I wonder if you should just create a single asset and exchange Evolve, Evolve2, CBOOKING for it to simplify. 1:1 for Evolve* and 1:1.4 (or whatever the math is) for CBOOKING. Then burn the other 3 assets.

I am glad I did not see the Evolve and Evolve2 offerings until they were all consumed up; otherwise, I likely would have invested. I am glad I put more BTCs into the SuperNET ICO instead. I, and I assume many others did as well, thought Evolve and Evolve2 were a part of SuperNET.

Thank you for pointing out legit and clear concerns.

*** How do you plan to generate a revenue stream? We are past the age of build a nice looking website and they will come?

- Main revenue stream coming from: Fixed Fees charged for our services;
- Secondary revenue stream: Paid Ads and Google AdSense;

*** How do you plan to use the 60BTC you have made by selling 35% of your revenue to actually generate revenue?

Please note that the development, hosting and other expenses are paid out of my pocket.
The whole IPO fund will go into promoting our services and paying for some part-time jobs. From my experience I know that this is the most important part.
A full detailed Budget Tracking Spreadsheet will be available as soon as we start our Promotion step. We are mainly focused on development right now, and we aim to have the main projects (CryptoHire.com, CoinGigs.com, CoinExplorer.net and TheCryptoBid.com) up and running with 0 bugs if possible by the next month.

As you can see, judging by the real potential of those projects combined with SuperNET promotion/traffic coverage, a 60 BTC IPO marketcap for 35% revenue share is a good deal.
I have not asked for crazy amounts like other IPOs, 5,10,15 million NXT for a blog or who know what.


*** How can you use your time to produce 2 different assets when not even the first one that has been sold out is actually generating any revenue?

It's way to soon to judge by those facts, since the websites are running free of charge for this first month, as clearly stated before. Even if we had 100.000 ads on our websites, there is going to be no revenue for the first month. I also know that we MUST offer our services free of charge for a period, before we can charge any fee. This is like a demo product. It's an investor job to study before investing into a business.
Only by selling Paid Ads on our website for this month, we can generate some profit, but nobody is willing to pay for an ad on a fresh website, am I right?


Chris

Hello Chris,

Sorry i do apologise for not elaborating earlier.

My understanding of the agreement between supernet and evolve was purely for profit sharing. Since this agreement was done you have been able to sell 1.4million assets at 0.6 NXT each meaning you received about 60BTC. This is a huge figure since your sites were not able to pull in even 10 BTC in a failed IPO previously.

The only reason why it brought such a big figure was due to people inferring incorrectly that the asset sale was endorsed by James.

Here is the current status of your sites.

http://cryptohire.com/ (You have 1 ad from 3 days ago)

http://coingigs.com/ (You have 2 ads)

http://http://coinexplorer.net/ (You have test items)

http://http://coinevolve.com/ (Under construction)

I dont think any of them are generating any revenue let alone any profits to be shared. Now i know that it will take time and that is fine but today you turn around and present a new project outside of this profit sharing agreement. This was done so you can raise more money as confirmed by yourself.

Now since James has not endorsed the new site, you are probably unable to sell the asset and you are going back to the revenue share to try to get him to agree. 100% revenue of a site generating 0 BTC is still 100% right? But then again you would have the NXT from the asset sale so it would be ok. This is why i think James should not accept the new partnership regardless of the percentage.

My questions to you would be the following:

How do you plan to generate a revenue stream? We are past the age of build a nice looking website and they will come.
How do you plan to use the 60BTC you have made by selling 35% of your revenue to actually generate revenue?
How can you use your time to produce 2 different assets when not even the first one that has been sold out is actually generating any revenue?

I will respond later to the posts above but I hope James rejects that offer. I will elaborate as soon as I get the kids off to bed.

Right now, Chris has leveraged off the supernet brand to promote his websites. Now I cannot see anything substantial apart from sites anyone could make given enough talent and a few hundred dollars.

Instead of building the user base for the current asset, he creates a new one to get more money.

How would supernet get a return for the money it has helped generate for Chris (which he could not raise in a failed ipo before) and how would the people that purchased assets at inflated prices make their money back.

I'm saying this not out of hate or anything like that, but if this venture by Chris turns sour it would help to tarnish the supernet brand which is what I care about.

I have made advices to Chris, but apparently my English was not so easy to understand for him.

The SuperNET revenue sharing deal was for the coinevolve websites and no assets were involved. It was purely a revenue sharing arrangement.

So, for people that are assuming that these assets are having any direct relation to me or SuperNET, please understand that I am not having any influence on the asset issuings that Chris is doing. I suggest we all wait for the revenues before we make any judgements.

The coinevolve sites that are doing the revenue sharing with SuperNET will likely benefit from the SuperNET userbase

James

P.S. The asset issuer is the most important factor. The second most important is the details of the asset. You need to make sure you understand who the issuer is and what exactly the asset is for.

Chris,

just don't create evolve3, because evolve2 is all bought up too already, let the market carry on from here

I really don't think that is fair to those that bought the original shares, is it?

There are several decentralized storage solutions/coins so the storage is not a big issue
decentralized name server is already built into the NXT alias system, so this too is not a big issue
I think this is just a matter of piecing together existing tech and make a nice GUI.

I can offer a bounty for this, but preferably a NXTventure deal modeled after the Privatebet format so that it is fitting into a standard SuperNET model

James