The ICO will be over in about 20 hours. But the Bitcoin-price will fluctuate and with it the Fiat-price(s) (Dollar and Yen).

In the slack it was said end of October or early November.

It's not that hard to foresee an aprox. ICO-price for tomorrow (I expect it to be at about $ 0.15). But after the End of the ICO and until launch the Bitcoin-price will play a role. If it should double in the next 4 weeks - that would be very good for the team but maybe not so good for the market situation when ANS will launch.

Best would be: They dump all Bitcoins right before launch to crash the BTC-price before ANS hits the exchanges. ;-)

@.m.: I have to agree with the others here. It doesn't make sense to try to explain you more, because....

1) Again and again you try to use yourself and your "I can store hashes into the Bitcoin-Blockchain myself" as argument, while it was already explained multiple times, that Factom does not target private persons with minimal demand.

2) If I give you a video in which Tiana Laurence explains the difference of Factom to Bitcoin, your reaction is:


- "Thanks for videos, I stopped the first one in 15 sec after (...)"
- "If you really think a marketing blondie said something with a value (...)"



3) And after all that you complain that there would be personal attacks against you - kind of weird but funny.

Do the math. ICO 1 was about 16% of the total supply = 16,000,000 ANS. If we assume a price of $ 0.14 (currently $ 0.1395) it would be a volume of 3,666 BTC to sell all those ICO 1 - ANS.

1) That isn't very much
2) Not everybody of those who bought into ICO 1 will just dump
3) Once ANS is listed on exchanges, hopefully Poloniex, it will get a lot more attention than it has now, especially in combination with chinese exchanges --> there will be Buyers
 

Exactly that was my initial concern as well - the distribution and the voting power it gives besides the money-part.

But: In the end it's all (and always) about the team behind a project.

1) If there are reasons to believe that a team is not able to do deliver, one should stay away.
2) If there are reasons to believe that a team might be dishonest, one should stay away.
3) It there are signs that there is a lack of accuracy, that a project is not thought out - one should stay away.

Thing is: I believe this is a very good team. Everything seems very thoughtful. They obviously don't rush things out and they are no nobodies in china.

About the 50% of the total supply they will hold: It's not different to Factom. I'm not sure about the numbers, but the Factom-team also holds something about 30-50%, plus they've made additional funding-rounds with the Bank of Future. Because reality is: Especially big projects need to be well funded. They are like companies. And I would be very surprised if the team would be careless with the market once they can sell and they've given themselves restrictions. If this is what I believe to see it's a good longterm-project with real chances on the business-side - and that is still rare. I only know of one project I currently see that: Factom, which is my Nr. 1.

So, under the line I expect that ANS could surprise some who are critical about it.

Different purposes. ETH is kind of a laboratory for computer science - positive said. Negative said: They try out what fails and make money through market-manipulations in the meantime.

ANS has some chances to have real business-use.

What is the average ICO-price in BTC?

No, I didn't say that. The price of EC's is fixed now at $0.001. After M3 the federated servers will set it. And of course they will have in mind to do it in best interest for the Factoid-price. That means: They will want to find a price with the highest demand, the highest burning rate of Factoids. If they would set the EC-price very high, those who still buy EC's will burn more Factoids because of that. But it can be expected that there would be less demand in general. If the price would be near to zero, there would be very high incentive to use Factom and to push a ton of entries into it - but less Factoids would be burned.

Example: Let's say a price at $0.0005 would be perfect - it would be cheaper than it is now but maybe more big companies would put more entries into Factom than they would do at a price of $0.001. With other words: A cheaper Entry Credit - price could be better for Factoid-holders.

But what it is not and will never be: The price of Factoids won't determine the price of EC's. FCT's can go up and down without any effect on the EC-price.


I just used that example to explain the principle. In reality Factom can used by you and me and everybody but Factom targets big companies with tons of important data. And they couldn't do with Bitcoin what they can do with Factom. If they would try it, it would be expensive and it would bloat the Bitcoin-blockchain. The blocksize already was at it's limit, just because of daily transactions.



Your misconceptions about Bitcoin and Factom are no Achilles heel of Factom and it's business-model. Because, again: While potentially every private person can use it, like potentially everybody can place hashes into the Bitcoin-Blockchain, big companies like banks couldn't do what they want to do with Bitcoin.



Edit: Watch this:

Disruptive Infrastructure Solutions / Insurance Disrupted Q2 2016
 - Tiana Laurence
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_gPYSaZAfE&feature=youtu.be&t=15m45s

And focus on this:
https://youtu.be/w_gPYSaZAfE?t=18m20s

There she explains Factom in opposite to the core limitations of Bitcoin.

It's possible to store Hashes directly into the Bitcoin-Blockchain, but while Bitcoin can handle only about 7 transactions per second, Factom can handle much much more - billions per day. Factom targets companies who would bloat the Bitcoin-blockchain if they would place their hashes directly. And btw: Factom reduces costs, it's much cheaper.

Regarding the EC-price: It's not the same as in Bitcoin. For now the $0.001 for 1 Entry is a fixed price. After M3, when Factom is running on 32 Servers (plus 32 Audit Servers) those servers will adjust the price a little bit like gold-fixing I believe. And since they are paid with Factoids, they have incentive to do it in the best Interest for a high Factoid-price. Practically that means: A lower prices would be an incentive to place more entries, a higher price would destroy more FCT per Entry but maybe a cost-barrier for customers. It will be about the perfect ratio.

