[ANN] QIBUCK COIN - X13 - POS/POBH - 1st Proof of Baghold and asset backed.

[BITDV]

The pool structure is still used,what do you mean by radical change?
The structure is same just altered.

Payouts in QBK only would probably be considered a radical change, especially if folks expected BTC.
Requiring 500 or 1K QBK would be considered a major change, if folks bought 1-400 QBK with the idea of getting payouts.

I consider them radical changes anyway... unless, again, I am misunderstanding something here and small time people would still get payouts even under these changes.

And payouts could still be in Btc  without spending 2K on those cards, as I'm sure folks would be fine with funds just being sent direct to their wallet.

Wouldn't though us buying up QBK throughout the month help increase market activity and buy pressure? After all many are wanting us to find ways to help increase the market share and price, this one way would be a no brainier, including a multipool. I can understand changing the mini pool part would keep out a lot of investors so yes point taken there. So maybe there can be btc or qbk options for payment without the card.  all three pools would require a lot of accounting Making more mini stakes within and would dilute the pools x 10 so I wouldnt personally like that idea. So maybe just keeping all pools as they are but giving btc ad qbk options would not be such a radical change only we add a FOUNDER POOL x5% and take that off the smaller pool to reward the 25 FOUNDER MEMBERS who promise not to dump 10k coins for as long as they wish to retain founder benefits. That would mean up to 250k non dump able coins. This way we are rewarding holders and not dumpers.

And also with with just paying out in QBK I see that as a negetive as you would have investors getting payed in QBK and then dumping straight away to convert to BTC , so the BTC payouts with a QBK option would be the best idea, 1 people not dumping there QBK straight away to get BTC, 2 people that are bag holders can get all or some in QBK (saves them on trading fee) and get some BTC to covert to fiat or other coin that they are in and also for the people that are serious bagholders get more QBK again without the exchange fees , definately a multipool is a great option (if run correctly and is supported by the community as a whole)

[poornamelessme]

Wouldn't though us buying up QBK throughout the month help increase market activity and buy pressure? After all many are wanting us to find ways to help increase the market share and price, this one way would be a no brainier, including a multipool. I can understand changing the mini pool part would keep out a lot of investors so yes point taken there. So maybe there can be btc or qbk options for payment without the card.  all three pools would require a lot of accounting Making more mini stakes within and would dilute the pools x 10 so I wouldnt personally like that idea. So maybe just keeping all pools as they are but giving btc ad qbk options would not be such a radical change only we add a FOUNDER POOL x5% and take that off the smaller pool to reward the 25 FOUNDER MEMBERS who promise not to dump 10k coins for as long as they wish to retain founder benefits. That would mean up to 250k non dump able coins. This way we are rewarding holders and not dumpers.

As BITDV just stated, the problem with paying just in QBK is that many people would sell it immediately to cash out for BTC. So yep, multipool + devs buying up coins increases buy pressure, but at the same time if you pay out just in QBK, you probably would negate that ... as many would simply turn around and then dump the QBK. Having two options, btc or qbk, could work, although I expect the majority to choose btc.

As for multiple stakes, the problem as discussed earlier in this thread is, if you don't do multiple stakes, or go with a percentage model, people may cheat. And that skype idea really isn't so feasible in my opinion. You also couldn't pay direct into people's wallets without that btc card (requiring an address) if you plan to stop cheaters that way.

As for diluting pools due to multiple shares, I don't think it'd matter as much as you may think. Yes there will be more shares, so each individual share will be worth less. But keep in mind that also means people will have multiple shares. So it should more or less even out.  It's like two people splitting $100, each owning 2 shares, so $50/share. If they instead each owned 50 shares, at $2/share, there would be no difference in the end. For the small time investor, perhaps they'd get a bit less, due to spillover from the rich folks now getting extra mini-shares with any leftover they have ... but it's better than requiring 1K to get anything at all. You'd have to crunch the numbers and see how that comes out.

A founder pool would probably be okay, but their money would need to be taken from someone else's pool... which may not go over so well. I'm not necessarily against it, just not sure how others would feel about it. Maybe they could be paid mostly in QBK from the multipool or something like that.

[AdamWhite]

I can appreciate how QBK would be the easiest way to go, but i would also love the option of BTC of course. But that would mean exposing yourselves to scammers cheaters hackers etc. What if BTC option was available to 1000 QBK+ holders or something along those lines.

