY or any of these strange niche currencies that can't even do micropayments?

On the other hand once they can do micropayments and people gain some experience with them, the size of the community grows. Even if it grows bottom up, from the poorest on up, it's still able to grow. While now it's not growing very much because only rich people are being targeted and expected to buy BTS without anything they can do with it.

If there is no yield you shouldn't expect to attract rich people to hold anything.

[MarkoPaasila]

I don't know why I expected this project to be further along. Maybe I thought it was an actual business that was being cultivated, but I realize now that is not the case. It doesn't matter what the underlying software can do or not, CNX can't get funding, they can't produce a competitive exchange and don't know the market they are entering into. Bitshares, if looked at as a company, can't be run by a community of individuals that do not know or entirely trust each other. I don't have the answers for how to turn things around, but I see the same mistakes continually being made and I don't have a reason to stay anymore.

Complaining is easy, but if you put things in the right perspective you might have the reason to hold. You might not actually know how hard it is to bring something completely new to market and create a profitable business. Here are some brilliant people working and trying to make something sustainable and profitable, and it's still way too early to tell which crypto's will succeed in the end. No cryptocurrency is actually used (arguably) in the real world yet, other than for speculation, so there is no reason to be upset if bitshares isn't. When bitshares succeeds, you will make a profit too -by just holding. You could listen to the hangouts and Beyond Bitcoin and notice how smart the people working for you are.
I my eyes the best things about bitshares are 1) It has the most sustainable long-term funding/incentive model of any crypto-project and 2) It has the most impressive technology. What a combination actually! Just think about NXT. What will be the long term incentive to keep developing the platform once the major stakeholders have made all the profit they can? Now it might seem good, but it will be interesting to see where it goes when it gets harder to make profit. The long-term funding model of Ethereum isn't clear either. They actually just hope for the best, like bitcoin. Bitshares has an actual plan.
One more reason to hold bitshares is to concieve some business that utilizes cryptocurrencies. If I was to create a business today, which needed a cryptocurrency, I would try to implement it on bitshares first because it is the most efficient (cheapest, quickest), it has an internal exchange (broader market, less risk), and it has a long term plan (less risk again). Those are three crucial elements, which set bitshares apart from most other crypto's.

[testz]

You can expect further abuse of shareholders, while changing the rules so frequently that no business can start much less survive... All while staying financially and intellectually centralized by CNX.  Todays whale slaying just gives more concentrated power to CNX.

But remember... this whole price drop is because of negative people on the forum who scare away investors...lol

Please give the name and date of the last unnecessary 5 rule changes (outside the batch upgrade to 2.0 which implemented all the lessons learned from the previous year).

Please give one thing CNX has done to prevent decentralization.

No concentration in power distribution, since for every seller there was a buyer.

And yes, price is a function of supply and demand and pessimistic, negative vibs on this forum can't help but cut into demand from people we refer here for the first time.  It's called negative marketing.  It's what trolls do.

The upgrade to 2.0 killed or critically damaged several companies trying to build on bts (moonstone, metaexchange says its one of the hardest API's to integrate, all the sqr and arbitrarily implemented shorting rules that smoked many shorts, improperly communicated hardforks with exchanges).  Not counting the merger which started the price crushing, in which Dan basically said 'dilute and pay a shitload for FMV otherwise i'm gone'.

BTS is centralized because CNX can push through anything it wants... It owns the majority of the witness spots via inits or CNX minions.  CNX has control over by far the largest proxies.  People are afraid Dan is going to do what he did during the merger again (via MAS) and he has the ability to do it right now.

If CNX wants bts to survive, it needs to distribute it's knowledge monopoly.  It needs to come up with features that it thinks need to be implemented, but give them to another developer to do and implement.  This will at least distribute the knowledge centralization that CNX has.

"Knowledge monopoly" in open source project!?

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

@clout

You are being ridiculous for faulting Bitshares for not attracting large banking partners. No decentralized cryptocurrency has been able to do that, yet Bitshares should have been able to.... give me a break. 

Have you missed all of the recent articles that all of the large banks are all developing their own private blockchains? Sadly, Identabit is going nowhere. Banks want 100% of the pie and 100% control. It is the sad reality of the matter.

You're talking about the big banks. And largely, I agree. They'll take one look at our DPOS proposal debates and say 'no thanks'. They sure as hell won't put their back end on this blockchain while it's under decentralized control. BUT if enough smaller and mid-sized businesses give it a try, recognizing how much money it saves them and all the advantages it holds, there is a real chance that: (a) we add sufficient scale to start growing, and (b) that stability, which must be longer term in terms of governance (and not just one change after another, as we've seen in recent years/months), then that may attract some larger organizations. Our witnesses and committees and whoever the hoo-ha's are will be a lot less inclined to make changes on a whim when all of us have a vested interest in letting the system grow and prosper, which can only happen with stability and predictability. In my mind, there's a big difference between those BIG banks and everyone else.

Same with venture capitalists... they are only investing in Bitcoin companies, or brand new cryptocurrencies/side chains with which they can have a large part of the pie. I haven't seen any VC money going into any established alternative cryptocurrencies which have been around for a while. Again, how can you fault Bitshares for this when no established alternative cryptocurrencies are succeeding in this department..

Not entirely true. FBAs are going to be extraordinarily well received by VCs... I already know.

Also more sophisticated VCs can understand the value proposition Bitshares offers depending on how it is being presented and by whom.

However, we are just coming out of the holiday season with little more than 2 months from the MVP launch of 2.0. The story really hasn't gotten out there as much as Bitcoin has. So to expect everyone to be banging on the door now is far to premature.

Only ones coming in now are by way of current holders that had connections to partners that got them in the know before 2.0 launched.

As mentioned in my previous post, people should really wait six more months.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

If you think the reason for holding bitshares is Identabit then you need to get your facts straight.

If you really think that is where the value is, you should be converting all your BTS into BROWNIE.PTS.. if I recall correctly, the sharedrop on BROWNIES was going to be significantly higher than any other sharedrop.

Secondly, Identabit isn't even going to be built on Bitshares, it's suppose to be a side chain that is built with Graphene.. at least that was the original idea.

IF there is anything to happen in regards to an Identabit launch, and your grand plan for returns is the anticipated sharedrop, then the price changes should mean nothing for two reasons. One, doesn't matter, you still get your Identabit shares (assuming they choose a genesis time that works for your holders). Two, it's going to be YEARS until you see any real movement on that front. They are banks, that's all I need to say.

So for those two reasons and your anticipation of value in BTS to be in Identabit, you should be holding BROWNIES.PTS and should not be paying any attention when other unrelated markets (Shanghai) cause BTS value to fall on the downward pressure of whales selling out to cover other losses.

To state the obvious.. do not consider this investment advice.

Further to this... I noticed that you defined Bitshares as a financial platform and tool. That outlook and limited definition really puts on blinders to everything else that is happening and can happen with Bitshares now.

It has been repeated so many times over the past months about the Bitshares PLATFORM being about to support different businesses, yet this thread shows the focus is all around copying financial instruments that have been done and redone that all require MASSIVE efforts and resources to pull off as being what is really needed (it takes more than just coding something). I don't believe any of those things are really going to be what carries Bitshares forward and up any time soon.

There is much more low hanging fruit out there that can be accessed easier and faster.

I think you are going to see things outside of the financial sector that are going to be built with the bitshares platform.. while they take advantage of features like the DEX in their operations, they will have other primary functions that will generate transactions.

