I wish Fiat Antidote would stay quiet. Half of what he says doesn't make sense. For what it's worth, I do actually believe that Nico and his brother may have done shady stuff in the past, but the fact that they haven't been convicted of anything gives me a little comfort. The progress they've made with the platform also looks legitimate. You can't fake what they've shown so far, even with beta being delayed. For that reason, I'm still cautiously bullish on PPT and will continue to hold unless someone can show more evidence of wrongdoing than a single article from over 10 years ago. The birthday inconsistencies are odd, but not really concerning. |
|
|
|
By the end of last year PPT was alone in this field and after watching this kind of appreciation some copycat projects appeared as well. In the end originality and lot of homework done in the back ground will prevail. Bitpopulous has no competitor such strong to challenge it this easily.
I think Populous is the best invoice financing company out there right now, but there's no doubt more competition will come online quickly. That's why it's so important that Populous has as clean a launch as possible. |
|
|
|
Has anyone seen the Debitum Network crowdsale that now live https://debitum.network?a_aid=goat. It's been touted as being similar or a competitor to Populous. Seeing how well populous is doing i think its worth owning both. Read through both whitepapers...they are very different. |
|
|
|
Populous has not delayed anything they've extended the pre-testing phase to the public, in the form of a bounty program that will stress test the security of the platform.
Which means technically the Beta is already available to the public, by public I mean security experts within the public etc, that will try and brute force their way past the security.
This is fundamentally good news. And it is progress. It goes to show the Populous team takes security seriously. They are challenging the public to come and try to break their security measures.
Which shows the populous team is also confident.
We don't want populous to be the next major headline that causes FUD all over the market due to a hack... We want Populous to be safe and secure.
Populous has considerable support at these prices, again showing that you have no idea what you are talking about and just spitting shit out of your mouth to try spread FUD.
You know its a good project when the fudders are out lol
Know or even heard of anyone who is involved in this testing who can conform it. I garantee you won't cause its bs. scam scam scam. when are you guys going to wake up march 2019... hey just one more month... when nico doesn't deliver he just feeds your all crap and you eat it up. here is some worthless pxt tokens , new white paper, screen shoots. is any of this worth more then 2 billion dollars. There is a reason this is one of the most dump coins today. Given the rediculicous statements made. I can smell out a lot of first time investors in this pack. They've opened up a couple of repos on github for review. I find it hard to believe they'd do that if it were a scam. |
|
|
|
Populous has not delayed anything they've extended the pre-testing phase to the public, in the form of a bounty program that will stress test the security of the platform.
Which means technically the Beta is already available to the public, by public I mean security experts within the public etc, that will try and brute force their way past the security.
This is fundamentally good news. And it is progress. It goes to show the Populous team takes security seriously. They are challenging the public to come and try to break their security measures.
Which shows the populous team is also confident.
We don't want populous to be the next major headline that causes FUD all over the market due to a hack... We want Populous to be safe and secure.
Populous has considerable support at these prices, again showing that you have no idea what you are talking about and just spitting shit out of your mouth to try spread FUD.
You know its a good project when the fudders are out lol
Please don't go around calling the security testing beta. It's not. Beta had been delayed and that's OK. |
|
|
|
the launch of the beta will take a month. source: slack
Kidding me? no, nico said they need another month. Shock....could be a new Bitconnect this Comments like this make it clear that you either don't understand Populous or you don't understand Bitconnect. |
|
|
|
I'm reading this conversation and I want to answer to you, gorrion on this point
"I supposed some Exchanges like Coinbase or Bittrex never hacked because high security, but who knows. Anyway if you send Ethereum to REAL ( the company ) they can be hacked as well, if they are hacked probably the REAL token will suffer. "
Yes exchanges have high security but potentially they can hack them.
