|
ycagel
|
 |
May 28, 2014, 11:08:26 PM |
|
The supply has been discussed quite a bit. What does reducing the supply do to existing investors? Does it hurt their position? Can you even reduce supply when a coin has been in existence already?
YC
|
|
|
|
|
|
ycagel
|
|
May 28, 2014, 11:10:39 PM |
|
We need to get more marketing done. I have been asking about PR contacts for quite some time. Does anyone in the community have any folks that would do a story on DGB?!
Thanks,
YC
|
|
|
|
|
|
the_game1224
|
|
May 28, 2014, 11:31:28 PM |
|
The supply has been discussed quite a bit. What does reducing the supply do to existing investors? Does it hurt their position? Can you even reduce supply when a coin has been in existence already?
YC
It does nothing to the holdings of existing investors, if you have 50,000DGB before you will still have 50,000DGB. You definitely can reduce supply in several ways after a coin has been in existence, many coins have done it recently. |
|
|
|
|
|
ycagel
|
|
May 28, 2014, 11:36:06 PM |
|
With the obvious conversation being that it creates scarcity, does it naturally cause a price increase? What are the negatives of reducing supply? The supply has been discussed quite a bit. What does reducing the supply do to existing investors? Does it hurt their position? Can you even reduce supply when a coin has been in existence already?
YC
It does nothing to the holdings of existing investors, if you have 50,000DGB before you will still have 50,000DGB. You definitely can reduce supply in several ways after a coin has been in existence, many coins have done it recently. |
|
|
|
|
|
the_game1224
|
|
May 28, 2014, 11:39:36 PM |
|
With the obvious conversation being that it creates scarcity, does it naturally cause a price increase? What are the negatives of reducing supply? The supply has been discussed quite a bit. What does reducing the supply do to existing investors? Does it hurt their position? Can you even reduce supply when a coin has been in existence already?
YC
It does nothing to the holdings of existing investors, if you have 50,000DGB before you will still have 50,000DGB. You definitely can reduce supply in several ways after a coin has been in existence, many coins have done it recently. In theory yes it does and has on the coins I've seen, well at least the ones people actually care about  As far a negative I guess if it doesn't increase the price it makes it less profitable to mine (assuming sticking with PoW). |
|
|
|
|
|
ycagel
|
|
May 28, 2014, 11:44:51 PM |
|
Typically what is the price impact percentage wise and how does the long term health of the coin get affected? Are miners and others more receptive to this? YC With the obvious conversation being that it creates scarcity, does it naturally cause a price increase? What are the negatives of reducing supply? The supply has been discussed quite a bit. What does reducing the supply do to existing investors? Does it hurt their position? Can you even reduce supply when a coin has been in existence already?
YC
It does nothing to the holdings of existing investors, if you have 50,000DGB before you will still have 50,000DGB. You definitely can reduce supply in several ways after a coin has been in existence, many coins have done it recently. In theory yes it does and has on the coins I've seen, well at least the ones people actually care about As far a negative I guess if it doesn't increase the price it makes it less profitable to mine (assuming sticking with PoW). |
|
|
|
|
|
the_game1224
|
|
May 28, 2014, 11:50:19 PM |
|
Typically what is the price impact percentage wise and how does the long term health of the coin get affected? Are miners and others more receptive to this? YC With the obvious conversation being that it creates scarcity, does it naturally cause a price increase? What are the negatives of reducing supply? The supply has been discussed quite a bit. What does reducing the supply do to existing investors? Does it hurt their position? Can you even reduce supply when a coin has been in existence already?
YC
It does nothing to the holdings of existing investors, if you have 50,000DGB before you will still have 50,000DGB. You definitely can reduce supply in several ways after a coin has been in existence, many coins have done it recently. In theory yes it does and has on the coins I've seen, well at least the ones people actually care about As far a negative I guess if it doesn't increase the price it makes it less profitable to mine (assuming sticking with PoW). To be honest I don't know enough to speak for other coins. XC just did it and is still skyrocketing but their situation is different as they stopped PoW and moved to PoS and are a very new coin. But every coin is different and there are many factors in play. As far as DigiByte goes I do think coupled with a multi-algo change it would be a positive all around. GPU, CPU, FGPA and ASICs could all mine assuming multi algo and with less coins coming into the supply investors should be happy. |
|
|
|
|
|
ycagel
|
|
May 29, 2014, 12:20:42 AM |
|
I can confirm a multi algo announcement will be made soon. This should help in all situations. Not sure about the reduction of the supply, but if DGB's sell is to get digibytes into the hands of all consumers, would that cause a problem in the original benefit of the coin? YC Typically what is the price impact percentage wise and how does the long term health of the coin get affected? Are miners and others more receptive to this? YC With the obvious conversation being that it creates scarcity, does it naturally cause a price increase? What are the negatives of reducing supply? The supply has been discussed quite a bit. What does reducing the supply do to existing investors? Does it hurt their position? Can you even reduce supply when a coin has been in existence already?