You can do what you like.. and nobody here needs to convince you of anything.. and frankly to make decisions on forum responses from a bunch of mostly anonymous aliases would be just outright irresponsible. That said, I am quite certain anybody selling off now will be regretting it within six months from now

[CoinHoarder]

@clout

You are being ridiculous for faulting Bitshares for not attracting large banking partners. No decentralized cryptocurrency has been able to do that, yet Bitshares should have been able to.... give me a break. 

Have you missed all of the recent articles that all of the large banks are all developing their own private blockchains? Sadly, Identabit is going nowhere. Banks want 100% of the pie and 100% control. It is the sad reality of the matter.

You're talking about the big banks. And largely, I agree. They'll take one look at our DPOS proposal debates and say 'no thanks'. They sure as hell won't put their back end on this blockchain while it's under decentralized control. BUT if enough smaller and mid-sized businesses give it a try, recognizing how much money it saves them and all the advantages it holds, there is a real chance that: (a) we add sufficient scale to start growing, and (b) that stability, which must be longer term in terms of governance (and not just one change after another, as we've seen in recent years/months), then that may attract some larger organizations. Our witnesses and committees and whoever the hoo-ha's are will be a lot less inclined to make changes on a whim when all of us have a vested interest in letting the system grow and prosper, which can only happen with stability and predictability. In my mind, there's a big difference between those BIG banks and everyone else.

It's a similar story with venture capitalists... they are only investing in Bitcoin companies, or brand new cryptocurrencies/side chains with which they can have a large part of the pie. I haven't seen any VC money going into any established alternative cryptocurrencies which have been around for a while. Again, how can you fault Bitshares for this when no established alternative cryptocurrencies are succeeding in this department..

[donkeypong]

@clout

You are being ridiculous for faulting Bitshares for not attracting large banking partners. No decentralized cryptocurrency has been able to do that, yet Bitshares should have been able to.... give me a break. 

Have you missed all of the recent articles that all of the large banks are all developing their own private blockchains? Sadly, Identabit is going nowhere. Banks want 100% of the pie and 100% control. It is the sad reality of the matter.

You're talking about the big banks. And largely, I agree. They'll take one look at our DPOS proposal debates and say 'no thanks'. They sure as hell won't put their back end on this blockchain while it's under decentralized control. BUT if enough smaller and mid-sized businesses give it a try, recognizing how much money it saves them and all the advantages it holds, there is a real chance that: (a) we add sufficient scale to start growing, and (b) that stability, which must be longer term in terms of governance (and not just one change after another, as we've seen in recent years/months), then that may attract some larger organizations. Our witnesses and committees and whoever the hoo-ha's are will be a lot less inclined to make changes on a whim when all of us have a vested interest in letting the system grow and prosper, which can only happen with stability and predictability. In my mind, there's a big difference between those BIG banks and everyone else.

[CoinHoarder]

@clout
You are being ridiculous for faulting Bitshares for not attracting large banking partners. No decentralized cryptocurrency has been able to do that, yet Bitshares should have been able to.... give me a break. Have you missed all of the recent articles that all of the large banks are all developing their own private blockchains? Sadly, Identabit is going nowhere. Banks want 100% of the pie and 100% control. It is the sad reality of the matter.

@Empirical1.2 @neo1344

http://prestonbyrne.com/2014/08/17/dont-walk-away-run/
Bts has lost 90% 0f its value since above article was published.

That guy wasn't too bright imo, I think he was mostly attacking the pegging system and that it would fail with a 50% price drop but actually it's held up very well.

Good point Empirical1.2, Preston Byrne's main accusation was that bitAssets would fail, which has turned out to be false thus far. In my opinion he simply wanted attention (and got it) in is blog posts on Bitshares. He was largely wrong as bitAssets have closely resembled the value of their real life counterparts for a long time now.. the only thing he coincidentally happened to be right on is the price.

@Akado @morpheus @Ander
I don't think anyone disagrees that those features would be beneficial to Bitshares (prediction markets, bond markets, etc.) The problem is that we have a limited amount of developers and the community cannot agree on what is most important. Everyone has their own opinion, and unfortunately everyone cannot immediately get what they want. It is time to stop whining every time you don't get what you want. I was against dilution (among other things) and I'm still here supporting Bitshares. You need to sell your stake if you don't like the direction the project is headed, or learn to accept the way it is headed is the way it is going to go for the time being.

@onceuponatime @clout

I sold a month or so ago when Dan made the post about vision. I realized then that this going nowhere. Dan's too much of an idealist and this project has lived and died by that ethos.

So, if you sold "a month ago" does the title you gave to this thread make you some kind of troll or just an ignoramus?

+1000000000% 

@lil_jay890

You can expect further abuse of shareholders, while changing the rules so frequently that no business can start much less survive... All while staying financially and intellectually centralized by CNX.  Todays whale slaying just gives more concentrated power to CNX.

But remember... this whole price drop is because of negative people on the forum who scare away investors...lol

Either your account was conceived as an elaborate trolling scheme from day one, you already sold your stake and want to burn the house down on the way out, or you are the most retarded stakeholder of any cryptocurrency ever with all the FUD you've been spewing lately. Which one is it?


@fuzzy @luckybit

If you have to ask this question then maybe it's time for you to sell.

If you cannot find an objective and rational reason to hold, to stay, then perhaps you shouldn't.

 

I hate to agree but it isn't necessarily a bad thing..

You guys are way too smart for your own good. 

[morpheus]

WOW! Hold the horse. There is only one correct form of dividend: putting real money into my wallet on regular schedule. All other forms of dividend is scam. BTS delivers no dividend. Zero. For this reason, it is nothing more than a collateral token. This is a good reason to keep it, but don't tell people that it is something more than it is.

Warren Buffet would disagree with you, and the empirical evidence that this method can work is Berkshire Hathaway.

You can't seriously mention WB in reference to crypto...

WB said stay away from bitcoin in 2015.  Bitcoin was the best performing currency in the world in 2015 up 39% against the $.

http://www.businessinsider.com/warren-buffett-money-tips-for-2015-2014-12?utm_content=buffera0c03&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

[wallace]

And who is going to buy back my BTS shares? At which prise?

It's in the docs under reserve pool and refund workers.


https://bitshares.org/technology/stakeholder-approved-project-funding/

I've read it.  This does not answer my question. This buy back argument is a bull shit. Your BTS is a collateral token, no more.

you forget the most important point: BTS is the key tool for CNX to get money

[yvv]

And who is going to buy back my BTS shares? At which prise?

It's in the docs under reserve pool and refund workers.


https://bitshares.org/technology/stakeholder-approved-project-funding/

I've read it.  This does not answer my question. This buy back argument is a bull shit. Your BTS is a collateral token, no more.

[clout]

WOW! Hold the horse. There is only one correct form of dividend: putting real money into my wallet on regular schedule. All other forms of dividend is scam. BTS delivers no dividend. Zero. For this reason, it is nothing more than a collateral token. This is a good reason to keep it, but don't tell people that it is something more than it is.

Warren Buffet would disagree with you, and the empirical evidence that this method can work is Berkshire Hathaway.

You can't seriously mention WB in reference to crypto...

[clout]

Someone Give Me a Reason To Keep Holding BTS

You shouldn't hold it unless you want to borrow bitAsset. It is a collateral token, nothing more.

