Investing through delegation and curation
This is a subject I've been talking to some people about and how it will change the way we invest into future projects compared to the ways we've done so before with Bitcoin and Ethereum.
With Bitcoin it was pretty straight forward back in the day, there were coins popping up and you could invest through exchanges. It didn't take a long time for currencies to become listed nor did it cost a lot cause there weren't many around and exchanges would gladly list them because their incentive was to get as much volume going as possible so they could earn from the fees. At the same time during this period mining was really popular, Bitcoin had moved on from CPU's and GPU's into ASICs which left a lot of people looking for something new to mine with their hardware. One of them was Litecoin but considering the few differences between the two more and more were popping up so investing at that time was more about investing your electricity and hardware wear and tear than it was about spending your Bitcoins to invest early in "ICOs".
With Ethereum on the other hand we got smart contracts and the ICO craze started. The DAO project that was supposed to make all of this easy got wrecked hard due to a flaw in the code which made the Ethereum founders roll back transactions to return the stolen Eth which caused the hardfork that created Ethereum Classic. Since the DAO didn't exist, people started turning to ERC-20 tokens and smart contracts to fund their new projects. With the success of many early ones and new money, attention and influence coming into the space it also brought in a lot of scams that didn't look like scams, but being projects that didn't do much with the investments they raised was not much different. Studies have shown that about 90% of ICO's raised in 2017 have no working product and that the majority of currencies in the top100 list on coinmarketcap don't either. The demand for Ethereum and Bitcoin to invest in these ICO's kept rising and at the same time it raised the marketcaps of these ICO's because they were all filled with Ethereum and Bitcoin.
Then came the big downtrend and everything started dropping, the big currencies are still doing rather okay and looking at it now it seems as if Eth took a much harder beating than Bitcoin which quite likely is due to all those ICO's that only accepted Eth. It is important to remember that many of these ICO's needed fiat to operate and evolve into the project they had promised their investors so many of them had to sell Eth. Many of them started gambling with trading much like your banks do with the money you hand over to them and due to the brutal swings of the cryptocurrency markets I bet many of them ended up with not as much funding as they started out with and either went back on their words, exitscammed or just has been laying low stalling development.
The important thing to remember here is that all the people who had invested in Ethereum early or bought it to invest into these ICO's got rid of their tokens. They do not own them anymore. They took a risk betting on ICO's, many in the hopes of just increasing the value of their investment and getting out quick, many actually believing the project would accomplish what it set out to do. The fact is that all these Eth either got sold, are worth up to 90% less now or have been scammed out and those people won't be heard from ever again. Original investors got burned while whales or other ones saw this coming and have been accumulating more at the lower prices to decrease their average buy in price as they believe Ethereum will still see many of these swings. The investors that got burned won't be able to touch new investments anymore or as much or they may even have left the scene completely generalizing the space as a scam because that's what their experience of it felt like. You have to remember that people who actually understand what these cryptocurrencies are actually set out to do and accomplish are not many. The investors have barely bothered learning how to invest in ICO's and transfer their Eth than to actually dig deep into the main currency or learn more about other projects and to know how to trust which ones are legit and which ones aren't. People aren't so clever, they can easily get tricked no matter how much or how little money they have. It is also impossible at this point to be able to follow all of the projects and be aware of what is going on at all times.
This brings me to SMT's and how things work on Steem right now and how they are possibly going to work in the near future.
I believe that SMT's starting up here will turn into asking for delegations and curations to reward the investors with their SMT instead of asking for direct investments. I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with directly investing Steem and I am aware that there are already some projects here who have been doing it like that but I think in general many investors will prefer the other, especially if they've had experience with the ERC-20 ICO craze. This is a good thing.
Not only will investors have full control of their Steem Power when delegated to a project, but incentivizing curation will also encourage them to learn more about the SMT, be able to judge its development and the creators of it will be under a lot more pressure to communicate and keep the investors updated. If things start to stall or results are not showing, investors will be able to cancel their delegations and curations at any time and that's on the creators of the SMT to win them back. Even though the reward pool may not be able to fund the SMT as good in the beginning as they'd like to, we'll still have Steemit inc helping them get their kickstart but in the end it's up to the creators of the SMT to inventivize other investors to trust them with future rewards of the rewardpool for their development.
The more promising SMT's such as @steemhunt we have the more demand there will be on Steem Power as they will want to invest more into the project to receive bigger shares of their distribution. Considering how low risk this is for investors since they can recall the delegation at any time and re-invest it somewhere else after 5 days, I think that more and more investors will start delegating to SMT's and Steem will mainly be used as a way to invest into other projects on the Steem network.
I'm not saying that blogging, vlogging, ulogging, etc will die, but a much bigger pie from the reward pool will go towards SMT's and that's a good thing. I've been meaning to talk about posts being overrewarded on Steem due to stake weighted and in comparison to other platforms since Steem has no adrevenue, etc, but that will have to be discussed in another post.
Today we are already seeing more and more projects migrate to the Steem network from other slower blockchains and this is a very good sign that once we get closer to SMT's there will be a lot more startups and investors joining and it may very well lead into a new craze of ICO's called SMT's. Combined with the low risk of investing through delegations and the rewardpool it can easily cause a chain reaction of the more people start investing, the higher the price goes up, the more value the reward pool gives out and the faster these SMT's get funded.
I am very excited to see this unfold.
