How much is a new user worth?

[bytemaster]

Thw problem with concrete limits on dilutions is that there already are: there's no dilution. Our ability to set social consensus disappears forever if we dilute btsx.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

Yes.. this is why we don't want to inflate and are actively working on alternatives.

[toast]

Thw problem with concrete limits on dilutions is that there already are: there's no dilution. Our ability to set social consensus disappears forever if we dilute btsx.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

[roadscape]

The fixed supply is one of the main reasons I joined BTSX. It's hard for me to let go of that fact. That's why I agree that dilution could be a big PR issue.

I'd also be concerned about the value of my shares, but I feel confident about what bytemaster says regarding a net benefit.

It seems to me the only problem is the phycological (marketing) side. I could easily be sold on dilution if I knew the concrete limits.

[speedy]

Suppose you could pay a *CREDIT CARD BILL* with BitUSD......

Suppose you're using the word "Suppose " just to hide the fact that this is not fictional but something that's happening 

If this is really happening, then why not just disclose who you are discussing with to make this happen? Why all the teasing without any concrete details?

[Gentso1]

OK two questions......

"Net result:  users buy $1,000 worth of BitUSD and spends it via the pre-paid card earns $100...assuming a referral they buy $1000 worth of BitUSD and cost $200 worth of USD... "
1. These pre-paid cards, are they bitUSD or USD? If its bitUSD where can they spend it?

"Users who recommend 10 people who and buy and spend $1000 worth of BitUSD will earn $1100..."
2.Whats the point of giving bitUSD away in any amount when it can not be traded directly for fiat and no merchants accept it. Yes I know you can use it to buy btsx which has value(the platform), but isn't the goal to give the assets themselves value?

I am very very leery of adjusting the supply of btsx because as other users mentioned it sets a dangerous precedent.

The cards are funded with BitUSD but spend just like any USD converted at 1:1 no spread.  The card service provider would either hold the BitUSD or sell it on the market to get real USD.  As the card service provider is earning a fee from merchants they can handle the spread  (and/or make the BitUSD market).  It would be on the card provider to liquidate the BitUSD and not on the user.

This is it, this is the moment  with the above statement we will have a liquid bitUSD market. If it can be done without going over that 2bill cap it will just make it easier for users to say YES and give more credit to bitsharesX.

Also please don't think KYC is going to stop gaming of a referral system, that would just be naive and I know you guys are smarter then that. I like the referral idea as it is a tried and true method that works. Banks, brokers, exchanges have been offering free money, with success to gain a expand a user base. I personally think 100$ is a bit steep perhaps a 50$ or use some kind of tiered system based off the deposit amount.   

Speed seems to be a factor of late, many alts seem to be adopting bitsharesX ideas. I dont think devs will be afforded the same time line bitcoin adoption/development has taken. Bitcoin has paved the road for many alts and thus I believe adoption can come much easier and quicker if developers can keep up.

Lastly tell me you will put a fiat-on ramp in please before* you would launch the above. I would hate to see users have to drop through the hoop of buying bitcoin just to get into btsx and bitUSD.

[lil_jay890]

If your worried about dilution, why not just buy bitUSD or bitGLD before the dilution and wait to see if the marketing campaign is on track to being successfull?  Worst comes to worst and the campaign destroys bitsharesX, at least you didn't lose any money... Granted there is enough liquidity that you can get out.

[Ander]

Effectively, for every 1 BTSX burned we could create at most 1 BTSX for dilution purposes.

I like it. But the burn rate is probably too low for a useful dilution?

Yeah, burn rate is too low for it to be more than a piece of the needed funding.  But it might be able to be one source of funding, while other money comes from other sources.


My order of preference is:
1) Marketing campaign gets funded in some way, BTSX supply doesn't increase above 2B.
2) Marketing campaign gets funded, BTSX supply does increase above 2B.  (By a known fixed amount that is reasonable).
3) Marketing campaign doesnt get funded. 

Bytemaster's ideas are very exciting and this should happen in some form, imo.  If we can avoid dilution that is preferable, if we cant then it is still worth doing.

[roadscape]

Finally, at no point can the supply of BTSX exceed 2B shares. Do not inflate and do not mess with the burn.

Inflation in some form may be rationalized on a theoretical level, but the PR nightmare that may result would be catastrophic.

Sure, use some AGS funds to roll out a referral program. If timed right it will pay for itself.

But do not inflate.

This would be best.  Do everything we can to avoid putting the supply of BTSX over 2B shares.

Effectively, for every 1 BTSX burned we could create at most 1 BTSX for dilution purposes.

I like it. But the burn rate is probably too low for a useful dilution?

[Ander]

Finally, at no point can the supply of BTSX exceed 2B shares. Do not inflate and do not mess with the burn.

Inflation in some form may be rationalized on a theoretical level, but the PR nightmare that may result would be catastrophic.

Sure, use some AGS funds to roll out a referral program. If timed right it will pay for itself.

But do not inflate.

This would be best.  Do everything we can to avoid putting the supply of BTSX over 2B shares. 

[Empirical1.1]

Can we do the debit card thing without the $100 bonus first?

 

If this is to be done at all it should be done without such a high affiliate commission. The only clear winner in this that I can see is the affiliate marketer who gets a state-of-the-art product to "email market" to their databases. Everyone else takes risk with an unclear benefit, if any.

 

Finally, at no point can the supply of BTSX exceed 2B shares. Do not inflate and do not mess with the burn.

Inflation in some form may be rationalized on a theoretical level, but the PR nightmare that may result would be catastrophic.

Sure, use some AGS funds to roll out a referral program. If timed right it will pay for itself.

But do not inflate.