This is not true, and if it were true there would be no reason to hold BTS.

BTS also represents a share in the value of profit made from services provided by the Bitshares blockchain, such as exchange, transfers, etc.  Currently this profit doesnt exist because its speculative phase, but if it reached enough adoption to generate a profit, this profit would go to BTS holders by a dividend in the form of a reduction in the BTS supply, and thus an increase in the value of each individual BTS.

That's not true. BTS does not give you a share in earnings. Burning BTS is not the same as distributing it. It's just not.

[clout]

At this point the only reason to invest in BTS is Identabit, but even that is dubious. I love that no one mentioned that. The features aren't the problem, its the resources, connections and funding that are.

If you have sold a month ago, what is the purpose of op? It seems disingenuous. Also you make statements like the one quoted as if it were fact. I am excited about Identabit and wish the project the very best, but it has not yet launched. I find it curious that you would claim it as the only reason to invest in BTS....which has an incredibly powerful product launched, active network, existing community, active funding and is being actively developed.

How is it disingenuous if I actively manage a BTS position?

I say that Identabit is the only reason I'd consider holding BTS because the product as it stands is useless. It doesn't matter if the tech is good no one is using. Bitshares has little to no connection to broader financial and payment system. If you can get money transmitters then theres a different story. If you can make the entire system regulatory compliant then there's a different story. If you can get venture capital backing then theres a different story. This is Identabits approach.

The community is getting smaller and smaller by the day. I've been here from pretty much the beginning. This community is a lot smaller than you are suggesting and those that have faithfully believed in this project have lost a lot of their capital.

The software development also is slow and the team is small, both in relation to other crypto projects and those business Bitshares is attempting to compete with.

[muse-umum]

You still need to 'hold' BTS for another 10 months...
A reason? Why do you need a reason when you don't have a choice? Are you able to claim all your remaining BTS? NO! Goddamn NO because they are frozen, bytemaster helps you hold them. All you can do is to claim some every day or week and sell on exchanges.

[Riverhead]

And who is going to buy back my BTS shares? At which prise?

It's in the docs under reserve pool and refund workers.


https://bitshares.org/technology/stakeholder-approved-project-funding/

[lil_jay890]

I'm going to guess that the bond market is much more difficult and prone to big bugs and losses than when it was originally conceived.

[mint chocolate chip]

BitShares 2.0 has been in development for over a year, it was announced 6 months ago, but it had secretly been in development for the 6 months prior to that, with only the CNX insiders and a handful of project owners - some of which have subsequently pitched their project and then ditched their project - were in the know. From a shareholder perspective, I found this kind of secretiveness dubious. BitShares 2.0 was announced and it sounded good, and so I mistakenly bought more at a price significantly north of where it is now. However, the exchange portion is pretty sweet and I consider the opinions of some on here that say the functionality will be of some great use for something or somebody soon that I continue to hold, I hope that this includes some cool applications like those mentioned in this thread.

[yvv]

WOW! Hold the horse. There is only one correct form of dividend: putting real money into my wallet on regular schedule. All other forms of dividend is scam. BTS delivers no dividend. Zero. For this reason, it is nothing more than a collateral token. This is a good reason to keep it, but don't tell people that it is something more than it is.

Warren Buffet would disagree with you, and the empirical evidence that this method can work is Berkshire Hathaway.

Go tell about how your method can work to your clients. Cheers.

Its not 'my method', its a perfectly valid method of returning value to shareholders.

You can return value in two ways:  A Dividend, or a Share Buyback.  Many tech companies for example have stated a preference for share buyback over dividends.

BTS uses the share buyback model, not the dividend model.  Its a perfectly valid model, used by many large companies.

And who is going to buy back my BTS shares? At which prise?

[morpheus]

That gives an incentive to BTS holders to hold. Because just by lending it on the market they can get a return. Simple as that.

And keep in mind, its not just bts that we can lend.  I can create gold, silver, or oil and lend it out, and earn a return on my bts all without being exposed to price fluctuations.  I can target markets with the highest demand for loans with the highest yield.  In this sense, bts becomes the true sought-after reserve currency of the system.  Speculators can gain leverage in these markets by taking these loans.  I have no idea why this is not a priority.  The dex is mostly useless without this.  Of course this may be easier said than done.

[Akado]

If the focus is going to be stealth, then the development of gambling features should probably be right behind it or in parallel.  Then at least you can combine stealth and gambling and provide something potentially useful. 

Bonds, combined with a margin trading service similar to poloniex should be a priority.

Prediction markets (which is sort of like gambling but different) should be a priority.


While I have mostly given up, if BTS is going to make a recovery at some point, how it will happen is that at least one of these things is implemented and starts to get some use.  And then another of them, etc.  At this point I am beyond caring what order they are implemented but it would be nice to see at least one of them implemented ever.

Sad thing is it seems they aren't considered as a priority...

I am 100% with you guys.  Bond market should be the highest priority, even if it has to be done through worker proposal. 

I was almost going to sell out when I saw bm's vision post also.  In hindsight maybe I should have.  I don't care if mas is a personal pet project.  Bm is the leader of this project and if his attention is on something that is in direct conflict with what shareholders want, then it won't fly.  We are a team and we need bm to be a part of this team and share the same vision and goals as the rest of us shareholders:  to change the world for the better through a decentralized bank and exchange - that is what we all signed up for.  If you don't believe me, then put it to shareholder vote.  Most of us did not sign up for an all-purpose chain or mas, we signed up for a dex, plain and simple and bm's vision seemed to go off on a tangent.  We need bm and we need cnx and we all need to be focused in the same direction and stay the course.  Shareholders have done our market research also.  If done right, we will all have 10-baggers to invest in:  metafees, obits, maker, bond, stealth, and perhaps the biggest payoff of all:  bts.  Forget mas for now.  If I see it proposed, then I will vote it down.  My proxy is with bm right now, but that can change and I'm sure it will change with others too.

I didn't even thought about CNX doing Bonds for free without a worker proposal (even though it's listed on the site's technology section). I think that's one of the few things that it's really worth the money. That gives an incentive to BTS holders to hold. Because just by lending it on the market they can get a return. Simple as that. You got people making money, you got volume, you got utility, you got incentives for holders. What can possibly have a higher priority than that? What's so difficult to understand about that?

[morpheus]

If the focus is going to be stealth, then the development of gambling features should probably be right behind it or in parallel.  Then at least you can combine stealth and gambling and provide something potentially useful. 

Bonds, combined with a margin trading service similar to poloniex should be a priority.

Prediction markets (which is sort of like gambling but different) should be a priority.


While I have mostly given up, if BTS is going to make a recovery at some point, how it will happen is that at least one of these things is implemented and starts to get some use.  And then another of them, etc.  At this point I am beyond caring what order they are implemented but it would be nice to see at least one of them implemented ever.

Sad thing is it seems they aren't considered as a priority...

I am 100% with you guys.  Bond market should be the highest priority, even if it has to be done through worker proposal. 