When you send ethereum to a smart contract it's not possible that it can be hacked, unless the contract itself is bugged like the DAO or recently, Parity's multisig contracts. An example is etherdelta, they got hacked but unless you were dumb to put your private key in while it was hacked (it was suspicious that suddendly your address didn't appear in the top right corner) you didn't lose your ethereum and tokens
Thanks for your answer. So if you send crypto with smart contract will be 100 % safe. I thought insured bitcoins or cold storage as Coinbase offers could be other posibilities, but not expert. But still in the dark about how really works the REAL token, and how can you participate in an stable real state investment if the token fluctuates in the exchanges. I will wait for the platform to see if their idea makes sense. By the way they said before the ICO in an interview with Ian Balina ( he gave 5 stars to this ICO ! ) that the platform would be live in October 2017 and still i have not seen even the beta version. REAL is very simple. They will invest in real estate and if the investments do well, you will make money. There's really nothing else to consider besides the real estate strategy when analyzing the opportunity. Well for ICO investors they put 100 % money but received just 50 % of tokens. So if it was that simple was a terrible investment. So we expected the token in exchanges could do well. But I don’t see clear how token can be in exchanges if it is thought to be used to buy properties. It will be simple for me changing opinion if someone could answer me those simple questions:
1 - To buy a part of property people has to buy REAL in exchanges ? or people has to buy sending ETH to the platform ? 2 - And if people sell their part of property how they will be paid, in ETH or in REAL 3 - And in any case who will determine the value of REAL, the company or the market in the exchanges. You're right. It was a terrible investment for anyone who bought into the ICO because you paid to fund an asset (the technology) that doesn't generate any return for you. As a buyer from an exchange, it really is as simple as deciding if you like the real estate strategy. To answer your specific questions: 1) Yes. To buy properties (using RPP tokens), you first need to own REAL. 2) I think if you want to sell your property interest (RPPs), you'll get REAL back. 3) The market determines the value of REAL Thanks for your comments. I agree that was a bad investment in the ICO. But I disagree that is a good investment if you like the real state strategy. The token don't make any sense. With not liquidity if you sell the value of 15 ETH in REAL the value goes to 0. If you want to buy 15 ETH of REAL to buy some real state the price will sky rocket. For this to work it would be necessary that investors just use a very liquid crypto, as Bitcoin or maybe ETH. I think they try to adapt some parts of blockchain technology to their crowdfunding real state idea but they made a company that don't make any sense. For me they didn't need a token, or at least this token can't be used to invest in the first place. Maybe they use some parts of blockchain technology, but for me was never needed. I don't think the founders Bernardo Hernandez and Enrique Dubois are scammers, they just jump to the opportunity of dumb money. Maybe they will figure out some solution ( all will be done in ETH ) but then the REAL token is just useless and not serious exchange will ever list it. If you want to invest in Real State using this soon you will realize you can't calculate your rendability using the REAL Token. At some point I expect the team to actually acquire real estate. Once they do, that real estate should generate a return for token holders. If that happens, the liquidity will appear. As an example, let's say the real estate provides a 10% annual return based on its true value. If the token is trading at a 50% discount, you'd earn a 20% return for buying it at that price. I can pretty much guarantee there will be buyers if the return looks attractive. However, this is the same reason you can't really expect the token to trade at much of a premium. If the real estate is generating a 10% return and you pay 2x the value for the token, you'd only earn 5%. That said, I think you're right about other points. The token isn't really necessary, and this business doesn't even have to be on the blockchain. Fractional ownership real estate already exists. It's not a very liquid business, but REAL isn't solving that problem either. The team didn't scam anyone. Unfortunately, they structured the ICO in a way that made it a terrible investment, but they were pretty upfront about the terms. Anyone who did proper research into the ICO should have known it wasn't worthwhile. The team saw an "easy" way to raise money and took advantage of it. |
|
|
|
I'm reading this conversation and I want to answer to you, gorrion on this point
"I supposed some Exchanges like Coinbase or Bittrex never hacked because high security, but who knows. Anyway if you send Ethereum to REAL ( the company ) they can be hacked as well, if they are hacked probably the REAL token will suffer. "
Yes exchanges have high security but potentially they can hack them.
