|
jioy
|
 |
April 19, 2016, 05:00:31 PM |
|
It's great to see what you managed to deliver far, I'm amazed!
Can you inform us about your next steps, maybe some rough roadmap?
When do you think your product will be finished, and you can start to contact parking companies in order for them to start using this technology?
Regards
Goldmaxx
yes，I want to know above too |
|
|
|
|
|
take_off
|
|
April 19, 2016, 05:08:59 PM |
|
It's great to see what you managed to deliver far, I'm amazed!
Can you inform us about your next steps, maybe some rough roadmap?
When do you think your product will be finished, and you can start to contact parking companies in order for them to start using this technology?
Regards
Goldmaxx
yes，I want to know above too i would also keep up the good work |
|
|
|
|
|
ParkByte (OP)
|
|
April 20, 2016, 08:42:27 AM |
|
Thanks
As I have always stated I still won't be giving actual dates for completion of different stages but there is still a fair bit of work to do.
Off the top of my head here is a list of stuff that still needs to be completed before the product is fully complete
ParkByte Web Frontend Management Console
Variety of data interogation - Reports & Charts
Different Tariff Structures
Zone Management
User Managment
Company Management
ParkByte Lottery
Enforcement APP
iOS and Android needs developing in full
User APP
Coinomi Commericial Use Licensing needs discussing in further detail
iOS APP needs building
Different tariff display layouts
Other Admin stuff
British Parking Association membership
Complete business plan
Complete product information documents
(Still Considering) Raise some capital to speed up the development to a release standard by selling some equity in ParkByte Limited on a crowdfunding service
All this said, the basic proof of concept is ready now so it is possible to demonstrate this to parking companies now
|
|
|
|
|
|
goldmaxx
|
|
April 20, 2016, 09:46:58 AM |
|
(Still Considering) Raise some capital to speed up the development to a release standard by selling some equity in ParkByte Limited on a crowdfunding service
Great idea!
|
|
|
|
|
SlowGrowth
|
|
April 20, 2016, 10:56:49 AM |
|
this project looks amazing... Is there any way we can help?
|
|
|
|
|
|
ParkByte (OP)
|
|
April 22, 2016, 09:41:20 PM
Last edit: April 24, 2016, 12:12:38 PM by ParkByte |
|
this project looks amazing... Is there any way we can help?
Thanks, At the moment there isn't really much that can be done by others I am mid process of sorting out the finer details. (Still Considering) Raise some capital to speed up the development to a release standard by selling some equity in ParkByte Limited on a crowdfunding service
Great idea!
I agree and will most likely be doing this sooner rather than later, I have been looking at https://bnktothefuture.com/. Market research is key for this and it should be relatively easy to get some great stats, but can take some time. Many car parks here in UK are ran by councils which mean they are required under the Freedom of Information Act to respond to me with information so I have recently sent off around 100 requests to various councils asking for details of how many transactions and how much revenue went through similar Credit/Debit Card services. I also found a few Annual Parking Reports councils published where there were over 10million transactions for 2014/2015, I expect this to be a lot more in 2015/2016. So soon i should have some actual up to date stats and from what I have found out from various public publications (Tender's submitted to councils) there will be some very interesting data. Parking Providers like PayByPhone and RingGo charge between £0.10-£0.20 convenience fee per transaction, there is also reference to the council paying the provider between 5-9% processing fees. Extortionate! Lets do some rough maths  Problem: Existing Credit/Debit Card Mobile APPs, going on the lowest fees:]10,000,000 * £0.10 = £1m + 5% = £1,050,000 10,000,000 * £0.10 = £1m + (£1.50 * 10,000,000 * 0.05 = £750,000) = £1,750,000 spent on processing fees, I would guess most of that goes to the Credit/Debit Card processors Solution: ParkBytePKB/GBP @ £1,000 (Lol, it could happen you never know) PKB TX Fee @ 0.00001PKB = £1000 * 0.00001 = £0.01 Lets assume there is a BitPay type service for PKB charging 1% to convert to GBP, average parking transaction is around £1.50 = £0.015 ParkByte Limited APP/Service Fee = £0.02 Total PKB Fee = £0.01 + £0.015 + £0.02 = £0.045 10,000,000 * £0.045 = £450,000So that is £1,050,000 vs £450,000 ..... So that is £1,750,000 vs £450,000 ..... Clearly this looks like one of the best selling points of PKB, the coin. As for the company; ParkByte Limited, if we did 10m tickets @ £0.02p fee/ticket that's a nice £200,000 income. ** Noticed I made an error in that calculation ... On the problem I did +5% on fees alone when it should be 5% on total revenue |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ParkByte (OP)
|
|
April 25, 2016, 09:39:29 PM |
|
