Author Topic: poll for the percent based transfer fee  (Read 20661 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

jakub

  • Guest
I do not understand why you set cap to 100 BTS, which means each time one transfer more than 100k BTS will pay 100BTS, about $0.3
in my view the cap should be close or a little above 0.0001 BTC, that's why I prefer 20 BTS.
it will be funny if the BTS transfer be more expensive than inter-Bank CNY transfer.

If you are a user who needs to transfer bigger amounts on a regular basis, you need to become LTM.

That's the whole point of the referral program.
If you buy LTM, BitShares can offer you very competitive pricing, much better than inter-bank fees.
If you don't buy LTM, you will only have the small transfers cheap, not the big ones.

In other words, there is only one group of users who are not taken care of: those who want to transfer big amounts on a regular basis but still don't want to buy LTM.
And my point is this: we will be fine if we ignore this group of users - they need to go away, BitShares is not for them.

The original intention of percentage-based fees was to offer the following deal to the big-transfer guys:
- either you agree to sponsor the small-transfer guys
- or you buy LTM

If the percentage-based fees project turns out to be a backdoor way to kill the referral program, it will be hard for me to continue supporting it.

EDIT: It's not fair to compare non-LTM transfer fees to inter-bank transfer fees.
You don't get access to inter-bank transfers if you haven't paid huge fees beforehand for setting up and maintaining an account there.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2016, 11:54:25 am by jakub »

jakub

  • Guest
What fee are we talking about here? Trading fee or transfer fee?
Transfer fees only.

Offline clayop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
    • View Profile
    • Bitshares Korea
  • BitShares: clayop
Thanks for your hard work @clayop .
One more thing need to be considered add into analysis: If we apply % fee to an asset, hopefully quantity of micro payments in that asset will increase, and perhaps quantity of big payments will decrease. If we make an estimation for example apply *5 to the former and 1/3 to the latter(depends on the parameters change), how will the result change?

//For example, 30BTS is unacceptable for most of tipping UIAs, so there are very few tips in the historical data. If we set the fee to 1BTS, perhaps tipping would get much more active.

I will do it when I have time. But I think big transfers won't decrease much, because they are real demands. On the other hand, we can expect more micro-transactions, but I cannot guess the number because if some services using micro-payment (e.g. messaging / telecommunications) are really successful, they can increase the number dramatically. Assuming 10,000 messages are sent a day, the total fee goes up from 600k to 1.1mil BTS.
Yes, you got my idea definitely. That's why we tried to design a percentage based fee structure.
Charge a little more on real demands, charge less on small payments to attract more uses.
+5%
With your development, we will be able to have decentralized message app with instant smartcoin tipping features ;)
Bitshares Korea - http://www.bitshares.kr
Vote for me and see Korean Bitshares community grows
delegate-clayop

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4664
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
Thanks for your hard work @clayop .
One more thing need to be considered add into analysis: If we apply % fee to an asset, hopefully quantity of micro payments in that asset will increase, and perhaps quantity of big payments will decrease. If we make an estimation for example apply *5 to the former and 1/3 to the latter(depends on the parameters change), how will the result change?

//For example, 30BTS is unacceptable for most of tipping UIAs, so there are very few tips in the historical data. If we set the fee to 1BTS, perhaps tipping would get much more active.

I will do it when I have time. But I think big transfers won't decrease much, because they are real demands. On the other hand, we can expect more micro-transactions, but I cannot guess the number because if some services using micro-payment (e.g. messaging / telecommunications) are really successful, they can increase the number dramatically. Assuming 10,000 messages are sent a day, the total fee goes up from 600k to 1.1mil BTS.
Yes, you got my idea definitely. That's why we tried to design a percentage based fee structure.
Charge a little more on real demands, charge less on small payments to attract more uses.
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline clayop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
    • View Profile
    • Bitshares Korea
  • BitShares: clayop
Thanks for your hard work @clayop .
One more thing need to be considered add into analysis: If we apply % fee to an asset, hopefully quantity of micro payments in that asset will increase, and perhaps quantity of big payments will decrease. If we make an estimation for example apply *5 to the former and 1/3 to the latter(depends on the parameters change), how will the result change?

