Bananas + blockchain ... Can it work?

[BTCMILLIONAIRE]

And what for do you use the blockchain?
There is no need in payment security or anonymity. So, why to discover something useless

Learn to read. It has been stated numerous times in this thread what the blockchain is used for. It's not different from putting the company on the stock market, except that it's easier and more efficient. If you think this is useless you don't understand the blockchain technology at all.

[carrie_white]

indeed bananacoin is a very unique idea, combining bananas with blockchain technology, but I do not think anything can be successful if it is associated with blockchain, we also can not predict whether it will be successful or not,, but hopefully the project is a success, and become the first blockchain banana project

[Cryptolive]

haha. It is just a token issued to their investors and has nothing to change the future of blockchain. It implements blockchain to sustain their project thats it.

[Be_Happy]

I love bananas, but I do not quite understand why blockchain is here to grow bananas and how then the profits and the price for products will be calculated.

I didn't read too much detail, but based on the OP summary, 1 coin is equal to the cost of 1kg of bananas, so I suppose you will enjoy the profits of 1kg of bananas by purchasing 1 coin?

It turns out the price of a coin will depend on the market price of bananas, and not on the exchange rate of other coins. I do not quite understand the cultivation of bananas and the calculation of the cost taking into account the poor harvest or other nuances.

[artmen007]

I think it's just a divorce. I don't see that on the blockchain can be podkrepleniya real assets in this case bananas.

Recently heard of Kazakhstan creates its own cryptocurrency which will be backed by FIAT. It's not realistic to do.

Read expert on the blockchain which is not possible actually to tie any currency to real asset who would not say that

[cdb1690]

It does make sense, if you actually understand what blockchain and ICOs are about...

Whether or not this particular project will work out, I don't know. But as long as tokens automatically grant participation in the profits of the farmers it would be almost no different from investing in a business. The only difference would be that the blockchain makes it far easier to invest. And that is indeed a big part of the future of the blockchain: Allowing everybody to invest in ventures and businesses, not just a select few wealthy people with access to the right middlemen services.

If you were a seasoned investor you would be able to appreciate the general idea behind this proposal.

For this to be true, there has to be some legal framework in place that guarantees that. And for that you need government involvement. And government involvement could very easily mean that only a select few wealthy people with access to the right middlemen services will be able to invest money into business through an ICO. Good example of this is China, where after the ICO ban companies can sell their tokens only to accredited investors.

[Crumple Cat]

I like this concept. And I'm sure in the future there will be more and more blockchain projects linked to real assets. Unequivocally, this makes sense from the point of view of the concept of ownership, profit distribution, investment, others. Variations can be many. In general, I haven't analyzed this project deeply and don't know its quality. But bananas - this is definitely a steep move. If I become an investor of this project, I want to receive bananas as dividends. I eat a lot of bananas 

[BTCMILLIONAIRE]

It does make sense, if you actually understand what blockchain and ICOs are about...

Whether or not this particular project will work out, I don't know. But as long as tokens automatically grant participation in the profits of the farmers it would be almost no different from investing in a business. The only difference would be that the blockchain makes it far easier to invest. And that is indeed a big part of the future of the blockchain: Allowing everybody to invest in ventures and businesses, not just a select few wealthy people with access to the right middlemen services.

If you were a seasoned investor you would be able to appreciate the general idea behind this proposal.

For this to be true, there has to be some legal framework in place that guarantees that. And for that you need government involvement. And government involvement could very easily mean that only a select few wealthy people with access to the right middlemen services will be able to invest money into business through an ICO. Good example of this is China, where after the ICO ban companies can sell their tokens only to accredited investors.

There doesn't need to be any legal framework in place that doesn't already exist. Contracts can take care of that. Tokens are just a way to keep track of investments and simplify the process of collecting funds. Furthermore, it's impossible to regulate ICOs. You can only regulate the change from crypto into fiat, which most people won't ever care about.