I was almost going to sell out when I saw bm's vision post also.  In hindsight maybe I should have.  I don't care if mas is a personal pet project.  Bm is the leader of this project and if his attention is on something that is in direct conflict with what shareholders want, then it won't fly.  We are a team and we need bm to be a part of this team and share the same vision and goals as the rest of us shareholders:  to change the world for the better through a decentralized bank and exchange - that is what we all signed up for.  If you don't believe me, then put it to shareholder vote.  Most of us did not sign up for an all-purpose chain or mas, we signed up for a dex, plain and simple and bm's vision seemed to go off on a tangent.  We need bm and we need cnx and we all need to be focused in the same direction and stay the course.  Shareholders have done our market research also.  If done right, we will all have 10-baggers to invest in:  metafees, obits, maker, bond, stealth, and perhaps the biggest payoff of all:  bts.  Forget mas for now.  If I see it proposed, then I will vote it down.  My proxy is with bm right now, but that can change and I'm sure it will change with others too. 

[Ander]

WOW! Hold the horse. There is only one correct form of dividend: putting real money into my wallet on regular schedule. All other forms of dividend is scam. BTS delivers no dividend. Zero. For this reason, it is nothing more than a collateral token. This is a good reason to keep it, but don't tell people that it is something more than it is.

Warren Buffet would disagree with you, and the empirical evidence that this method can work is Berkshire Hathaway.

Go tell about how your method can work to your clients. Cheers.

Its not 'my method', its a perfectly valid method of returning value to shareholders.

You can return value in two ways:  A Dividend, or a Share Buyback.  Many tech companies for example have stated a preference for share buyback over dividends.

BTS uses the share buyback model, not the dividend model.  Its a perfectly valid model, used by many large companies.

[yvv]

WOW! Hold the horse. There is only one correct form of dividend: putting real money into my wallet on regular schedule. All other forms of dividend is scam. BTS delivers no dividend. Zero. For this reason, it is nothing more than a collateral token. This is a good reason to keep it, but don't tell people that it is something more than it is.

Warren Buffet would disagree with you, and the empirical evidence that this method can work is Berkshire Hathaway.

Go tell about how your method can work to your clients. Cheers.

[Ander]

http://prestonbyrne.com/2014/08/17/dont-walk-away-run/
Bts has lost 90% 0f its value since above article was published.

Correlation is not causation. We had a marketing director, we had a merger, things got a little ugly.

If Preston Byrne had said that BTS was overhyped and was too early in its alpha stage to be worth its valuation, then he would have been correct.  Instead he posted a bearish article on BTS for reasons that were mostly wrong, but ended up being right in the sense that BTS went down.  (As have most altcoins). 

[Empirical1.2]

http://prestonbyrne.com/2014/08/17/dont-walk-away-run/
Bts has lost 90% 0f its value since above article was published.

That guy wasn't too bright imo, I think he was mostly attacking the pegging system and that it would fail with a 50% price drop but actually it's held up very well.

Also that article was published on 17th Aug 2014, according to CMC  BTSX was at $21 million on that date and $0.01 per share, so yes a big loss since then but not 90%. http://coinmarketcap.com/historical/20140817/

BTSX actually carried on gaining value after that and hit it's high vs. BTC on Oct 4/5th and fell once dilution became a market reality imo. (Which is what I contend started the pretty much 15 month long downtrend BTS has been on.)

[Ander]

WOW! Hold the horse. There is only one correct form of dividend: putting real money into my wallet on regular schedule. All other forms of dividend is scam. BTS delivers no dividend. Zero. For this reason, it is nothing more than a collateral token. This is a good reason to keep it, but don't tell people that it is something more than it is.

Warren Buffet would disagree with you, and the empirical evidence that this method can work is Berkshire Hathaway.

[TravelsAsia]

http://prestonbyrne.com/2014/08/17/dont-walk-away-run/
Bts has lost 90% 0f its value since above article was published.

Correlation is not causation. We had a marketing director, we had a merger, things got a little ugly.

[neo1344]

http://prestonbyrne.com/2014/08/17/dont-walk-away-run/
Bts has lost 90% 0f its value since above article was published.

[Akado]

If the focus is going to be stealth, then the development of gambling features should probably be right behind it or in parallel.  Then at least you can combine stealth and gambling and provide something potentially useful. 

Bonds, combined with a margin trading service similar to poloniex should be a priority.

Prediction markets (which is sort of like gambling but different) should be a priority.


While I have mostly given up, if BTS is going to make a recovery at some point, how it will happen is that at least one of these things is implemented and starts to get some use.  And then another of them, etc.  At this point I am beyond caring what order they are implemented but it would be nice to see at least one of them implemented ever.

Sad thing is it seems they aren't considered as a priority...

[yvv]

Someone Give Me a Reason To Keep Holding BTS

You shouldn't hold it unless you want to borrow bitAsset. It is a collateral token, nothing more.

This is not true, and if it were true there would be no reason to hold BTS.

BTS also represents a share in the value of profit made from services provided by the Bitshares blockchain, such as exchange, transfers, etc.  Currently this profit doesnt exist because its speculative phase, but if it reached enough adoption to generate a profit, this profit would go to BTS holders by a dividend in the form of a reduction in the BTS supply, and thus an increase in the value of each individual BTS.

WOW! Hold the horse. There is only one correct form of dividend: putting real money into my wallet on regular schedule. All other forms of dividend is scam. BTS delivers no dividend. Zero. For this reason, it is nothing more than a collateral token. This is a good reason to keep it, but don't tell people that it is something more than it is.

[Ander]

If the focus is going to be stealth, then the development of gambling features should probably be right behind it or in parallel.  Then at least you can combine stealth and gambling and provide something potentially useful. 

Bonds, combined with a margin trading service similar to poloniex should be a priority.

Prediction markets (which is sort of like gambling but different) should be a priority.


While I have mostly given up, if BTS is going to make a recovery at some point, how it will happen is that at least one of these things is implemented and starts to get some use.  And then another of them, etc.  At this point I am beyond caring what order they are implemented but it would be nice to see at least one of them implemented ever.

[Ander]

Someone Give Me a Reason To Keep Holding BTS

You shouldn't hold it unless you want to borrow bitAsset. It is a collateral token, nothing more.

This is not true, and if it were true there would be no reason to hold BTS.

BTS also represents a share in the value of profit made from services provided by the Bitshares blockchain, such as exchange, transfers, etc.  Currently this profit doesnt exist because its speculative phase, but if it reached enough adoption to generate a profit, this profit would go to BTS holders by a dividend in the form of a reduction in the BTS supply, and thus an increase in the value of each individual BTS.

[Akado]

In terms of easiest way for BTS to increase market value, profit & adoption right now...

1. Crypto-currency               (Remove dilution & commit to being sound money - highly unlikely.)
2. Gambling                          (Blockchain based Dice)
3. Liquid Smartcoins           (Liquidity incentives & lower fees)
4. DEX features                    (Bond Market)
5. Sports Betting                 (Prediction Market)
6. Blue Chip Stocks            (Derivatives of world's most popular stocks.)
7. STEALTH                          (More valuable when you have a popular product any of 1-5 above to apply STEALTH too.)
8. Referral Programme      (Need sellable product for referral programme to work.)
9. UIA's                                 (Counterparty and NXT currently dominate UIA's and demonstrate they don't add significantly to market value)

That's what we need. Fast. Reasons for people to use the platform. Incentives to hold BTS. Stimulate the market.

We have UIAs and like you mentioned it isn't significant at all and won't be for the next years..
We have the Referral Programme. That's something. But people will refer others to our platform and what will others do? Nothing at the moment.

So we're missing, imo, the most important and strongest tools, even from a marketing pov which we suck so bad at. Bond and Prediction Markets. I've continually stressed that but kind of feel ignored.

