This is the most confusing IPO of all time, wtf am I supposed to do?

[AdamBLevine]

I just want a single source, a single page, a single set of guidelines as to what they follow... "click here for only legitimate answer"... all I have right now is speculations, misinformation, and no central source of fact... read the forums yourself if you want me to read them, people give different answers to the same questions, I know I've read thousands of messages trying ot make heads or tails of it.

Heh, I can sympathise with that. Even in the last half hour, my opinion changed somewhat
All I can say is build your own investing strategy. I have personally settled on holding all three - PTS, AGS and BTC. Sure, it may not end up giving me the best return but I should be covered in this confusing landscape.

I also see you said I will get 2.5x the BTS XT than before... what is BTS XT... this is the first time I am reading about this now... I thought I was getting BitSharesX... you say 2.5x someone else says 1.3x someone else says 1.1x all messages posted within 24 hours... did they change name of the new currency already?!

Bitshares XT is what is being released, but there may be three other chains that release from Bitshares XT.  This post seems to still be sticky'd as a roadmap, but i'm not sure it's accurate currently https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2940.0

[sumantso]

There may be some 3rd party DACs which may decide honour PTS but not AGS.

You get more of BTSX - 2,5x time in fact; but not the future ones since AGS is going to keep generating after 28th February. Remember, by future DACs, I mean entirely different DACs. All the BTSX chains which are going to be released will follow the initial BTS XT and so, yes, AGS is much better.

See you just gave me misinformation and speculation in the forums showing my point that there is no one place to get clear and concise information... because on the website it says the information below... however when reading forums I read messages from people who seem to be moderators which to my understanding would mean they are employees or knowledge people, and they even say one time they can't force a DAC to honor this, and then this information says that DACs will have to follow this... then its called a donation, then a share, then an earnings... you see where I am coming from with my frustration... they don't even seem to know what it is some days... and with it clearly having changed, they needed to go remove those threads, or modify all the messages stating what it is... this is why one central location for information is critical... the word "should" below means maybe it will maybe it won't... then it goes on to say that it will "require" them to... so is it maybe, maybe not, or required... I don't know!

(you can't tell me I am investing in a cow and then I show up and two chickens are before me... I wanted the cow in your advertisement)


At least 10% of the BitShares should be allocated to holders of BitShares PTS.
At least 10% of the BitShares should be allocated to holders of BitShares AGS.
The remaining BitShares should be customized to the needs of each BitShares chain.

This emerging social consensus and resulting network effect will be further reinforced by the Social Consensus Software License which will require each derivative software product to initialize its blockchain according to this consensus.

What misinformation is that? You are getting 50%, which, as you may realise, covers the 'at least 10%' clause.

[sumantso]

Btw, its none of my business, but converting 1 PTS for 0.9 AGS (as has been happening) may not be the best of strategies.

Maybe!  Then again, maybe it's better to buy ALL AGS so you can maximize your BTS, sell half your BTS (still have more left over than just getting BTS from PTS) and use the proceeds to buy your original PTS back at the deflated price.   The whole situation is so confusing I really don't know what the best way to protect yourself is.    It's my understanding that AGS and PTS were being amalgamated into BTS for future-chain purposes because otherwise you have to manage AGS and PTS investors differently.  Am I mistaken?

I meant PTS to AGS directly. I would say sell PTS for BTC and maybe buy AGS with some of those BTC - BTC/AGS is usually more profitable than PTS/AGS, but that again is a gamble.

I have a feeling that the initial BTSX price will surprise people. Keeping some BTC just in case maybe a good move rather than dumping all PTS into AGS.

I don't know what the best strategy is. As I said earlier, I decided to keep hold of all 3 - PTS, AGS and BTC; though I am having a hard time justifying my PTS holdings with the tasty market price.

[Darkbane]

I just want a single source, a single page, a single set of guidelines as to what they follow... "click here for only legitimate answer"... all I have right now is speculations, misinformation, and no central source of fact... read the forums yourself if you want me to read them, people give different answers to the same questions, I know I've read thousands of messages trying ot make heads or tails of it.