When you send ethereum to a smart contract it's not possible that it can be hacked, unless the contract itself is bugged like the DAO or recently, Parity's multisig contracts. An example is etherdelta, they got hacked but unless you were dumb to put your private key in while it was hacked (it was suspicious that suddendly your address didn't appear in the top right corner) you didn't lose your ethereum and tokens
Thanks for your answer. So if you send crypto with smart contract will be 100 % safe. I thought insured bitcoins or cold storage as Coinbase offers could be other posibilities, but not expert. But still in the dark about how really works the REAL token, and how can you participate in an stable real state investment if the token fluctuates in the exchanges. I will wait for the platform to see if their idea makes sense. By the way they said before the ICO in an interview with Ian Balina ( he gave 5 stars to this ICO ! ) that the platform would be live in October 2017 and still i have not seen even the beta version. REAL is very simple. They will invest in real estate and if the investments do well, you will make money. There's really nothing else to consider besides the real estate strategy when analyzing the opportunity. Well for ICO investors they put 100 % money but received just 50 % of tokens. So if it was that simple was a terrible investment. So we expected the token in exchanges could do well. But I don’t see clear how token can be in exchanges if it is thought to be used to buy properties. It will be simple for me changing opinion if someone could answer me those simple questions:
1 - To buy a part of property people has to buy REAL in exchanges ? or people has to buy sending ETH to the platform ? 2 - And if people sell their part of property how they will be paid, in ETH or in REAL 3 - And in any case who will determine the value of REAL, the company or the market in the exchanges. You're right. It was a terrible investment for anyone who bought into the ICO because you paid to fund an asset (the technology) that doesn't generate any return for you. As a buyer from an exchange, it really is as simple as deciding if you like the real estate strategy. To answer your specific questions: 1) Yes. To buy properties (using RPP tokens), you first need to own REAL. 2) I think if you want to sell your property interest (RPPs), you'll get REAL back. 3) The market determines the value of REAL |
|
|
|
I'm reading this conversation and I want to answer to you, gorrion on this point
"I supposed some Exchanges like Coinbase or Bittrex never hacked because high security, but who knows. Anyway if you send Ethereum to REAL ( the company ) they can be hacked as well, if they are hacked probably the REAL token will suffer. "
Yes exchanges have high security but potentially they can hack them.
When you send ethereum to a smart contract it's not possible that it can be hacked, unless the contract itself is bugged like the DAO or recently, Parity's multisig contracts. An example is etherdelta, they got hacked but unless you were dumb to put your private key in while it was hacked (it was suspicious that suddendly your address didn't appear in the top right corner) you didn't lose your ethereum and tokens
Thanks for your answer. So if you send crypto with smart contract will be 100 % safe. I thought insured bitcoins or cold storage as Coinbase offers could be other posibilities, but not expert. But still in the dark about how really works the REAL token, and how can you participate in an stable real state investment if the token fluctuates in the exchanges. I will wait for the platform to see if their idea makes sense. By the way they said before the ICO in an interview with Ian Balina ( he gave 5 stars to this ICO ! ) that the platform would be live in October 2017 and still i have not seen even the beta version. REAL is very simple. They will invest in real estate and if the investments do well, you will make money. There's really nothing else to consider besides the real estate strategy when analyzing the opportunity. |
|
|
|
When there is a transfer of ownership of the invoice (i.e. a "sale" of the invoice), then by definition the transaction must be factoring, not invoice discounting. Invoice discounting is a type of loan/financing that does not involve a transfer of title. The only exception in the world is the UK, where invoice discounting/financing is basically the same thing as factoring. Here is a quote from Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factoring_(finance)#Reserve_account: Factoring is the sale of receivables, whereas invoice discounting is a borrowing that involves the use of the accounts receivable assets as collateral for the loan. However, in some other markets, such as the UK, invoice discounting is considered to be a form of factoring, involving the "assignment of receivables", that is included in official factoring statistics. It is therefore also not considered to be borrowing in the UK. In the UK the arrangement is usually confidential in that the debtor is not notified of the assignment of the receivable and the seller of the receivable collects the debt on behalf of the factor.Now if you tell me that Populous is going to focus only on the UK market, which represents less than 4% of global GDP, then the transaction steps they've outlined make sense. In the rest of the world, which encompasses more than 90% of the global opportunity, the transaction as described by Populous will not work. In the USA for instance, non-notification factoring represents only 12% of the total pie, and is only available to larger companies under long term contracts and based on a pool of receivables (never one-off transactions). In addition, the due diligence that invoice sellers are put through