[ANN] SuperNET NXT asset 12071612744977229797, SUPERNET KMD assetchain in summer

[OrientA]

When is the official last date of the ICO? Since 2 -4 weeks is very vague

Maybe after jl777 sells his own NXT and BTCD to the public?

[Cassius]

When is the official last date of the ICO? Since 2 -4 weeks is very vague

Almost certainly next Monday. Two days after volume drops to 3% a day, after the initial 2-week period, I think is the rule.
Since there was such a surge of interest early on, it's unlikely that any day will see 3% unless there is a big pick-up towards the end. Hence two days later = next Monday, presumably at 14:00 GMT.
Then a voting period to approve changes - I don't know how long this will take.

[ChrisSommer]

I've decided that it is to my interest to also include CoinBooking.net project into SuperNET, taking advantage of the marketing, promotion and traffic generated from the SuperNET project.
I've made an offer to James by cutting down my revenue share coming from CoinBooking.net, and sharing this with SuperNET.

I hope that he accepts my offer so that we can continue our love tale 
I apologize for handling this matter as a rookie

Thank you,
Chris

[PondSea]

I will respond later to the posts above but I hope James rejects that offer. I will elaborate as soon as I get the kids off to bed.

[ChrisSommer]

I will respond later to the posts above but I hope James rejects that offer. I will elaborate as soon as I get the kids off to bed.

You have hopes which are against investors interest.
Why are acting like this? I don't get this at all.

You elaborate? Like this? "Right now, Chris has leveraged off the supernet brand to promote his websites. Now I cannot see anything substantial apart from sites anyone could make given enough talent and a few hundred dollars."

Please, at least raise conclusive concerns, based on facts and written clearly for everybody to understand.

Thank you,
Chris

[Cassius]

When is the official last date of the ICO? Since 2 -4 weeks is very vague

Maybe after jl777 sells his own NXT and BTCD to the public?

The secret agenda is to sell everything, buy the moon and bring it down to earth - to finally make the "To the moon!" saying come true. We're currently negotiating with the U.S. & Russians about the price, but 6000BTC should be enough. Hopefully we have some BTC left to buy hookers and cocaine.

Aha, a new troll policy.
I like it.

[PondSea]

I will respond later to the posts above but I hope James rejects that offer. I will elaborate as soon as I get the kids off to bed.

You have hopes which are against investors interest.
Why are acting like this? I don't get this at all.

You elaborate? Like this? "Right now, Chris has leveraged off the supernet brand to promote his websites. Now I cannot see anything substantial apart from sites anyone could make given enough talent and a few hundred dollars."

Please, at least raise conclusive concerns, based on facts and written clearly for everybody to understand.

Thank you,
Chris

Hello Chris,

Sorry i do apologise for not elaborating earlier.

My understanding of the agreement between supernet and evolve was purely for profit sharing. Since this agreement was done you have been able to sell 1.4million assets at 0.6 NXT each meaning you received about 60BTC. This is a huge figure since your sites were not able to pull in even 10 BTC in a failed IPO previously.

The only reason why it brought such a big figure was due to people inferring incorrectly that the asset sale was endorsed by James.

Here is the current status of your sites.

http://cryptohire.com/ (You have 1 ad from 3 days ago)

http://coingigs.com/ (You have 2 ads)

http://http://coinexplorer.net/ (You have test items)

http://http://coinevolve.com/ (Under construction)

I dont think any of them are generating any revenue let alone any profits to be shared. Now i know that it will take time and that is fine but today you turn around and present a new project outside of this profit sharing agreement. This was done so you can raise more money as confirmed by yourself.

Now since James has not endorsed the new site, you are probably unable to sell the asset and you are going back to the revenue share to try to get him to agree. 100% revenue of a site generating 0 BTC is still 100% right? But then again you would have the NXT from the asset sale so it would be ok. This is why i think James should not accept the new partnership regardless of the percentage.

My questions to you would be the following:

How do you plan to generate a revenue stream? We are past the age of build a nice looking website and they will come.
How do you plan to use the 60BTC you have made by selling 35% of your revenue to actually generate revenue?
How can you use your time to produce 2 different assets when not even the first one that has been sold out is actually generating any revenue?