//For example, 30BTS is unacceptable for most of tipping UIAs, so there are very few tips in the historical data. If we set the fee to 1BTS, perhaps tipping would get much more active.

I will do it when I have time. But I think big transfers won't decrease much, because they are real demands. On the other hand, we can expect more micro-transactions, but I cannot guess the number because if some services using micro-payment (e.g. messaging / telecommunications) are really successful, they can increase the number dramatically. Assuming 10,000 messages are sent a day, the total fee goes up from 600k to 1.1mil BTS.
Bitshares Korea - http://www.bitshares.kr
Vote for me and see Korean Bitshares community grows
delegate-clayop

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4664
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
Thanks for your hard work @clayop .
One more thing need to be considered add into analysis: If we apply % fee to an asset, hopefully quantity of micro payments in that asset will increase, and perhaps quantity of big payments will decrease. If we make an estimation for example apply *5 to the former and 1/3 to the latter(depends on the parameters change), how will the result change?

//For example, 30BTS is unacceptable for most of tipping UIAs, so there are very few tips in the historical data. If we set the fee to 1BTS, perhaps tipping would get much more active.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2016, 08:22:28 am by abit »
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline clayop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
    • View Profile
    • Bitshares Korea
  • BitShares: clayop
OK, here'are some summaries of analysis.

1. Minimum fee does not significantly influence total fee. Given 1% and 300 max (as suggested by jakub), min fee change from 1 to 6 only increases 1.8% of total fee. So I easily conclude that minimum fee is not that important, and lower minimum fee is more preferable to encourage micro-transactions. However, the minimum fee should be efficient to prevent spam. Therefore, I fixed the minimum fee to 1 BTS.

2. Given 1 BTS minimum, I tested scenarios proposed by bitcrab and jakub (0.1%/20 and 1%/300). Bitcrab's was 137k BTS fee in total while Jakub's is 1,830k BTS. I think the former is too small compared to transfer fees collected with 30 BTS flat fee. (137k vs. 13,212k, roughly 1%). While, the latter is 14%.

3. I tried to find a way to have the same level of fee as actually collected. But all scenarios are less then the 13mil BTS. So I conclude that it is impossible to have equal amount of fee under percentage-based fee system.

4. I checked how many txs are supposed to pay more (over 30 BTS) under 1% fee. It is found that 45% (7317/16243) of all transfers are affected implying more burdens in general. However, the rate decreases to 30% with 0.1% fee, and 25% with 0.05%. Meanwhile, 55% of transfers are benefited with 1% fee system, 69% with 0.1%, and 75% with 0.05%. The ratio of minimum-fee-paying transfers are 37%, 50%, 53% respectively (under 1%/0.1%/0.05% fee system).

These are my findings so far, and the followings are my opinions and suggestions.

1. I tried to have 5% of total fee actually collected. That is around 600k BTS.

2. I compared two fee rates, 0.1% and 0.05%. With 0.1%, 150 BTS maximum has 593k BTS fee. With 0.05%, 300 BTS maximum has 615k BTS fee.

3. I think lower percentage+high maximum is preferred to higher percentage+low maximum, because it is easy to justify "the bigger, the more". Given 0.05%/300, transfers over 600k BTS ($1800) pay the maximum fee of 300 BTS ($1).

So my suggestion is 0.05%/1/300. If you want to analyze by yourself, https://cryptofresh.com/bts_tx_history.csv will be the starting point (Thanks Roadscape).