under non-notification/confidential factoring is akin to bank lending; it's thorough and complex, thereby expensive to do. The way that Populous imagines these transactions is completely ridiculous, and provides no protection for the invoice buyers. You mentioned that under the Populous model, the sellers will pledge corporate assets while company directors are to give personal guarantees... do you really think that Populous will pay the costs involved in international litigation to recover against sellers based outside of the UK? I doubt they will do that even inside the UK, as enforcement of these types of pledges is very expensive from a legal standpoint, and wouldn't work for any facility of less than $150,000-200,000. Again, for these transactions to work, the buyer of the invoices needs to take control of the repayment from the ultimate customer. Under Populous' current model, there isn't even a notification mechanism for the invoice buyer to be informed when the invoices have been cashed out... how then is the buyer supposed to know whether non-repayment is caused by debtor default (so that credit insurance can be invoked) or by the seller's non-compliance (so that legal action can be taken against the pledges)  It makes zero sense. It's been explained to you several times, so I'm not sure why you're still focusing on the same questions. Yes, the way you're describing it would be ridiculous, but I don't think that's how it's going to work. They haven't outlined every aspect of the process, but there are ways for it to work that would safeguard the investor and be consistent with what we already know. It would be silly for them to run the process the way you are describing it when there are more "protective" options, so I'm not sure why you automatically assume they are just going to take the weaker approach. Also, aside from the fact that you shouldn't get caught up in what they call it, Populous is a UK company, so that's likely where they are getting the symantics from. The UK is not going to be the exclusive focus of their business though. |
|
|
|
What you are saying is, I write a database, and in this database I put a number of bank accounts. I have to send dollars to all those bank accounts which they're located in many countries, what can happen? Some banks will accepet the transfer, maybe other not, other maybe will freeze my account because I got a transfer from Singapore. You have to trust banks, anything can happen really! I repeat, there's a smart contract in place where RPP are located, they send profits in ETH and you get paid automatically without a third party, if it's not clear now I don't know what to say anymore
I don't say that ! I can send you Bitcoins or ETH, then your platform don't need take dollars, and can run without blockchain. Bittrex is an example of a platform that don't need using blockchain. First, if you trust a third party like Bittrex with your coins/tokens, good for you, personally I don't leave coins/tokens in exchanges, unless it's decentralized and I own the private keys. Second you're saying "I can send you Bitcoins or ETH" but you write also "you can run without blockchain". But btc and eth are on blockchains  Third, why I have to send manually btc or eth to hundreds of addresses if a smart contract can do it in one go? That's the last time that I try to argue with you on this, seems that you're lacking some basic knowledge, no offense, I'm not trying to be rude in any way Yes, but the smart contract came at a huge cost for token holders. From an investment perspective, it's hard to justify the added cost to build out the platform. Investors fund the technology and the team gets to own it. |
|
|
|
Nico on slack channel reported a couple of days ago they were ready to go but had a problem with the SSL certificate through 'Meteor' that they are using, and just to 'wait a bit' till the site was secure to go... i would guess that they are all in the office today...
Best of luck to them, great work up to this point and prob best just to leave em to it... if i have to wait some more time for security, checking the tyres etc then no problem at all from this end
He said it's down to spelling errors at this point, so hopefully it's not much longer. |
|
|
|
Why price of ATLANT go down so much?Is there any big reason for that or it's because price of BTC?Thank you
I think the lack of confidence in the team has a lot to do with it. I think it's not only about their team and confidence. Look at coinmarcetcap, everything is red. No matter which altcoin you choose - it is very cheap now True, but that doesn't change the fact that the team doesn't inspire confidence. |
|
|
|
Hey guys, is the beta now officially released? Or did i mis a tweet? I guess communication to the public could be better, the last news update on their website is from august  https://populous.co/press.htmlGrts! It seems to be complete, but they haven't given the go ahead to start signing up yet. |
|
|
|
Why price of ATLANT go down so much?Is there any big reason for that or it's because price of BTC?Thank you
I think the lack of confidence in the team has a lot to do with it. |
|
|
|
another month and still no BETA we are waiting for months since november  as i remember january should be full lanch not BETA..cmon Nico ur black u should work fast as black peeps do  Guys! BETA is out! Please go to beta.populous.co. You can sign up there. I can confirm it! When you sign up there is an option of investors and borrowers. You can sign up now!!!! Just waiting for their official tweet for populous to skyrocket! The email verification link doesn't work for me! It worked for me yesterday. |
|
|
|
They gambled with our money and with Bitfinex being given the court orders, we are screwed regarding ethereum appreciation.