Heh, I can sympathise with that. Even in the last half hour, my opinion changed somewhat
All I can say is build your own investing strategy. I have personally settled on holding all three - PTS, AGS and BTC. Sure, it may not end up giving me the best return but I should be covered in this confusing landscape.

I also see you said I will get 2.5x the BTS XT than before... what is BTS XT... this is the first time I am reading about this now... I thought I was getting BitSharesX... you say 2.5x someone else says 1.3x someone else says 1.1x all messages posted within 24 hours... did they change name of the new currency already?!

[sumantso]

I just want a single source, a single page, a single set of guidelines as to what they follow... "click here for only legitimate answer"... all I have right now is speculations, misinformation, and no central source of fact... read the forums yourself if you want me to read them, people give different answers to the same questions, I know I've read thousands of messages trying ot make heads or tails of it.

Heh, I can sympathise with that. Even in the last half hour, my opinion changed somewhat
All I can say is build your own investing strategy. I have personally settled on holding all three - PTS, AGS and BTC. Sure, it may not end up giving me the best return but I should be covered in this confusing landscape.

[Darkbane]

[quote author=Darkbane link=topic=3099.
There may be some 3rd party DACs which may decide honour PTS but not AGS.

You get more of BTSX - 2,5x time in fact; but not the future ones since AGS is going to keep generating after 28th February. Remember, by future DACs, I mean entirely different DACs. All the BTSX chains which are going to be released will follow the initial BTS XT and so, yes, AGS is much better.

See you just gave me misinformation and speculation in the forums showing my point that there is no one place to get clear and concise information... because on the website it says the information below... however when reading forums I read messages from people who seem to be moderators which to my understanding would mean they are employees or knowledge people, and they even say one time they can't force a DAC to honor this, and then this information says that DACs will have to follow this... then its called a donation, then a share, then an earnings... you see where I am coming from with my frustration... they don't even seem to know what it is some days... and with it clearly having changed, they needed to go remove those threads, or modify all the messages stating what it is... this is why one central location for information is critical... the word "should" below means maybe it will maybe it won't... then it goes on to say that it will "require" them to... so is it maybe, maybe not, or required... I don't know!

(you can't tell me I am investing in a cow and then I show up and two chickens are before me... I wanted the cow in your advertisement)


At least 10% of the BitShares should be allocated to holders of BitShares PTS.
At least 10% of the BitShares should be allocated to holders of BitShares AGS.
The remaining BitShares should be customized to the needs of each BitShares chain.

This emerging social consensus and resulting network effect will be further reinforced by the Social Consensus Software License which will require each derivative software product to initialize its blockchain according to this consensus.

[AdamBLevine]

When I read Adam's arguments, I realise, even if I consider only my selfish profits, that as a long term PTS holder I may not be getting a better deal. The argument that is rolled out (by me too) is that the jump from 10% to 50% means that PTS holders are getting rewarded.

However, in the original scheme, only 400k BTSX would have been available at the start. In the new scheme, there will be 10 times more. Sure, PTS holders got 5x the original allotment but then they have to contend with 10x the initial supply.

So, not only the initial supply is huge, PTS holders will also have to contend with BTSX owners who have gotten them for even less than 0.0025 BTC in some cases through AGS route. Maybe it doesn't matter in the long run - I dunno.

Personally, I am covered. I have PTS, AGS as well as BTC (to buy cheap PTS and/or BTSX in March); and I do believe that I3 has the best of intentions in all these changes. This is new territorry, and it was difficult to get the right scheme from the start.

Exactly.  Guys like us are fine, this IS a win for those who understand the situation enough to position themselves accordingly, but how to best do that is VERY confusing

Btw, its none of my business, but converting 1 PTS for 0.9 AGS (as has been happening) may not be the best of strategies.

Maybe!  Then again, maybe it's better to buy ALL AGS so you can maximize your BTS, sell half your BTS (still have more left over than just getting BTS from PTS) and use the proceeds to buy your original PTS back at the deflated price.   The whole situation is so confusing I really don't know what the best way to protect yourself is.    It's my understanding that AGS and PTS were being amalgamated into BTS for future-chain purposes because otherwise you have to manage AGS and PTS investors differently.  Am I mistaken?