YC
It does nothing to the holdings of existing investors, if you have 50,000DGB before you will still have 50,000DGB. You definitely can reduce supply in several ways after a coin has been in existence, many coins have done it recently. In theory yes it does and has on the coins I've seen, well at least the ones people actually care about As far a negative I guess if it doesn't increase the price it makes it less profitable to mine (assuming sticking with PoW). To be honest I don't know enough to speak for other coins. XC just did it and is still skyrocketing but their situation is different as they stopped PoW and moved to PoS and are a very new coin. But every coin is different and there are many factors in play. As far as DigiByte goes I do think coupled with a multi-algo change it would be a positive all around. GPU, CPU, FGPA and ASICs could all mine assuming multi algo and with less coins coming into the supply investors should be happy. |
|
|
|
|
|
the_game1224
|
|
May 29, 2014, 12:52:31 AM |
|
I can confirm a multi algo announcement will be made soon. This should help in all situations. Not sure about the reduction of the supply, but if DGB's sell is to get digibytes into the hands of all consumers, would that cause a problem in the original benefit of the coin? YC Typically what is the price impact percentage wise and how does the long term health of the coin get affected? Are miners and others more receptive to this? YC With the obvious conversation being that it creates scarcity, does it naturally cause a price increase? What are the negatives of reducing supply? The supply has been discussed quite a bit. What does reducing the supply do to existing investors? Does it hurt their position? Can you even reduce supply when a coin has been in existence already?
YC
It does nothing to the holdings of existing investors, if you have 50,000DGB before you will still have 50,000DGB. You definitely can reduce supply in several ways after a coin has been in existence, many coins have done it recently. In theory yes it does and has on the coins I've seen, well at least the ones people actually care about As far a negative I guess if it doesn't increase the price it makes it less profitable to mine (assuming sticking with PoW). To be honest I don't know enough to speak for other coins. XC just did it and is still skyrocketing but their situation is different as they stopped PoW and moved to PoS and are a very new coin. But every coin is different and there are many factors in play. As far as DigiByte goes I do think coupled with a multi-algo change it would be a positive all around. GPU, CPU, FGPA and ASICs could all mine assuming multi algo and with less coins coming into the supply investors should be happy. The reduction is pure rumor and speculation although it wouldnt surprise me! 21 Billion DigiBytes was the original stated number so getting them into the hands of all consumers would not be a problem even if you halved or took that down drastically to say 1 Billion or something. |
|
|
|
|
iikun
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1062
Merit: 1003
|
|
May 29, 2014, 03:37:41 AM |
|
We need to get more marketing done. I have been asking about PR contacts for quite some time. Does anyone in the community have any folks that would do a story on DGB?!