Thank you REAL team
What court orders? Bloomberg is just a FUDding machine : https://twitter.com/BTCVIX/status/958416711526617088 . About ethereum, remember that when calculated the new budget eth was at $400 if I recall correctly, so just chill and wait for more news Yes but similarly, they have illustrated crap risk management. They should have parted with a %, especially at the recent highs. Whether you think it will rise in the medium to long term, it is not right to speculate with the community's money, especially after the ICO price tanked and investors lost the opportunity cost of holding ether, which they themselves don't seem to be capitalising on. Cashing out is always have some risks. It was below $400. And some of though it was good opprtunity to cash out partly when Ethereum was over $500. Then $1000. I don't know their strategy but there is good amount of money waiting for buying some properties which give real value to the tokens. I think the point is that people invested in REAL to be real estate investors, not crypto speculators. Sure, prices might go up, but investors could have held on to the ETH themselves if that's the bet they wanted to make. |
|
|
|
I think there's a great misconception about how Populous platform works. It is not offering invoice factoring or discounting, but rather a loan from the invoice "seller" to the the invoice "buyer", with the faint promise that the loan will be repaid once the invoice "seller" is paid by the ultimate customer. This makes no sense at all. In real factoring/discounting, the sale of the receivable transfers ownership of the receivable to the factor (i.e. the buyer of the invoice), and the factor obtains all of the rights associated with the receivables. Accordingly, the receivable becomes the factor's asset, and the factor obtains the right to receive the payments made by the customer for the invoice amount. In other words, the buyer of the invoice should be the one repaid directly by the ultimate customer, not the seller. Otherwise the seller is being paid twice for the same invoice (once by the invoice buyer and once by the customer); this goes against the very essence of what a factoring transaction is. It is also possible to structure a collateralized loan transaction that uses the invoices as collateral for the ultimate repayment of the loan, but that isn't what Populous is doing. In fact, the transaction that Populous is envisioning makes no sense at all.
The way you describe how Populous works is just wrong. It IS an actual sale of the invoice at a discounted price. I suggest you some more research on the process. That said, it's a variation of invoice discounting and I'm not aware of any existing models that are similar, so you can't really make a direct comparison to traditional factoring or discounting. It'll compete in the same market, but it's not exactly the same type of business. If it were indeed, as you say, a sale of the invoice at a discounted price, then why is the process described as follows on Populous's website ( https://populous.co/about-platform.html):
-Deposits must be exchanged to Pokens.
-Invoice buyer transfers Pokens to invoice seller.
-Invoice seller transfers Pokens to invoice buyer on repayment of invoice.
-Withdrawal of funds in government currencies, Bitcoin or Ethereum.It is pretty clear from the above that the invoice seller is the one who is ultimately repaid by the customer, which is the very antithesis of an invoice sale or factoring transaction. You can clearly see in the process above that the invoice seller gets paid twice, once by the invoice buyer (in Pokens) and once by the ultimate customer (in fiat). The reason real factoring transactions don't work like this is that they are structured in such a way as to avoid the moral hazard of seller non-compliance. In real factoring, when an invoice is sold, ownership of the invoice is transferred to the buyer, so that the buyer recovers directly from the customer. That is the very essence of factoring/invoice discounting. This same process is explained in further detail on page 16-17 of the Feb 2017 Whitepaper https://web.archive.org/web/20170606070843/http://populous.co/populous_whitepaper.pdf: If the auction is successful:
1.6.9. The beneficiary of the auction receives the funds from the investor group, which has won the auction.
1.6.10. The investors from the other investor groups are refunded their bids.
1.6.11. When the borrower cashes the invoice, which he has auctioned, he sends the money to the platform.
1.6.12. When the funds are received, the investors from the investor group, which has won the auction, receive their winnings. Each investor receives dividends propor-tional to his bidding contributions.You can see clearly above that invoice "seller" is paid funds once by the investor group (paragraph 1.6.9.) and then a second time by the customer when the invoice is cashed out (paragraph 1.6.11.). From a functional perspective, this cannot be a "sale" of the invoice, because in such case the "seller" cannot be repaid directly by the customer, the right of repayment having been transferred to the buyer. Now, when you take away the right of direct repayment from the invoice "buyer", then this becomes nothing more than a simple loan, or an "IOU". There is no collateralization or other defensive mechanism protecting the invoice "buyer" from the seller's eventual non-compliance. In fact, there isn't even a way for the invoice "buyer" to know whether the invoice has been repaid/cashed out. You should really be asking yourself whether it's a good idea to invest in a team that can't even properly explain how a factoring transaction works... perhaps this is because they have absolutely no experience in this field. - Borrowers or invoice sellers sell their invoices at a discount depending on the risk credit rating calculated. So an invoice may be worth $1000 and the borrower may sell it for 10% less of it's value which is $900. This will rewarded the invested with $100 profit. - If the borrower/invoice seller sells his invoices through Populous, they will receive Pokens from the sale which they can send to us and we will transfer them fiat currency equivalent or they can keep the Pokens and do what they want with them. The invoice seller can transfer Pokens outside the platform to his/her wallet or sell even sell on other exchanges. Pokens are worth the same as the fiat currency the inovice was sold in. To offset the risk of default for any invoice sold by a invoice seller, There are three main things ppt do but this is on cases by case basis. 