WAVES. Ultimate crypto-tokens blockchain platform.

[sasha35625]

Hey,

1. Why create a new token/blockchain? OpenLedger for example already has fiat integration and the possibility to create assets. There are other coins that also offer colored coins functionality. Why not add your dev team to an existing team and make something already working even better?

2. Why not just continue to use NXT? What is wrong with NXT that prevents you to add fiat tokens and reputation systems to it.

3. The Dev team gets all the money from the ICO, plus 9M tokens? You're essentially being paid twice. There is no coin burning... You have to agree that from a certain point-of-view this looks like a money grab and a get-rich-quick plan. If the devs want to profit further from their work, why don't they buy the tokens they want themselves, with what they're being paid from the ICO? I'm sure we're not talking about modest salaries here. I wouldn't be making this point - a cut being reserved for devs - if there was no ICO.

4. There are plenty of bots around to make money on exchanges, market-making etc. Why don't you put some of those to work with a part of the ICO fund to support the 'post-ICO bounties', instead of reserving 1M?

5. '4 million tokens are reserved for strategical partners and backers' - could this be more transparent? 'partners and backers' would usually buy their way in, no? I'd love to see examples, even if you don't mention any specific 'partners and backers'

The comparisons with Lisk ICO are inevitable, but I'm not sure this will even get close to the values there...

1.  All current colored coins implementations have severe limitations. Obviously Bitcoin blockchain based tokens won't work due to 10 min confirmation times. In Ethereum it's quite difficult to create a decentralized exchange. Openledger is a web-interface to Bitshares  blockchain actually, it's not a colored coins protocol.

We are focused specifically  on custom blockchain tokens. Our vision is very different from Bitshares vision, for example.  Personally I don't think that pegged assets is a viable idea. We want to do for blockchain tokens what Ethereum is doing for Bitcoin scripting - make it perfect.

2. NXT is cool, I've been involved with NXT for a long time. But right from the start its development has been hindered by such problems as a really unfortunate initial distribution, changing developer teams, strange  development decision.  A moment came when I realized that it's time to make things right, from scratch. It will be much more effective, and even faster. And of course I'd never fork NXT.

3. Why do you think that we won't be buying coins with our own money? We sure will.  Also please understand a crucial point here - we need a good distribution for a POS coin. I've seen what poor distribution can lead to, as in NXT case. The more stakers you have the better  for the network.

4.  Of course ICO funds will be used to maintain buy walls, if there's a need for this.

5. Of course we'll announce them soon. In any case there's a full transparency here, enforced by the nature of crypto itself - you'll be able to see where the tokens go to.

As for Lisk comparisons - to be frank I don't really care about it, we are not trying to break some record or something like that. All we need is enough money for development.

[1714101032]

1714101032

[1714101032]

1714101032

[mangox]

I myself consider WAVES very promising

[Vlegale]

Hey,

1. Why create a new token/blockchain? OpenLedger for example already has fiat integration and the possibility to create assets. There are other coins that also offer colored coins functionality. Why not add your dev team to an existing team and make something already working even better?

2. Why not just continue to use NXT? What is wrong with NXT that prevents you to add fiat tokens and reputation systems to it.

3. The Dev team gets all the money from the ICO, plus 9M tokens? You're essentially being paid twice. There is no coin burning... You have to agree that from a certain point-of-view this looks like a money grab and a get-rich-quick plan. If the devs want to profit further from their work, why don't they buy the tokens they want themselves, with what they're being paid from the ICO? I'm sure we're not talking about modest salaries here. I wouldn't be making this point - a cut being reserved for devs - if there was no ICO.

4. There are plenty of bots around to make money on exchanges, market-making etc. Why don't you put some of those to work with a part of the ICO fund to support the 'post-ICO bounties', instead of reserving 1M?

5. '4 million tokens are reserved for strategical partners and backers' - could this be more transparent? 'partners and backers' would usually buy their way in, no? I'd love to see examples, even if you don't mention any specific 'partners and backers'

The comparisons with Lisk ICO are inevitable, but I'm not sure this will even get close to the values there...

1.  All current colored coins implementations have severe limitations. Obviously Bitcoin blockchain based tokens won't work due to 10 min confirmation times. In Ethereum it's quite difficult to create a decentralized exchange. Openledger is a web-interface to Bitshares  blockchain actually, it's not a colored coins protocol.

We are focused specifically  on custom blockchain tokens. Our vision is very different from Bitshares vision, for example.  Personally I don't think that pegged assets is a viable idea. We want to do for blockchain tokens what Ethereum is doing for Bitcoin scripting - make it perfect.