[Darkbane]

Instead of getting all worked up and typing big replies, you could have spent the time to actually look through these forums. In anycase, I will try to summarise it.

1> PTS gives 1.3 BTSXT, while AGS gives 3.33 BTSXT. All the future BTSX chains will be based on BTSXT so AGS is way more profitable if you are mainly interested in BTSX.
2> All the non-BTSX DACs by Invictus will allot atleast 10% each to PTS and AGS. By the time those come out I assume all the PTS/AGS will have been mined/released so you will get the same amount.

PTS deal is actually sweeter than what was promised earlier. Its just that if you would have hung around you could have made an even better deal. You still can if you step back and take some time to think and come up with a good strategy. Keep in mind the possibility that there will be 4m BTSX on the market right at the start, a lot of which would have been acquired for as low as 0.0025 BTC.

I have read all of those postings... but they are the same regurgitated posts from people without supplying factual basis for how or why this information is accurate and proven.... its just one rumor passed and retold by another... there is nothing on the invictus.io website to confirm ANYYYYY of this... its all left for wild rumors and rampant speculation that are not factual...

my point being... WHY IS THERE NO CENTRAL WEBSITE WITH CLEAR AND CONCISE INFORMATION TO BE USED AS THE FACTUAL BASIS FOR WHAT WILL OCCUR...

I go to protoshares.net = following SOME links sends me to forums where it says PTS will be 1:1 (and many links don't work)

I go to invictus-innovations.com = tells me to go to Invictus.io

I go to Invictus.io  = now I start clicking around and eventually get to something that says I can get 10% of all future DACs and points me to the official forums, where I now start reading conflicting answers, some which seem posted by moderators who state conflicting information from what is being posted today... okay which do I believe again?

check the wiki = nothing, oh wait an FAQ on it... great now I've got 3 more questions after reading that...

at this point you go back to the forums and start asking questions, where you get different answers on what when how why...

go back to the website and read about how my "donation" will be used... wait am I donating money or am I buying shares in something... in language translation donation means something different to me, than to you... donate in my country means I give something and get nothing... so I clearly don't want to donate, but on the other side of the screen it says I earn them... so am I donating, am I earning, am I investing... what am I doing... is this just legal wording to bypass some measures?

http://invictus.io/bitshares-ags.php

then it says on the same page... ""That said, these are no-strings-attached donations and should not be construed to place any legal obligation on Invictus Innovations to provide anything in return for these donations."" so then this is a donation and I have no guarantee of receiving any AGS after all? so its not earning or investing...

I WANTTTT to understand and know how it works, but there is SO MUCH conflicting information and words used to describe the same thing... you can't call a transaction, a donation, an investment, or earning all at once...

I just want a single source, a single page, a single set of guidelines as to what they follow... "click here for only legitimate answer"... all I have right now is speculations, misinformation, and no central source of fact... read the forums yourself if you want me to read them, people give different answers to the same questions, I know I've read thousands of messages trying ot make heads or tails of it.

[sumantso]

Btw, its none of my business, but converting 1 PTS for 0.9 AGS (as has been happening) may not be the best of strategies.

[sumantso]

When I read Adam's arguments, I realise, even if I consider only my selfish profits, that as a long term PTS holder I may not be getting a better deal. The argument that is rolled out (by me too) is that the jump from 10% to 50% means that PTS holders are getting rewarded.

However, in the original scheme, only 400k BTSX would have been available at the start. In the new scheme, there will be 10 times more. Sure, PTS holders got 5x the original allotment but then they have to contend with 10x the initial supply.

So, not only the initial supply is huge, PTS holders will also have to contend with BTSX owners who have gotten them for even less than 0.0025 BTC in some cases through AGS route. Maybe it doesn't matter in the long run - I dunno.

Personally, I am covered. I have PTS, AGS as well as BTC (to buy cheap PTS and/or BTSX in March); and I do believe that I3 has the best of intentions in all these changes. This is new territorry, and it was difficult to get the right scheme from the start.

[sumantso]

There may be some 3rd party DACs which may decide honour PTS but not AGS.

