[ANN][GEMZ] GetGems - Social Messaging App That Pays - Live on Android, iOS, Web

[nextgencoin]

I think the concerns are not being understood. I'm saying that Getgems has possibly been tricked out of giving up its greatest asset to banks. You could develop an app like Venmo and guarantee almost it would be the next big thing in payments cause literally no one else can come close to cross social network payments.



What I think they have done is given the golden goose away to the banks. I'm sure the getgems app will do ok but I am talking building the next Venmo or PayPal with Bitcoin...instead the tech will just be licenceed out getgems the company get a cut and getgems followers eventually get forgotton. It's like instead of hosting the party you give free tickets out to everyone and turn up for the last 5 minutes.


wake the hell up people. Having one central app that banks had to connect to make cross social payments is a billion dollar idea, getgems the app is not......PayKey was about to leverage it to supper star status now it's back to, yeah we got 30,000 downloads.

I honestly think the Banks have played the team. And people here aren't getting at all the opportunity that they just lost.


*And whether you understand it or not, when a more pure fiat Paykey gets 100 million downloads in like 3 months and getgems messenger gets 20,000 it will click and you will think shit! That app could of had btc and gems as an option in its paymnet choices......then you will get it....groan.

[reRaise]

Getgems is getting strong recognition, more capabilities and hopefully more funding, Paykey using bitcoin and gems will be great for the crypto world, alts will beg getgems to get implemented into its paykey feature. seems paykey for getgems going to be released this month, not sure tho.

[veritasBS]

I think the concerns are not being understood. I'm saying that Getgems has possibly been tricked out of giving up its greatest asset to banks. You could develop an app like Venmo and guarantee almost it would be the next big thing in payments cause literally no one else can come close to cross social network payments.



What I think they have done is given the golden goose away to the banks. I'm sure the getgems app will do ok but I am talking building the next Venmo or PayPal with Bitcoin...instead the tech will just be licenceed out getgems the company get a cut and getgems followers eventually get forgotton. It's like instead of hosting the party you give free tickets out to everyone and turn up for the last 5 minutes.


wake the hell up people. Having one central app that banks had to connect to make cross social payments is a billion dollar idea, getgems the app is not......PayKey was about to leverage it to supper star status now it's back to, yeah we got 30,000 downloads.

I honestly think the Banks have played the team. And people here aren't getting at all the opportunity that they just lost.


*And whether you understand it or not, when a more pure fiat Paykey gets 100 million downloads in like 3 months and getgems messenger gets 20,000 it will click and you will think shit! That app could of had btc and gems as an option in its paymnet choices......then you will get it....groan.

Look. I am willing to give the team the benefit of doubt here. There is no reason to bring out pitchforks just yet. But...
If in fact the team chooses to use (or have used) any of the GetGemz ICO money to develop PayKey, we as investors have an ownership right to the PayKey app. This is a class case that many, many attorneys will take in a heartbeat if PayKey becomes successful. I'm not concerned...

[eightnineten]

I think the concerns are not being understood. I'm saying that Getgems has possibly been tricked out of giving up its greatest asset to banks.

How have they been "tricked" if they are the ones offering to modify PayKey to a bank's liking?

What I think they have done is given the golden goose away to the banks. I'm sure the getgems app will do ok but I am talking building the next Venmo or PayPal with Bitcoin...instead the tech will just be licenceed out getgems the company get a cut and getgems followers eventually get forgotton.

What you're saying is pure speculation--no one has said that Gems or Bitcoin will be removed from PayKey. That said, what makes you think you can force Bitcoin/Gems on banks and governments just because they like the concept of PayKey?

wake the hell up people. Having one central app that banks had to connect to make cross social payments is a billion dollar idea, getgems the app is not......PayKey was about to leverage it to supper star status now it's back to, yeah we got 30,000 downloads.

I honestly think the Banks have played the team. And people here aren't getting at all the opportunity that they just lost.

*And whether you understand it or not, when a more pure fiat Paykey gets 100 million downloads in like 3 months and getgems messenger gets 20,000 it will click and you will think shit! That app could of had btc and gems as an option in its paymnet choices......then you will get it....groan.