Also, what is your criteria for asset purchases? Could use a mix of these assets for exposure to mining operations & such: https://www.havelockinvestments.com

[qiwoman2]

Wouldn't though us buying up QBK throughout the month help increase market activity and buy pressure? After all many are wanting us to find ways to help increase the market share and price, this one way would be a no brainier, including a multipool. I can understand changing the mini pool part would keep out a lot of investors so yes point taken there. So maybe there can be btc or qbk options for payment without the card.  all three pools would require a lot of accounting Making more mini stakes within and would dilute the pools x 10 so I wouldnt personally like that idea. So maybe just keeping all pools as they are but giving btc ad qbk options would not be such a radical change only we add a FOUNDER POOL x5% and take that off the smaller pool to reward the 25 FOUNDER MEMBERS who promise not to dump 10k coins for as long as they wish to retain founder benefits. That would mean up to 250k non dump able coins. This way we are rewarding holders and not dumpers.

As BITDV just stated, the problem with paying just in QBK is that many people would sell it immediately to cash out for BTC. So yep, multipool + devs buying up coins increases buy pressure, but at the same time if you pay out just in QBK, you probably would negate that ... as many would simply turn around and then dump the QBK. Having two options, btc or qbk, could work, although I expect the majority to choose btc.

As for multiple stakes, the problem as discussed earlier in this thread is, if you don't do multiple stakes, or go with a percentage model, people may cheat. And that skype idea really isn't so feasible in my opinion. You also couldn't pay direct into people's wallets without that btc card (requiring an address) if you plan to stop cheaters that way.

As for diluting pools due to multiple shares, I don't think it'd matter as much as you may think. Yes there will be more shares, so each individual share will be worth less. But keep in mind that also means people will have multiple shares. So it should more or less even out.  It's like two people splitting $100, each owning 2 shares, so $50/share. If they instead each owned 50 shares, at $2/share, there would be no difference in the end. For the small time investor, perhaps they'd get a bit less, due to spillover from the rich folks now getting extra mini-shares with any leftover they have ... but it's better than requiring 1K to get anything at all. You'd have to crunch the numbers and see how that comes out.

A founder pool would probably be okay, but their money would need to be taken from someone else's pool... which may not go over so well. I'm not necessarily against it, just not sure how others would feel about it. Maybe they could be paid mostly in QBK from the multipool or something like that.

So probably the best out of all options would be:

1. Keep at 100 QBK or above, give people option in payouts QBK or BTC no card otherwise would cost us monies where we can use for other development assets. Keep the Bagholder pool @ 50%

2. Founder pool - not take from any percentage, as they get a big slice of the pie in payouts we can just over more incentives and perks which can come out of the bounty pool..like free silver every three months or other premium goods and services as we grow.
I think this route would be the easiest, also by just checking the rich list each month on audit date then we can just configure payments. BAGHOLDERS would still need to sign up and post both their btc and QBK addies and just choose an option for payment.

This is why I like to brainstorm on the threads in a civilized manner, that way we get a lot of feedback.

[qiwoman2]

I can appreciate how QBK would be the easiest way to go, but i would also love the option of BTC of course. But that would mean exposing yourselves to scammers cheaters hackers etc. What if BTC option was available to 1000 QBK+ holders or something along those lines.

Also, what is your criteria for asset purchases? Could use a mix of these assets for exposure to mining operations & such: https://www.havelockinvestments.com

Yeap I am a member of Havelock..We will get the Team to look at some investments here. Thank you for the reminder..

[chilly2k]

Wouldn't though us buying up QBK throughout the month help increase market activity and buy pressure? After all many are wanting us to find ways to help increase the market share and price, this one way would be a no brainier, including a multipool. I can understand changing the mini pool part would keep out a lot of investors so yes point taken there. So maybe there can be btc or qbk options for payment without the card.  all three pools would require a lot of accounting Making more mini stakes within and would dilute the pools x 10 so I wouldnt personally like that idea. So maybe just keeping all pools as they are but giving btc ad qbk options would not be such a radical change only we add a FOUNDER POOL x5% and take that off the smaller pool to reward the 25 FOUNDER MEMBERS who promise not to dump 10k coins for as long as they wish to retain founder benefits. That would mean up to 250k non dump able coins. This way we are rewarding holders and not dumpers.

As BITDV just stated, the problem with paying just in QBK is that many people would sell it immediately to cash out for BTC. So yep, multipool + devs buying up coins increases buy pressure, but at the same time if you pay out just in QBK, you probably would negate that ... as many would simply turn around and then dump the QBK. Having two options, btc or qbk, could work, although I expect the majority to choose btc.

As for multiple stakes, the problem as discussed earlier in this thread is, if you don't do multiple stakes, or go with a percentage model, people may cheat. And that skype idea really isn't so feasible in my opinion. You also couldn't pay direct into people's wallets without that btc card (requiring an address) if you plan to stop cheaters that way.

