makeorbrake wrote: and I quote... "A pyramid scheme (commonly known as pyramid scams) is a business model that recruits members via a promise of payments or services for enrolling others into the scheme"
Sleeper12 wrote: » The what's in the whatsy now? You do realise that everyone who bought into a pyramid scheme thought they were buying into the next big thing.
Sleeper12 wrote: » The reality is that only a few early adocptors make money but the problem is that they make it off the backs of the late adocptors, the little guy.
makeorbrake wrote: They know that its not a flash in the pan and that its going to be around for many years to come. Otherwise, why are they all now investing in it? As regards setting a price, that's a different issue - but of course it's an issue as the same benchmarks can't be used as conventional stocks.
kaymin wrote: » Unless there is sufficient demand to use the network such that all the tokens in circulation are in demand then the token price will drop. Unless of course there is irrational speculation in the token.
kaymin wrote: » An alternative network would succeed if it offers better value.
makeorbrake wrote: » It depends on which blockchain network you're referring to but they usually go to many decimal places so that's an irrelevance. Bitcoin unit price is misleading to an extent - it goes to 8 decimal places. As regards a replicated network, sure someone can set one up. There are many instances where a conventional online business can be replicated but unless it does something better, then why would it succeed?
Sleeper12 wrote: » That is pure deflection. Please point me to a law, statue that states that a pyramid scheme has to be perpetrated by someone?
Sleeper12 wrote: » You say supply & demand yet there's nothing stopping me from copying your blockchain & currency & starting sleepers bitcoin.
Sleeper12 wrote: » Some countries have tried this in times of crisis. Increasing supply of currency. They are usually called banana republics and have 1000 percent inflation because the government keeps printing more money.
kaymin wrote: » If the tokens are valued in the billions, the users of the network will have to pay high amounts to use the network. Unless there's high barriers to entry / competitive moat, then it becomes a race to the bottom. Inevitably someone else will offer a similar network at a much lower cost which will attract all the users.
makeorbrake wrote: They have and each time it has been pointed out to them that a pyramid scheme has to be perpetrated by someone. Who has done so in this instance?
makeorbrake wrote: If the blockchain network in question is successful and the circulating token pool is restricted, demand will rise. It's a simple case of supply/demand.
TallyRand wrote: » Okay, I’ll go onto the highly reputable ccn or coin telegraph websites for my info, the propaganda from the crypto heads would put goebbels to shame!
TallyRand wrote: » Okay, Block chain will have a positive impact as a ledger for supply chain logistics, I don’t have much after that. I know you have given examples before and I genuinely can’t re-call so if you could add a quick positive (a two liner even not asking for in-depth ) that will impact me then please do?
TallyRand wrote: » Where have Morgan Stanley said this?
Sleeper12 wrote: » How exactly? It's still all new. There no rhyme no reason to how the value of crypto changes from day to day.
makeorbrake wrote: » If the blockchain network in question is successful and the circulating token pool is restricted, demand will rise. It's a simple case of supply/demand.
makeorbrake wrote: Those guys know exactly what they're doing.
TallyRand wrote: » Supply and demand, until there is a fallout and a hard fork!
makeorbrake wrote: » They have and each time it has been pointed out to them that a pyramid scheme has to be perpetrated by someone. Who has done so in this instance? If the blockchain network in question is successful and the circulating token pool is restricted, demand will rise. It's a simple case of supply/demand.
makeorbrake wrote: » Are you honestly suggesting that they've changed their views on the basis of this short term drop? Seriously? Were Goldman Sachs blindsided too? Those guys know exactly what they're doing. Other than that, is it highly volatile and speculative? Of course. Nobody has claimed any different. So is day and swing trading but I don't see the same people here getting animated about that. The same with Forex.
Sleeper12 wrote: » Many posters have tried to point out how much this is to a pyramid scheme.
Sleeper12 wrote: » They are "investing" in an imaginary currency that happens to use a new technology but they don't own the technology. They only own the imaginary currency.
rapul wrote: » Fair dues makeorbrake that Tallyrand lad wants to be spoon fed info if seems, do your own research stop asking the same stuff over and over and just brick walling very good honest answers!!
Sleeper12 wrote: » Do you honestly believe that they would publish such rubbish now? Only three weeks later?
makeorbrake wrote: » I wouldn't imagine there's a whole lot of 'use case' in either of them. Let me remove the invective... Bitcoin arose as a direct consequence of the mismanagement by governments and the banking community - which gave rise to the 2008 financial crisis. It's a gen 1. crypto and doesn't have the same flexibility in terms of overcoming issues that have arisen (example - scalability) whereas a fresh project can account for these issues as a direct result of being able to start from scratch. That said, it may well be that layer 2 solutions will still overcome these issues and that it succeeds. We'll have to wait and see. What's the big deal? Grindle said he'd fill his boots if it went down to that level. So what? In a wave of new tech, startups fail all the time. It's a reasonable assumption that the best will survive. So what? What of it? They're centralised cryptos. If you knew anything, you'd know they don't fulfil the role of a decentralised crypto. If you think you've quoted a list of negatives, once again, I have to tell you - you haven't a clue. And still can't quote a single positive re. blockchain technology apart from trotting out the mantra from the banks.
Eric Cartman wrote: This was always going to happen, at the end of the day they sell houses and cars and lunch in fiat, there was never robust methods of extracting large amounts of fiat out of your investment quickly, people have figured this now. Those who got in early cashed out , but similar to a Ponzi scheme it appears those at the top won at the expense of those on the bottom.
TallyRand wrote: » My little head head is spinning even more now,
TallyRand wrote: » Bitcoin is crock of sh1t that relies on its brand
TallyRand wrote: » Hope that ETH goes down to $10
TallyRand wrote: » 99% of coins are scrap heap material
TallyRand wrote: » And central banks are likely to develop their own digital currency
TallyRand wrote: » You wouldn’t be leaving lots of room for positives there lads, it’s turning into a club clique rather than cracking into the mainstream.
TallyRand wrote: » Whatever about blockchain but crypto will remain a niche. It seems you would be better investing in plc’s that plan to develop blockchain (if it’s the really all about the tech for you) than investing in “coins” that do nothing
makeorbrake wrote: released at the beginning of this month.
Sleeper12 wrote: » In all honesty no one in the financial or investment world classes something that can swing as much as crypto as an investment. All investments can have highs and lows but there has never been "an investment" that swings like this.
TallyRand wrote: » If it was purely an investment in new tech, why didn’t all these companies (is every crypto coin a company with a genuine business plan?) seek investment in the conventional sense rather than inventing tokens / coins?
TallyRand wrote: Who is the beneficiary from all this coin investments? (My answer is the likes of coinbase and the fraud scammers)