1) Credit insurance: Which is for large invoice amounts. 2) Charge on the invoice sellers company. Which is often known as a debenture registered a against the invoice sellers company. 3) Directors personal guarantee. By taking out credit insurance the insurance company basically says they will cover the value of the invoice if the invoice sellers customer does not pay. A debenture will allow the assets of the invoice sellers company to be legal taken to settle the debt should the invoice not be paid. Directors personal guarantee would allow recovery of the debt in a worst case scenario by selling property of the invoice seller, such as his or her house. These are used as recovery options and which are installed in the process of risk management of the invoice sale. Prior to that PPT carry our a full check on both the invoice seller and their customer in order to not get to the stage in which there would be a default. Wow, an official response from PPT staff, I am honoured! You are not addressing my main point; that the transaction as you have described cannot be a true sale of invoice (factoring) as long as the seller of the invoice is the one that receives payment from the customer (debtor). Even in "non-notification factoring", the buyer of the invoice (factor) assumes the identity of the invoice seller, and recovers money directly to an account controlled by them. Again, the idea that the seller should cash out on an invoice is the very antithesis of invoice factoring.The object of credit insurance is to insure against default by the customer (debtor) who is liable on the invoice, not the risk of non-repayment by the seller. Credit insurance never insures against the moral hazard that the invoice seller refuses to repay the invoice buyer, simply because factoring transactions don't require this type of coverage when they are structured properly (not the case on Populous platform). The next two defensive mechanisms you have outlined are typical in recourse factoring, however Populous is not a factoring platform, so again you are mixing up concepts. At best, Populous offers invoice discounting without the protections that are typically seen in those types of transactions. If you are still insisting that Populous does offer factoring solutions (and true sale of invoices), I challenge you to find a single public internet source where factoring is described in such a manner that the 1) invoice seller is advanced funds by the factor when the invoice is sold and 2) the invoice seller recovers funds from the customer in their own bank account and 3) transfers the money to the invoice buyer's account. If you type "How does invoice factoring work", here are the first 10 results that appear: 1) https://www.comcapfactoring.com/blog/how-does-invoice-factoring-work/Most factoring companies purchase invoices in two installments. The first installment – the factoring advance – covers about 80% of the receivable (this amount varies). The remaining 20%, less the factoring fee, is rebated as soon as your client pays the invoice in full. (this clearly implies that the invoice buyer receives the funds since they rebate the 20% balance, less the factoring fee 2) https://fitsmallbusiness.com/how-invoice-factoring-works/Step 4. Your Client Pays the Factor
Your client will pay the factor within 90 days according to the terms of the invoice.
Step 5. The Factor Forwards You the Remaining Balance (Minus Fees)
After receiving payment from your client, the factor will give you the remaining balance of the invoice, called the reserve amount, minus their fees.3) https://www.cit.com/thought-leadership/how-does-factoring-work/Step 3: Factoring Company Collects from Retailer
At invoice maturity, the factoring company collects from the retailer and credits the supplier's account. The factor fully manages the accounts receivable including the lock box, cash application and collection of past dues. Retailer deductions or disputes over delivery terms or product are reported to the supplier. The factor maintains the accounts receivable ledgers and provides this information to the supplier electronically via Internet reporting capabilities.
4) http://www.rtsfinancial.com/guides/what-factoring
Factoring is a transaction in which a business sells its invoices, or receivables, to a third-party financial company known as a “factor.” The factor then collects payment on those invoices from the business’s customers. And so on... Again, you can't just pull the definition of "factoring" and say Populous won't work because it doesn't fit the description. It's intentionally different. I understand your point about how the seller will receive cash from both sides, but I don't think it's accounts that they control. I don't know the mechanics for certain, but there are a couple of simple solutions that make sense so that's how I expect it to work out. It's not that hard of an issue to deal with so I'm not particularly worried that Populous is just going to leave open the risk that the Seller takes money from both sides and disappears. |
|
|
|
Hey people, Pillar announces a competition, everyone has a chance to win 1 ETH, all you need is to create new iconic image for Pillar, "something cool, something iconic". Don`t be shy, send your artwork, as a pillar fan, i want to spread this information among my friends-designers, you can do the same. https://pillarproject.io/pillars-iconic-image/It's pretty cool that they do stuff like this. It makes me wish I were a better designer! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