[apex944]

When is the official last date of the ICO? Since 2 -4 weeks is very vague

Maybe after jl777 sells his own NXT and BTCD to the public?

The secret agenda is to sell everything, buy the moon and bring it down to earth - to finally make the "To the moon!" saying come true. We're currently negotiating with the U.S. & Russians about the price, but 6000BTC should be enough. Hopefully we have some BTC left to buy hookers and cocaine.

Sorry if this was already discussed.... And I re-read the OP ...but will these hookers be Russian ?   If their selection is still under consideration I vote they are sourced from Berlin.
SuperNet sounding better every day.

[ChrisSommer]

I will respond later to the posts above but I hope James rejects that offer. I will elaborate as soon as I get the kids off to bed.

You have hopes which are against investors interest.
Why are acting like this? I don't get this at all.

You elaborate? Like this? "Right now, Chris has leveraged off the supernet brand to promote his websites. Now I cannot see anything substantial apart from sites anyone could make given enough talent and a few hundred dollars."

Please, at least raise conclusive concerns, based on facts and written clearly for everybody to understand.

Thank you,
Chris

Hello Chris,

Sorry i do apologise for not elaborating earlier.

My understanding of the agreement between supernet and evolve was purely for profit sharing. Since this agreement was done you have been able to sell 1.4million assets at 0.6 NXT each meaning you received about 60BTC. This is a huge figure since your sites were not able to pull in even 10 BTC in a failed IPO previously.

The only reason why it brought such a big figure was due to people inferring incorrectly that the asset sale was endorsed by James.

Here is the current status of your sites.

http://cryptohire.com/ (You have 1 ad from 3 days ago)

http://coingigs.com/ (You have 2 ads)

http://http://coinexplorer.net/ (You have test items)

http://http://coinevolve.com/ (Under construction)

I dont think any of them are generating any revenue let alone any profits to be shared. Now i know that it will take time and that is fine but today you turn around and present a new project outside of this profit sharing agreement. This was done so you can raise more money as confirmed by yourself.

Now since James has not endorsed the new site, you are probably unable to sell the asset and you are going back to the revenue share to try to get him to agree. 100% revenue of a site generating 0 BTC is still 100% right? But then again you would have the NXT from the asset sale so it would be ok. This is why i think James should not accept the new partnership regardless of the percentage.

My questions to you would be the following:

How do you plan to generate a revenue stream? We are past the age of build a nice looking website and they will come.
How do you plan to use the 60BTC you have made by selling 35% of your revenue to actually generate revenue?
How can you use your time to produce 2 different assets when not even the first one that has been sold out is actually generating any revenue?

Thank you for pointing out legit and clear concerns.

*** How do you plan to generate a revenue stream? We are past the age of build a nice looking website and they will come?

- Main revenue stream coming from: Fixed Fees charged for our services;
- Secondary revenue stream: Paid Ads and Google AdSense;

*** How do you plan to use the 60BTC you have made by selling 35% of your revenue to actually generate revenue?

Please note that the development, hosting and other expenses are paid out of my pocket.
The whole IPO fund will go into promoting our services and paying for some part-time jobs. From my experience I know that this is the most important part.
A full detailed Budget Tracking Spreadsheet will be available as soon as we start our Promotion step. We are mainly focused on development right now, and we aim to have the main projects (CryptoHire.com, CoinGigs.com, CoinExplorer.net and TheCryptoBid.com) up and running with 0 bugs if possible by the next month.

As you can see, judging by the real potential of those projects combined with SuperNET promotion/traffic coverage, a 60 BTC IPO marketcap for 35% revenue share is a good deal.
I have not asked for crazy amounts like other IPOs, 5,10,15 million NXT for a blog or who know what.


*** How can you use your time to produce 2 different assets when not even the first one that has been sold out is actually generating any revenue?