2. NXT is cool, I've been involved with NXT for a long time. But right from the start its development has been hindered by such problems as a really unfortunate initial distribution, changing developer teams, strange  development decision.  A moment came when I realized that it's time to make things right, from scratch. It will be much more effective, and even faster. And of course I'd never fork NXT.

3. Why do you think that we won't be buying coins with our own money? We sure will.  Also please understand a crucial point here - we need a good distribution for a POS coin. I've seen what poor distribution can lead to, as in NXT case. The more stakers you have the better  for the network.

4.  Of course ICO funds will be used to maintain buy walls, if there's a need for this.

5. Of course we'll announce them soon. In any case there's a full transparency here, enforced by the nature of crypto itself - you'll be able to see where the tokens go to.

As for Lisk comparisons - to be frank I don't really care about it, we are not trying to beat some record or something like that. All we need is enough money for development.

Thanks
It's all clear to me.
Have only one question:
Where are you going to keep BTC before tokens distribution? Coinbase?

[mxxxxxx]

Hey,

1. Why create a new token/blockchain? OpenLedger for example already has fiat integration and the possibility to create assets. There are other coins that also offer colored coins functionality. Why not add your dev team to an existing team and make something already working even better?

2. Why not just continue to use NXT? What is wrong with NXT that prevents you to add fiat tokens and reputation systems to it.

3. The Dev team gets all the money from the ICO, plus 9M tokens? You're essentially being paid twice. There is no coin burning... You have to agree that from a certain point-of-view this looks like a money grab and a get-rich-quick plan. If the devs want to profit further from their work, why don't they buy the tokens they want themselves, with what they're being paid from the ICO? I'm sure we're not talking about modest salaries here. I wouldn't be making this point - a cut being reserved for devs - if there was no ICO.

4. There are plenty of bots around to make money on exchanges, market-making etc. Why don't you put some of those to work with a part of the ICO fund to support the 'post-ICO bounties', instead of reserving 1M?

5. '4 million tokens are reserved for strategical partners and backers' - could this be more transparent? 'partners and backers' would usually buy their way in, no? I'd love to see examples, even if you don't mention any specific 'partners and backers'

The comparisons with Lisk ICO are inevitable, but I'm not sure this will even get close to the values there...

1.  All current colored coins implementations have severe limitations. Obviously Bitcoin blockchain based tokens won't work due to 10 min confirmation times. In Ethereum it's quite difficult to create a decentralized exchange. Openledger is a web-interface to Bitshares  blockchain actually, it's not a colored coins protocol.

We are focused specifically  on custom blockchain tokens. Our vision is very different from Bitshares vision, for example.  Personally I don't think that pegged assets is a viable idea. We want to do for blockchain tokens what Ethereum is doing for Bitcoin scripting - make it perfect.

2. NXT is cool, I've been involved with NXT for a long time. But right from the start its development has been hindered by such problems as a really unfortunate initial distribution, changing developer teams, strange  development decision.  A moment came when I realized that it's time to make things right, from scratch. It will be much more effective, and even faster. And of course I'd never fork NXT.

3. Why do you think that we won't be buying coins with our own money? We sure will.  Also please understand a crucial point here - we need a good distribution for a POS coin. I've seen what poor distribution can lead to, as in NXT case. The more stakers you have the better  for the network.

4.  Of course ICO funds will be used to maintain buy walls, if there's a need for this.

5. Of course we'll announce them soon. In any case there's a full transparency here, enforced by the nature of crypto itself - you'll be able to see where the tokens go to.

As for Lisk comparisons - to be frank I don't really care about it, we are not trying to beat some record or something like that. All we need is enough money for development.

Thanks
It's all clear to me.
Have only one question:
Where are you going to keep BTC before tokens distribution? Coinbase?

It will be announced next week by the partner doing the escrow, not Coinbase, but also great one

[sasha35625]

Hey,

1. Why create a new token/blockchain? OpenLedger for example already has fiat integration and the possibility to create assets. There are other coins that also offer colored coins functionality. Why not add your dev team to an existing team and make something already working even better?

2. Why not just continue to use NXT? What is wrong with NXT that prevents you to add fiat tokens and reputation systems to it.

3. The Dev team gets all the money from the ICO, plus 9M tokens? You're essentially being paid twice. There is no coin burning... You have to agree that from a certain point-of-view this looks like a money grab and a get-rich-quick plan. If the devs want to profit further from their work, why don't they buy the tokens they want themselves, with what they're being paid from the ICO? I'm sure we're not talking about modest salaries here. I wouldn't be making this point - a cut being reserved for devs - if there was no ICO.