Thanks,
YC
The cnbc thing helped a little but it was only a short lived gain. Perhaps we should follow the 'if you build it they will come' principle and look at features more than marketing. After all, from a real benefit point of view all we have is the speed of transactions. Something innovative like Dark had with annonimity might work better long term. |
|
|
|
|
HR
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1011
Transparency & Integrity
|
|
May 29, 2014, 06:54:37 AM |
|
Total US M2 money supply was $11.269 TRILLION on 2014-05-12. http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M2/That's 536.62 times as much as eventual DGB. And it's still worth a Dollar! 21 billion is puny in comparison (especially when taken in a worldwide context where the combined M2 of industrial nations is around 6 times that of just the US). If anything, one might argue that 21 billion borders on the low end. |
|
|
|
|
maxsinner
|
|
May 29, 2014, 08:26:56 AM |
|
Total US M2 money supply was $11.269 TRILLION on 2014-05-12. http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M2/That's 536.62 times as much as eventual DGB. And it's still worth a Dollar! 21 billion is puny in comparison (especially when taken in a worldwide context where the combined M2 of industrial nations is around 6 times that of just the US). If anything, one might argue that 21 billion borders on the low end. I suggest you don't get overly excited about those numbers. You need to think first what is a realistic market share for DigiByte out of all that. And if you come up with anything larger than 0.001%, I will call you delusional. |
|
|
|
|
HR
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1011
Transparency & Integrity
|
|
May 29, 2014, 08:52:26 AM |
|
Total US M2 money supply was $11.269 TRILLION on 2014-05-12. http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M2/That's 536.62 times as much as eventual DGB. And it's still worth a Dollar! 21 billion is puny in comparison (especially when taken in a worldwide context where the combined M2 of industrial nations is around 6 times that of just the US). If anything, one might argue that 21 billion borders on the low end. I suggest you don't get overly excited about those numbers. You need to think first what is a realistic market share for DigiByte out of all that. And if you come up with anything larger than 0.001%, I will call you delusional. That depends a bit on when you are talking about: today, tomorrow, 5 years from now, 10 years from now . . .  |
|
|
|
|
illodin
|
|
May 29, 2014, 09:34:06 AM |
|
I wrote this same thing in a couple of other alt coin threads I'm (bag)holding, and certainly wouldn't mind someday seeing DigiByte pulling this off - this could potentially be the greatest thing in terms of getting DigiByte to the people: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the_game1224
|
|
May 29, 2014, 02:10:42 PM |
|
We need to get more marketing done. I have been asking about PR contacts for quite some time. Does anyone in the community have any folks that would do a story on DGB?!
Thanks,
YC
The cnbc thing helped a little but it was only a short lived gain. Perhaps we should follow the 'if you build it they will come' principle and look at features more than marketing. After all, from a real benefit point of view all we have is the speed of transactions. Something innovative like Dark had with annonimity might work better long term. Definitely need a good mix of both PR and features. You can have all the features in the world but if few know about them what good are they? On the other side you can market all you want but if the product is inferior or not unique it won't do any good. |
|
|
|
|
|
the_game1224
|
|
May 29, 2014, 02:15:01 PM |
|
That depends a bit on when you are talking about: today, tomorrow, 5 years from now, 10 years from now . . . I think this may be the hardest thing to balance in the crypto world for Devs. You want to build for the long term but things move so fast and there is so much competition that if you don't pay attention to the now as well you will get passed by. |
|
|
|
|
22langer22
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 38
Merit: 0
|
|
May 29, 2014, 02:56:34 PM |
|
That depends a bit on when you are talking about: today, tomorrow, 5 years from now, 10 years from now . . . I think this may be the hardest thing to balance in the crypto world for Devs. You want to build for the long term but things move so fast and there is so much competition that if you don't pay attention to the now as well you will get passed by. "Things may come to those who wait, but only the things left by those who hustle.” Abraham Lincoln Wierd that their pinned tweet says just that yet no announcements in a long time. |
|
|
|
|
|
the_game1224
|
|
May 29, 2014, 02:58:24 PM |
|
That depends a bit on when you are talking about: today, tomorrow, 5 years from now, 10 years from now . . . I think this may be the hardest thing to balance in the crypto world for Devs. You want to build for the long term but things move so fast and there is so much competition that if you don't pay attention to the now as well you will get passed by. "Things may come to those who wait, but only the things left by those who hustle.” Abraham Lincoln Wierd that their pinned tweet says just that yet no announcements in a long time. They have stated that there will be an announcement this week |
|
|
|
|
22langer22
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 38
Merit: 0
|
|
May 29, 2014, 03:08:07 PM |
|
That depends a bit on when you are talking about: today, tomorrow, 5 years from now, 10 years from now . . . I think this may be the hardest thing to balance in the crypto world for Devs. You want to build for the long term but things move so fast and there is so much competition that if you don't pay attention to the now as well you will get passed by. "Things may come to those who wait, but only the things left by those who hustle.” Abraham Lincoln Wierd that their pinned tweet says just that yet no announcements in a long time. They have stated that there will be an announcement this week Yes, but if there was any movement made during the Naut hype, during the Doge race, during the DRK run when people had their profits, DGB could have sent itself to the launch pad. Opportunities were not capitalized on. Now personally I understand when personal things come up, but in the eyes of the crypto world, who I swear has ADD, you need to be as transparent as possible. |
|
|
|
|
|