Onceuponatime was kind enough to pay for a feature he values. It's useful but I really don't know it's importance atm as it won't bring much utility and liquidity. It's something used sporadically so imo, not a priority.  Then because of this stuff that (once again, imo. I start feeling egoistical) is more imporant like Bond and Prediction Markets keep being pushed further and further away. THey're not even in sight at the moment. Our strongest selling points. Our most useful features. The ones that give a reason an incentive for one to hold BTS. They keep getting delayed. I'm really thankful we (most shareholders) can have a feature like STEALTH for "free" but imo that just shouldn't be a priority...

But money talks. People vote for what they want.

Still, if a voting was made at the same time for STEALTH and MAKER with bond and prediction markets I feel very confident saying bond and prediction markets would get most votes. That's what I didn't like about that, they weren't even considered for voting when they're considered a priority by many. Of course we can't do everything at the same time, but those options were simply ignored. It was either MAKER or STEALTH from the start. Why not STEALTH and BONDS or STEALTH and PMs for example.

[cass]

Cass the ruthless speculator did well though 

I just want to say ... i've investet 2 BTC --> 4000 ETH during the IPO sale last year!

And did sell them for approx. 19 BTC! So from the investment point of view ... ETH was a really good investment!
But i've also learned from BTS ... If i had sell my BTS last year when high .. it would be the same ...

With this revenue i can fund my next 3 month working for BTS/CNX ... so IMO good deal

 

[Empirical1.2]

Empirical not using empirical data. 

https://www.quandl.com/data/CRYPTOCHART/ETC-Ethercoin-BITCOIN-Price

On average before the spike up ether coin was worth .004 per btc.  At 350 dollars per btc this equates to a value of $1.4 on average for ether coin.  You have to remove the spike up datapoints because augur is not in that behavior pattern in the least bit (eg. It has not announced launch date or is even in beta testing).  Therefore it fits the former pattern and hypothesis that excludes all the run up in value due to launch date.

  Good point, it could possibly be a good time to buy and you may still catch the run up in value due to launch date.

However my point still stands that the small supply of GateCoin REP will probably overvalue REP pre-launch and when the actual much larger REP supply hits the market the price will likely fall. So if you expect a launch date run up profit opportunity,  I would sell before and then buy my long term REP position after when the actual supply is on the market.

[yvv]

Someone Give Me a Reason To Keep Holding BTS

You shouldn't hold it unless you want to borrow bitAsset. It is a collateral token, nothing more.

[topcandle]

Empirical not using empirical data. 

https://www.quandl.com/data/CRYPTOCHART/ETC-Ethercoin-BITCOIN-Price

On average before the spike up ether coin was worth .004 per btc.  At 350 dollars per btc this equates to a value of $1.4 on average for ether coin.  You have to remove the spike up datapoints because augur is not in that behavior pattern in the least bit (eg. It has not announced launch date or is even in beta testing).  Therefore it fits the former pattern and hypothesis that excludes all the run up in value due to launch date.

[Ben Mason]

At this point the only reason to invest in BTS is Identabit, but even that is dubious. I love that no one mentioned that. The features aren't the problem, its the resources, connections and funding that are.

If you have sold a month ago, what is the purpose of op? It seems disingenuous. Also you make statements like the one quoted as if it were fact. I am excited about Identabit and wish the project the very best, but it has not yet launched. I find it curious that you would claim it as the only reason to invest in BTS....which has an incredibly powerful product launched, active network, existing community, active funding and is being actively developed.

[Empirical1.2]

While I think Augur in particular could have a great deal of success, a lot of businesses building on your platform doesn't necessarily translate to increased value...

Did you invest in Augur?

Nope There's some REP IOUs trading on Gatecoin though which already values Augur at $20 million on $5 million raised.

I'll probably be buying but will wait for it to properly start trading though, the limited supply could be inflating the price/valuation like the small amount of pre-traded ETH IOU did.

If I remember correctly.  For most of the time IOU ethereum was less than laugh date ethereum...

http://coinmarketcap.com/historical/20150802/

No ETC (Ethercoin) traded at between $2-3 each (So ETC was valuing ETH at a CAP of $180 million)

When ETH immediately started trading it may have referenced the ETC valuation but then rapidly crashed to a lower valuation as supply hit the market.

From 160 to 80 million in 12 hours T_T

Under 50M now, still falling. 
The initial buyers were idiots, buying at 20x the IPO.

Cass the ruthless speculator did well though 

I just want to say ... i've investet 2 BTC --> 4000 ETH during the IPO sale last year!

And did sell them for approx. 19 BTC! So from the investment point of view ... ETH was a really good investment!
But i've also learned from BTS ... If i had sell my BTS last year when high .. it would be the same ...

With this revenue i can fund my next 3 month working for BTS/CNX ... so IMO good deal

[topcandle]

]

Can't wait for Augur to start trading on Poloniex so I can short it.

For what reason you'll short augur?  Why do you think there not legitimate?

[clout]

At this point the only reason to invest in BTS is Identabit, but even that is dubious. I love that no one mentioned that. The features aren't the problem, its the resources, connections and funding that are.

[topcandle]

While I think Augur in particular could have a great deal of success, a lot of businesses building on your platform doesn't necessarily translate to increased value...

Did you invest in Augur?

Nope There's some REP IOUs trading on Gatecoin though which already values Augur at $20 million on $5 million raised.

I'll probably be buying but will wait for it to properly start trading though, the limited supply could be inflating the price/valuation like the small amount of pre-traded ETH IOU did.

If I remember correctly.  For most of the time IOU ethereum was less than laugh date ethereum...

[Stan]

You can expect further abuse of shareholders, while changing the rules so frequently that no business can start much less survive... All while staying financially and intellectually centralized by CNX.  Todays whale slaying just gives more concentrated power to CNX.

But remember... this whole price drop is because of negative people on the forum who scare away investors...lol

Please give the name and date of the last unnecessary 5 rule changes (outside the batch upgrade to 2.0 which implemented all the lessons learned from the previous year).

Please give one thing CNX has done to prevent decentralization.

No concentration in power distribution, since for every seller there was a buyer.

And yes, price is a function of supply and demand and pessimistic, negative vibs on this forum can't help but cut into demand from people we refer here for the first time.  It's called negative marketing.  It's what trolls do.

The upgrade to 2.0 killed or critically damaged several companies trying to build on bts (moonstone, metaexchange says its one of the hardest API's to integrate, all the sqr and arbitrarily implemented shorting rules that smoked many shorts, improperly communicated hardforks with exchanges).  Not counting the merger which started the price crushing, in which Dan basically said 'dilute and pay a shitload for FMV otherwise i'm gone'.

BTS is centralized because CNX can push through anything it wants... It owns the majority of the witness spots via inits or CNX minions.  CNX has control over by far the largest proxies.  People are afraid Dan is going to do what he did during the merger again (via MAS) and he has the ability to do it right now.

If CNX wants bts to survive, it needs to distribute it's knowledge monopoly.  It needs to come up with features that it thinks need to be implemented, but give them to another developer to do and implement.  This will at least distribute the knowledge centralization that CNX has.

It is trivially easy to stop CNX from "pushing through anything it wants".  We can be down-voted 20 to one.  If no one does that, that's a vote of confidence in our recommendation.

All our documentation is openly available to anyone else and the contents of our engineers heads are available for consulting at any time.

Dan has made it clear that MAS is something he is doing on his own dime and offering to BTS for free.