4. There are plenty of bots around to make money on exchanges, market-making etc. Why don't you put some of those to work with a part of the ICO fund to support the 'post-ICO bounties', instead of reserving 1M?

5. '4 million tokens are reserved for strategical partners and backers' - could this be more transparent? 'partners and backers' would usually buy their way in, no? I'd love to see examples, even if you don't mention any specific 'partners and backers'

The comparisons with Lisk ICO are inevitable, but I'm not sure this will even get close to the values there...

1.  All current colored coins implementations have severe limitations. Obviously Bitcoin blockchain based tokens won't work due to 10 min confirmation times. In Ethereum it's quite difficult to create a decentralized exchange. Openledger is a web-interface to Bitshares  blockchain actually, it's not a colored coins protocol.

We are focused specifically  on custom blockchain tokens. Our vision is very different from Bitshares vision, for example.  Personally I don't think that pegged assets is a viable idea. We want to do for blockchain tokens what Ethereum is doing for Bitcoin scripting - make it perfect.

2. NXT is cool, I've been involved with NXT for a long time. But right from the start its development has been hindered by such problems as a really unfortunate initial distribution, changing developer teams, strange  development decision.  A moment came when I realized that it's time to make things right, from scratch. It will be much more effective, and even faster. And of course I'd never fork NXT.

3. Why do you think that we won't be buying coins with our own money? We sure will.  Also please understand a crucial point here - we need a good distribution for a POS coin. I've seen what poor distribution can lead to, as in NXT case. The more stakers you have the better  for the network.

4.  Of course ICO funds will be used to maintain buy walls, if there's a need for this.

5. Of course we'll announce them soon. In any case there's a full transparency here, enforced by the nature of crypto itself - you'll be able to see where the tokens go to.

As for Lisk comparisons - to be frank I don't really care about it, we are not trying to beat some record or something like that. All we need is enough money for development.

Thanks
It's all clear to me.
Have only one question:
Where are you going to keep BTC before tokens distribution? Coinbase?

There are other great companies, with products much more innovative than what Coinbase offers.

[basyaru]

I'm in 
Waiting for 12th of April

[complexring]

watching closely.

[reefsea]

I subscribe waves newsletter
Got it, You've been added to our email list

[Kushedout]

SaluS project will also part take in this.

Good luck!

-Kushed

[davide72]

Sasha sorry to bother you, i know you quite busy!  I am one the very early person who was interested in waves, so i did follow you on facebook , twitter, sign campaign and i got your first newsletter from waves! Shell i inform anyone about or just wait till the  ICo end and you will check for future bounty? also i will buy some at first day ICO to get bonus! thanks for your answer in advances!

[coralreefer]

Signed up for newsletter.  Seems like there is quite a bit of interest in Waves already.

[mxxxxxx]

SaluS project will also part take in this.

Good luck!

-Kushed

Kushed in the house

Great work with SaluS brother!

[ngdias]

Afaik, Bitshares accepts creation of all kinds of assets, not just pegged ones? The BTS fiat-pegged assets are backed against 6x collateral, I think, value doesn't come just from what 'people believe'. Anyway that was just an example; have you looked at NEM mosaics for example? I'm sure there are many more colored cryptos out there, I'm not off to make a thorough list. In the end, if you value above all control and the ability to do things your way, a new project is the only option, I guess.  Have you checked on what Maker DAO is trying to do? (it only a part of Wave's ecossystem). What exactly are the 'severe limitations' of other colorored coins you could compare Wave to?

You guys will bring more people, complete a successful ICO and achieve a good initial distribution of coins if the workings of this project hit that sweet spot where people see something new, with potential, fair and backed by competent and trustworthy people. My perception is that the team is solid, but I get a feeling that most people around here don't understand exactly how this project's approach to fiat and assets will result in a much larger adoption than other projects that have been trying to do the same for a while now. I read a few sound bites about this in the thread, repeated a few times, but I don't see a critical, well explained factor that will for sure tip the balance in your favor.

Do you really need to reserve so many coins to pay for development? Maybe the focus should be to give investors the sweetest deal possible (and they will front more BTC), with a well explained, compelling project instead of taking such a big cut from investors to devs 'just to be safe'. My other point with the bots and bounties was simply that the project could do without that reserve because those resources could come from market trading, later. And the ICO funds are not going to be spent/distributed all at once, right? A part could be put to use, to generate income while it is waiting to be disbursed in due time.