You get more of BTSX - 2,5x time in fact; but not the future ones since AGS is going to keep generating after 28th February. Remember, by future DACs, I mean entirely different DACs. All the BTSX chains which are going to be released will follow the initial BTS XT and so, yes, AGS is much better.

so essentially... all my PTS could be worthless (as a hold in theory) for future DACs because they won't be forced to honor what they said they would have to honor... they can just pick and choose with the honor system and I have no clear future understanding and will again have to go through this process of guess what they'll do or not do and change and not change every other day???

I mean getting started I was told, PTS would get you shares in everything, then I see AGS now gets half the shares, then I see AGS was cheaper to get than PTS, then I see future DACs may or may not honor PTS or AGS or both or one or who knows what they will do... how can anyone trust in something that has no rules or clear path... the path has changed week to week! and all my informations comes from rumors and maybes from folks in a forum!

I finally saw they planned to launch an official website on march 21st... should that not be the FIRST thing they do BEFORE they decide to do all the rest... I can't even get updates and clear information on their current website... all speculations and maybes from strangers in a forum and I have no clue who is a developer or not... SO FRUSTRATING.

Instead of getting all worked up and typing big replies, you could have spent the time to actually look through these forums. In anycase, I will try to summarise it.

1> PTS gives 1.3 BTSXT, while AGS gives 3.33 BTSXT. All the future BTSX chains will be based on BTSXT so AGS is way more profitable if you are mainly interested in BTSX.
2> All the non-BTSX DACs by Invictus will allot atleast 10% each to PTS and AGS. By the time those come out I assume all the PTS/AGS will have been mined/released so you will get the same amount.

PTS deal is actually sweeter than what was promised earlier. Its just that if you would have hung around you could have made an even better deal. You still can if you step back and take some time to think and come up with a good strategy. Keep in mind the possibility that there will be 4m BTSX on the market right at the start, a lot of which would have been acquired for as low as 0.0025 BTC.

[AdamBLevine]

@AdamBLevine.  If he wants to do real investigative journalism he'd go back and source quotes from the forum. 

I, for one, believe in and trust Invictus.  They have only continued to maximize value for me as a shareholder throughout the process, from November to the current moment, and I believe they will continue to do so.  Granted, I was not a lazy investor, and I followed my intuition, my gut, and the advice of the Invictus team.  Those who did not have the wherewithal to invest as best as possible, I don't feel sorry for. This is the real world, don't expect me or anyone to hold your hand and walk you into every great investment maneuver. 

I'm posting in a forum thread, when did I claim that I was doing *anything* journalistic here?   Or is it just that I'm not allowed to be an investor myself since I have a public presence?   You'll notice I'm not posting an article detailing all of my frustrations with Invictus but I guess if you'd prefer me to take off my investor hat and put on my journalist hat there's plenty of meat on these bones.    You may view this as an attack but I'm actually trying to help.   

I, for one, believe in and trust Invictus.  They have only continued to maximize value for me as a shareholder throughout the process, from November to the current moment, and I believe they will continue to do so.  Granted, I was not a lazy investor, and I followed my intuition, my gut, and the advice of the Invictus team.  Those who did not have the wherewithal to invest as best as possible, I don't feel sorry for. This is the real world, don't expect me or anyone to hold your hand and walk you into every great investment maneuver. 

You'll notice I'm on the forum quite a bit too, *I* am not suffering from this development.  *I* have profited.   But *I* recognize that my profit comes at the cost of those who thought they could just invest and then come back when there was actually something ready for them to use as a normal user.    What % of Invictus's investors do you think that is?   I bet you a whole lot of them came from my discussions with Daniel and strong recommendations of his product.  So it is not myself I am concerned about, it is my audience who I chose to expose to this project that is now a very different arrangement than when they bought in.  And they did buy in.

Here's the most important thing you said

I, for one, believe in and trust Invictus.

I used to (trust invictus), and I very much consider Dan a friend (although after this maybe not) but I am do not think it is trustworthy or professional behavior to make a plan, sell a product and then renegotiate the deal unilaterally without the means to get that message out to the people who already made decisions based on the original deal.   You trust Invictus because they're going to make you money, there's really no doubt about that in my mind - they will make money.