And, yeah, we should have stayed back at BitShares 0.9 indefinitely.

[clout]

So, if you sold "a month ago" does the title of this thread make you some kind of troll or just an ignoramus?

I had others invest a substantial amount in BTS early on. I sold my personal stake, because I saw more opportunity in day trading on Poloniex.  I haven't told the other investors to pull out yet, but I will be...

Have you downloaded and are you testing the android bitshares wallet? Linking to the POS with 50,000 users expected by March?

Do you know that Privacy Mode GUI development has been paid for and is under development with a defined time table, implementation expected around the end of February?

No problem with telling those people that you recommended to buy BTS to now sell because I'll be buying. Well, actually, there is an ethical problem. Perhaps you should have told those others that you brought in that you were selling before you sold out and put downward pressure on the market price.

You're not understanding the problem if you think that those promises are going to correct the market.

I sold because I have the time to explore other markets, investments and trading strategies before they do. The price didn't fall because I sold my shares...

[onceuponatime]

So, if you sold "a month ago" does the title of this thread make you some kind of troll or just an ignoramus?

I had others invest a substantial amount in BTS early on. I sold my personal stake, because I saw more opportunity in day trading on Poloniex.  I haven't told the other investors to pull out yet, but I will be...

Have you downloaded and are you testing the android bitshares wallet? Linking to the POS with 50,000 users expected by March?

Do you know that Privacy Mode GUI development has been paid for and is under development with a defined time table, implementation expected around the end of February?

No problem with telling those people that you recommended to buy BTS to now sell because I'll be buying. Well, actually, there is an ethical problem. Perhaps you should have told those others that you brought in that you were selling before you sold out and put downward pressure on the market price.

[lil_jay890]

You can expect further abuse of shareholders, while changing the rules so frequently that no business can start much less survive... All while staying financially and intellectually centralized by CNX.  Todays whale slaying just gives more concentrated power to CNX.

But remember... this whole price drop is because of negative people on the forum who scare away investors...lol

Please give the name and date of the last unnecessary 5 rule changes (outside the batch upgrade to 2.0 which implemented all the lessons learned from the previous year).

Please give one thing CNX has done to prevent decentralization.

No concentration in power distribution, since for every seller there was a buyer.

And yes, price is a function of supply and demand and pessimistic, negative vibs on this forum can't help but cut into demand from people we refer here for the first time.  It's called negative marketing.  It's what trolls do.

The upgrade to 2.0 killed or critically damaged several companies trying to build on bts (moonstone, metaexchange says its one of the hardest API's to integrate, all the sqr and arbitrarily implemented shorting rules that smoked many shorts, improperly communicated hardforks with exchanges).  Not counting the merger which started the price crushing, in which Dan basically said 'dilute and pay a shitload for FMV otherwise i'm gone'.

BTS is centralized because CNX can push through anything it wants... It owns the majority of the witness spots via inits or CNX minions.  CNX has control over by far the largest proxies.  People are afraid Dan is going to do what he did during the merger again (via MAS) and he has the ability to do it right now.

If CNX wants bts to survive, it needs to distribute it's knowledge monopoly.  It needs to come up with features that it thinks need to be implemented, but give them to another developer to do and implement.  This will at least distribute the knowledge centralization that CNX has.

[clout]

While I think Augur in particular could have a great deal of success, a lot of businesses building on your platform doesn't necessarily translate to increased value...

Did you invest in Augur?

Nope There's some REP IOUs trading on Gatecoin though which already values Augur at $20 million on $5 million raised.

I'll probably be buying but will wait for it to properly start trading though, the limited supply could be inflating the price/valuation like the small amount of pre-traded ETH IOU did.

Can't wait for Augur to start trading on Poloniex so I can short it.

[clout]

Dan's use case is ideological but the platform isn't.

This is a financial services platform that is not integrated with any noteworthy financial institutions. There's no utility in that, and Dan's idealism leads him to think that people and business are going to magically appear and start using Bitshares. That's symply not the case.

I honestly really started to lose confidence in this project when Dan suggested that CNX was not able to get VC funding. CNX is a blockchain development company that can't get funding in a year where the demand for industrial grade blockchains has surged. There's an issue with that picture.

[TravelsAsia]

And of course BitUSD isn't successful because without micropayments it never will be. People around the world and in poorer parts of the US are getting paid in what Silicon Valley developers would call micropayments. Without the ability to pay micropayments you miss the majority of payment types which take place online.

  all day long, all day long.

  I've purchased another 70k bts today, when it drops to the 500s, I'll probably do the same.  Dan might find lightning in a bottle again down the road, so I'm willing to buy at these falling prices.  I'm more interested in the success of Peertracks, so it's important to me that Bitshares at least continues to mature.  Like with Augur, I have more faith in the value of the services using the technology than the technology value itself.

Don't buy bts because of Peertracks. That would be a terrible mistake.

I'm not. I've basically invested heavy into Peertracks and ONLY NOW buying back a little Bitshares since I have the money to speculate at these low prices. 2 different strategies, just need one of them to pay off.  

[clout]

So, if you sold "a month ago" does the title of this thread make you some kind of troll or just an ignoramus?

I had others invest a substantial amount in BTS early on. I sold my personal stake, because I saw more opportunity in day trading on Poloniex.  I haven't told the other investors to pull out yet, but I will be...

[clout]

And of course BitUSD isn't successful because without micropayments it never will be. People around the world and in poorer parts of the US are getting paid in what Silicon Valley developers would call micropayments. Without the ability to pay micropayments you miss the majority of payment types which take place online.

  all day long, all day long.

  I've purchased another 70k bts today, when it drops to the 500s, I'll probably do the same.  Dan might find lightning in a bottle again down the road, so I'm willing to buy at these falling prices.  I'm more interested in the success of Peertracks, so it's important to me that Bitshares at least continues to mature.  Like with Augur, I have more faith in the value of the services using the technology than the technology value itself.

Don't buy bts because of Peertracks. That would be a terrible mistake.

[onceuponatime]

If you have to ask this question then maybe it's time for you to sell.

If you cannot find an objective and rational reason to hold, to stay, then perhaps you shouldn't.

I feel like bitshares is stuck between is it a platform for other businesses/developers to build on or is it an exchange company?

In either case there are design issues.  For example no way people are going to build on a platform where in order to get your app/business on you have to get people to vote for it etc.

Alternatively look at ethereum...its clearly a platform that wants others to build on top of it.  And many have already.

We all have complains and concerns. I've complained about the lack of micropayment capability as being a main hindering factor. I've complained about the lack of bonds or similar functionality as being a limiting factor. Of course there is no place to collect yield in Bitshares 2.0, so of course there are a lot less people holding in Bitshares 2.0. What did anyone expect?

And of course BitUSD isn't successful because without micropayments it never will be. People around the world and in poorer parts of the US are getting paid in what Silicon Valley developers would call micropayments. Without the ability to pay micropayments you miss the majority of payment types which take place online.

Now it's time to be tough. You can either hold no matter what, even if BTS goes to  0.001 and lower, and wait the situation out, or you can sell now and get out before the next seemingly inevitable price drop. Until the exchange has bond markets, lots of unique assets, prediction markets, stealth, and we have micropayments, we can't really say Bitshares 2.0 is good enough to deserve a $100,0,000,000 marketcap or even a $50,000,000 marketcap.

