Something I wondered about, and asked you in one of the other threads, but that thread sort of got buried under tons of other threads...

What coins are you currently mining or invested in? I'll take it that you have btc and jackpot coin, but what else?

For the last several months you have basically been all gloom and doom ... sky is falling, solar storms will wipe out cryptos, regulation is needed, and so on. All this time I just assumed you were heavily into btc, expecting if alts crashed, people instead would gravitate towards btc (faulty thinking, but a touch of logic to it).

Many of the coins out there are a complete waste of time. But that's the tricky part, finding what coins may have something unique about them. The market is geared entirely towards short term holding right now, unless a coin has active and constant development. Hold a generic, okay-ish coin from months and months ago, and it'll fall .... and why wouldn't it, unless it somehow gained real world usage or improved its features in relation to the competition?

As for what would possibly improve things .... in my opinion, btc will need to gain more adoption -- major adoption from a decent size company would certainly help -- then increase in price, and then drag some of the alts along with it. That Winklevoss btc fund could also help, although I haven't kept track of where it is right now, or if it's still planned.

It might help a little if that unnamed project wasn't quite so unnamed.

I see little point to when devs announce a 'secret project'. Basically just tell people what it is, a rough estimate of the release date, and that's it. Only point to keeping a project secret is if you don't know if it'll come to fruition, and in that case, it's best not to even announce anything at all. The exception being of course unless it's a joint project and due to legalities you aren't allowed to mention anything.

That's sort of a silly statement -- http://www.greenbackscurrency.com/site/roadmap/

They met every item listed, on time, so far. If you want to state any knock on the devs, is there is somewhat of a dangerous gap between now and when the marketplace will be ready.

And 30 million, you say? Are you even in the right coin thread? There is a max of what, like 20 million coins total?

Nice review, but I'm also a little confused as to how this adds value to groupcoin. Unless you plan for it to be sort of a tipping currency for those who write coin reviews?

A proper website would of course work better than posting reviews upon coin threads, as obviously negative reviews in a moderated forum will just get taken down.

I'm sure all devs are aware about the markets. But when a dev is also accumulating, for a stability fund, or for whatever reason, they may also behave like an investor too.

Meaning... they know when a coin has been pumped (sell high)... and when it will fall back. Devs can manipulate the markets pretty easily if they try to.

I'm not saying this is the case here, but pretend you were a dev with a lot of ICO money and wishing for 10% of the coin supply (or however many they want). They wouldn't put up a wall at 1500 ... it'd probably  make more sense at 750 instead. I expect a lot of devs (especially ico devs) do have 'defense funds' but they aren't actually used for defending a certain price (unless it falls below ico levels). It's to accumulate.

That has to be one of the weaker attempts at fud I've seen here. I mean, can't you at least put a little effort into it? Criticize a coin feature, wallet, or something?

Question for the devs ....

About a week ago you mentioned a secret project? Can you be a little less secretive about it, give some clue what it is, and a rough timeline for release?

The 2.5 wallet is due on the 12th of Sep, correct?

It might not be a bad idea to stress upcoming features, exchanges, or whatever, and space them out weekly if you can. Sometimes I think many investors here have some form of investing ADD, where they need to see constant features or additions, or they lose interest in a coin. I guess for newer coins, it's sometimes just reassurance that the devs will remain active.  Or it keeps the gambler sorts from feeling they need to jump coin to coin with their btc.

From a purely percentage based perspective, the two coins I probably made the most on were either NEM or Groupcoin. NEM was a .1 btc investment, sold at a bit over 2 btc. Groupcoin was .04 btc, turned into a little over 1 btc. So 20-25x increase.

That's not counting completely free coins, like comm, itc and such... which were basically just free btcs.

Cryptsy is sort of broken right now for a lot of people. It's not just the speed of btc.

I deposited btc into cryptsy over 2 days ago, and they still don't have it. They said they are working on wallets, or something... beats me what... I just know I sent btc there and it never showed up. It's happened to multiple people the past several days.

If I remember right, around 880ish?

I wouldn't expect any major upwards movement until the short-term dev stuff is done. After the windows wallet + custom blockchains are functional, then things may get interesting.

I wonder how the crypto version of that mindset came about actually.

What it is supposed to mean, is:

'Buy on a rumor before most people know about it. When people do know (the news), then sell as the price rises'.

But here in crypto-land, it's a twisted version where people buy as the price hikes until whatever the 'news' is, comes true. Then they sell when that news comes to fruition, regardless of what it is or if it makes any logical sense to sell at all. I saw one coin where people bought on the rumor (which was actually the news) of the coin being released, and sold as soon as the blockchain was released ... very bizarre.