It's way to soon to judge by those facts, since the websites are running free of charge for this first month, as clearly stated before. Even if we had 100.000 ads on our websites, there is going to be no revenue for the first month. I also know that we MUST offer our services free of charge for a period, before we can charge any fee. This is like a demo product. It's an investor job to study before investing into a business.
Only by selling Paid Ads on our website for this month, we can generate some profit, but nobody is willing to pay for an ad on a fresh website, am I right?


Chris

[ChrisSommer]

I will respond later to the posts above but I hope James rejects that offer. I will elaborate as soon as I get the kids off to bed.

You have hopes which are against investors interest.
Why are acting like this? I don't get this at all.

You elaborate? Like this? "Right now, Chris has leveraged off the supernet brand to promote his websites. Now I cannot see anything substantial apart from sites anyone could make given enough talent and a few hundred dollars."

Please, at least raise conclusive concerns, based on facts and written clearly for everybody to understand.

Thank you,
Chris

Hello Chris,

Sorry i do apologise for not elaborating earlier.

My understanding of the agreement between supernet and evolve was purely for profit sharing. Since this agreement was done you have been able to sell 1.4million assets at 0.6 NXT each meaning you received about 60BTC. This is a huge figure since your sites were not able to pull in even 10 BTC in a failed IPO previously.

The only reason why it brought such a big figure was due to people inferring incorrectly that the asset sale was endorsed by James.

Here is the current status of your sites.

http://cryptohire.com/ (You have 1 ad from 3 days ago)

http://coingigs.com/ (You have 2 ads)

http://http://coinexplorer.net/ (You have test items)

http://http://coinevolve.com/ (Under construction)

I dont think any of them are generating any revenue let alone any profits to be shared. Now i know that it will take time and that is fine but today you turn around and present a new project outside of this profit sharing agreement. This was done so you can raise more money as confirmed by yourself.

Now since James has not endorsed the new site, you are probably unable to sell the asset and you are going back to the revenue share to try to get him to agree. 100% revenue of a site generating 0 BTC is still 100% right? But then again you would have the NXT from the asset sale so it would be ok. This is why i think James should not accept the new partnership regardless of the percentage.

My questions to you would be the following:

How do you plan to generate a revenue stream? We are past the age of build a nice looking website and they will come.
How do you plan to use the 60BTC you have made by selling 35% of your revenue to actually generate revenue?
How can you use your time to produce 2 different assets when not even the first one that has been sold out is actually generating any revenue?

Thank you for pointing out legit and clear concerns.

*** How do you plan to generate a revenue stream? We are past the age of build a nice looking website and they will come?

- Main revenue stream coming from: Fixed Fees charged for our services;
- Secondary revenue stream: Paid Ads and Google AdSense;

*** How do you plan to use the 60BTC you have made by selling 35% of your revenue to actually generate revenue?

Please note that the development, hosting and other expenses are paid out of my pocket.
The whole IPO fund will go into promoting our services and paying for some part-time jobs. From my experience I know that this is the most important part.
A full detailed Budget Tracking Spreadsheet will be available as soon as we start our Promotion step. We are mainly focused on development right now, and we aim to have the main projects (CryptoHire.com, CoinGigs.com, CoinExplorer.net and TheCryptoBid.com) up and running with 0 bugs if possible by the next month.

As you can see, judging by the real potential of those projects combined with SuperNET promotion/traffic coverage, a 60 BTC IPO marketcap for 35% revenue share is a good deal.
I have not asked for crazy amounts like other IPOs, 5,10,15 million NXT for a blog or who know what.


*** How can you use your time to produce 2 different assets when not even the first one that has been sold out is actually generating any revenue?

It's way to soon to judge by those facts, since the websites are running free of charge for this first month, as clearly stated before. Even if we had 100.000 ads on our websites, there is going to be no revenue for the first month. I also know that we MUST offer our services free of charge for a period, before we can charge any fee. This is like a demo product. It's an investor job to study before investing into a business.
Only by selling Paid Ads on our website for this month, we can generate some profit, but nobody is willing to pay for an ad on a fresh website, am I right?


