I would propose we wait for the first website offering convenient access to the BCE blockchain appears that has a nice mobile version and forget about the rest.
If that doesn’t happen in time, the development of exactly such a website gets funded by a BKS grant (or a BKC grant; unlikely, but possible if there’s already enough traffic by transactions on BCE’s blockchain).
I don’t see the benefit of an app for Android, IOS (what about WindowsPhone, etc.?)
You can have a very transparent funding of the website and as a result another product related to BCE that generates revenue: BCE’s exchange website with the fees for using the website!
I don’t feel like you have explained why it’s necessary to continue the sale of BKS now.
And I haven’t found an explanation why those who come late and have to face much less risk, don’t have to pay more per BKS for having less risk…
Frankly, the current demand for buying BKS directly from BKS is low. This might change once BCE has it’s first success (whatever may be perceived as such). After that there will be demand, BKS will be more valuable. Let’s relfect that in the price.
If there’s no such success and BCE fails, the remaining 50,000 BKS will not be sold - either if the sale continues now or gets restarted by a new BKS grant.
But stopping the sale now would provide current BKS holders provide with a better exit from holding BKS (for those who want that):
stopping the BKS sale and burning the remaining BKS removes sell pressure from the market.
As long as the sale goes on it will be hard to come close to a price of $4 at the market.
…what you have demonstrated by your offer
A long as there’s a virtual sell wall of 10,000 BKS at $4.08 and over 20.000 BKS each at $4.16 and $4.24 the market price will be below that which is not in the best interest of the current BKS holders…
…who are able to change that by this motion once it has started.
It’s really a question of business philosophy. I will attempt to outline a possible philosophy supported by this motion:
With funding for the barebones structure accomplished, we are given the capability to vote. The first kernel of motions should be a motion that empowers the shareholders to control their own economy, thus giving direction to future motions. As people discuss and propose new ideas that need funding, those projects can be funded with additional shares sold. This allows the shareholders to vote on each new project before allowing their money to be spent on it. Instead of channeling funds directly into the developer fund, the money is put into buying BKS on the open market, allowing price discovery so future sale prices can be more readily understood by shareholders.
I’m in favour of a motion to cease BKS sales immediately. There are still a number of features we want to get funded. Ongoing development will be important to the success of B&C Exchange, so I fully expect we will see BKS grants in the future to fund development and marketing.
Now is not the right time to raise funds for future development.
[quote=“masterOfDisaster, post:5, topic:2485, full:true”]
I don’t feel like you have explained why it’s necessary to continue the sale of BKS now.[/quote]
Additional funding for additional features. The better the exchange when it go’s live the faster it’ll become successful in my opinion.
I don’t think the current risk is much lower than the risk of the initial funders, it’s not like the exchange is up and running the blockchain isn’t even finalized yet (not trying to sound negative here).
[quote]But stopping the sale now would provide current BKS holders provide with a better exit from holding BKS (for those who want that):
stopping the BKS sale and burning the remaining BKS removes sell pressure from the market.
As long as the sale goes on it will be hard to come close to a price of $4 at the market.
…what you have [demonstrated by your offer][1]
A long as there’s a virtual sell wall of 10,000 BKS at $4.08 and over 20.000 BKS each at $4.16 and $4.24 the market price will be below that which is not in the best interest of the current BKS holders…
…who are able to change that by this motion once it has started.[/quote]
I do think it’s a good idea to stop the sale before BKS hits the markets, as explained in my post initial market prospect seems grim in the current situation, hence my offer. My reason for not supporting an immediate halt of the sale is my perceived belief we need additional funds for the additional features, if this is not the case then it would support this motion.
Would you disagree with my opinion that it would be better to get the best possible version of the exchange developed before release instead of improving it after it has been released? I"m referring to the first impression argument i made in the other topic.
I agree that releasing a stronger B&C Exchange initially would improve the odds that it generates early momentum. I’m curious how @JordanLee’s perspective has changed since he commented on this last:
If there’s no demand for substantial change of the motion draft, I’m going to finalize it within the next two days.
If each of the features gets funded with a grant, there’s transparency and the possibility to achieve financial controlling.
The seed investors provided BCE development with money when it was unclear whether minimum funding would be achieved. They could have faced a total loss or would have funded the remaining money themselves.
Second-round purchasers sit here and wait for BCE to work and try to support the best they can whatever that means.
Their risk is considerably higher than the risk of people who wait for the first order to be processed on BCE to storm th e inbox of BCE and grab some of the remaining 50,000 BKS at $4.something.
The blockchain is finalized like @willy already pointed out.
Everything comes at a price.
The $200,000 that BCE has available for development will already fund some milestones. After only some of them have been achieved I bet there’s some recognition of BCE and people might want to buy BKS.
They will pay more than $4 then.
BCE will get even more money to develop an even better exchange if the sale gets stopped now and continued by BKS grants later.
If you are in favor of continuing the sale now, BCE will get money, but according to my prediction less than with a stopped sale and BKS grants later.
No need for a panic sale now
I totally agree with your assessment, only I see a different and more efficient way to that goal.
Please have a look at the last paragraph of my last post. I don’t want to quote this here, would feel silly
I’m very curious about this as well, since from the quote you posted it seems Jordan originally had the same position I am now holding. What is your reasoning for this reversal in position Jordan?
[quote=“masterOfDisaster, post:13, topic:2485, full:true”]The seed investors provided BCE development with money when it was unclear whether minimum funding would be achieved. They could have faced a total loss or would have funded the remaining money themselves.