I have thought about it alot and really there are two different things here and it starts to get rather complex. 1) Blockchain/Coins - "PKB" - Decentralised not controlled by anyone 2) The company - "ParkByte Limited" - Currently 100% controlled and owned by myself - This is where the equity would come from for the crowdfunding I think the best way forward is to keep these separate. The main reason is to not restrict other established parking companies from adopting and integrating PKB into their own apps. The thing is ParkByte Limited will start to compete for business against established companies like RingGo and PayByPhone while at the same time wanting to join forces to use PKB by providing much of the infrastructure. The established companies are key to quick adoption and the success of PKB because they have established contracts already in place and they usually last 5 years+. For these companies it should be as simple as offering a new payment method that drastically reduce the fees paid to the payment service providers (Credit Card processors). I would like there to be 2-3 established companies partnered up with ParkByte Limited using the same APP/wallet for payments by PKB, each paying ParkByte Limited a "lifetime discounted early adopter fee" for an annual subscription to support the infrastructure provided by ParkByte Limited such as the APP, Support and other development. They would also get a slice of the premine as previously mentioned. Any company wishing to join after the partnerships have been made will have to pay a normal annual subscription fee to use the ParkByte Limited infrastructure. I would then look at getting ParkByte Limited competing directly with the early adopters by bidding for tenders, running services exactly like theirs maybe having to go down the Credit Card routes aswell. My main focus at the moment is getting PKB adopted by providing real life benefits and solutions, if PKB gets some interest from established parking companies and there are signs of it being adopted that volume on exchanges would shoot up fast, Currently not many in the crypto community know about the project/coin and after all there are only 4.7m PKB around, 922k of which is held in cold storage from the premine. The figures I mentioned in my previous post were all rough guesses and I have only received one response so far to my Freedom of Information Act requests. To give you an idea of the size of the market (This is a relatively small council, Edinburgh for instance have on their website they took £5,531,715.18 from cashless parking) ... 1st April 2015 - 31st March 2016 - £1,216,152.63 income from 209,751 transactions, using the parking industry basic handling fee of 8.8% (found on a few public documents, others listed per transaction etc work out around the same 8.8% seems to be the marker). £107,021.43 was spent on processing cashless parking transactions in the last year by 1 council (there are over 200 with parking services in UK), needless to say ParkByte infrastructure costing £0.05/transaction and with a 1% PKB-to-GBP service like BitPay offer for BTC that would of been £22,649.08, not much of a saving  I won't be doing any sort of coin sale like I think you are suggesting and I don't have any numbers really in mind for the crowdfunding investment into ParkByte Limited, probably maximum of 20% of equity in exchange for an unknown figure. |
|
|
|
|
|
ptic-1
|
|
April 25, 2016, 10:37:05 PM
Last edit: April 28, 2016, 11:04:57 AM by ptic-1 |
|
So I see. PayByPhon has:
...ifferent cities results in varying transaction fees, sometimes, zero, or ranging from $0.25 to $1.00.  Looks like they have mobile solutions already..might not be interested..Might be, if some of them are enthousiast BTC traders.. And dont know about PKB yet... PKB has some problems  (in being as trading token wise) it has bad distribution. Its not being traded while it has "bad distribution-the trade has been kind of done " ... wallet 200 has 1PKB in it 200 P9qRXXc5...1.0 PKB 0.00 % 54 days 2 hours Ignoring reserved premine 20%, your 25% there might be 100 something.. enthousiast BTC traders and non enthousiast BTC traders  Which as how developed PKB already is its bad that its sleeping trading wise.. no on news reacting bot If you would own some car park infrastructure you could start offering this solution from day x "there" and trading would still go on "here". But is a unique solution that is tradable with bitcoin for enthousiast BTC -ers that car park in Great Britain  Trading will resume with established companie-s addopting it for sure. And it would not take much profit from Credit/Debit Card processors. Its basiclly a bit cheaper solution for users, secure and fun payment option. They can even trade it them self.. as currencies aren't that volatile  Is one of the killer blockchain app |
█ B █ T █ C █12J89RucSq2vX5m5TcC5fP3PwVUrtWHn4c█ B █ T █ C █
|
|
|
Mig-23
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1000
|
|
April 30, 2016, 09:56:46 AM |
|
is there any company that uses your project ?