Bitshares is at a low price because that is where it's current utility is. Unless more utility is built around it, it's not supposed to be priced higher than it's worth. Ethereum is actually over priced due to hype and should be $20,000,000 or less, but it's Ethereum.

Hahah i don't know why you're stuck on micropayments. That's simply not where the money is.

I sold a month or so ago when Dan made the post about vision. I realized then that this going nowhere. Dan's too much of an idealist and this project has lived and died by that ethos.

So, if you sold "a month ago" does the title you gave to this thread make you some kind of troll or just an ignoramus?

[btswolf]

I`m too lazy to cash out and actually I`m just beginning to understand the system better from day to day.
Giving up now would mean I had invested a lot of my time for just taking a huge loss in money.
Maybe I`m a bullshitwolf and idiot but even if we are all a disorganized bunch of bellyacher I do like to stay side by side with most of you.
No I don`t give up, not now.

[Riverhead]

If you have to ask this question then maybe it's time for you to sell.

If you cannot find an objective and rational reason to hold, to stay, then perhaps you shouldn't.

I feel like bitshares is stuck between is it a platform for other businesses/developers to build on or is it an exchange company?

In either case there are design issues.  For example no way people are going to build on a platform where in order to get your app/business on you have to get people to vote for it etc.

Alternatively look at ethereum...its clearly a platform that wants others to build on top of it.  And many have already.

We all have complains and concerns. I've complained about the lack of micropayment capability as being a main hindering factor. I've complained about the lack of bonds or similar functionality as being a limiting factor. Of course there is no place to collect yield in Bitshares 2.0, so of course there are a lot less people holding in Bitshares 2.0. What did anyone expect?

And of course BitUSD isn't successful because without micropayments it never will be. People around the world and in poorer parts of the US are getting paid in what Silicon Valley developers would call micropayments. Without the ability to pay micropayments you miss the majority of payment types which take place online.

Now it's time to be tough. You can either hold no matter what, even if BTS goes to  0.001 and lower, and wait the situation out, or you can sell now and get out before the next seemingly inevitable price drop. Until the exchange has bond markets, lots of unique assets, prediction markets, stealth, and we have micropayments, we can't really say Bitshares 2.0 is good enough to deserve a $100,0,000,000 marketcap or even a $50,000,000 marketcap.

Bitshares is at a low price because that is where it's current utility is. Unless more utility is built around it, it's not supposed to be priced higher than it's worth. Ethereum is actually over priced due to hype and should be $20,000,000 or less, but it's Ethereum.

Hahah i don't know why you're stuck on micropayments. That's simply not where the money is.

I sold a month or so ago when Dan made the post about vision. I realized then that this going nowhere. Dan's too much of an idealist and this project has lived and died by that ethos.

Dan's use case is ideological but the platform isn't.

[clout]

If you have to ask this question then maybe it's time for you to sell.

If you cannot find an objective and rational reason to hold, to stay, then perhaps you shouldn't.

I feel like bitshares is stuck between is it a platform for other businesses/developers to build on or is it an exchange company?

In either case there are design issues.  For example no way people are going to build on a platform where in order to get your app/business on you have to get people to vote for it etc.

Alternatively look at ethereum...its clearly a platform that wants others to build on top of it.  And many have already.

We all have complains and concerns. I've complained about the lack of micropayment capability as being a main hindering factor. I've complained about the lack of bonds or similar functionality as being a limiting factor. Of course there is no place to collect yield in Bitshares 2.0, so of course there are a lot less people holding in Bitshares 2.0. What did anyone expect?

And of course BitUSD isn't successful because without micropayments it never will be. People around the world and in poorer parts of the US are getting paid in what Silicon Valley developers would call micropayments. Without the ability to pay micropayments you miss the majority of payment types which take place online.

Now it's time to be tough. You can either hold no matter what, even if BTS goes to  0.001 and lower, and wait the situation out, or you can sell now and get out before the next seemingly inevitable price drop. Until the exchange has bond markets, lots of unique assets, prediction markets, stealth, and we have micropayments, we can't really say Bitshares 2.0 is good enough to deserve a $100,0,000,000 marketcap or even a $50,000,000 marketcap.

Bitshares is at a low price because that is where it's current utility is. Unless more utility is built around it, it's not supposed to be priced higher than it's worth. Ethereum is actually over priced due to hype and should be $20,000,000 or less, but it's Ethereum.

Hahah i don't know why you're stuck on micropayments. That's simply not where the money is.

I sold a month or so ago when Dan made the post about vision. I realized then that this going nowhere. Dan's too much of an idealist and this project has lived and died by that ethos.

[jaran]

  For example no way people are going to build on a platform where in order to get your app/business on you have to get people to vote for it etc.

Alternatively look at ethereum...its clearly a platform that wants others to build on top of it.  And many have already.

This is incorrect. The only time a business needs votes is if they require a protocol change or expect the blockchain to pay for something.

To contrast with Ethereum, which also freely allows anyone to build on top of it, there is no mechanism for shareholders to vote for features, forks, etc. A problem they are currently struggling with.

I don't mean to say one is better than the other but there is a bit of "grass is always greener" going on.

Correct, I was thinking of apps that need to run on chain as a smart contract. 

Also, I was not saying ethereum is "better" than bitshares I was saying look at the messaging / branding.  Ethereums messaging is clear.  They are a platform you can build on within its technical limitations.  Just like IOS is a platform you can build apps on within it's technical limitations.

[Empirical1.2]

While I think Augur in particular could have a great deal of success, a lot of businesses building on your platform doesn't necessarily translate to increased value...

Did you invest in Augur?

Nope There's some REP IOUs trading on Gatecoin though which already values Augur at $20 million on $5 million raised.

I'll probably be buying but will wait for it to properly start trading though, the limited supply could be inflating the price/valuation like the small amount of pre-traded ETH IOU did.

[Stan]

You can expect further abuse of shareholders, while changing the rules so frequently that no business can start much less survive... All while staying financially and intellectually centralized by CNX.  Todays whale slaying just gives more concentrated power to CNX.

But remember... this whole price drop is because of negative people on the forum who scare away investors...lol

Please give the name and date of the last unnecessary 5 rule changes (outside the batch upgrade to 2.0 which implemented all the lessons learned from the previous year).

Please give one thing CNX has done to prevent decentralization.

Please explain how concentration in power occurs, since for every seller there was a buyer.

Please explain your rationale for a why pure negative marketing here will have a non-negative effect on market demand (or interest in further investigation) when newcomers come here to check us out before making their first purchase. 

[TravelsAsia]

Like with Augur, I have more faith in the value of the services using the technology than the technology value itself.

Wait your bullish on Augur?  Did you invest?  I am the only one left out?

Yes, I invested in Augur. However, I meant I'm more interested in services such as Peertracks/MUSE than BTS itself. I'm re-buying 70k-100k bts per 100 drop just because there's always a chance we hit lightning again.

[fuzzy]

If you have to ask this question then maybe it's time for you to sell.

If you cannot find an objective and rational reason to hold, to stay, then perhaps you shouldn't.

 

I hate to agree but it isn't necessarily a bad thing..

[luckybit]

  For example no way people are going to build on a platform where in order to get your app/business on you have to get people to vote for it etc.

Alternatively look at ethereum...its clearly a platform that wants others to build on top of it.  And many have already.

This is incorrect. The only time a business needs votes is if they require a protocol change or expect the blockchain to pay for something.

