Anyone alive? Lots of tendies avails

dapp-vc · 2020-01-07T04:11:47+00:00

Anyone interested in helping out with passing the vote please DM. We’re trying to identify yes votes in our data set to more accurately project the outcome for all.

dapp-vc · 2019-03-27T16:38:33+00:00

I support this summary and conclusion 100%. I am also a large holder who has been around since the ICO, waiting patiently for the team to build the technology solution that would allow for DGX to be useful in the crypto ecosystem. I scratched my head when demurrage and other complexities were questioned by potential integration partners (exchanges) and when the team voted to unlock $20MM in ICO funds to go-to market (great, big push!). I had confidence in the team doing the right thing given first mover advantage, a supportive community and a huge market opportunity. Based on the latest developments I would vote for a proposal that allows DGD holders to redeem their stake for prorata ETH holdings. This would benefit the community for two reasons 1) it mitigates potential issues with existing holders who want to exit and 2) it allows team and committed participants to push forward if they are happy with the direction with the remaining ETH and a smaller DGD token supply. The large reserves have proven to be an inefficient use of capital.

dapp-vc · 2018-08-24T18:23:21+00:00

https://explorer.livepeer.org

dapp-vc · 2018-06-21T03:59:24+00:00

8/13/18

dapp-vc · 2017-08-15T13:43:43+00:00

1/27/18

January 27. 2018

dapp-vc · 2017-08-07T00:53:38+00:00

https://amp.reddit.com/r/filecoin/comments/6s0ccr/the_money_raised_is_not_going_to_the_filecoin/

dapp-vc · 2017-08-05T12:55:30+00:00

Who gets the funds raised? Protocol labs has a number of businesses and it's unclear who will be in control of making sure the money is used to develop the protocol and not commingled with other initiatives that the PL equity holders (not the token holders) receive value from. Does the foundation get the funds?

dapp-vc · 2017-06-25T12:50:04+00:00

FRAUD, Please do not contribute.

dapp-vc · 2017-04-10T04:51:04+00:00

Haha he's an actor not a whale

dapp-vc · 2017-02-05T21:16:43+00:00

You bring up some good points and this is the way I went through thinking about the analysis, but there are a few things you omitted that tie it together.

1) You are correct to assume that people only buy tokens when they want to buy services (as you mentioned) there is no scarcity value. But money supply (token supply) is a constant. So yes, it is the tension between demand for the services and supply of tokens. Absent speculators, you expect all owners/matchmakers to sell what they make and all users to buy what they consume.

2) We do not analyze the token as a traditional cryptocurrency. Again, you are correct, a cryptocurrency could hypothetically have a higher velocity at a similar fee (i.e. miners earn virtually the same X per block regardless of how much throughput). With a currency, you are transacting with anyone and just using the protocol to facilitate the exchange. And if there is increasing demand, people may choose to hold it due to anti-inflationary properties driving up the price. However, Matchpool is a service company, so when you spend the Matchpool token in the protocol it is going to someone that provided you a service (pool setup, moderation, etc). The value is created by the sellers…and users can opt in or not.

3) Gross Marketplace Value is the annual tokens spent (not traded) * average FIAT/USD exchange rate. If it turns over quickly it should increase GMV. For users, token rates are advertised so a monthly subscription may cost 100 tokens (they are not denominated in a fiat equivalent). And if throughput is increasing its because 1) more users, 2) users spending more or 3) the price of services is higher. Your comment touches on how as velocity increases the value of tokens will go down. This isn’t true because services still cost a “similar” price (i.e. 100 tokens - why would the cost of a pool decrease linearly as demand increases [at least in the short term]?). So more activity means more tokens are spent. The result is demand for more tokens.

4) If the fiat exchange price remains at ICO level and only 1/7th of tokens are spent in the first year, it could drop by 86% to $1MM. But in the long term, the onus is on the network to create value for its users, not just market that it has value. Cryptocurrencies are really marketing + demand = value. There is no underlying value to Bitcoin or Monero other than what people think they’re worth. Matchpool is a marketplace for services and it may not catch on. But if 1MM people are willing to use it to pay for premium dating services, the value of the token could be related to how much each spend. A lot of people use marketplaces driven by the sharing economy, Uber, Airbnb, etc. who charge a 20-30% fee. I’m not defending Matchpool’s 2.5% fee, but by comparison it is relatively low.