how many company ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
SlowGrowth
|
|
April 30, 2016, 10:42:13 AM |
|
the idea is great but like everything in life, if we dont do it somebody will... and seems that someone is doing it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wosterlee
|
|
April 30, 2016, 11:17:29 AM |
|
Why would people use ParkByte over BTC?
|
|
|
|
|
|
ParkByte (OP)
|
|
April 30, 2016, 11:22:31 AM |
|
is there any company that uses your project ?
how many company ?
At the moment no company uses PKB. Looks like they have mobile solutions already..might not be interested..Might be, if some of them are enthousiast BTC traders.. And dont know about PKB yet...
Thats right, there are a few mobile solutions already. The idea is for them to add an additional payment method to their service, they won't have to do much development as they can use the ParkByte generic app, we will integrate into their system to aid adoption. The whole solution is aimed to reduce their (or their clients) handling fees by around 75%, I estimate that the UK councils pay around £15-20m in handling fees a year, its a huge micropayment business ideal for blockchain tech. The companies with mobile solutions may not be interested, and it doesn't need bitcoin enthusiasts to be in their company. Adoption will happen when their clients (Government Councils) apply pressure on them to reduce their credit card handling bill once a cheaper solution is available, money talks. Crypto is becoming readily available and as more services start to accept it, the demand to use it should increase. Page 4 of this document is what the car park operators are faced with ... http://rds.eppingforestdc.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=20409&ku=kuThe proposal from Cobalt has three alternatives for the method by which the card transactions are
processed. As this is a service that is not currently offered it is not possible to set out a robust
financial model that evaluates each option. Depending on the level of take up, the split between
debit and credit cards, the split between the different stay periods and tariffs and other key variables
situations can be constructed under which each of the three options would provide the best
outcome for the Council.
The first option is for the Council to deal with the payment service provision and channel payments
through existing card handling arrangements. This would leave the Council to deal with chargeback
enquiries on disputed payments and the Council would not receive either the convenience or
reminder fees. It is also a concern that the Council’s current handling cost for debit cards of 18p per
transaction is more than the charge for a 30 minute stay, 10p, and 22.5% of the charge for a one
hour stay, 80p. The main advantage to the Council with this option is that there would be no delay in
the Council receiving the income, both the other options involve a monthly transfer from Cobalt
which will have a negative effect on cash flow.
The second option is for Cobalt to provide the payment service provision. Here the card charges are
consolidated at one rate, although the rate has not been specified in the proposal. This would
benefit the Council if the majority of payments were made on debit cards but may not be beneficial if
the majority were on credit cards, which the Council would pay a 2% handling charge on under its
own arrangements. This option would also not give the Council the convenience or reminder fees
and leaves the Council with responsibility for chargeback enquiries.
The third option is for Cobalt to provide the payment service provision, but card charges are made
as a percentage of transaction value, 8.8%, rather than as a charge per transaction. This would
benefit the Council if the majority of use was in the up to two hour range and paid by debit cards, as
the 18p per transaction charge is 12% of the 2 hour charge of £1.50. Conversely, if the majority of
payments were made on credit cards the Council would be paying 6.8% more in handling charges
than if it was the payment service provider. This option has two significant advantages in that it is
the only one under which the Council receives the convenience and reminder fees and is not
responsible for chargeback enquiries.