Does accusing people of being stupid make you feel superior?

We get it now...we got it before. It's not rocket science. Gems and BTC would be ideal to have in every iteration of PayKey. As I mentioned before, I don't know how friendly banks and regulators will be to Bitcoin. I think eventually, they will all HAVE to be friendly to Bitcoin and figure out ways to adapt to a new decentralized economy.

But right now, Daniel/Alon have to quickly sell PayKey to banks all over the world, and I don't know if every bank will want BTC/Gemz right off the bat. After PayKey is established, and it is installed in millions of phones, then the team could force a BTC/Gems payment option a year or so later. But to force it on banks right from the start might increase resistance, which would slow adoption.

Remember that Google and Apple are probably not far behind PayKey, and they already have the userbase. All they need to do is install a dollar sign in their keyboards--they already have the bank partnerships lined up.

You also might want to treat people with respect--it would help you to better get your point across.

[eightnineten]

I think the concerns are not being understood. I'm saying that Getgems has possibly been tricked out of giving up its greatest asset to banks. You could develop an app like Venmo and guarantee almost it would be the next big thing in payments cause literally no one else can come close to cross social network payments.



What I think they have done is given the golden goose away to the banks. I'm sure the getgems app will do ok but I am talking building the next Venmo or PayPal with Bitcoin...instead the tech will just be licenceed out getgems the company get a cut and getgems followers eventually get forgotton. It's like instead of hosting the party you give free tickets out to everyone and turn up for the last 5 minutes.


wake the hell up people. Having one central app that banks had to connect to make cross social payments is a billion dollar idea, getgems the app is not......PayKey was about to leverage it to supper star status now it's back to, yeah we got 30,000 downloads.

I honestly think the Banks have played the team. And people here aren't getting at all the opportunity that they just lost.


*And whether you understand it or not, when a more pure fiat Paykey gets 100 million downloads in like 3 months and getgems messenger gets 20,000 it will click and you will think shit! That app could of had btc and gems as an option in its paymnet choices......then you will get it....groan.

Look. I am willing to give the team the benefit of doubt here. There is no reason to bring out pitchforks just yet. But...
If in fact the team chooses to use (or have used) any of the GetGemz ICO money to develop PayKey, we as investors have an ownership right to the PayKey app. This is a class case that many, many attorneys will take in a heartbeat if PayKey becomes successful. I'm not concerned...

Where in the ANN does it say that investors hold a percentage of the company profits? Say you hired Bill Gates to build you database software for $800,000, and at the same time he delivered you the database he also sold MS-DOS to IBM for 100 million. Would you be entitled to a cut of his profits? I don't think it works that way.

You, as a crowd, basically hired them to write you a program, and in exchange, got a percentage of the ICO. They made good on all promises; therefore, it seems you have no case.

[yoyoamigo]

Many details about PayKey, especially how it works exactly and its features, are still unknown. the video presentation at North43 Buffalo only showed a tiny few things happening. That's not enough to determine whether GETGEMS will go south or High North. i got questions like:
--- does PayKey App store/hold money? can it?
--- if no, then how does one send money? direct transactions between bank accounts?
--- if yes, is it secured enough to store money on it, particularly fiat? i mean its a keyboard app so is it as safe and secure as any social apps like Telegram?
--- if yes, how does one send money to PayKey App? through Debit Cards? Or by connecting one's bank account to it?
--- How will PayKey be tailored to each financial services (e.g. banks, etc) when all of them will be able to send fiat across all social platforms? As in, for e.g., how different will HSBC PayKey be to Citi PayKey when both can do that when that is the selling point of PayKey? Won't they, and every single financial services, be directly competing with each other?
--- Does PayKey only leverage off social network contacts? What about Phone contacts?
--- soooo many Qs...

The wisest thing to do now is to wait it out and see how this PayKey works first. So Daniel and his team will be AIMING to release PayKey with GEMS by the end of the month - hopefully 'the month' means 'this month'. No specific 'month' was mentioned in ZapChain so hopefully its 'this month'.