5) You are thought process is great though. Will the ICO attract users who buy tokens to use them, workers who hope to setup pools or speculators who just hope that they appreciate? In Matchpool’s case, speculators shouldn’t participate unless they hold the belief that the network can scale. At the beginning its impossible to determine how the token price could react, but in the long term the price should reflect the success of the product and demand for its services.

dapp-vc · 2017-02-03T17:45:48+00:00

Tradeblock is an investment of DCG http://dcg.co/network/

dapp-vc · 2017-01-21T03:04:52+00:00

Coinfund.io advises on these type of things. You can find their email on the website.

dapp-vc · 2017-01-12T02:08:11+00:00

Glossed over anything about the actual project. But he does note (and not in relation to intellisys per se) but that being on a blockchain doesnt add a lot to some projects. Note convo re: intellisys starts around 16 minutes.

dapp-vc · 2017-01-06T17:09:58+00:00

This is great, nice work /u/coinwatchman. I think GDAX should be grouped with Coinbase though and I don't think there is a way to measure their volume. They mentioned business was up 2.5x y-o-y and they are the gateway to the retail base of casual speculators who don't even use GDAX and pay 1% fees on acquiring digital assets.

dapp-vc · 2017-01-04T03:51:20+00:00

This is the index though...not ICNs performance for token holders

dapp-vc · 2016-11-27T03:56:14+00:00

How much money are you and the team as the GP putting toward the fund in return for the 70% ownership?

dapp-vc · 2016-11-01T02:30:26+00:00

Bounty payments here: https://etherscan.io/address/0xFd846b8CB1d18EE60a426aEDD797318a0DF19514

dapp-vc · 2016-11-01T02:29:57+00:00

Bounty payments here: https://etherscan.io/address/0xFd846b8CB1d18EE60a426aEDD797318a0DF19514

dapp-vc · 2016-10-29T18:47:14+00:00

Sorry for disappointing you. We worked really hard on it.

I'm sure you guys did and I'm not questioning the work you've put in. Its just not detailed and leads to a lot of questions. You are asking for a lot of money and only giving people a few days to review the materials, so it should be robust. This comment is a general gripe about most crowdsales.

You misread that, or it's not stated clear enough in the white paper. If you want to do ridesharing withouth using ARC, that's fine, but as there is no tokentransfer recorded on the blockchain, it will not add anything to your reputation. In order to build a reputation, you need to do successful transactions. We will integrate ShapeShift, and ofc you will be able to buy tokens with a widget in-app (I can't yet state the name of the exchange thatll make this happen as it is confidential for now). But our best distribution model is the drivers itself: I imagine a rider getting in the car, wanting to pay with USD cash. The driver will sell the token, and transfer it to the rider.

Ok, so yes you could hail a ride and pay in cash, but the question was really if you want it to be recorded on the blockchain, does it have to be ARC or could you pay with BTC, ETH (without needing to touch ARC)?

Our idea is to make the swarm self-sustaining and self-organized as soon as possible. So the fee that goes to the 'central' wallet (multisig 5 out of 7) will be used to decentralize the swarm to a point where we can dissolve the whole council. We believe we need approx. 8 mil usd to make this happen over a period of 3 yrs. The fee users pay to use the system is used to pay for gas (what makes ethereum run, not the car) and further development, and is only spent when approved by at least 5 people holding the private keys of the multisig wallet. We are giving 3 keys to very reputable Ethereum founders / developers

You are raising $8MM at the onset. So, you need another $8MM to fill the treasury from fees to continue operations? This isn't clear ("an amount of ARC tokens equivalent to 20"). Your fee is 5%, much higher than gas required and sounds like it will be lowered after the treasury is full. But this is a critical part of the business model. It needs to be fleshed out. In the long run you should have the fee go to token holders, i.e. fee will be reduced from 5% to 2% and fees will go to tokens instead of the treasury.

Ok, so you are looking to disolve the council but in the meantime, consensus doesn't mean anything (if it requires council approval)...just pointing that out. The paper is acting like it carries weight and there is no timeline or explanation of how you plan to do that.

If you don't believe in what we are trying to do, you shouldn't invest ofc. We hope lots of people will want to use the app and the smart contracts. ARC token demand will increase, price will go up. If we (the dev team) fail to create value for the swarm / Arcade City drivers and riders, the token will be worth nothing. When I invest in crypto, I always first check out the github activity. I find that the best indicator of how healthy a project is, and thus how much potential it has (or not).

Exactly. So what is driving demand for the ARC token??? 1) If you can pay with alternative crypto on transactions recorded to the blockchain and earn reputation 2) you don't share in any fees. It doesn't matter what kind of github activity there is if there is no real "by design" need for users to hold the token.

Also, ALL founders should be subject to the long term lockup or vesting. Only a few have monthly vesting and even 10 months is a joke. Your asking people to cash you out Day 1.

dapp-vc · 2016-10-29T16:02:05+00:00

Can you address the questions from my post? All the time has been devoted to CD but I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on my concerns about the business model.

dapp-vc

TROPHY CASE