As for diluting pools due to multiple shares, I don't think it'd matter as much as you may think. Yes there will be more shares, so each individual share will be worth less. But keep in mind that also means people will have multiple shares. So it should more or less even out.  It's like two people splitting $100, each owning 2 shares, so $50/share. If they instead each owned 50 shares, at $2/share, there would be no difference in the end. For the small time investor, perhaps they'd get a bit less, due to spillover from the rich folks now getting extra mini-shares with any leftover they have ... but it's better than requiring 1K to get anything at all. You'd have to crunch the numbers and see how that comes out.

A founder pool would probably be okay, but their money would need to be taken from someone else's pool... which may not go over so well. I'm not necessarily against it, just not sure how others would feel about it. Maybe they could be paid mostly in QBK from the multipool or something like that.

So probably the best out of all options would be:

1. Keep at 100 QBK or above, give people option in payouts QBK or BTC no card otherwise would cost us monies where we can use for other development assets. Keep the Bagholder pool @ 50%

2. Founder pool - not take from any percentage, as they get a big slice of the pie in payouts we can just over more incentives and perks which can come out of the bounty pool..like free silver every three months or other premium goods and services as we grow.
I think this route would be the easiest, also by just checking the rich list each month on audit date then we can just configure payments. BAGHOLDERS would still need to sign up and post both their btc and QBK addies and just choose an option for payment.

This is why I like to brainstorm on the threads in a civilized manner, that way we get a lot of feedback.

   Are the investments generating BTC anyway?  And I'm sure you guys will already have a pool of QBK.  So offering both options will not involve exchanging one for the other, hopefully. 

[qiwoman2]

Wouldn't though us buying up QBK throughout the month help increase market activity and buy pressure? After all many are wanting us to find ways to help increase the market share and price, this one way would be a no brainier, including a multipool. I can understand changing the mini pool part would keep out a lot of investors so yes point taken there. So maybe there can be btc or qbk options for payment without the card.  all three pools would require a lot of accounting Making more mini stakes within and would dilute the pools x 10 so I wouldnt personally like that idea. So maybe just keeping all pools as they are but giving btc ad qbk options would not be such a radical change only we add a FOUNDER POOL x5% and take that off the smaller pool to reward the 25 FOUNDER MEMBERS who promise not to dump 10k coins for as long as they wish to retain founder benefits. That would mean up to 250k non dump able coins. This way we are rewarding holders and not dumpers.

As BITDV just stated, the problem with paying just in QBK is that many people would sell it immediately to cash out for BTC. So yep, multipool + devs buying up coins increases buy pressure, but at the same time if you pay out just in QBK, you probably would negate that ... as many would simply turn around and then dump the QBK. Having two options, btc or qbk, could work, although I expect the majority to choose btc.

As for multiple stakes, the problem as discussed earlier in this thread is, if you don't do multiple stakes, or go with a percentage model, people may cheat. And that skype idea really isn't so feasible in my opinion. You also couldn't pay direct into people's wallets without that btc card (requiring an address) if you plan to stop cheaters that way.

As for diluting pools due to multiple shares, I don't think it'd matter as much as you may think. Yes there will be more shares, so each individual share will be worth less. But keep in mind that also means people will have multiple shares. So it should more or less even out.  It's like two people splitting $100, each owning 2 shares, so $50/share. If they instead each owned 50 shares, at $2/share, there would be no difference in the end. For the small time investor, perhaps they'd get a bit less, due to spillover from the rich folks now getting extra mini-shares with any leftover they have ... but it's better than requiring 1K to get anything at all. You'd have to crunch the numbers and see how that comes out.

A founder pool would probably be okay, but their money would need to be taken from someone else's pool... which may not go over so well. I'm not necessarily against it, just not sure how others would feel about it. Maybe they could be paid mostly in QBK from the multipool or something like that.

So probably the best out of all options would be:

1. Keep at 100 QBK or above, give people option in payouts QBK or BTC no card otherwise would cost us monies where we can use for other development assets. Keep the Bagholder pool @ 50%

2. Founder pool - not take from any percentage, as they get a big slice of the pie in payouts we can just over more incentives and perks which can come out of the bounty pool..like free silver every three months or other premium goods and services as we grow.
I think this route would be the easiest, also by just checking the rich list each month on audit date then we can just configure payments. BAGHOLDERS would still need to sign up and post both their btc and QBK addies and just choose an option for payment.

This is why I like to brainstorm on the threads in a civilized manner, that way we get a lot of feedback.