Something I made wrong significantly. (didn't remove non-BTS). I will make it again soon.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2016, 04:25:01 pm by clayop »
Bitshares Korea - http://www.bitshares.kr
Vote for me and see Korean Bitshares community grows
delegate-clayop

Offline clayop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
    • View Profile
    • Bitshares Korea
  • BitShares: clayop
There can be another point, which has a higher fee percentage (over 1%) and higher upper limit. Still digging in the data.
Bitshares Korea - http://www.bitshares.kr
Vote for me and see Korean Bitshares community grows
delegate-clayop

Offline clayop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
    • View Profile
    • Bitshares Korea
  • BitShares: clayop
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9wS1MU8AsmNbUpaXzZid0JSWjQ/view?usp=sharing  (98M)

Based on some descriptive analysis, I think 0.05% / 1 Min / 300 Max is reasonable numbers.
Thanks for the analysis. Would you like to provide a summary of the analysis here? It's a bit hard to download a 98M file or open it in Google Sheets.

Yup that's my plan. Sometime today :)
Bitshares Korea - http://www.bitshares.kr
Vote for me and see Korean Bitshares community grows
delegate-clayop

Offline yvv

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile
What fee are we talking about here? Trading fee or transfer fee?

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4664
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9wS1MU8AsmNbUpaXzZid0JSWjQ/view?usp=sharing  (98M)

Based on some descriptive analysis, I think 0.05% / 1 Min / 300 Max is reasonable numbers.
Thanks for the analysis. Would you like to provide a summary of the analysis here? It's a bit hard to download a 98M file or open it in Google Sheets.
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline clayop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
    • View Profile
    • Bitshares Korea
  • BitShares: clayop
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9wS1MU8AsmNbUpaXzZid0JSWjQ/view?usp=sharing  (98M)

Based on some descriptive analysis, I think 0.05% / 1 Min / 300 Max is reasonable numbers.


P.S Special thanks to @roadscape for providing the data!
« Last Edit: January 20, 2016, 06:06:31 pm by clayop »
Bitshares Korea - http://www.bitshares.kr
Vote for me and see Korean Bitshares community grows
delegate-clayop

Offline clayop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
    • View Profile
    • Bitshares Korea
  • BitShares: clayop
I think percentage based fee can satisfy both sides (micropayment vs. network profit/referral system). So I would suggest like,
1 BTS (lower than the current) / 100 BTS (higher than the current) / 0.1% (These are just my rough hypothetical numbers)

I do not understand why you set cap to 100 BTS, which means each time one transfer more than 100k BTS will pay 100BTS, about $0.3
in my view the cap should be close or a little above 0.0001 BTC, that's why I prefer 20 BTS.
it will be funny if the BTS transfer be more expensive than inter-Bank CNY transfer.

They are hypothetical examples. The main idea is it can be higher than the current level.
Bitshares Korea - http://www.bitshares.kr
Vote for me and see Korean Bitshares community grows
delegate-clayop

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1928
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
I think percentage based fee can satisfy both sides (micropayment vs. network profit/referral system). So I would suggest like,
1 BTS (lower than the current) / 100 BTS (higher than the current) / 0.1% (These are just my rough hypothetical numbers)

I do not understand why you set cap to 100 BTS, which means each time one transfer more than 100k BTS will pay 100BTS, about $0.3
in my view the cap should be close or a little above 0.0001 BTC, that's why I prefer 20 BTS.
it will be funny if the BTS transfer be more expensive than inter-Bank CNY transfer.

Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline clayop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
    • View Profile
    • Bitshares Korea
  • BitShares: clayop
I asked @roadscape to get historical data of transfer activities to estimate potential impacts of each possible scenario.
We may need more solid base to justify a certain fee structure.

Addition:
I think percentage based fee can satisfy both sides (micropayment vs. network profit/referral system). So I would suggest like,
1 BTS (lower than the current) / 100 BTS (higher than the current) / 0.1% (These are just my rough hypothetical numbers)
« Last Edit: January 20, 2016, 08:14:42 am by clayop »
Bitshares Korea - http://www.bitshares.kr
Vote for me and see Korean Bitshares community grows
delegate-clayop