Given the lack of hard data on which to construct a robust financial model there would be concerns
if the proposal was for a longer period than the 15 month trial. Currently the third option appears the
most favourable, primarily due to the council receiving the convenience and reminder fees, but a full
appraisal of the data should be undertaken after 10 months to establish how the payments service
should be provided if the service is to continue. So if we use the 8.8% of revenue to calculate the fees; From 1st April 2015- 25th April 2016 London Borough of Islington took £6,128,815.08 over 1,578,480 payments using their PayByPhone service. 8.8% of £6,128,815.08 = £539,335.73. I have calculated that if all those transactions used PKB instead of card the council could have daily settlement of FIAT for around £140,212.15 rather than £539,335.73, thats a £399,123.58 saving a year. Obviously all those transactions would have to go through PKB but as blockchain tech starts to dominate the financial industry I wouldn't expect this to be a problem. This project is aimed at the UK to start with but it is not limited to the UK and I would like it to be used globally, the current mobile solution providers already operate globally Why would people use ParkByte over BTC?
Bitcoin is expensive in transaction fees, slow confirmations and the companies who dominate what payments the industry accept (car park operators/mobile solution providers) could take 5% of the total supply for partnering up. |
|
|
|
|
|
SlowGrowth
|
|
April 30, 2016, 11:38:42 AM |
|
is there any company that uses your project ?
how many company ?
At the moment no company uses PKB. Looks like they have mobile solutions already..might not be interested..Might be, if some of them are enthousiast BTC traders.. And dont know about PKB yet...
Thats right, there are a few mobile solutions already. The idea is for them to add an additional payment method to their service, they won't have to do much development as they can use the ParkByte generic app, we will integrate into their system to aid adoption. The whole solution is aimed to reduce their (or their clients) handling fees by around 75%, I estimate that the UK councils pay around £15-20m in handling fees a year, its a huge micropayment business ideal for blockchain tech. The companies with mobile solutions may not be interested, and it doesn't need bitcoin enthusiasts to be in their company. Adoption will happen when their clients (Government Councils) apply pressure on them to reduce their credit card handling bill once a cheaper solution is available, money talks. Crypto is becoming readily available and as more services start to accept it, the demand to use it should increase. Page 4 of this document is what the car park operators are faced with ... http://rds.eppingforestdc.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=20409&ku=kuThe proposal from Cobalt has three alternatives for the method by which the card transactions are
processed. As this is a service that is not currently offered it is not possible to set out a robust
financial model that evaluates each option. Depending on the level of take up, the split between
debit and credit cards, the split between the different stay periods and tariffs and other key variables
situations can be constructed under which each of the three options would provide the best
outcome for the Council.
The first option is for the Council to deal with the payment service provision and channel payments
through existing card handling arrangements. This would leave the Council to deal with chargeback
enquiries on disputed payments and the Council would not receive either the convenience or
reminder fees. It is also a concern that the Council’s current handling cost for debit cards of 18p per
transaction is more than the charge for a 30 minute stay, 10p, and 22.5% of the charge for a one
hour stay, 80p. The main advantage to the Council with this option is that there would be no delay in
the Council receiving the income, both the other options involve a monthly transfer from Cobalt
which will have a negative effect on cash flow.
The second option is for Cobalt to provide the payment service provision. Here the card charges are
consolidated at one rate, although the rate has not been specified in the proposal. This would
benefit the Council if the majority of payments were made on debit cards but may not be beneficial if
the majority were on credit cards, which the Council would pay a 2% handling charge on under its
own arrangements. This option would also not give the Council the convenience or reminder fees
and leaves the Council with responsibility for chargeback enquiries.
The third option is for Cobalt to provide the payment service provision, but card charges are made
as a percentage of transaction value, 8.8%, rather than as a charge per transaction. This would
benefit the Council if the majority of use was in the up to two hour range and paid by debit cards, as
the 18p per transaction charge is 12% of the 2 hour charge of £1.50. Conversely, if the majority of
payments were made on credit cards the Council would be paying 6.8% more in handling charges
than if it was the payment service provider. This option has two significant advantages in that it is
the only one under which the Council receives the convenience and reminder fees and is not
responsible for chargeback enquiries.