[cdb1690]

There doesn't need to be any legal framework in place that doesn't already exist. Contracts can take care of that. Tokens are just a way to keep track of investments and simplify the process of collecting funds. Furthermore, it's impossible to regulate ICOs. You can only regulate the change from crypto into fiat, which most people won't ever care about.

I agree with you in that blockchain technology in itself is impossible to regulate as it was purposely designed to make any government regulation unenforceable. That's a good thing. However, legal entities can be regulated very easily. So as soon as you have some company regulated and registered in certain legal jurisdiction associated with particular blockchain technology, that blockchain technology can be also regulated. For example, government can brought legal action against that company and force it to change its technology to be more complied with government regulations. So yeah, anonymous ICOs would be impossible to regulate, however there doesn't seem to be a lot of those right now.

EDIT: Another important thing. Although blockchain assets are impossible to seize, control or regulate, this is not true for any other real worlds assets. OP’s banana plantation can be shut down be government. Its property can be seized. So, when a blockchain asset is a representation of real world asset, it is susceptible to government regulation. In other words, making blockchain assets a representation of the property that exists outside of a blockchain itself voids the blockchain inherent resistance against regulatory interventions.

[BTCMILLIONAIRE]

There doesn't need to be any legal framework in place that doesn't already exist. Contracts can take care of that. Tokens are just a way to keep track of investments and simplify the process of collecting funds. Furthermore, it's impossible to regulate ICOs. You can only regulate the change from crypto into fiat, which most people won't ever care about.

I agree with you in that blockchain technology in itself is impossible to regulate as it was purposely designed to make any government regulation unenforceable. That's a good thing. However, legal entities can be regulated very easily. So as soon as you have some company regulated and registered in certain legal jurisdiction associated with particular blockchain technology, that blockchain technology can be also regulated. For example, government can brought legal action against that company and force it to change its technology to be more complied with government regulations. So yeah, anonymous ICOs would be impossible to regulate, however there doesn't seem to be a lot of those right now.

EDIT: Another important thing. Although blockchain assets are impossible to seize, control or regulate, this is not true for any other real worlds assets. OP’s banana plantation can be shut down be government. Its property can be seized. So, when a blockchain asset is a representation of real world asset, it is susceptible to government regulation. In other words, making blockchain assets a representation of the property that exists outside of a blockchain itself voids the blockchain inherent resistance against regulatory interventions.

The worst thing a government can do is enforcing KYC for this type of venture. But even that would be a big upgrade from the current paradigm, which requires both KYC and very specific connections to even be able to invest in ventures. I'm assuming that both types will coexist in the future - coins with KYC and coins without KYC.
Depending on how regulation happens, companies might also just start their ICOs in specific countries that don't require strict KYC rules and thus attract more investors. In either case, governments and tax collectors are in for a ride... Very curious to see how this plays out in the coming decades.
I'm hoping that tax will just become voluntary and will be used in a transparent way that will make people more likely to pay taxes. If people knew that their money gets spent in good ways they probably wouldn't evade taxes in the way they do now. But most of the tax money gets wasted on bullshit, so it's no surprise that nobody wants to pay them.

[cdb1690]

The worst thing a government can do is enforcing KYC for this type of venture. But even that would be a big upgrade from the current paradigm, which requires both KYC and very specific connections to even be able to invest in ventures. I'm assuming that both types will coexist in the future - coins with KYC and coins without KYC.
Depending on how regulation happens, companies might also just start their ICOs in specific countries that don't require strict KYC rules and thus attract more investors. In either case, governments and tax collectors are in for a ride... Very curious to see how this plays out in the coming decades.
I'm hoping that tax will just become voluntary and will be used in a transparent way that will make people more likely to pay taxes. If people knew that their money gets spent in good ways they probably wouldn't evade taxes in the way they do now. But most of the tax money gets wasted on bullshit, so it's no surprise that nobody wants to pay them.