   Are the investments generating BTC anyway?  And I'm sure you guys will already have a pool of QBK.  So offering both options will not involve exchanging one for the other, hopefully. 

Most of the investments will be generating BTC yes..We will erect a multipool for miners to hatch QBK..

[istvandv]

Keep at 100 QBK or above, give people option in payouts QBK or BTC no card otherwise would cost us monies where we can use for other development assets. Keep the Bagholder pool @ 50%

This is why I like to brainstorm on the threads in a civilized manner, that way we get a lot of feedback.

brainstorming for new ideas is okay but as mentioned in other posts try not to change so much from the original plan prior to ICO

100QBK entry point for example, there was a motion to raise it to 1000 that is 10x more than the original and IS a radical change, if you dont consider that radical change well then i would fear what other "small" changes are in the works AFTER the ICO

it would be nice to have the investor signup page up already, have the real investors sign up and bring the suggestions up to the investors then up for voting if necessary, maybe 3 votes for MAXI? 2 votes weight for MIDI and 1 Vote weight for MINI investors or something to that effect

[BITDV]

Keep at 100 QBK or above, give people option in payouts QBK or BTC no card otherwise would cost us monies where we can use for other development assets. Keep the Bagholder pool @ 50%

This is why I like to brainstorm on the threads in a civilized manner, that way we get a lot of feedback.

brainstorming for new ideas is okay but as mentioned in other posts try not to change so much from the original plan prior to ICO

100QBK entry point for example, there was a motion to raise it to 1000 that is 10x more than the original and IS a radical change, if you dont consider that radical change well then i would fear what other "small" changes are in the works AFTER the ICO

it would be nice to have the investor signup page up already, have the real investors sign up and bring the suggestions up to the investors then up for voting if necessary, maybe 3 votes for MAXI? 2 votes weight for MIDI and 1 Vote weight for MINI investors or something to that effect

There will be a dedicated forum set up to do things lime this as it would be to hard to do that here trying to find threadsand so onfrom my understanding it will be set up in the following week and will make it much easier to discuss diffrent aspects without having to rumage through 1 thread or search for threads amoungst so many different threads

[CryptoJohn]

Keep at 100 QBK or above, give people option in payouts QBK or BTC no card otherwise would cost us monies where we can use for other development assets. Keep the Bagholder pool @ 50%

This is why I like to brainstorm on the threads in a civilized manner, that way we get a lot of feedback.

brainstorming for new ideas is okay but as mentioned in other posts try not to change so much from the original plan prior to ICO

100QBK entry point for example, there was a motion to raise it to 1000 that is 10x more than the original and IS a radical change, if you dont consider that radical change well then i would fear what other "small" changes are in the works AFTER the ICO

it would be nice to have the investor signup page up already, have the real investors sign up and bring the suggestions up to the investors then up for voting if necessary, maybe 3 votes for MAXI? 2 votes weight for MIDI and 1 Vote weight for MINI investors or something to that effect

I like this thinking in regards to the votes per level.

I also support not changing the entry level above what was established initially. I'm in for 1% but believe the 100QBK investor is still owed what was promised, this is why they bought 100 and not 99. Too late for changes there.

On the fence in regards to paying in QBK. I agree that many may just dump the coin essentially negating the buy support provided by paying in QBK. The silver lining here is even if ppl dumped it would be trade volume and in the end volume is king.

Great job on the brainstorming and kudos to everyone for remaining open and respectful

[qiwoman2]

Keep at 100 QBK or above, give people option in payouts QBK or BTC no card otherwise would cost us monies where we can use for other development assets. Keep the Bagholder pool @ 50%

This is why I like to brainstorm on the threads in a civilized manner, that way we get a lot of feedback.

brainstorming for new ideas is okay but as mentioned in other posts try not to change so much from the original plan prior to ICO

100QBK entry point for example, there was a motion to raise it to 1000 that is 10x more than the original and IS a radical change, if you dont consider that radical change well then i would fear what other "small" changes are in the works AFTER the ICO

it would be nice to have the investor signup page up already, have the real investors sign up and bring the suggestions up to the investors then up for voting if necessary, maybe 3 votes for MAXI? 2 votes weight for MIDI and 1 Vote weight for MINI investors or something to that effect

I like this thinking in regards to the votes per level.

I also support not changing the entry level above what was established initially. I'm in for 1% but believe the 100QBK investor is still owed what was promised, this is why they bought 100 and not 99. Too late for changes there.

On the fence in regards to paying in QBK. I agree that many may just dump the coin essentially negating the buy support provided by paying in QBK. The silver lining here is even if ppl dumped it would be trade volume and in the end volume is king.