But frankly, making money in cryptocurrency is the easy part.  Building a reputation, delivering a product and sticking to your word even when it's difficult - those are things that are hard to come by and far more important in the medium-long run than how much profit you can generate for your first investors.   And in this case, the first investors are being screwed because Invictus didn't get any money from them.  They can choose to give their funds to Invictus in exchange for the better deal, but that actually REWARDS them for changing the deal which makes them more likely to do it again in the future. 

Tell me i'm wrong

[Darkbane]

There may be some 3rd party DACs which may decide honour PTS but not AGS.

You get more of BTSX - 2,5x time in fact; but not the future ones since AGS is going to keep generating after 28th February. Remember, by future DACs, I mean entirely different DACs. All the BTSX chains which are going to be released will follow the initial BTS XT and so, yes, AGS is much better.

so essentially... all my PTS could be worthless (as a hold in theory) for future DACs because they won't be forced to honor what they said they would have to honor... they can just pick and choose with the honor system and I have no clear future understanding and will again have to go through this process of guess what they'll do or not do and change and not change every other day???

I mean getting started I was told, PTS would get you shares in everything, then I see AGS now gets half the shares, then I see AGS was cheaper to get than PTS, then I see future DACs may or may not honor PTS or AGS or both or one or who knows what they will do... how can anyone trust in something that has no rules or clear path... the path has changed week to week! and all my informations comes from rumors and maybes from folks in a forum!

I finally saw they planned to launch an official website on march 21st... should that not be the FIRST thing they do BEFORE they decide to do all the rest... I can't even get updates and clear information on their current website... all speculations and maybes from strangers in a forum and I have no clue who is a developer or not... SO FRUSTRATING.

[bitbro]

AGS has made PTS far more valuable, regardless.

 

[AdamBLevine]

If the disagreement is a matter of economic judgement, then you're disagreeing primarily with how to run the company to achieve maximum returns, rather than disagreeing with how to allocate shares fairly.

1. Not going back on their word.
2. Allocating shares fairly.
3. Maximizing the value proposition.

Furthermore, are we investing in Invictus as trusting their judgement to maximize the value proposition, or are we investing in Invictus to complete a preordained scheme that we believe will maximize the value proposition?

Most people don't understand Bitshares and trust in the judgement of the people developing it. Of course if we can communicate ideas that will improve the judgement of Invictus then we should do so for our own sake, but then we should focus on improving what we perceive to be wrong.

From what I can tell you're arguing against a mix of the above three components. As an investor, I'd like to see you suggest alternatives that do not lower the value proposition. And if people disagree on whether or not it lowers the value proposition we're then in the realm of argumentation. As an interested participant, I'd like to see you suggest how Invictus should proceed from here.

Dwelling on past mistakes are only relevant as guide to avoiding future mistakes. And better than telling people what to avoid is to suggest alternatives that are superior.

1 - Start an official invictus blog where all announcements go.
2 - Determine the FINAL Deal with regards to Angelshares, Bitshares, and Protoshares.  How they will be distributed, who gets what and at what rates.   And then never change it again
3 - If Invictus actually wants to listen to their customers and investors, they should set a rule that all proposed changes are announced and discussed for two weeks before the decision is made.  If Invictus wants to do what they want, they should stop making the claim.    The trouble with using a forum as the arbiter of decision is you only get people who have time to live on a forum making the decisions.  As someone who himself sits on forums with a bunch of my time, that is not ideal.  See point 1.
4 -

You're a champion for the guys throwing in their support but not necessarily their time and attention. I think it's a bit irresponsible for I3 to be collecting money from that audience at this stage. It seems like nobody is in a rush to help make things user-friendly until after the snapshot.

Yeah, no. I am explaining that things are not so simple as you would like them to be and that these unexpected changes have meaningful repercussions for people who supported invictus IN THE WAY INVICTUS ASKED THEM TO who now are getting screwed.   The deal they signed on for was as the only way to acquire BTS before, and now it's the worst way to acquire BTS before.   How do you not register this as a problem?  Do you think Invictus only has the couple hundred people who have invested in them that even read these forums?