Second-round purchasers sit here and wait for BCE to work and try to support the best they can whatever that means.
Their risk is considerably higher than the risk of people who wait for the first order to be processed on BCE to storm th e inbox of BCE and grab some of the remaining 50,000 BKS at $4.something.[/quote]
People buying BKS right now are still part of the second-round purchasers no? As stated I would agree with you that it’s a good idea to have the sale finished by the time BKS hits the exchanges.
Just now ye, right after I posted.
[quote]Everything comes at a price.
The $200,000 that BCE has available for development will already fund some milestones. After only some of them have been achieved I bet there’s some recognition of BCE and people might want to buy BKS.
They will pay more than $4 then.
BCE will get even more money to develop an even better exchange if the sale gets stopped now and continued by BKS grants later.
If you are in favor of continuing the sale now, BCE will get money, but according to my prediction less than with a stopped sale and BKS grants later.
No need for a panic sale now
[/quote]
The question is will additional functionalities upon release be more valuable than selling part or whole of that 50000 unsold BKS later on for a higher price? I think it is you disagree. I’m afraid we’re going to have to agree to disagree on this.
I don’t know what you mean with “release”, but we already have a production blockchain. That doesn’t support the transactions required for BCE being an exchange.
I’m not talking about stopping the BKS sale now and wait until all is complete and the $200,000 funding is consumed.
I’m talking about stopping the BKS sale now and making grants once the demand for BKS is higher than it is now, because some parts of it are already working.
I doubt this will bring BCE less than $4 per BKS
It will bring even more functionalities if you can sell 50,000 BKS at $6 and have $300,000 for additional development instead of selling them for $200,000!
Potential investors are waiting and seeing. Just like me.
Because we don’t know the activity of NSR holders’ BKS, will they sell cheaply? If so, I’ll buy BKS on CCEK etc. If not, I’ll buy directly from developers.
Since we can go for auction of BKS as BKS holders wish from now, does it matter if we stop sale of BKS and open again in future?
The difference is accountability of the shareholders to the allocation of funds. If we raise 50k for general developer funds, we operate under the concept of a reserve with money that can flow from project to project. If we make individual project grants the money is allocated by the shareholders directly, rather than using a third party to act as reserve.
With release I mean once the exchange is functional and opened to the public.
[quote]I’m not talking about stopping the BKS sale now and wait until all is complete and the $200,000 funding is consumed.
I’m talking about stopping the BKS sale now and making grants once the demand for BKS is higher than it is now, because some parts of it are already working.
I doubt this will bring BCE less than $4 per BKS
It will bring even more functionalities if you can sell 50,000 BKS at $6 and have $300,000 for additional development instead of selling them for $200,000! [/quote]
Your automatically assuming that BKS demand will be higher when the exchange is released. This is not necessarily the case, as stated in my post I think demand will be less then sell pressure. Even if we burn the 50000 for now. It could take months if not more than a year before demand is high enough to raise price over 4 dollars a piece.
My whole point is that to ensure demand is high in the future (and thus increase value of BKS) we need to release the best possible exchange we can. And I’m assuming that’s going to acquire additional funding (according to JasonLee the 200k is only for basic functioning, no gimmicks) on top of the 200k. Hence why I’m all for selling as much of that 50k shares we have left as we can, even if we need to sell them slightly cheaper (action them if you will).
You’re wrong to automatically assume that demand will be higher when the exchange starts operating and thus giving us the possibility to sell the remaining BKS at a higher price.
I feel my proposed strategy is less risky than yours and will ensure a greater chance of success and eventually lead to more valuable BKS.
The only thing that has changed is that we have observed weak demand for BlockShares very recently. Leaving BKS sales open prevents BKS from going up until all shares have sold. With shares not selling quickly right now, that could be a while. Creating a situation where BKS can drop in value but not rise for months is likely to have a dampening effect on BKS purchases.
In order to succeed, we have to prioritize defending the value of BlockShares. Making BlockShares more scarce than planned is an excellent way to do that. We have funding to complete a functional exchange. As we progress down that path, hopefully the project will get more recognition and BKS demand will rise. Then we can get additional funding.
I suspect those who are opposed to stopping BKS sales haven’t sufficiently appreciated that the current pace of BKS sales suggests that we simply don’t have the option of raising significant additional funds right now, even if we keep sales open. Where keeping sales open places heavy selling pressure on the BKS price, the potential problems of keeping sales open outweigh the potential benefits.
Jordan what is your opinion on creating a sort of limited time auction for the remaining shares. Where we create additional incentive to buy BKS now and after say 2/3 weeks have passed the sale is over and we stop BKS sale through the main channel. For example a progressive discount (I posted this earlier in a different topic) where you get 4% discount for every 1000 BKS you buy after your initial 1000 bought.
So say someone wants to buy 4000 shares. He gets 3 times (first discount after 2000, second one after 3000 BKS bought etcetc) 4% discount netting him 12% discount in total over his purchase. This combined with the limited time frame where one can still buy BKS though the “official” channel should spur some significant interest I think. Also this means we remove the 50000 BKS before BKS gets traded on exchanges and thus relieving sale pressure, yet still generating additional funds now for additional functionality.
I favour this. I’m inclined to believe the optimal time period to continue BKS sales after passage of the proposed motion is three to seven days. This approach probably enhances short term fundraising prospects compared to our original plan.
I doubt existing shareholders would feel this is fair to them.
Fair point. Maybe we could also include previously bought shares towards discount on the next shares you buy. So someone who has already bought 5000 shares would start with 16% discount on the shares he buys in the auction.
