|
Elkmar
|
 |
August 15, 2017, 11:13:56 PM |
|
Ok but mathematically you can't purchase products at a lower price in the long run. If you participate in thousands of events, at some point your losses should be averaged with your savings and overall result in paying the original price of the product. When you save, someone has to pay, and when you pay, someone can save.
Would anyone from the team mind commenting on this? It is not precisely true to say that you could shop premium products at lower prices. Someone has to pay for your benefit, and in the end the community in aggregate didn't save a penny. In the long run, even an individual shouldn't be able to save money. Correct me if I am wrong please. That was one of the question I had on the french ANN. It was said it would be answered during the Q&A session, but maybe I did not hear the answer since I was anwering some questions in the chat. I'm interested in the answer too. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin mining is now a specialized and very risky industry, just like gold mining. Amateur miners are unlikely to make much money, and may even lose money. Bitcoin is much more than just mining, though!
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rigorous
|
|
August 15, 2017, 11:28:49 PM |
|
Ok but mathematically you can't purchase products at a lower price in the long run. If you participate in thousands of events, at some point your losses should be averaged with your savings and overall result in paying the original price of the product. When you save, someone has to pay, and when you pay, someone can save.
Would anyone from the team mind commenting on this? It is not precisely true to say that you could shop premium products at lower prices. Someone has to pay for your benefit, and in the end the community in aggregate didn't save a penny. In the long run, even an individual shouldn't be able to save money. Correct me if I am wrong please. You can see in the whitepaper that the revenue per product is higher than its cost, because of the participation fee and winner's contribution. Theoretically you would be correct, except there's a way to push luck in your favor through the karma system. Anyway, the main thing to remember is that is designed around the sensation of winning a super discount. That is something worth in itself. And that psychological effect makes it a perfect investment. |
|
|
|
|
|
magisterr
|
|
August 15, 2017, 11:34:48 PM |
|
What will you do with tokens that wont be bought? And if you are going to destroy it how it will correlate with bounty amount?
I hope they can make an arrangement with some of the exchanges where the unsold tokens from presale will be sold. what? unsold tokens must be burn.. like in other good ICO project. usually the unsold tokens be burn, also the dev can distribute the unsold tokens to the former investor! For information on what happens with the "unsold" tokens, check chapter 6 of our WHITEPAPERYou are going to find all the answers there. By the way, if there's something you don't understand, let us know we will be available. Just read again your whitepaper and can find this... can you tell us, what will be whis this tokens? |
|
|
|
|
|
Trrrt
|
|
August 15, 2017, 11:36:01 PM |
|
Yes the concept is also based on the sensation to win something, its not just buying discount product, you participate to a countest and your bids is based on your will intention. That mean that if you want more you should put more snapcoin in the auction, but it's not really an auction. The Snapup team keep saying that is a new economic model and it's not totally like a countest or an auction, but a different concept based on will intention.
|
|
|
|
|
|
no-ice-please
|
|
August 15, 2017, 11:55:21 PM |
|
Ok but mathematically you can't purchase products at a lower price in the long run. If you participate in thousands of events, at some point your losses should be averaged with your savings and overall result in paying the original price of the product. When you save, someone has to pay, and when you pay, someone can save.
Would anyone from the team mind commenting on this? It is not precisely true to say that you could shop premium products at lower prices. Someone has to pay for your benefit, and in the end the community in aggregate didn't save a penny. In the long run, even an individual shouldn't be able to save money. Correct me if I am wrong please. You can see in the whitepaper that the revenue per product is higher than its cost, because of the participation fee and winner's contribution. Theoretically you would be correct, except there's a way to push luck in your favor through the karma system. Anyway, the main thing to remember is that is designed around the sensation of winning a super discount. That is something worth in itself. And that psychological effect makes it a perfect investment. Well, the expected value for any single individual participating in events should approach zero with zero = original product of the price under the assumption of an individual's participation converging ∞. This is not a new economic model. |
|
|
|
|
|
Elkmar
|
|
August 15, 2017, 11:58:04 PM |
|
Yes the concept is also based on the sensation to win something, its not just buying discount product, you participate to a countest and your bids is based on your will intention. That mean that if you want more you should put more snapcoin in the auction, but it's not really an auction. The Snapup team keep saying that is a new economic model and it's not totally like a countest or an auction, but a different concept based on will intention.
I think the true question that he asked is, everybody can win ? Because normally, there is no possibility that everybody can win, if there is a winner, there is a loser. If not, it's not economically viable. Even with the karma system, it would mean that good participants have a chance to have a good discount but bad participants to balance this could finally pay way more than the original price of the product (Via participation cost + the percentage of the product paid) to have something in return. |
|
|
|
|
|
haxllega
|
|
August 16, 2017, 12:06:10 AM |
|
It's a problem that recently there are so many ICOs providing a shopping platform and only few will survive you really have to outperform a lot of competitors
|
|
|
|
|
Rigorous
|
|
August 16, 2017, 12:38:25 AM |
|
Ok but mathematically you can't purchase products at a lower price in the long run. If you participate in thousands of events, at some point your losses should be averaged with your savings and overall result in paying the original price of the product. When you save, someone has to pay, and when you pay, someone can save.