Chris

"Now since James has not endorsed the new site"

I want to also point out that this project not being part of SuperNET has nothing to do with James not endorsing the new website. On the contrary, James was angry with me for keeping this project out of SuperNET without consulting him first. Yes, I did a stupid rookie mistake right there, because he really is something.


"you are probably unable to sell the asset and you are going back to the revenue share to try to get him to agree."

I want to let you know that the site is going to be developed and launched anyway. It does not matter how many shares will be sold. The website is almost finished (~80%) since I bought the whole project in an almost-developed state. You can check some previews on our Asset OP on nxt forums. I'm not going to post anymore info about this project on this thread since the project is separate right now.

I'm very sorry that you see the things that way.

Chris

[michaelb87]

I will respond later to the posts above but I hope James rejects that offer. I will elaborate as soon as I get the kids off to bed.

You have hopes which are against investors interest.
Why are acting like this? I don't get this at all.

You elaborate? Like this? "Right now, Chris has leveraged off the supernet brand to promote his websites. Now I cannot see anything substantial apart from sites anyone could make given enough talent and a few hundred dollars."

Please, at least raise conclusive concerns, based on facts and written clearly for everybody to understand.

Thank you,
Chris

Hello Chris,

Sorry i do apologise for not elaborating earlier.

My understanding of the agreement between supernet and evolve was purely for profit sharing. Since this agreement was done you have been able to sell 1.4million assets at 0.6 NXT each meaning you received about 60BTC. This is a huge figure since your sites were not able to pull in even 10 BTC in a failed IPO previously.

The only reason why it brought such a big figure was due to people inferring incorrectly that the asset sale was endorsed by James.

Here is the current status of your sites.

http://cryptohire.com/ (You have 1 ad from 3 days ago)

http://coingigs.com/ (You have 2 ads)

http://http://coinexplorer.net/ (You have test items)

http://http://coinevolve.com/ (Under construction)

I dont think any of them are generating any revenue let alone any profits to be shared. Now i know that it will take time and that is fine but today you turn around and present a new project outside of this profit sharing agreement. This was done so you can raise more money as confirmed by yourself.

Now since James has not endorsed the new site, you are probably unable to sell the asset and you are going back to the revenue share to try to get him to agree. 100% revenue of a site generating 0 BTC is still 100% right? But then again you would have the NXT from the asset sale so it would be ok. This is why i think James should not accept the new partnership regardless of the percentage.

My questions to you would be the following:

How do you plan to generate a revenue stream? We are past the age of build a nice looking website and they will come.
How do you plan to use the 60BTC you have made by selling 35% of your revenue to actually generate revenue?
How can you use your time to produce 2 different assets when not even the first one that has been sold out is actually generating any revenue?

+100

No investing in ideas without a solid business case. Even with explanation it's a weak case...

[cryptodance]

I will respond later to the posts above but I hope James rejects that offer. I will elaborate as soon as I get the kids off to bed.

You have hopes which are against investors interest.
Why are acting like this? I don't get this at all.

You elaborate? Like this? "Right now, Chris has leveraged off the supernet brand to promote his websites. Now I cannot see anything substantial apart from sites anyone could make given enough talent and a few hundred dollars."

Please, at least raise conclusive concerns, based on facts and written clearly for everybody to understand.

Thank you,
Chris

Hello Chris,

Sorry i do apologise for not elaborating earlier.

My understanding of the agreement between supernet and evolve was purely for profit sharing. Since this agreement was done you have been able to sell 1.4million assets at 0.6 NXT each meaning you received about 60BTC. This is a huge figure since your sites were not able to pull in even 10 BTC in a failed IPO previously.

The only reason why it brought such a big figure was due to people inferring incorrectly that the asset sale was endorsed by James.

Here is the current status of your sites.

http://cryptohire.com/ (You have 1 ad from 3 days ago)

http://coingigs.com/ (You have 2 ads)

http://http://coinexplorer.net/ (You have test items)

http://http://coinevolve.com/ (Under construction)

I dont think any of them are generating any revenue let alone any profits to be shared. Now i know that it will take time and that is fine but today you turn around and present a new project outside of this profit sharing agreement. This was done so you can raise more money as confirmed by yourself.