Think about it - why the rush trying to confirm all these details now? And confirmed by yourself + any others who agree with you? what are you gonna do when its confirmed and not by Daniel and his team? the wise thing to do from here on now would be to wait for clear details from them. i see no reason to rush.

And really? backing out when AirDrop just came out like 1 week ago? Web/Desktop Client just came out a few days ago? Hasty decision my friend.  

In any case, seems like we all agree on one thing: banks and financial services will only be interested to utilize Fiat and not any cryptocurrencies as of now, while GETGEMS PayKey will have Bitcoin and GEMZ. the GETGEMS app (not PayKey) may possibly have other altcoins if ShapeShift gets implemented.
Firstly, the day when an altcoin gets to be directly exchanged for FIAT is getting closer than ever. i foresee Litecoin, Ethereum...these few will be among the first. And once those 2 are in, it will be easier to add others. It won't be long - the very latest will be before end of 2016. Bitcoin has achieved it but only in a certain enclosed space - Coinbase. It's not on the whole entire grand scale as of yet but at least it has been done. Because Coinbase is an exchange, a wallet, and has direct connections to bank accounts. So the flow and economy is all there in one place - centralized unfortunately.
Secondly, who says we need bank accounts? Take one step back and look at Facebook: they use debit cards to send money in their messenger. that is another way - an easier way than simply connecting one's bank accounts that has a lot more paper work and legal stuff to work with.
Thirdly, keeping in mind of the previous 2 points, there is a lot of debate with how banks will take over and reign supreme with Paykey. But once GETGEMS PayKey can send FIAT too, then what's with all the fuss?

[veritasBS]

I think the concerns are not being understood. I'm saying that Getgems has possibly been tricked out of giving up its greatest asset to banks. You could develop an app like Venmo and guarantee almost it would be the next big thing in payments cause literally no one else can come close to cross social network payments.



What I think they have done is given the golden goose away to the banks. I'm sure the getgems app will do ok but I am talking building the next Venmo or PayPal with Bitcoin...instead the tech will just be licenceed out getgems the company get a cut and getgems followers eventually get forgotton. It's like instead of hosting the party you give free tickets out to everyone and turn up for the last 5 minutes.


wake the hell up people. Having one central app that banks had to connect to make cross social payments is a billion dollar idea, getgems the app is not......PayKey was about to leverage it to supper star status now it's back to, yeah we got 30,000 downloads.

I honestly think the Banks have played the team. And people here aren't getting at all the opportunity that they just lost.


*And whether you understand it or not, when a more pure fiat Paykey gets 100 million downloads in like 3 months and getgems messenger gets 20,000 it will click and you will think shit! That app could of had btc and gems as an option in its paymnet choices......then you will get it....groan.

Look. I am willing to give the team the benefit of doubt here. There is no reason to bring out pitchforks just yet. But...
If in fact the team chooses to use (or have used) any of the GetGemz ICO money to develop PayKey, we as investors have an ownership right to the PayKey app. This is a class case that many, many attorneys will take in a heartbeat if PayKey becomes successful. I'm not concerned...

Where in the ANN does it say that investors hold a percentage of the company profits? Say you hired Bill Gates to build you database software for $800,000, and at the same time he delivered you the database he also sold MS-DOS to IBM for 100 million. Would you be entitled to a cut of his profits? I don't think it works that way.

You, as a crowd, basically hired them to write you a program, and in exchange, got a percentage of the ICO. They made good on all promises; therefore, it seems you have no case.

I didn't hire them to build anything and even if I did they used the funds to build something else. They cannot use ICO funds to build another product and claim I do not have ownership of that product. The courts will come down on the side of the investor nearly every time. The burden will be on getgems to prove their case.

[yoyoamigo]

I think the concerns are not being understood. I'm saying that Getgems has possibly been tricked out of giving up its greatest asset to banks. You could develop an app like Venmo and guarantee almost it would be the next big thing in payments cause literally no one else can come close to cross social network payments.



