Post #428 - Monday 8 Sep.

If you look at the roadmap there are still a lot of exciting features to come. Just be patient. Just keep on trading on the exchange to keep the volume >0.1BTC to give some time for the dev work to be finalised. The more trading there is, the higher the volume that will then take care of the >0.1BTC average.

What I dont understand is why CryptoGir would abandon Zimstake, a perfectly functioning rare coin for something like RAW, before real life services could be implemented? He destroyed his reputation with the lame move of leaving ZS and its community and now he wants to move to another coin? It completely boggles my mind and does not make sense whatsoever. CG does not reply to PMs or on constructive comments and disappears for long times on end. What CG should do is to rescue ZS first, restore his credibility and then move on to new coins.

If you look at his promise to the ZS community it seems like making ZS his main project went out the window as he went off the radar. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583591.msg6564578#msg6564578

Having said this every person can do what he wants, especially in crypto, so if that is how he operates dumping a community and letting many people lose their money then I guess that is ok. At least just have the courtesy to tell the ZS community he is gone and moved on to RAW.

Agree, hopefully over time the big holders will distribute to the wider base via the market in a mature and responsible manner.

It is what I call the "gearing effect". A low price has a big impact on holdings and a potential huge/catastrophic impact in future when things take off. One of the risks of trading at low prices is that more people are able to load up huge bags and even worse, a whale loading up. in other words, less people get larger holdings where a stable coin needs more people with less holdings. Later on when things take off, these large holders can dump on everyone and cause a lot of damage. That is probably the biggest reason for shouting for something to be implemented to create a higher trading floor and probably the biggest reason for having had to implement something early on just after a fair distribution to prevent this happening once the price drops so low - even more so with Minerals that had its biggest claim to fame of having had a fair distribution in the beginning. A low price destroys that completely.

It is too early to say that Min is dead.  As long as there is a dev team and trading volume is >0.1BTC avg the coin is alive. The dev said very clearly that it is a long term project. The low price and low volume is normal and is 100% in line with other alt coins. Alt coin culture is all about making quick bucks with the initial rise and then it is downwards all the way.  I notice a trend lately of coins trying to implement real life usable services of which Min is one in order to break the cookie-cutter pattern - some have poor ideas and others have excellent ideas. These coins with plausible real life services are long term holdings. All that is required is to keep it alive by one of a few possibilities until the services can be delivered and adopted which is the hard part. Real life services take a long time to code and get right.  Anon was recommended to do exactly that, to make it easier to keep the coin alive while betting development is done. Anon is not crucial and it is up to the devs to determine if they want to/can finish that first and then carry on with betting. If anon is abandoned it is still possible to achieve the main goal but then it will just be more difficult to keep it alive in the mean time.

I don't know of coins that have really nailed real life services because they all fail on the same point and that is having enough steam and support to keep the coin alive until the real life services are delivered.  The only coins that I know of that have achieved some success in delivering on real life services are those that have anon as their main real life service that people can use to keep their tx private for whatever purpose. They succeeded so far because the time to market for anon as a service is much shorter than the time to market of most other real life services and adoption of anon is almost instant with an instant demand. Betting is Min's main real life service and time to market is much longer than anon and I estimate 3-6 months time to market with a quality product and 6-12 months for main stream adoption outside of the current coin holders.

Whether anon is done or not, both routes can lead to success if a solution is found for keeping the coin alive for the next number of months until time to market. This will let Min bridge to gap where most other coins fail.

It is a pity that MineralsPR is leaving as I really like him. A piece of advice for MinPR's new project is that after the initial hype of whatever its main thing is, the project will face exactly the same problem to solve that Min is experiencing now and he will have exactly the same decisions to make on how to keep the coin alive during the development of real life services and will have exactly the same end result of most coins because they fail to solve the point I raised above, unless his real life services including adoption is something very short in line with the current attention span of the alt coin market.