At this point I'm not so much worried about tx transparency - ppl tend to take that as a given when discussing blockchains - but more about why the 'partners and backers' need to be paid in the first place. That's the kind of thing I'd like to see examples of. If in the future you need to add features, why not make an asset for each of those features, sell the asset to investors and distribute any income from the features among those asset holders. Once Waves is up and running and showing how it works and how solid the connections are to the 'outside world'.

How much money do you (estimate) need for development, can you be transparent about that?

Like someone else posted early on, this thread is full of support and excitement mostly from accounts with a very low number of posts. I'm not trying to bring this project down, I just see too many posts just pledging support blindly and nobody really asking any questions. Well, apart from the ones about the free coins to early supporters...

[yonatangov]

Looks interesting, good luck.
Will paticipate in the ico.

When will the coins be traded on exchanges?

[Punggawa]

I joined WAVES Facebook, follow WAVES account on Twitter
and sign up for subscribe to WAVES newsletter.

[tottong]

I signed up in the signature campaign and Subscribe news letter.
and I have already added a signature.

[$dakini]

Updated my sig. Hope I am not late for this.

[sasha35625]

Afaik, Bitshares accepts creation of all kinds of assets, not just pegged ones? The BTS fiat-pegged assets are backed against 6x collateral, I think, value doesn't come just from what 'people believe'. Anyway that was just an example; have you looked at NEM mosaics for example? I'm sure there are many more colored cryptos out there, I'm not off to make a thorough list. In the end, if you value above all control and the ability to do things your way, a new project is the only option, I guess.  Have you checked on what Maker DAO is trying to do? (it only a part of Wave's ecossystem). What exactly are the 'severe limitations' of other colorored coins you could compare Wave to?

You guys will bring more people, complete a successful ICO and achieve a good initial distribution of coins if the workings of this project hit that sweet spot where people see something new, with potential, fair and backed by competent and trustworthy people. My perception is that the team is solid, but I get a feeling that most people around here don't understand exactly how this project's approach to fiat and assets will result in a much larger adoption than other projects that have been trying to do the same for a while now. I read a few sound bites about this in the thread, repeated a few times, but I don't see a critical, well explained factor that will for sure tip the balance in your favor.

Do you really need to reserve so many coins to pay for development? Maybe the focus should be to give investors the sweetest deal possible (and they will front more BTC), with a well explained, compelling project instead of taking such a big cut from investors to devs 'just to be safe'. My other point with the bots and bounties was simply that the project could do without that reserve because those resources could come from market trading, later. And the ICO funds are not going to be spent/distributed all at once, right? A part could be put to use, to generate income while it is waiting to be disbursed in due time.

At this point I'm not so much worried about tx transparency - ppl tend to take that as a given when discussing blockchains - but more about why the 'partners and backers' need to be paid in the first place. That's the kind of thing I'd like to see examples of. If in the future you need to add features, why not make an asset for each of those features, sell the asset to investors and distribute any income from the features among those asset holders. Once Waves is up and running and showing how it works and how solid the connections are to the 'outside world'.

How much money do you (estimate) need for development, can you be transparent about that?

Like someone else posted early on, this thread is full of support and excitement mostly from accounts with a very low number of posts. I'm not trying to bring this project down, I just see too many posts just pledging support blindly and nobody really asking any questions. Well, apart from the ones about the free coins to early supporters...

Actually I'd recommend you DO a list of all colored coins projects. That could be really instructive
The thing is we have a very clear sales pitch, the fact that you don't get it shows us that we have to work some more on it.
We are really focused on mass market adoption, and will be offering a product unseen in crypto before. Imagine an online bank with integrated crowdfunding platform, very simple to use and intuitive,  but running on the blockchain technology. Also we'll be tackling some more fundamental problems of blockchain tech along the way.

In a nutshell our vision is very different from existing tech, and the fastest way to build it is to have full control

As for the the premine  - 15% is a very modest premine. And you know you have to have partners especially in our case, when we're bringing banks and payment systems on board.  All our ICO funds will be used for development, infrastructure, and marketing. There will be full transparency. As you  might know Ethereim has been spending about 300 k monthly on development. Of course we'll do it with much less money,
but QUALITY development in crypto is costly.

[JollyTrades]

As you  might know Ethereum has been spending about 300 k monthly on development.

WHATT?? That's way too much. That amount should be enough to mine the necessary metals and oil, build a factory, produce computers and then develop the system.

Or the developers eat nothing but caviare.

[WEMCoin]

http://www.wemcoin.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/微盟2.jpg
Hi,anyone here knew the WMCoin?