Yes, indeed there are interesting times ahead of us. I also think that regulatory heavens for ICOs will emerge sooner or later, most likely candidates are Carribean or Channel Islands. Isle of Man and Gibraltar, two Meccas of online gambling, seems to be taking the lead: https://www.coindesk.com/icos-welcome-isle-of-man-to-unveil-friendly-framework-for-token-sales/ https://www.coindesk.com/gibraltar-regulate-bitcoin-exchanges-possibly-icos/

Incidentally, this is something that all “regulation is good because it weeds out scammers” guys, don’t realize: the stamp of approval from regulation authority doesn’t mean squat, unless you are pretty sure that the regulation authority does its job properly and does not hand out licenses to anyone willing to pay for it.

As a side note, particular government can do much worse than enforce KYC. For example, government can ban ICOs altogether. Or it can ban public ICOs as China has done recently. In China companies are not allow to sell tokens to general public, but are still allowed to raise money from accredited investors (which is very similar to the old system).

[BTCMILLIONAIRE]

The worst thing a government can do is enforcing KYC for this type of venture. But even that would be a big upgrade from the current paradigm, which requires both KYC and very specific connections to even be able to invest in ventures. I'm assuming that both types will coexist in the future - coins with KYC and coins without KYC.
Depending on how regulation happens, companies might also just start their ICOs in specific countries that don't require strict KYC rules and thus attract more investors. In either case, governments and tax collectors are in for a ride... Very curious to see how this plays out in the coming decades.
I'm hoping that tax will just become voluntary and will be used in a transparent way that will make people more likely to pay taxes. If people knew that their money gets spent in good ways they probably wouldn't evade taxes in the way they do now. But most of the tax money gets wasted on bullshit, so it's no surprise that nobody wants to pay them.

Yes, indeed there are interesting times ahead of us. I also think that regulatory heavens for ICOs will emerge sooner or later, most likely candidates are Carribean or Channel Islands. Isle of Man and Gibraltar, two Meccas of online gambling, seems to be taking the lead: https://www.coindesk.com/icos-welcome-isle-of-man-to-unveil-friendly-framework-for-token-sales/ https://www.coindesk.com/gibraltar-regulate-bitcoin-exchanges-possibly-icos/

Incidentally, this is something that all “regulation is good because it weeds out scammers” guys, don’t realize: the stamp of approval from regulation authority doesn’t mean squat, unless you are pretty sure that the regulation authority does its job properly and does not hand out licenses to anyone willing to pay for it.

As a side note, particular government can do much worse than enforce KYC. For example, government can ban ICOs altogether. Or it can ban public ICOs as China has done recently. In China companies are not allow to sell tokens to general public, but are still allowed to raise money from accredited investors (which is very similar to the old system).

You can't ban ICOs though, since you can just move the ICO to a different country that doesn't care or did not ban them. It's very easy to set up companies elsewhere, so this approach is pretty much meaningless.
The best bet governments probably have is to suck up to crypto investors and to make paying taxes something desirable for the tax payer, otherwise people will just laugh at regulation attempts if profits can be made while circumventing regulations.
And there are numerous countries that have no capital gains tax where people could easily move to (at least on paper) to realize their profits. It'd take a lot of effort, but it's nothing new and something that the elite has been doing for ages. Now it's slowly becoming possible for just about anyone with enough perseverance to do the same. Who knows what governments will end up doing though.

[FrankNoland]

Recently there is been a lot agricultural projects built on blockchain.
The ideas behind all those projects sounds fascinating, however, I am not sure if they will make it on the blockchain. Hopefully, these will be a good investment for an investors who really believes in agriculture and farming, but I hope they make it in the future.

[BTCMILLIONAIRE]

Recently there is been a lot agricultural projects built on blockchain.
The ideas behind all those projects sounds fascinating, however, I am not sure if they will make it on the blockchain. Hopefully, these will be a good investment for an investors who really believes in agriculture and farming, but I hope they make it in the future.

Why would they not make it on the blockchain? It's just a means of collecting investments and keeping track of them. If anything, the blockchain makes their business easier since getting funding is usually quite difficult. As long as they don't collect more money than they can efficiently use everything should be fine.