For those who missed the live-show:


The Crypto Show with the Factom crew Paul SNOW-den and Brian Deery
https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/the-crypto-show-with-the-factom-crew-paul-snow-den-and-brian-deery?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Now I'm prominent! ;-)

Thanks to Brian for asking my questions, and to Paul for the answers!

What I would like to know:

If Factom speaks with potential customers, what are the biggest concerns of them, or maybe the "highest barriers" that they use it?

And, more the opposite: Which business-sector is most interested in using Factom and why?

No worries. Lies in the trollbox are part of the daily game and nearly nobody will believe it.

And most of the talking there is positive: http://www.polonibox.com/?messageText=factom

Imagine a security-camera in a Hotel-lobby. It takes 24 photos per second (or something like that) and all photos are stored on the server of the security-company.

The security-company uses Factom to hash the film-material - each single photo. It also hashes log-ins of the accounts of employees. All is hashed into Factom on an own chain for that company, plus: timestamped and anchored into the Bitcoin-Blockchain.

Important is: The actual data is stored on servers of the security-company - not in Factom. They only store hashes of each photo on the

Let's say the film-recordings play a role in a lawsuit. The security-company is able to proof that they have the whole material - no photo is missing, no file was altered and they also can proof that the time-stamp is correct.

If that wouldn't be the case, let's say the film-material was manipulated --> the files wouldn't match anymore to the hashes.

If photos were deleted --> there would be timestamped hashes in Factom while the real data is missing.

And because the security company also hashes log-ins of employee-accounts into Factom it would be possible to find out who was responsible and what he did and when.

And those Entries are stored on several Factom-servers. While the server of the security-company is a single-point of failure, because a corrupted employee could mess with the data or it could be hacked, it's near to impossible to do that with the decentralized federated servers of Factom. And even if: After 10 minutes it's in the Bitcoin-Blockchain.


But: The Factom server don't necessarily provide Entry Credits. They are paid with Factoids from the protocol for their work. Entry Credits are created through a transaction from Factoids to an Entry-Credit-Adress. The security-company could pay somebody (an EC-store, maybe somebody who runs a Factom-Server) with $x  to purchase Entry Credits. The EC-Store-Owner sends Factoids (matching the $ amount - dependent on the current FCT-price) to the EC-Adress of the security-company.

- The security company gets Entry Credits for Dollar
- The converted Factoids are out of the system - burned/destroyed


Or to make it easier: Let's say one of your friends wants to hash a lot of important documents into Factom but he doesn't have an account on Poloniex to buy Factoids. He could give you cash and you could make a transaction from your Factoid-address to his Entry-Credit-Address. Or he could be the Factom-EC-store and they would send him Factoids on his EC-Address. If I would want to do it I would send from my Factoid address to my EC-address.

What I want to say with that, because some don't understand that: In all possible ways of purchasing EC's, FCT's are converted into EC's and burned through that process.

It's the same in Factom. The hashes, and hashes are data, are stored forever - in Factom and the Bitcoin-Blockchain. But the data that is hashed is not stored by Factom. It has to be that way, because nobody would want to store personal data, like medical records, on a blockchain.

The sense is: Let's say a bank hashes transactions and places the hashes into Factom and Factom into the Bitcoin-Blockchain ---> one year or five years later the bank has proof that nothing was altered or deleted. If there would be a hash in Factom but the file is missing, it would reveal that data was deleted. If there is a file that doesn't match to the hash it was altered etc. Plus: It's also about organizing data and we talk about "big-data" here.

And Factom also can be used to hash access to data. Let's say you work for a bank and you log into your account - Factom can record that as hash (depends on the application, on how the bank uses Factom). And let's say you open a file and change it --> Entry into Factom. So it's not just about the data and hashes but also about responsibility. It makes it much harder to mess with data once it's recorded as hashes. And that is more powerful than most people think because it's not just about objective aspects like:


- Proof of Existence: a document existed in this form at a certain time.
- Proof of Process: a document existed and is linked to this new updated document.
- Proof of Audit: an updated document can be verified to have changed according to a set of rules.

...but also about the way people think and act. That's why it's called "honesty-system". It doesn't prevent dishonest behaviour, it doesn't make it impossible to manipulate or delete data. But Factom would reveal it.

To understand how powerful that is it needs some knowledge about how it's handled today and how much manipulation is going on everywhere on this world with data.

I doubt that Antshares has anything to do with that.

And I would be very carefully, I personally won't touch IOU's.


What they (Liqui) want to do is:

Those who want to invest in the ICO can do that through their service. Basically that means that an Investor deposits Bitcoin on Liqui and they invest in the ANS-ICO. That makes it possible to know how many ANS they will have to trade it as IOU's before the network is up and everybody can access the real ANS.

It's a risky game in my eyes. Nobody knows if they are legit. And even if they are legit, the supply will be very limited and that will distort the trading-price.


Edit: For those who don't know what IOU means: I owe you 

....says the XC-bagholder!

Go, buy some more XC! ;-)

The more the system will be used, the higher the price of FCT needs to rise, because buying Entry Credits = burning of Factoids.

XMR gets some news because of the dark-markets. But: Will XMR be the one and only Anon-solution? No. Soon there will be Zcash and there will be others as well. In the end it won't be XMR.



The price for customers! The price to use Factom. He did not talk about the price of Factoids! ;-)


The opposite is true. Factom is designed to be used and the more demand - the more Factoids will be burned - the higher the price has to be. I know, I already said it, but it's worth to say it again.


You just don't understand it. That's all. ;-)