Now since James has not endorsed the new site, you are probably unable to sell the asset and you are going back to the revenue share to try to get him to agree. 100% revenue of a site generating 0 BTC is still 100% right? But then again you would have the NXT from the asset sale so it would be ok. This is why i think James should not accept the new partnership regardless of the percentage.

My questions to you would be the following:

How do you plan to generate a revenue stream? We are past the age of build a nice looking website and they will come.
How do you plan to use the 60BTC you have made by selling 35% of your revenue to actually generate revenue?
How can you use your time to produce 2 different assets when not even the first one that has been sold out is actually generating any revenue?

+100

No investing in ideas without a solid business case. Even with explanation it's a weak case...

I am glad I did not see the Evolve and Evolve2 offerings until they were all consumed up; otherwise, I likely would have invested. I am glad I put more BTCs into the SuperNET ICO instead. I, and I assume many others did as well, thought Evolve and Evolve2 were a part of SuperNET.

[ChrisSommer]

I will respond later to the posts above but I hope James rejects that offer. I will elaborate as soon as I get the kids off to bed.

You have hopes which are against investors interest.
Why are acting like this? I don't get this at all.

You elaborate? Like this? "Right now, Chris has leveraged off the supernet brand to promote his websites. Now I cannot see anything substantial apart from sites anyone could make given enough talent and a few hundred dollars."

Please, at least raise conclusive concerns, based on facts and written clearly for everybody to understand.

Thank you,
Chris

Hello Chris,

Sorry i do apologise for not elaborating earlier.

My understanding of the agreement between supernet and evolve was purely for profit sharing. Since this agreement was done you have been able to sell 1.4million assets at 0.6 NXT each meaning you received about 60BTC. This is a huge figure since your sites were not able to pull in even 10 BTC in a failed IPO previously.

The only reason why it brought such a big figure was due to people inferring incorrectly that the asset sale was endorsed by James.

Here is the current status of your sites.

http://cryptohire.com/ (You have 1 ad from 3 days ago)

http://coingigs.com/ (You have 2 ads)

http://http://coinexplorer.net/ (You have test items)

http://http://coinevolve.com/ (Under construction)

I dont think any of them are generating any revenue let alone any profits to be shared. Now i know that it will take time and that is fine but today you turn around and present a new project outside of this profit sharing agreement. This was done so you can raise more money as confirmed by yourself.

Now since James has not endorsed the new site, you are probably unable to sell the asset and you are going back to the revenue share to try to get him to agree. 100% revenue of a site generating 0 BTC is still 100% right? But then again you would have the NXT from the asset sale so it would be ok. This is why i think James should not accept the new partnership regardless of the percentage.

My questions to you would be the following:

How do you plan to generate a revenue stream? We are past the age of build a nice looking website and they will come.
How do you plan to use the 60BTC you have made by selling 35% of your revenue to actually generate revenue?
How can you use your time to produce 2 different assets when not even the first one that has been sold out is actually generating any revenue?

+100

No investing in ideas without a solid business case. Even with explanation it's a weak case...

I am glad I did not see the Evolve and Evolve2 offerings until they were all consumed up; otherwise, I likely would have invested. I am glad I put more BTCs into the SuperNET ICO instead. I, and I assume many others did as well, thought Evolve and Evolve2 were a part of SuperNET.

You mean you are glad that you lost the chance to make 4x your investment. True that, very legit post.
Come on now, why do people love to troll everything?

Chris

[cryptodance]

I will respond later to the posts above but I hope James rejects that offer. I will elaborate as soon as I get the kids off to bed.

You have hopes which are against investors interest.
Why are acting like this? I don't get this at all.

You elaborate? Like this? "Right now, Chris has leveraged off the supernet brand to promote his websites. Now I cannot see anything substantial apart from sites anyone could make given enough talent and a few hundred dollars."

Please, at least raise conclusive concerns, based on facts and written clearly for everybody to understand.

Thank you,
Chris

Hello Chris,

Sorry i do apologise for not elaborating earlier.

