The fee model of BCE will be solely based on the size of transactions (order, deposit, withdraw, etc.) and not on processed value. It will be hard to adjust them to a fee per trading volume. But I appreciate your efforts in an estimation of BCE revenue.
Have a look here if you are interested in my take of BCE’s fee structure: [Passed] Motion to provide seed funding for B&C Exchange - a decentralized exchange built on the Peershares platform.
This post contains no numbers, but a concept.
BKS would be generated if the money from selling them would be needed. If a part of the BCE revenue would per motion be used to pay bills, it would be ok as well.
Why is this a reason to sell BKS cheap now, ignore the different risk seed investors and early funders have and keep the sell pressure from the ~50,000 BKS on the market price?
As soon as multi signature deposits are possible and the first website offers convenient access to the BCE blockchain you already have that.
There’s no need to develop apps for different mobile phones - they have a browser! The website should have a fancy mobile version for that
If no website starts offering such a service (likely for a fee), it would be more transparent to create a grant for funding exactly that: a website funded and and operated by BCE with a fancy mobile version; this way BCE can even collect the fees from the website
I don’t think so. Even if BCE does, the BKS holders can vote for a BKS grant to create and sell BKS to fund it (see above). There’s no need to sell BKS cheap now or soon and especially not for the same price if the risk has been dramatically reduced by showing the world the first working iterations of BCE that can process orders.
If you really think that BCE needs a lot more money, buy BKS from BCE before a motion passes that stops the sale