What I think they have done is given the golden goose away to the banks. I'm sure the getgems app will do ok but I am talking building the next Venmo or PayPal with Bitcoin...instead the tech will just be licenceed out getgems the company get a cut and getgems followers eventually get forgotton. It's like instead of hosting the party you give free tickets out to everyone and turn up for the last 5 minutes.


wake the hell up people. Having one central app that banks had to connect to make cross social payments is a billion dollar idea, getgems the app is not......PayKey was about to leverage it to supper star status now it's back to, yeah we got 30,000 downloads.

I honestly think the Banks have played the team. And people here aren't getting at all the opportunity that they just lost.


*And whether you understand it or not, when a more pure fiat Paykey gets 100 million downloads in like 3 months and getgems messenger gets 20,000 it will click and you will think shit! That app could of had btc and gems as an option in its paymnet choices......then you will get it....groan.

Look. I am willing to give the team the benefit of doubt here. There is no reason to bring out pitchforks just yet. But...
If in fact the team chooses to use (or have used) any of the GetGemz ICO money to develop PayKey, we as investors have an ownership right to the PayKey app. This is a class case that many, many attorneys will take in a heartbeat if PayKey becomes successful. I'm not concerned...

Where in the ANN does it say that investors hold a percentage of the company profits? Say you hired Bill Gates to build you database software for $800,000, and at the same time he delivered you the database he also sold MS-DOS to IBM for 100 million. Would you be entitled to a cut of his profits? I don't think it works that way.

You, as a crowd, basically hired them to write you a program, and in exchange, got a percentage of the ICO. They made good on all promises; therefore, it seems you have no case.

I didn't hire them to build anything and even if I did they used the funds to build something else. They cannot use ICO funds to build another product and claim I do not have ownership of that product. The courts will come down on the side of the investor nearly every time. The burden will be on getgems to prove their case.

im okay as long as its beneficial to the investors too, i believe that's our main concern, yes? if we don't benefit, then yes...bring in the drums and hammers.

[nextgencoin]

At the very least you guys should be asking the getgems team to postpone providing the white label to banks before they completely screw any hope of the app getting any usage. I'm not being impolite I'm just trying to get across the difference between owning a piece of PayPal to a piece of getgems app......it really is as big a difference.


The getgems team if they do this basically had two choices.


1. White label the thing, they get rich from the licenceing and a percentage of every paymnet using their tech, they get rich but crypto doesn't move forward, in fact fiat is given a leapfrog in digital payments. The die rich but unsatisified old men knowing they threw away the God given opportunity to do good.


2. Getgems held onto the patent, took a risk developed an app that the whole world would of wanted which would include btc and gems, they might even have to deal with opposition from the banks. they would become rich, famous tech billionaires and would of introduced crypto to the masses and all the economic corruption busting wealth creating benefits that come with that. They die rich knowing they made a difference.



I'm sorry for the team as well as investors here if they choose 1.

[lawsonvl]

I'm beginning to feel the GG team have done something quite dishonest.

It seems as though they've developed an entirely new app, that's independent of their original product, in stealth, with crowdfunded money.

Paykey is not on the GG roadmap — it is a separate service that functions independent of the GG messenger, the gemz token, and the promised attention economy. Also, its revenue model is not dependent on gemz retaining a value.

It’s taken many months to skin Telegram and integrate a wallet, but now we know that all efforts weren’t directed at these milestones.
The development of Paykey has likely diverted funds and development time that would have been put towards reaching the original GG goals sooner and with better results. I believe it violates the spirit of the roadmap.

As of today, the GG app still has a lot of bugs in its basic functions. Also, the airdrop is only in beta and there's no pre-sale perk or attention economy in sight. It’s a hard sell to refer this app even to close friends, and we’re approaching the 1-year mark.

There’s no debate that the company's focus has radically changed. Take a look at the Getgems mission statement: it no longer mentions the messaging app, gemz token, or attention economy. It simply describes the functions of Paykey.

http://www.magmavc.com/portfolio/portfolio-companies.html

Has Daniel misappropriated investor funds?

Since Paykey is not an added feature of GG, but an independent product with a different revenue model, why is it using the crowdsourced money? Is it not a separate project, that necessitates its own funding and development team?