My understanding of the agreement between supernet and evolve was purely for profit sharing. Since this agreement was done you have been able to sell 1.4million assets at 0.6 NXT each meaning you received about 60BTC. This is a huge figure since your sites were not able to pull in even 10 BTC in a failed IPO previously.

The only reason why it brought such a big figure was due to people inferring incorrectly that the asset sale was endorsed by James.

Here is the current status of your sites.

http://cryptohire.com/ (You have 1 ad from 3 days ago)

http://coingigs.com/ (You have 2 ads)

http://http://coinexplorer.net/ (You have test items)

http://http://coinevolve.com/ (Under construction)

I dont think any of them are generating any revenue let alone any profits to be shared. Now i know that it will take time and that is fine but today you turn around and present a new project outside of this profit sharing agreement. This was done so you can raise more money as confirmed by yourself.

Now since James has not endorsed the new site, you are probably unable to sell the asset and you are going back to the revenue share to try to get him to agree. 100% revenue of a site generating 0 BTC is still 100% right? But then again you would have the NXT from the asset sale so it would be ok. This is why i think James should not accept the new partnership regardless of the percentage.

My questions to you would be the following:

How do you plan to generate a revenue stream? We are past the age of build a nice looking website and they will come.
How do you plan to use the 60BTC you have made by selling 35% of your revenue to actually generate revenue?
How can you use your time to produce 2 different assets when not even the first one that has been sold out is actually generating any revenue?

+100

No investing in ideas without a solid business case. Even with explanation it's a weak case...

I am glad I did not see the Evolve and Evolve2 offerings until they were all consumed up; otherwise, I likely would have invested. I am glad I put more BTCs into the SuperNET ICO instead. I, and I assume many others did as well, thought Evolve and Evolve2 were a part of SuperNET.

You mean you are glad that you lost the chance to make 4x your investment. True that, very legit post.
Come on now, why do people love to troll everything?

Chris

I did not realize I was trolling. My bad ... by the way, I am confident that I will see a 4x ROI (long term) or more from my SuperNET investment; otherwise, I would not have invested. Honestly, I wish your project much success.

[4emily]

Looking forward to seeing some more 'Asset Issuer' Tokens listed for sale on the AE

[cryptodance]

Looking forward to seeing some more 'Asset Issuer' Tokens listed for sale on the AE

I'm a newbie. What's the AE? 

[bitdraw]

Looking forward to seeing some more 'Asset Issuer' Tokens listed for sale on the AE

I'm a newbie. What's the AE? 

The Nxt Asset Exchange. It runs on the Nxt Blockchain.

[yeXIABC]

I will respond later to the posts above but I hope James rejects that offer. I will elaborate as soon as I get the kids off to bed.

You have hopes which are against investors interest.
Why are acting like this? I don't get this at all.

You elaborate? Like this? "Right now, Chris has leveraged off the supernet brand to promote his websites. Now I cannot see anything substantial apart from sites anyone could make given enough talent and a few hundred dollars."

Please, at least raise conclusive concerns, based on facts and written clearly for everybody to understand.

Thank you,
Chris

Hello Chris,

Sorry i do apologise for not elaborating earlier.

My understanding of the agreement between supernet and evolve was purely for profit sharing. Since this agreement was done you have been able to sell 1.4million assets at 0.6 NXT each meaning you received about 60BTC. This is a huge figure since your sites were not able to pull in even 10 BTC in a failed IPO previously.

The only reason why it brought such a big figure was due to people inferring incorrectly that the asset sale was endorsed by James.

Here is the current status of your sites.

http://cryptohire.com/ (You have 1 ad from 3 days ago)

http://coingigs.com/ (You have 2 ads)

http://http://coinexplorer.net/ (You have test items)

http://http://coinevolve.com/ (Under construction)

I dont think any of them are generating any revenue let alone any profits to be shared. Now i know that it will take time and that is fine but today you turn around and present a new project outside of this profit sharing agreement. This was done so you can raise more money as confirmed by yourself.

Now since James has not endorsed the new site, you are probably unable to sell the asset and you are going back to the revenue share to try to get him to agree. 100% revenue of a site generating 0 BTC is still 100% right? But then again you would have the NXT from the asset sale so it would be ok. This is why i think James should not accept the new partnership regardless of the percentage.