Would anyone from the team mind commenting on this? It is not precisely true to say that you could shop premium products at lower prices. Someone has to pay for your benefit, and in the end the community in aggregate didn't save a penny. In the long run, even an individual shouldn't be able to save money. Correct me if I am wrong please. You can see in the whitepaper that the revenue per product is higher than its cost, because of the participation fee and winner's contribution. Theoretically you would be correct, except there's a way to push luck in your favor through the karma system. Anyway, the main thing to remember is that is designed around the sensation of winning a super discount. That is something worth in itself. And that psychological effect makes it a perfect investment. Well, the expected value for any single individual participating in events should approach zero with zero = original product of the price under the assumption of an individual's participation converging ∞. This is not a new economic model. You have a chance to buy it cheaper just like you have a chance to win 1000 in a lottery. You may end up spending more or less than the original amount in participation fees before you win the prize. Besides, "the product" is a malleable concept, it's the combination of the tangible and intangible. Why is a 120 g of peas in a cute tin can more expensive than a pound of peas in a bag? Why do people buy coconut water? Why do we happily keep paying the Apple premium? |
|
|
|
|
|
Trrrt
|
|
August 16, 2017, 01:12:47 AM |
|
The chance is an aspect of the concept too, they will balance it with a Karma system. I think with time they will improve the system. It need a new economic model that's hard to explain, its not just buying a product at low price.
It a concept, a fusion of chance, auction, low price product and community platform.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bambulee
|
|
August 16, 2017, 01:29:42 AM |
|
Amazing concept can't wait for the launch. best of luck for all.
|
|
|
|
|
sserugh
Member
 Offline
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
|
|
August 16, 2017, 02:25:57 AM |
|
After some more reading I understand your economic model a bit better. But to those who pay without getting anything(correct me if I am wrong), how will you convince them to continue paying? I mean, some people will pay and pay and pay, and loose a lot compared to just buying the products that they want?
|
|
|
|
|
|
pynetx
|
|
August 16, 2017, 04:19:25 AM |
|
I like the part where user don't necessarily have to know about cryptos. Because not everyone is aware about them.
You know what's the important thing? Projects like Snapup will open doors to mainstream and I don't think I have to explain what will happen when even "Joe the taxi driver" (I don't mean to offend taxi drivers all over the world sorry  ) will put moneys into cryptos None taken  . You are right it will make crypto mainstream. |
|
|
|
|
|
pynetx
|
|
August 16, 2017, 04:20:35 AM |
|
I like the part where user don't necessarily have to know about cryptos. Because not everyone is aware about them.
This is the best way for them to be introduce into crypto and interact with it, bidding using crypto is like an introduction to trading as well. Yeah, that way everyone can be part of the crypto revolution. |
|
|
|
|
|
Bambulee
|
|
August 16, 2017, 05:24:37 AM |
|
The future roadmap looks realistic and not too much steps. European Silicon Valley in September sounds nice. Wish All the best with the project.
|
|
|
|
|
|
no-ice-please
|
|
August 16, 2017, 06:21:42 AM |
|
Ok but mathematically you can't purchase products at a lower price in the long run. If you participate in thousands of events, at some point your losses should be averaged with your savings and overall result in paying the original price of the product. When you save, someone has to pay, and when you pay, someone can save.
Would anyone from the team mind commenting on this? It is not precisely true to say that you could shop premium products at lower prices. Someone has to pay for your benefit, and in the end the community in aggregate didn't save a penny. In the long run, even an individual shouldn't be able to save money. Correct me if I am wrong please. You can see in the whitepaper that the revenue per product is higher than its cost, because of the participation fee and winner's contribution. Theoretically you would be correct, except there's a way to push luck in your favor through the karma system. Anyway, the main thing to remember is that is designed around the sensation of winning a super discount. That is something worth in itself. And that psychological effect makes it a perfect investment. Well, the expected value for any single individual participating in events should approach zero with zero = original product of the price under the assumption of an individual's participation converging ∞. This is not a new economic model. You have a chance to buy it cheaper just like you have a chance to win 1000 in a lottery. You may end up spending more or less than the original amount in participation fees before you win the prize. Besides, "the product" is a malleable concept, it's the combination of the tangible and intangible. Why is a 120 g of peas in a cute tin can more expensive than a pound of peas in a bag? Why do people buy coconut water? Why do we happily keep paying the Apple premium? The point I am making is that I can't seem to find a "new economic model". There is no new economic model. It's a lottery with some extra spice called "Karma". A lottery is not a new economic model, is it? |
|
|
|
|
|
jonnytracker
|
|
August 16, 2017, 06:34:08 AM |
|
this is interesting .. i am from India and shop alot in flipkart.com and other similar sites.. would love to see snapup in amazon.in too.. good luck snapup
|
|
|
|
|
|
trademaniac
|
|
August 16, 2017, 07:34:40 AM |
|
how Apply for participation in Twitter Bounty stakes distribution
Just write in the topic, do I have to log somewhere?
|
|
|
|
|
lsgnaija
|
|
August 16, 2017, 08:12:52 AM |
|
I see in the platform are tradable digital goods! Only a Demo at the moment?
It will be convenient for online shopper to trade easily without stress like the other marketplace that will put restrictions on the goods to buy. Snapup will change how online shopper transact online |
|
|
|
|
|
lsgnaija
|
|
August 16, 2017, 08:17:18 AM |
|
The demo is pretty good. They will launch the platform in Q1 2018, we have to wait a bit but it's not so far for that kind of project, and our patience will be rewarded.
They have a lot of things to offer even after the launch, like new algorithm, just take a look at the roadmap !
Good thing that have a solid foundation takes time. Patience is the key. For snapping to achieve their aim and objective they need to implement features that will make them standout. |
|
|
|
|
|
Heimer
|
|
August 16, 2017, 08:21:43 AM |
|
I like the part where user don't necessarily have to know about cryptos. Because not everyone is aware about them.
This is the best way for them to be introduce into crypto and interact with it, bidding using crypto is like an introduction to trading as well. Yeah, that way everyone can be part of the crypto revolution. And that's the key for mass adoption. If something is simple and gives you fun, people won't be complaining about "crypto stuff" |
|
|
|
|
|