The real test of character for the Min dev team is the next few weeks/months if they will be able to stick with it and deliver and bridge the gap that few other coins have been able to bridge and that is to get through this phase of low price and volume until a polished e-betting product can delivered and adopted. If they fail and abandon the coin, Min follows the same pattern as all the other alt coins but if they stick with it and if they are committed and sincere and carry on it will lead to success. The concept of Min is sound which is rare, and it is still early days in the bigger scheme of things.

Hang in there.

The name sounds good. Ill support you. 3.8m coins are rare enough to take the new coin to 20k at least if you have a good dev behind it. For some obscure reason CG did not want to grab this excellent opportunity. Something else to consider is that if there is going to be forking, to re-introduce PoW. There are enough redundant Bitcoin miners that can be put to good use on the new coin. This will also assist with increasing the value as chances are good that a coin will not trade below the cost of mining if it has otherwise good fundamentals. Add to that some anon features and a new floor of 100k can be reached.

There is nothing wrong with the devs strategy. Let me use another analogy. An F1 race car that pulls into the pits to have racing slicks fitted and put on a super turbo and getting the car refueled. It is all supposed to happen quickly and simultaneously within a reasonable time. The car is then released to rejoin the race exploiting the enhancements made within the bigger scheme of the main goal which is winning the race. At anytime during the pitstop the team can make a go/no-go decision on what is done in the pitstop and pull the plug if the pitstop is taking too long.

In my mind e-sports betting is like the main race. Adding anon is like adding features during a pitstop that will help the main race. If the pitstop takes too long or the enhancements cannot be made, make a go/no-go decision, pull the plug and release the car back into the race less the gains of the enhancements.

I would hardly call a pitstop a change in focus. The dev team is doing a perfect job so far. They just have to make a call at some point to either implement the anon or call it quits and carry on with the betting piece. 3 weeks so far is still reasonable in a 6-12 months overall race. Let the dev tem make their business decisions and if the outcome is to carry on without anon then at least the devs attempted it and the race can continue.

You are too short term focussed. You have to make plans now for in 2-3 months time. 28BTC for one day means nothing. It is because PR posted again that the volume spiked. This actually provides proof of another weapon in the arsenal in this game which is dev team posts have a direct impact on price and volume. Regular posts and updates can only be good to maintain volume. Hint-hint.

Nice work Stafur.

I presume you will be the one that does the artificial buying and selling to maintain a 0.1BTC volume in two months time? Thanks. I agree now that they should drop anon. I did not think it will be this big an effort. Read my previous posts to understand why anon was needed. With some luck the coin can get by without it because the e-sports betting principle of Min is solid - the exchange will just need some nursing.

You know what, looking at PR's comments I did not realise that the devs dont have the skills for anon or could not manage a proper outsource for it - it is business economics and IT management 101. It should not have taken this long just to get to a point where you say it is not working. I am going to change my advice to you. Instead of aiming for a 10-20k price to consolidate at and that would have been a safe platform to develop your betting on, rather make peace with a price range of 100-300 sats for the next few months and focus on the betting. The lower price will have risks though as it will allow some to accumulate a couple of million for later. I might just put in some low orders myself.

Anon should not have taken this long with no results - I am a bit shocked. Drop it and rather focus then on the betting development, because things will only become worse if you carry on with no results. Your blockchain should still be fine and you have the previous wallets so it would be easy to drop it. If the volume should fall below 0.1BTC then so be it or perhaps some good souls can do artificial buying and selling to keep it alive.

Few people can see the potential of the concept as it is different to anything else in alt coins that have been done so far. It is not easy to grasp what the concept is about, but it is something that has the potential to catch on and be big. Volumes and price might be low now but I don't complain  . Volume must just stay above 0.1BTC avg while dev work is being done, that is all. If the concept does catch on then there will be an increase in volume. In addition, few people are willing to invest and wait some time for the dev work to be done. I dont put in money that I cannot afford to lose, so if something comes of it fine if not also fine. I am more positive about the future of this coin than several of the other alternatives out there currently.