Great job on the brainstorming and kudos to everyone for remaining open and respectful

I really like this voting idea and am pleased to see all this positive energy and input..
Yeap I think keeping the 100 QBK level entry for the smaller investors to help give them a chance to grow is important to keep, also having both options payments is great.. Once we have toe forum set up it will be much more easier to organize different projects and activities like BITDV  explained then the community can get more engaged as we raise each topic then this thread would be more of a thread for updates and progress reports.

We may even open up a paid to post points system on the forum but not for spammy posts, only for people wanting to engage in the voting and brainstorming process, could be something we can allocate monthly from the bounty fund perhaps? Also maybe from the monetizing of the forum itself..Just spewing out another idea.

[qiwoman2]

We Been looking at a few more places to invest. We found 3-4 on Havelock that are promising and one Script cloud hashing site as well as the Rigs. . So we will let you know next day or so what we are going to purchase. ..
Here is a nice silver custom bullion site we have also been looking at. Our aim is to create a custom SILVER BULLION QIBUCK COIN every three months, limited edition to give to our QIBUCK FOUNDERS for bagholding their 10k coins religiously. Also maybe have a few for sale too.

http://www.sunshinemint.com/CustomMinting.aspx

[TooDumbForBitcoin]

Our aim is to create a custom SILVER BULLION QIBUCK COIN every three months, limited edition to give to our QIBUCK FOUNDERS for bagholding their 10k coins religiously. Also maybe have a few for sale too

Suggestion:  Read up on Mike Caldwell's experience with FINCEN and physical bitcoins. (Caucausus, or something like that).  Don't want to be wasting the ICO on attorney's fees.

[BITDV]

Our aim is to create a custom SILVER BULLION QIBUCK COIN every three months, limited edition to give to our QIBUCK FOUNDERS for bagholding their 10k coins religiously. Also maybe have a few for sale too

Suggestion:  Read up on Mike Caldwell's experience with FINCEN and physical bitcoins. (Caucausus, or something like that).  Don't want to be wasting the ICO on attorney's fees.

I dont think they actually mean as a actual currency more the value in the silver as a reward just a personal design of QBK , a little different to the physical bitcoin fiasco that happened !! But yes would be better to double check it first!!

[johnnyrocket]

We Been looking at a few more places to invest. We found 3-4 on Havelock that are promising and one Script cloud hashing site as well as the Rigs. . So we will let you know next day or so what we are going to purchase. ..
Here is a nice silver custom bullion site we have also been looking at. Our aim is to create a custom SILVER BULLION QIBUCK COIN every three months, limited edition to give to our QIBUCK FOUNDERS for bagholding their 10k coins religiously. Also maybe have a few for sale too.

http://www.sunshinemint.com/CustomMinting.aspx

Custom minted coins is exciting - prices can be a bit steeper than one might anticipate though. Definitely make sure to do your research before committing to it here.

[ChrisLandin]

Hi.
Can some kind person tell  me staking details? Coin age etc?

Cheers

[naidledoes]

I have to say, I was becoming skeptical about this whole thing... But hearing talk about not changing the pre ICO plans too much. That makes me more comfortable. I'm also starting to want to buy more... i purchased a few shy of 1000, I'm wanting about 9150 more, hahaha... it's wooorking!!

Atm's, miners, websites, silver.... I'm excited.

[BITDV]

I have to say, I was becoming skeptical about this whole thing... But hearing talk about not changing the pre ICO plans too much. That makes me more comfortable. I'm also starting to want to buy more... i purchased a few shy of 1000, I'm wanting about 9150 more, hahaha... it's wooorking!!

Atm's, miners, websites, silver.... I'm excited.

Once it all comes together , it will be like mana from heaven!!
Its so good to see a Dev team actually building not just a trade pump and dump coin , but a actual coin with earning potential besides the actual trade side in it!!(very few and far between)

Got me Hook, line and sinker!!

[maccaspacca]

Nearly a week after this coin was launched and it is shaping itself into a nice company.

 - Real assets and investments and excellent business based ideas going forward
 - Real bagholders committed to maintaining their investment, bringing new ideas to the table and voting on them
 - A great team managing it all and ensuring they bring their combined experience in making profit to bear on the coin and its future value.

I look forward to seeing my investment (meager as it is - but will get bigger) growing over the next few months.

Thanks everyone for your efforts so far 

[qiwoman2]

Just sent request and Invoice to purchase 6 Swiftbitz Ltd ATM machine shares. Machines with these shares attached are being shipped out to the U.K next week. Payments/dividends from these shares will be paid to us monthly in BTC..