Daniel, I would like to know the date when Paykey’s development started and the resources consumed in its creation. Did you hire additional workers, or were existing ones pulled from GG to work on Paykey?

[nextgencoin]

It's not just that they have made PayKey possibly with getgems funds it's the fact that the inclusion of Gemz the currency they crowdfunded the project with are 'it's seems' only half hearty being used. I mean why would anyone white label your product without the need to use Gemz. it's like everyone supporting and crowd funding a NEM type coin and then they release 5 new NEMs at the same time.

[Netnox]

Some of u seem to keep pushing the agenda of them using crowdfund money to develop paykey, but you dont realise they wont receive any money if a milestone hasn't been met, when they deliver a certain milestone they are free in how to go from there, and spend the funds they got for delivering the milestone. Almost all milestone have been delivered except the ae which needs time. To be honest im not even sure if they didnt whitelable it they would be given the opportunities like joining citis accelarator program where they get lot of tools and backing to develope themselves.

While i agree with nextgencoin to a degree, whitelabeling also brings some benefits like receiving more funds and connection and more capabilities for innovative features as they earn more from this. 1M is nothing the raised in the beginning, snapchat raised 1B. Dont forget that paykey for getgems will still be the only app which provides bitcoin and gems, no bank is going to offer that, this alone can give lot recognition. The decision has already been made, now we can go back to some scammy alt that probably will never see the light of an average person using its service or stay supportive to a project that has the tools to make a difference. I personally wont even think about going back to another alt after all the efforts i ve seen from GG, im in bitcoin, augur and gg, these have all the potential to make it into mainstream. If paykey gets successfull then it will be like venmo, applepay or any other big player has incorporated bitcoin and gems.

If lets say citi incorporates paykey this means that getgems has made a product that has reached 100M users, its not gems but still getgems made this possible and it will be great advertising since its done under the getgems brand which still is mentioning gems, can you see the headlines already?

[yoyoamigo]

Take a look at the Getgems mission statement: it no longer mentions the messaging app, gemz token, or attention economy. It simply describes the functions of Paykey.

http://www.magmavc.com/portfolio/portfolio-companies.html

Has Daniel misappropriated investor funds?

Since Paykey is not an added feature of GG, but an independent product with a different revenue model, why is it using the crowdsourced money? Is it not a separate project, that necessitates its own funding and development team?

Daniel, I would like to know the date when Paykey’s development started and the resources consumed in its creation. Did you hire additional workers, or were existing ones pulled from GG to work on Paykey?

just here to reply specifically on this point - be careful in saying how Daniel and the GETGEMS Team use funds.

DON'T FORGET - $400 000 came from Magma. MAGMA HAS GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH CROWDSALE! It is possible that all of those funds were used for the development of PayKey and not a cent from the crowdsale was touched for PayKey. is $400 000 enough? yes...very very possible considering how small their team is and how long they took  (less than a year. nearly a year) to develop PayKey until its in a Near-Finished state to be aimed to be released by 'end of the month' (which i guess end of this month). Also, its a keyboard app? a really advanced one of course. But not as mega huge like Facebook's current app (not referring to the messenger. FB got 2 apps.) with tons of features, etc.  

No evidence to back up your claims or statements? then you are dismissed.

OHhhh and one more thing - for everybody's future references, GG won $250 000 from the North43 Buffalo Competition.
So anything like this again in the future, DON'T FORGET.

Off i go until i see/read something that is very off like the above point being made. Until then, i'm just gonna wait it out and see how this PayKey works first and also wait for clear details from Daniel and the GETGEMS Team regarding PayKey. if good comes to worst, just sell off your GEMZ and re-invest into something else. end of story but not for me. I'm gonna wait and be patient.

[nextgencoin]

Seriously why are you guys arguing to cut your own throat? I'm saying not really including gems and btc in an inclusive situation with getgems you aren't prioritising the very currency you created and we all bought. Why would anyone in right mind not mind if a team treated its own currency like that?


Maybe it's language barrier but I think people don't understand what I'm saying.



I'm guess you guys won't get it until you get a sick feeling in your stomach when you see cross social network payments blow up in the coming years fuelled by Paykey but your gems will be worth similar to now....cause they didn't get included in one exclusive app.