Given the lack of hard data on which to construct a robust financial model there would be concerns
if the proposal was for a longer period than the 15 month trial. Currently the third option appears the
most favourable, primarily due to the council receiving the convenience and reminder fees, but a full
appraisal of the data should be undertaken after 10 months to establish how the payments service
should be provided if the service is to continue. So if we use the 8.8% of revenue to calculate the fees; From 1st April 2015- 25th April 2016 London Borough of Islington took £6,128,815.08 over 1,578,480 payments using their PayByPhone service. 8.8% of £6,128,815.08 = £539,335.73. I have calculated that if all those transactions used PKB instead of card the council could have daily settlement of FIAT for around £140,212.15 rather than £539,335.73, thats a £399,123.58 saving a year. Obviously all those transactions would have to go through PKB but as blockchain tech starts to dominate the financial industry I wouldn't expect this to be a problem. This project is aimed at the UK to start with but it is not limited to the UK and I would like it to be used globally, the current mobile solution providers already operate globally Why would people use ParkByte over BTC?
Bitcoin is expensive in transaction fees, slow confirmations and the companies who dominate what payments the industry accept (car park operators/mobile solution providers) could take 5% of the total supply for partnering up. Again, there are a lot of things we could do and its obvious the benefits to everyone but the question remains... What is your plan now to attack that market? If exists competition already time is not on our side, so the time to do something is now... |
|
|
|
|
|
D4RK5T4R
|
|
April 30, 2016, 03:39:31 PM |
|
Why would people use ParkByte over BTC?
Have you not tried purchasing anything with BTC? it can take hours for the transaction to go through, days in some instances. |
|
|
|
|
ParkByte (OP)
|
|
May 02, 2016, 09:45:43 PM |
|
Again, there are a lot of things we could do and its obvious the benefits to everyone but the question remains... What is your plan now to attack that market? If exists competition already time is not on our side, so the time to do something is now...
As far as I am aware, competition for accepting crypto for parking doesn't exist at the moment, the mobile parking solutions already out there use Credit Cards/PayPal you could say these are competition but I see them as future partners. The plan of attack is to develop a full solution, do detailed market research and demo it to the companies that have a big market share that supply their services to the car park operators. This industry is pretty tight and it takes a fair bit of time to get the accreditation one would need to be able to attack this market. I have had some recent interest from two existing companies that have mobile parking solutions, so its not a case of this is the time to do something but more a case of I am doing something now. |
|
|
|
|
|
ParkByte (OP)
|
|
May 07, 2016, 10:38:28 AM |
|
Well I think the APP has come a long way since the last update If you would like to try it out please DM me on here or on twitter, or you can email me support@parkbyte.com and I shall send you the link to the APK for you to install. (There are still a couple of minor bugs that I shall fix next week) Based on Coinomi v1.6.1 Expiring Notification 15 minutes before expiry Expired Notification Google Maps added Extend ticket function added Email Receipt added - Last email address used saved Youtube Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-phxRwMvSUMScreenshots:  |
|
|
|
|
|
SlowGrowth
|
|
May 07, 2016, 11:20:42 AM |
|
Again, there are a lot of things we could do and its obvious the benefits to everyone but the question remains... What is your plan now to attack that market? If exists competition already time is not on our side, so the time to do something is now...
As far as I am aware, competition for accepting crypto for parking doesn't exist at the moment, the mobile parking solutions already out there use Credit Cards/PayPal you could say these are competition but I see them as future partners. The plan of attack is to develop a full solution, do detailed market research and demo it to the companies that have a big market share that supply their services to the car park operators. This industry is pretty tight and it takes a fair bit of time to get the accreditation one would need to be able to attack this market. I have had some recent interest from two existing companies that have mobile parking solutions, so its not a case of this is the time to do something but more a case of I am doing something now. Great news! Thats all the investors need and like to hear... Keep up the good work |
|
|
|
|
|
m4nki
|
|
May 18, 2016, 06:46:31 PM |
|
Looks like an interesting project! There is also another crypto project named Parkcoin, based in Berlin. I have talked to their founders and mentioned Parkbyte. They might be interested in collaborating. |
|
|
|
kcanup
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1000
|
|
May 21, 2016, 11:12:38 AM |
|
Good luck.. I'm staking this coin!!! Really nice to see how development is going here.. Go, Go PKB!! |
|
|
|
|
|