My questions to you would be the following:

How do you plan to generate a revenue stream? We are past the age of build a nice looking website and they will come.
How do you plan to use the 60BTC you have made by selling 35% of your revenue to actually generate revenue?
How can you use your time to produce 2 different assets when not even the first one that has been sold out is actually generating any revenue?

+100

No investing in ideas without a solid business case. Even with explanation it's a weak case...

I am glad I did not see the Evolve and Evolve2 offerings until they were all consumed up; otherwise, I likely would have invested. I am glad I put more BTCs into the SuperNET ICO instead. I, and I assume many others did as well, thought Evolve and Evolve2 were a part of SuperNET.

You mean you are glad that you lost the chance to make 4x your investment. True that, very legit post.
Come on now, why do people love to troll everything?

Chris

I did not realize I was trolling. My bad ... by the way, I am confident that I will see a 4x ROI (long term) or more from my SuperNET investment; otherwise, I would not have invested. Honestly, I wish your project much success.

    intel

[jeezy]

I will respond later to the posts above but I hope James rejects that offer. I will elaborate as soon as I get the kids off to bed.

You have hopes which are against investors interest.
Why are acting like this? I don't get this at all.

You elaborate? Like this? "Right now, Chris has leveraged off the supernet brand to promote his websites. Now I cannot see anything substantial apart from sites anyone could make given enough talent and a few hundred dollars."

Please, at least raise conclusive concerns, based on facts and written clearly for everybody to understand.

Thank you,
Chris

Hello Chris,

Sorry i do apologise for not elaborating earlier.

My understanding of the agreement between supernet and evolve was purely for profit sharing. Since this agreement was done you have been able to sell 1.4million assets at 0.6 NXT each meaning you received about 60BTC. This is a huge figure since your sites were not able to pull in even 10 BTC in a failed IPO previously.

The only reason why it brought such a big figure was due to people inferring incorrectly that the asset sale was endorsed by James.

Here is the current status of your sites.

http://cryptohire.com/ (You have 1 ad from 3 days ago)

http://coingigs.com/ (You have 2 ads)

http://http://coinexplorer.net/ (You have test items)

http://http://coinevolve.com/ (Under construction)

I dont think any of them are generating any revenue let alone any profits to be shared. Now i know that it will take time and that is fine but today you turn around and present a new project outside of this profit sharing agreement. This was done so you can raise more money as confirmed by yourself.

Now since James has not endorsed the new site, you are probably unable to sell the asset and you are going back to the revenue share to try to get him to agree. 100% revenue of a site generating 0 BTC is still 100% right? But then again you would have the NXT from the asset sale so it would be ok. This is why i think James should not accept the new partnership regardless of the percentage.

My questions to you would be the following:

How do you plan to generate a revenue stream? We are past the age of build a nice looking website and they will come.
How do you plan to use the 60BTC you have made by selling 35% of your revenue to actually generate revenue?
How can you use your time to produce 2 different assets when not even the first one that has been sold out is actually generating any revenue?

+100

No investing in ideas without a solid business case. Even with explanation it's a weak case...

I am glad I did not see the Evolve and Evolve2 offerings until they were all consumed up; otherwise, I likely would have invested. I am glad I put more BTCs into the SuperNET ICO instead. I, and I assume many others did as well, thought Evolve and Evolve2 were a part of SuperNET.

You mean you are glad that you lost the chance to make 4x your investment. True that, very legit post.
Come on now, why do people love to troll everything?

Chris

I did not realize I was trolling. My bad ... by the way, I am confident that I will see a 4x ROI (long term) or more from my SuperNET investment; otherwise, I would not have invested. Honestly, I wish your project much success.

    intel

So many bots in here recently... 

[NOjust]

Looking forward to seeing some more 'Asset Issuer' Tokens listed for sale on the AE

I'm a newbie. What's the AE? 

AE is "The Nxt Asset Exchange. "
you can find more information in https://nxtforum.org/