I feel sorry to say this but you guys don't seem that bright.....

[Netnox]

Bitcoin and gems will be included and if paykey explodes then gems would follow because its integrated in paykey aswell. Alts like litecoin would dream about being added to paykey.

[kunac]

The team build very little, actually, for their BTC investors. They took Telegram messaging app, their infrastructure and add to that confusing, mediocre BTC wallet. You can't use Counterparty functionality inside app witch is really disappointing for everybody who appreciate blockchain technology. Transparency is nonexistence. You don't get private key for your Gemz. Everything looks like typical BTC scam. But at the end they still delivered Social Messaging App That Pays .

[nextgencoin]

Bitcoin and gems will be included and if paykey explodes then gems would follow because its integrated in paykey aswell. Alts like litecoin would dream about being added to paykey.

Why would a bank or say a FB branded PayKey add Gemz........?


I'm really talking to a wall here.


I'll put it simple. the choice is Gemz is included in an app, a unique app that no other makes payments possible in ALL social networks that can be downloaded and used by 2 billion users worldwide, snapchat, Whatsapp, etc........or as what is happening it will be included in getgems which hasn't got past 10,000 users on Google Play in one year.......at the same time it will be available to anyone else who wants to use it. You do the maths.....

[lawsonvl]

Some of u seem to keep pushing the agenda of them using crowdfund money to develop paykey, but you dont realise they wont receive any money if a milestone hasn't been met, when they deliver a certain milestone they are free in how to go from there, and spend the funds they got for delivering the milestone.

It's not just money and milestones. It's finding out, after a year's wait, that the team has secretly ditched their roadmap to develop something completely different.

They should of delivered all their milestones, including a functioning AE, before starting to work on Paykey. That would be the most honest course of action.

At the very least, when Daniel had his change of heart about GG, he should of said something. I would of respected that.

[reRaise]

Nextgencoin and lawson how about you just sell and move on? You keep repeating the same shit. You got your milestones already and ae rightfully needs time.

Regarding nextgencoin why should everyone side with you when you were pushing vanillacoin as the next bitcoin here in the forums and were hugely wrong, look at vanilla now nobody gives a shit about it.

The fact is paykey is going to happen as stated by getgems, for getgems this is a huge upgrade. Take it for granted no alt will have this feature, yall dont deserve such team, your emotions is tied to the price if the price went up yall would praised them.

[Netnox]

Bitcoin and gems will be included and if paykey explodes then gems would follow because its integrated in paykey aswell. Alts like litecoin would dream about being added to paykey.

Why would a bank or say a FB branded PayKey add Gemz........?


I'm really talking to a wall here.


I'll put it simple. the choice is Gemz is included in an app, a unique app that no other makes payments possible in ALL social networks that can be downloaded and used by 2 billion users worldwide, snapchat, Whatsapp, etc........or as what is happening it will be included in getgems which hasn't got past 10,000 users on Google Play in one year.......at the same time it will be available to anyone else who wants to use it. You do the maths.....

Gems will be included in 'PayKey for GetGems' which is coming out soon and the current GetGems app. This is a unique app, can be downloaded by 2B users worldwide on every social platform you mentioned. Those who like Bitcoin/Crypto and want to use it on all social platforms need to download PayKey for GetGems or the current GetGems app. Some people don't want Crypto at all but just want fiat, these people can use the app offered by their bank if it has PayKey or maybe the GetGems apps if it supports fiat aswell where you can connect your bankaccount. Lets say i want to use Bitcoin and fiat, i would have to download GetGems app.

Not every bank is going to support PayKey here, for these people if the GetGems apps also would support fiat aside from bitcoin and gems, they would have to download the GetGems app aswell. I actually hope at one point the GetGems apps also integrate fiat payments and that's where their colabration with banks now might come handy in the future. What makes PayKey for GetGems unique is its ability to use Bitcoin and in the future AE requiring Gems. No banks will have this, yes maybe banks will have PayKey but instead the team gets lots of recognition and good deals which is good for GetGems.