I would think that by now those spreading doom and gloom messages would have realized red letters, as well as giant fonts, and all caps, are counterproductive. It's like a signal to people to basically ignore whatever they say.

Something I am curious about... what coins do you mine, and what do you own or trade?

For the last several months all I have seen are negative comments, the sky is falling, the sun will vaporize everyone's cryptos, and so on from you. I just assumed you were primarily a btc holder, going with the notion that if less folks invested in alts, they'd instead invest in btc (a misguided thought in my opinion, but at least there is a modicum of logic to it).

Besides Jackpot coin, are you into any other alts at all? I'm a pretty terrible trader, yet still can make money on these markets, so am wondering what coins have you invested in?

I've had that same problem. I find that Firefox can usually do it, but other browsers have an issue. It may depend on what version of FF too.

Yeah, but I meant less the nitty gritty details, and more simply the rewards themselves. That is what people will gravitate to anyway ... they want to see what they'll get.

I forget the exact numbers, but tier 1 is around $40/marketplace money, tier 2 around $22, and tier 3 is $4? Each month. And then there is the percentage of that debit card company too, assuming it gets off the ground.

One other thing I might suggest is perhaps changing rewards so folks get a percentage of transaction fees or tie the marketplace rewards into the coin's price, with a set minimum, or something similar. One potential problem you may run into down the road is the coin may be worth too much (as odd as that sounds).

General example:

If the coin gets to like 20K sats, you'd then have investors in tier 1 holding a little over $20,000 usd with a return of around $480 in yearly rewards, or approx. 2.5% yearly. You may eventually need to 'up' the rewards in some way as an incentive to remain in the loyalty program, the higher the coin's valuation gets. Staking and the company percentage thing helps, but I'm just wondering at what point would the coin's valuation be greater than the incentive to hold in the program.

It might help your loyalty program signups if you can list what vendors you have signed up, examples of merchandise, and what types of giftcards.

I also suggest providing more info on the rewards here in the forum, rather than relying on the pdf file, as people tend to be lazy.

And by increasing signups, you indirectly then influence the price upwards, as there are less coins on the exchange to sell ... and some folks are then trying to obtain more coins to sign up for the program.

I assume they plan to do something similar when they get to their debit card project. But that would be for down the road.

VertVerser sounds similar to verisend, although I haven't researched how vtc handles it. There are inherent problems with all processors like that, however, in that a coin needs volume for such a system to even make any sense. I'd suggest holding off on any such system here until after the marketplace comes out.

If not enough volume (although bittrex has been supplying a lot lately), people using such a system as intended would unintentionally crash the price of a coin, when converting from GB (or whatever) to BTC.

I agree. Gyft would be a pretty big deal.

But even if it's just gift cards direct from the marketplace, it'd at least be something.

If they get giftcards and/or gold+silver, then their loyalty program begins to get interesting. Someone getting $20+ (or however much) in free marketplace money each month probably won't think it a big deal, if their purchase options look like the typical crypto auction site (meaning a terrible version of eBay, primarily selling ebooks or junk). But if they can get $20+ worth of giftcards for free each month ... or a free silver coin each month ... forever ... then that loyalty program begins to look like a much better deal.

Moolah, as someone else already stated. Coinpayments too.

Try to get the coin on a chinese exchange, bter may be a good target. If you get Moolah, MP obviously would be in play.

And it's more for the marketplace, but I'd like to see a partnership with a gold/silver merchant. The ability to use crypto to buy gold/silver tends to be popular. I forget if you said you had something like this in the works or not.

I'm not talking about releasing the funds after they check out the wallet and make sure it's working properly. Nor releasing funds a couple of days after the ICO.

I mean releasing funds over the period of months. You need funds to hire a dev, submit a request and outlined plan, then they dribble out those funds. You need btc for marketing, the same. That sort of thing. Only Poloniex is currently doing ICOs that way, that I am aware of, but it's really how ICOs should be run.

Then again, it may not matter if this ICO doesn't do particularly well. If you are talking about a handful of btc, it's not exactly a big deal either way.

The dev asked for constructive criticism, so I offered suggestions as to how he could improve things. It wasn't meant just as a complaint type of post.

Whether or not he does any of those things is another matter. By having whomever is doing the escrow hold the funds until they are used for what they say they will, it does get around one major issue most people have with ICOs.

They will still be stuck with that name though.