[LeeRachelTobin]

It is useless, i dont understand why they have created an ico only to talk about bananas, it doesnt make sense at all, they are saying that they have millions of dollars, a huge farm all over the world, and they want to rise an ico to have more funds... uhmm very suspicius, i would not invest anything in that ico, of course that it looks very weird and the founders too, i dont trust in them at all.. Invest at your owk risky guys.

Hey! It's not suspicious at all. I can organise access to the farm if you want to go visit in Laos! Bananafarm has a farm in Laos, which is 100% real - look at their Twitter and Facebook accounts, they post daily updates. The farm employs local people and is environmentally-friendly, organic and ethical!!

They use ICO because it is a good way to crowdfund and transparently share profits with investors, just as many projects all over the world do!

 

[LeeRachelTobin]

This sounds all very useless and I don't see a potential at all in this project. If you do manage to make this project good, then kudos to you!

The potential is that there is a massive deficit in the banana trade - Chinese markets want bananas, yet there are no organic and ethical (or indeed, safe) plantations to provide them. This in itself means the project is super valuable and choosing blockchain means that funds can be raised and profits shared in a more transparent way with investors!

Anyway - thanks for the well wishes!! 

[BTCMILLIONAIRE]

This sounds all very useless and I don't see a potential at all in this project. If you do manage to make this project good, then kudos to you!

It's a pretty good investment if their numbers are right actually.

[chocopapaya]

How is the price of 1 coin = 1kg of bananas going to be guaranteed?

Everyone is talking about how some people don't understand blockchain technogology, but it seems like a whole lot of you are forgetting the fundamental principal of blockchain technology: it is decentralized, open source, and controlled by anybody.

Coins issued from a blockchain can be used freely by anyone, they can sell it for whatever price they want, keep it, whatever.
How can investors liquidate their investment?
If it's through exchanges than the people and market will determine the price, not the company.
If it works like stocks (similar to lykke), then the only way to guarantee the price would be if it is centrally controlled by the company itself.
Is there anything in the works for that?

So to me, it seems impossible to guarantee that 1coin = 1kg of bananas.
Salt has already run into similar problems when it promoted that membership into salt would be 1salt = $10
Well, the market has decided that 1salt -$2.49
How much value are people going to put on a coin that has no real use and no guarantee in price?

[BTCMILLIONAIRE]

How is the price of 1 coin = 1kg of bananas going to be guaranteed?

Everyone is talking about how some people don't understand blockchain technogology, but it seems like a whole lot of you are forgetting the fundamental principal of blockchain technology: it is decentralized, open source, and controlled by anybody.

Coins issued from a blockchain can be used freely by anyone, they can sell it for whatever price they want, keep it, whatever.
How can investors liquidate their investment?
If it's through exchanges than the people and market will determine the price, not the company.
If it works like stocks (similar to lykke), then the only way to guarantee the price would be if it is centrally controlled by the company itself.
Is there anything in the works for that?

So to me, it seems impossible to guarantee that 1coin = 1kg of bananas.
Salt has already run into similar problems when it promoted that membership into salt would be 1salt = $10
Well, the market has decided that 1salt -$2.49
How much value are people going to put on a coin that has no real use and no guarantee in price?

There are numerous cryptos that are pecked to a certain price. Just look at Tether, it's always at a fixed $1 USD.

And in the case of BananaCoin, it's simply that holding one coin will mean that you will later get the profits off of 1 kg of Bananas after they sell. It doesn't mean that the price of the token has to be exactly that, but you will get at least the price of one kg of bananas distributed to you after the sales.

People can choose to sell it for cheaper because they want to have liquidity now, or people can choose to pay more for a BananaCoin hoping to get the dividend multiple times in the future.

[Stamil]

The idea is very interesting and the team has experience in agriculture. Only I'm not sure that the coin value will be exactly 1 kg. of bananas. In any case, I will be interested to see the development of this project.