You dont understand. Anon would just be for other users to use the coin for keeping their tx private irrespective if it is betting or using the coin to pay for something. That is where the demand is. There will always be a huge demand for it (DRK/BTCD). However, in this game agility is key. What is a competitive advantage one day is a commodity the next. That is why I say that maybe the delays and debates has caused Min to miss the anon boat to the point that whatever gains it would have given the coin is lost. Had it been done earlier a new floor would have been gained and perhaps held. Coming from 300 sats to 10k might he difficult. Management has to detemine if anon is too difficult or they cannot get it right or do not know how to, then it does not make sense to keep on wasting time on it at this late stage. If they are almost finished by all means do it as there are still much that can be gained. In the first week after POW ended Coinier offered a resource that could implement it in 2 days. That was the best time to do it. It can still work now if the devs know how to or get the right people involved. Listening to what PR says about it though it seems that the devs are struggling and still a long way off because they can't get it right, which makes things difficult. All these things are normal business decisions. If they cannot get it right and it will take a long time at high cost the decision must be to look for an alternative method to create demand during betting development.

Agreed that Minerals do not need anon per se for betting. However, the argument for anon is to create a demand other than betting which will include the market outside of betting. This will cause a natural demand and volume for the coin to trade at higher levels which will mitigate a lot of risks that coins face that trade at <1000 sats.

If you drop anon then make sure there are other ways to keep it alive, like artificial trading and paying the market listing fees or whatever for a period of at least 6-12 months. Also, at these low levels do not be surprised if the portfolios tilt from more people holding less to fewer people stocking up huge bags of Min and then dump on everyones a$$es later when the price increases. Lower prices work against wider distribution as it enables a few people to gather up huge bags. With only betting there will be no demand in the short term to cause a breakout over 1000 sats.

So the decision is between anon, trading between 10-20k with less artificial measures to leep it alive during betting development, or no anon trading <1000 sats for some months to come. I guess it is a tradeoff between the risks going either route as each has its pros and cons. Looking at the market it might be that Min missed the wave on anon due to the delays and it could be too late, although there will always be a human nature demand for something anon like to keep what they are doing to themselves.

I have since reduced my Min holding significantly so I do not care as much as previously about how the coin is managed. I am just stating the principles as some people think that the argument for anon is because the coin needs it for betting which is not the case. However, having said that anon betting would be a killer combination.

I am saying it again, the principle of Min is sound, some of the best I have seen. It is just how you get to the end result that needs to be determined. If the devs struggle with anon then drop it. Just have a plan B of how to get to the end result. An example of a plan B would be for the devs or community to buy and sell into their own orders come Oct/Nov to make sure an avg trading volume of 0.1 BTC is maintained, while natural demand is slowly grown outside of the existing holders through awareness, marketing, tournaments and expanding the portfolio. To support such a plan B, the community can raise 1 BTC or so with the purpose to every 23 hours assess the BTC trading volume and if it is <0.1BTC do a few trades into itself until the volume is over the threshold. The fund then becomes a market fee fund. This way time can be bought while betting services are being developed and marketed.

Just keep avg trading volume >0.1BTC on Bittrex for a few weeks still until some announcement by the dev.

Patience will be rewarded. The dev team is busy with the current features as they have posted and you can see from Stafur's work that he knows what he is talking about. As the services they are busy with gets finalized and rolled out, they will continue with new services as listed in the roadmap. You can see the roadmap at this link http://trustplus.com/roadmap-2/ The items listed in the roadmap is the plan and the ones not yet done are the next steps in the plan.

If these things can be delivered then TrustPlus has a very very bright future.

CG was online today for a while. I really hope he comes back.

They have been told so many times to take extra fuel on their journey to make sure they reach the destination. It is sort of difficult to get fuel on foot when you have run out of it. The economic and business economic advice was there all the time. Maybe it is not too late. Maybe they have been working secretly on a great new feature that they will announce with a bang that would revive Min right up there.

I am sure the dev knows enough about economics and marketing principles to revive the coin. Or perhaps not, else it would not have come to this point. Lets hope he knows the Phoenix Incantation to grant a life point to Min.