 

guys i think i had a brilliant moment to solve the funding problem, but maybe i am just stupid 

suppose we have a friend like bytemaster discribed.
suppose we can fund this marketing stunt and everyone has a chance to profit from it.

suppose our friend will make this kind of card available and he gets people interested to buy 1.000 bitUSD for 1.000 USD and with his promise to pay them for using the card 100 bitUSD

his customer will transfer 1.000 USD and he needs to buy 1.000 bitUSD to load the card up.
- he needs a way to change his fiat Dollar in bitUSD, so this is a job maybe Invictus needs to handle
- the friend will send the USD to Invictus and Invictus will load the just opend customer card with 1.000 bitUSD

so far nothing special

but how will Invictus fund the whole operation?

- so Invictus needs 1.000 bitUSD but if they use 1.000 bitUSD of their own funds they will loose a lot of money, because they wanted to hold BTSX for the expected rise

but we have a source of untouched bitUSD - so overhang on SHORTS

at the moment a short can only be done at the feed price. for the marketing stunt we need an option to make it 20% above the feed price.

lets make an example

- Invictus needs for the deal 1.200 bitUSD for the created possible liabilities
- at they moment they could just buy 1.200 bit USD (suppose for 31,5 BTSX ) 37.800 BTSX at the open market
- but Invictus got only 31.500 BTSX worth from the friend
- so now we need a "marketing" SHORT (i suggest as long as the deal works only marketing shorts are accepted) to buy 1.200 bit USD for 31.500 BTSX while the real price is 37.800 BTSX
- the SHORT position will be greated with a "marketing price" of 26.5 BTSX and not on the feedprice of 31.5

- Invictus holds now 1.200 bitUSD and can easily fund the liabilities without risk
- done

Assumptions

- Invictus finds a solution for the fake user problem (maybe it is possible to create a new kind of account. If Invictus pays 1.000 bitUSD on this account, the account will be granted 100 bitUSD via spending. Like yield?)
- same problem is with our "friend" it needs to be a reliable source, because we could easily fund with this way his entry into BTSX and not the entry of many.
- SHORTS are willing to create with this discount, and in the beginning we had this problem, because anyone was really bullish, now with this bullish mind set you can support BTSX with only loosing 5 BTSX each created bitUSD. Would a SHORTER be willing to do it? I think yes, because from the created buying pressure BTSX will rise in value and the short will easily cover his position with a profit.
- for this kind of short no time restrictions wanted

I think this could be a solution for the egg and the hen problem and it is a really win- win situation.

At the moment we have only the problem that we have not many who are willing to buying bitUSD from the creators the shorts. Now we match them and the SHORT creators are willing to go into risk, but say will profit from the rise of BTSX big time.

what do you think?

wow - got total ignored. so this idea is bad? no, comments? and i thought i found the holy grail

I didn't understand it exactly. You're saying we could fund it with shorts?

So we could get people maybe to short now maybe in a long term contract and fund things that way?

Edit: Ok I think I get it. The third party gives us a $1000 and the system works as long as people are wiling to pay 20% and up front to short. Ok expensive but I see the idea. It could be good, maybe something along those lines but cheaper sounds worth considering.

[Method-X]

A working light weight client will help a lot...

I'd say a thin mobile app that deals only in BitAssets.

[oldman]

Suppose you could pay a *CREDIT CARD BILL* with BitUSD......
Suppose you could have Bill Pay mail a check to someone... with BitUSD...

Suppose this could happen this year or Q1 2015?

The low hanging adoption-fruit is allowing users/merchants to store value on the Bitshares platform (BTSX/bitUSD) and carry on their normal financial routines without any changes.

I move money into BTSX/bitUSD, earn capital gains or yield, and then pay bills (CC initially, then merchants/services providers) directly from the client.

Someone in between the client and the merchant/payee handles the conversions etc... would be a temporary gig as eventually merchants will just accept bitUSD directly.

I3 could be talking with OpenBazaar about integrating bitUSD rather than BTC. This would make an ideal test platform for the system.

Finally, at no point can the supply of BTSX exceed 2B shares. Do not inflate and do not mess with the burn.

Inflation in some form may be rationalized on a theoretical level, but the PR nightmare that may result would be catastrophic.

Sure, use some AGS funds to roll out a referral program. If timed right it will pay for itself.

But do not inflate.

Also, phone apps.

[Mysto]

Can we do the debit card thing without the $100 bonus first?

Wouldn't it make more sense to start out with a high bonus at first to grab peoples attention then slowly lower it. Just like paypal did.

"The bonuses were gradually phased out, first by reducing them to $5, then by adding more verification hoops (like bank account verification) so they became more difficult to get. Then they were eliminated altogether." -David O Sacks

[bytemaster]

A working light weight client will help a lot...

[Final_Acclaim]

Ok so back on topic.

• What sort of demographic would this attract?
• How "sticky" would said demographic be?
• What unique things could this demographic buy with BitUSD that they otherwise couldn't buy with FiatUSD?

I don't think this is the best use of opportunity cost, especially considering the precedent it will set. I think in terms of marketing, we should be thinking more along the lines of strategic seeding. Fortunately for us we've already got a great model to imitate: Bitcoin.

So, my question for the community is: what were the tipping points of early Bitcoin adoption?

In my opinion it isn't that they can buy different things with BitUSD, it is that they can use BTSX *like a bank* and all banks have checking accounts and savings account.  Almost all checking accounts have a "check card".   

Then our target market will be merchants... convince them to take BitUSD directly rather than pay 3%... merchants can then share the savings with customers.

Could this also tie into a crypto payment provider that charges 1%? In other words, a merchant could have direct BitUSD card or a merchant has an option to utilize BitUSD through a payment processor like Litecoin and Dogecoin is currently doing?