To contrast with Ethereum, which also freely allows anyone to build on top of it, there is not mechanism for shareholders to vote for features, forks, etc. A problem they are currently struggling with.

Ethereum practically has no users. It's entirely developers. It has no GUI last I checked. It's not able to scale effectively last I checked. The smart contract capability is not as secure as it needs to be last I checked.

Ethereum isn't really much better than Bitshares. For many things Ethereum clearly isn't better, such as decentralized exchange. For other things Ethereum is only temporarily better, such as with smart contracts, but the Ethereum smart contracts aren't implemented in the best possible way either so it's not sensible to copy their approach.

In the end Ethereum and Bitshares 2.0 are pretty much neck and neck in terms of functionality and utility. Ethereum on the other hand actually has Augur in development, actually has more apps in the pipeline, and that is the only reason there is more excitement around it. Not because Bitshares can't do the same stuff but because Ethereum is doing what we keep saying Bitshares needs to do.

[topcandle]

Like with Augur, I have more faith in the value of the services using the technology than the technology value itself.

Wait your bullish on Augur?  Did you invest?  I am the only one left out?

[TravelsAsia]

And of course BitUSD isn't successful because without micropayments it never will be. People around the world and in poorer parts of the US are getting paid in what Silicon Valley developers would call micropayments. Without the ability to pay micropayments you miss the majority of payment types which take place online.

  all day long, all day long.

  I've purchased another 70k bts today, when it drops to the 500s, I'll probably do the same.  Dan might find lightning in a bottle again down the road, so I'm willing to buy at these falling prices.  I'm more interested in the success of Peertracks, so it's important to me that Bitshares at least continues to mature.  Like with Augur, I have more faith in the value of the services using the technology than the technology value itself.

[Riverhead]

  For example no way people are going to build on a platform where in order to get your app/business on you have to get people to vote for it etc.

Alternatively look at ethereum...its clearly a platform that wants others to build on top of it.  And many have already.

This is incorrect. The only time a business needs votes is if they require a protocol change or expect the blockchain to pay for something.

To contrast with Ethereum, which also freely allows anyone to build on top of it, there is no mechanism for shareholders to vote for features, forks, etc. A problem they are currently struggling with.

I don't mean to say one is better than the other but there is a bit of "grass is always greener" going on.

[topcandle]

While I think Augur in particular could have a great deal of success, a lot of businesses building on your platform doesn't necessarily translate to increased value...

Did you invest in Augur?

[luckybit]

I feel like bitshares is stuck between is it a platform for other businesses/developers to build on or is it an exchange company?

In either case there are design issues.  For example no way people are going to build on a platform where in order to get your app/business on you have to get people to vote for it etc.

Alternatively look at ethereum...its clearly a platform that wants others to build on top of it.  And many have already.

We all have complains and concerns. I've complained about the lack of micropayment capability as being a main hindering factor. I've complained about the lack of bonds or similar functionality as being a limiting factor. Of course there is no place to collect yield in Bitshares 2.0, so of course there are a lot less people holding in Bitshares 2.0. What did anyone expect?

And of course BitUSD isn't successful because without micropayments it never will be. People around the world and in poorer parts of the US are getting paid in what Silicon Valley developers would call micropayments. Without the ability to pay micropayments you miss the majority of payment types which take place online.

Now it's time to be tough. You can either hold no matter what, even if BTS goes to  0.001 and lower, and wait the situation out, or you can sell now and get out before the next seemingly inevitable price drop. Until the exchange has bond markets, lots of unique assets, prediction markets, stealth, and we have micropayments, we can't really say Bitshares 2.0 is good enough to deserve a $100,0,000,000 marketcap or even a $50,000,000 marketcap.

Bitshares is at a low price because that is where it's current utility is. Unless more utility is built around it, it's not supposed to be priced higher than it's worth. Ethereum is actually over priced due to hype and should be $20,000,000 or less, but it's Ethereum.

[Empirical1.2]

But remember... this whole price drop is because of negative people on the forum who scare away investors...lol

That always make me laugh 

Seems like China's attempt at addressing that same false issue on their stock market has failed too, go figure 

I feel like bitshares is stuck between is it a platform for other businesses/developers to build on or is it an exchange company?

In either case there are design issues.  For example no way people are going to build on a platform where in order to get your app/business on you have to get people to vote for it etc.

Alternatively look at ethereum...its clearly a platform that wants others to build on top of it.  And many have already.

Yeah Ethereum seems to often be better suited to that task, also it seems easier to develop on it (Vs. needing to understand Graphene/Go through CNX.)

While I think Augur in particular could have a great deal of success, a lot of businesses building on your platform doesn't necessarily translate to increased value...

Look at the amount of businesses on NXT, XCP & MSC (17 of top 20) and their combined valuations http://coinmarketcap.com/assets/
BitShares still has a long way to go before it catches up/overtakes the existing market leaders in this area.
Worse, even when it does...  XCP + NXT + MSC = < $10 million

Personally I think if you want to make money on a decentralized blockchain you have to focus on offering products & services that benefit from privacy, transparency, may be restricted in certain jurisdictions and can mostly be coded.

So I guess a reason to keep holding is that even if it's not the core focus, BTS is a great platform for some of those products and services which will be added over time.

In terms of easiest way for BTS to increase market value, profit & adoption right now...

1. Crypto-currency               (Remove dilution & commit to being sound money - highly unlikely.)
2. Gambling                          (Blockchain based Dice)
3. Liquid Smartcoins           (Liquidity incentives & lower fees)
4. DEX features                    (Bond Market)
5. Sports Betting                 (Prediction Market)
6. Blue Chip Stocks            (Derivatives of world's most popular stocks.)
7. STEALTH                          (More valuable when you have a popular product any of 1-5 above to apply STEALTH too.)
8. Referral Programme      (Need sellable product for referral programme to work.)
9. UIA's                                 (Counterparty and NXT currently dominate UIA's and demonstrate they don't add significantly to market value)

I take an interest in the project still but besides my mostly unclaimed AGS allocation which is actually a reasonable size, I haven't been additionally invested in BTS for while.

[luckybit]

If you have to ask this question then maybe it's time for you to sell.

If you cannot find an objective and rational reason to hold, to stay, then perhaps you shouldn't.

[jaran]

I feel like bitshares is stuck between is it a platform for other businesses/developers to build on or is it an exchange company?

In either case there are design issues.  For example no way people are going to build on a platform where in order to get your app/business on you have to get people to vote for it etc.

Alternatively look at ethereum...its clearly a platform that wants others to build on top of it.  And many have already.

[lil_jay890]

You can expect further abuse of shareholders, while changing the rules so frequently that no business can start much less survive... All while staying financially and intellectually centralized by CNX.  Todays whale slaying just gives more concentrated power to CNX.

But remember... this whole price drop is because of negative people on the forum who scare away investors...lol

[nomoreheroes7]

Yup, I'm in the same boat. I'll just piggy-back on your thread I guess.

[clout]

I don't know why I expected this project to be further along. Maybe I thought it was an actual business that was being cultivated, but I realize now that is not the case. It doesn't matter what the underlying software can do or not, CNX can't get funding, they can't produce a competitive exchange and don't know the market they are entering into. Bitshares, if looked at as a company, can't be run by a community of individuals that do not know or entirely trust each other. I don't have the answers for how to turn things around, but I see the same mistakes continually being made and I don't have a reason to stay anymore.