PIVX definitely won't get to a $15 price range without new updates and posts from the dev. I would want to see how these people posting that it'll reach that height get their information.

I think u are having tantrum or being jealous of dash holders that managed to double their money within one month while ur pivx asscoin is just a piece of goshen. Ur irritation stems from ur teenage years when ur life was especially hard. U missed out on dash because u were out as ur body received punches from a street bandit which is the exact reason why u werent online when I was calling u out on ur last statement about dash.

Stop dreaming. Lets be realistic for once

The following questions should be answered first:

1. What is the market adoption of PIVX?

You can literally watch Slack membership, MN adoption and distribution, community involvement, etc. all sky rocketing before your eyes

2. On what exchangers is PIVX being traded?

Exactly.  When it hits more/bigger exchanges it opens itself to a much higher influx of money

3. What does PIVX bring new to the crypto space?

A hell of a lot more than DASH, who hit 750m in market cap, which is where PIVX parity would be at $15, not including the massive influx of $ happening daily into the crypto space

nice show, nice diving too

Please quote one piece that is FUD ? I asking difficult questions yes, and I have a strong opinion About both DASH and PIVX, That does not make me a troll

You on the other hand attacking me personally does make you a troll

Why does patrick lack legs?

It was backed up by the assets when dividends were going to be paid from the profits realised, and when people were more convinced they actually owned something. That gave the token value in the form of a 'passive income'.

I have explained this before. The connection is purely psychological now (not my words... the words of people who favour buybacks)

I might be wrong. I've said that too. But I am explaining the reasons behind people's concerns, and why more information is required from the team.

There's a number of ways of looking at it, and not all of them are positive. This is why people are asking questions, and want answers.

People like you have just been replying with "best case" responses, which aren't backed by any concrete information. Again, as I've stated before, you should be encouraging the team to respond to the concerns people have raised - not attempting to respond to them yourself. There's no point, because people don't want YOUR answers. They want the team to answer.

It's just irritating when somebody talks about these things, and the only response they get is a random user giving some silly calculation based on reduced supply, or some other baseless theory about why this system will work.

You all seem to think you're the experts with all of the answers, and people with questions aren't "enlightened" enough to understand the methods of the wise and powerful gods of Iconomi 

You are operating under the assumption that ICN represents ownership of anything. One of the concerns is that the token 'ICN' is now completely divorced from the platform, and serves purely as a stake in the company's success, with its value driven by nothing but speculation. Under this sort of set-up, the value of the token is not necessarily driven by the success of the platform.

You might say "Yes, the whitepaper said it represents ownership", but you'd have said the same about dividends at one time. What else might have changed?

At this stage, we don't really know either way. That's why people have raised concerns, and want answers.

There are other concerns too. The above is just a small portion of what people have been asking. And they want answers from the team - not just from other users/investors like you or I.

i guess this need some time and better do it right  than rush out.
i'm hoping on summer/fall but you never know in case of development

tbh. i think ZP is far more important than polo and i really don't care about polo too much
all we will get from polo add. is a temp bump nothing more.

on the other hand it is allways good to be on all major xchanges ...
but price should raise cuz of development, marketing and stuff, thats the way to go or at least how i like it.

cheers

Thanks for the explanation.  To me (in my noob opinion), this changes the supposed value of the token. 

By eliminating ETH dividends and using a ICN buyback method, the sole value of the token is related to the buyback.

The concept of ETH dividends made sense to me, as I'm trying to increase my ETH stash.  If my ICN are working for me and making me ETH, I see value in holding the tokens.

Again this is my noob brain talking, plz correct me - it'll prob be helpful for others too

i'm fine with 8$ too 

Agreed with this - the rationale for doing buybacks instead of dividends makes sense from a legal / management perspective.  What that means from a token value perspective - and how that impacts the investors - is something I don't fully understand.  (among many others)

Although I understand some of the WHY - I was offput by the ICONOMI team not addressing the change from dividends to buyback.

That post doesn't address that there was a change in business model at all.  The whole thing was just bizarre to me and doesn't reflect well on ICONOMI.

Then the way the thread is moderated it's really a bad look.

I personally like the buyback option but I agree they should have explained the reasons they changed their mind on dividents. Two of the main reasons are transaction fees and the compatibility with major exchanges IMO; they could have explained it better.

But I didn't see any genuine posts regarding these.. What I saw was FUD from newbie accounts!

lets make this coin at least 50 usd per coin, so we can all become millionaire  

btw : as side note, if this coin indeed reach such valuation will it reduce the MN requirement to 1000 pivx?