[image source pexels.com]
What I like about it is that financing projects through delegation and curation means that there is a much higher amount of accountability by the SMT. If they act poorly or do not perform, they will lose investment and will not be able to do a runner with coins taken.
Even when @dlive left, they left with their curation amount and some users, not the 1M Steem delegated to them which was then able to be immediately redirected to @oracle-d.
This is a massive advantage and a risk for SMTs looking to pump and dump. At this point with so many likely to fail, I would be wary of direct investments into projects on idea alone as track history is that most will only ever be vaporwear.
Great post. This is the power of delegation under steem that many have yet to grasp...
@tarazkp you raised a really interesting idea in a post a while back along similar lines, thinking about how steem might change the whole VC structure.
"why sink say £2m+ of cash into an investment (traditional model) when you could invest into steem instead and use the return on the steem to fund the business e.g. pay wages every month etc?".
This way you never lose your original steem investment and heck, it might even be worth more than the investment opp itself after 5 years!
I may be misquoting you, so apologies (!) but I think it's an idea worth exploring further as it's definitely got me thinking...
Posted using Partiko Android
No, you are right I did mention this. I was thinking about writing a little follow up about it also since Acidyo wrote this one :)
Looking forward to it ;)
Posted using Partiko Android
Good point, many of eth ICO's were scams and just ran with the funds raised.
I hope we as community can make participating to SMT ICO's through delegation/voting a popular method of fundraising since it would be insane boost for Steem Power demand.
yeah it would be a massive boost, especially if some of the SMTs start getting traction outside of Steem usage.
Luckily we have few that already have good chance to do that, of course it always takes some luck and hard work, but what is most important is that it's the underlying technology that's the most important piece, and everyone can quite easily start building upon it. So even if, for example, one app that rewards people for exercising fails to gain attraction, someone else can give it a try.
Because when it comes down to the essence, for some reason, I personally believe fitness people would like to reward each other for their efforts. And this applies to everything. I personally would always like to have a option to support someone financially no matter what they do and Steem enables that. And enabling investors to participate on these attempts with Steem Power would really enable sustainable double digit Steem prices in my mind.
Now we just have to wait and see are our hunch right or totally wrong. But what is already a fact is that majority has no clue on what Steem really is and what it is capable of.
Will SMTs be able to have inflation systems? And slow drip out of Tokens? whaleshares that took the code from Steem Blockchain and tweaked it a bit has a successful start now with starting it all with 21,000,000 Tokens and then in a year slowly going up to 42,000,000 and a year later 63,000,000 this seems to be the ideal. And at the beginning with let's say 90% inflation you can only power down 10%. This makes it so Tokens slowly get's released out on the open market. If SMTs can slowly drip out to the desired amount + Having inflation incentives for early holders.
Yes SMTs can optionally configure inflation as they like.
Not sure but I think they can set up their distribution as they choose.
So true. Sending ETH to some new shitcoin is almost a guarantee you will never see it again. Delegating is much safer
I know the crypto community loves its moon-travel, but I'd prefer if SMT's were a slow-burn success than an explosion:
Explosions attract unwanted attention, a "craze" will be inevitably followed by a "downer" or worse "unfulfilled unrealistic expectations" phase.
Build structure, not FOMO. Attract a loyal following, not opportunistic exploitation.
Very well put, couldn't agree more. I think the process of slowly funding these SMT's will help with it not blowing out of proportion.
This is exactly the key advantage of Steem especially when we speak about attracting the potential investors and stakeholders. I couldn't agree more. In the same time this is the greatest challenge for all of us - to explain to people that their investment is always in their possession. Personally, I found it entertaining to speak about steem with CEOs or high marketing executives in different systems, and the fun starts when I do the comparation with traditional CSR campaign budgeting and social responsibility projects that could be launched and implemented with enough Steem power...
I think the game is already done. Even if no human would promote it. Market forces will push people here eventually. The network is a Tsunami of value. Eventually word of mouth spreads. And every time someone clicks upvote, that is a time they don't use a Fiat system to send value to a node in a network.
Enjoy the party while it still lasts.
And also not to forget that Steemit Inc. has an upcoming $20m fund, to be used in both fiat and STEEM/vests for future SteemApps. That additionally to the huge amounts of STEEM they hold and can still throw in the pool, mostly to “fund”, read accelerate, development of SMTs.
Great times ahead of us.
SMTs will make things more fun. People love their bragging right of owning a specific Token with a nice Brand. Will attract so much more people. Since they no longer has to use "That Steemit Thing" haha.
Steem reinvented the way people will tip content creators in the future. I also believe Steem has reinvented the way people will invest in crypto projects as well. You delegate to a project and get rewarded SMTs; the SMT then uses your delegation to reward you via upvotes, etc. That is what a conveyor belt to success looks like.
I really don't know much about SMT, but I'm a bit skeptical about how this will positively affect small account holders and new on boarders. So I will appreciate if you can through more light on this, probably in your next article
I'll make a post explaining my view on this, there will be plenty of rewards for content creators, just less steem. :)
I'm looking forward to it...thank you
Posted using Partiko Android
Why skeptical?
With every new development or initiative on the blockchain, there have been promises made that are still far from being met. We are still faced with a plethora of problems that existed some years back. Maybe I'm not well abreast on the potentials of the SMTs that's why I'm a bit skeptical. But I reserve my comments till then. I want the best for the blockchain and if SMT is the way forward then so be it. I'm just keeping my fingers crossed.
The most important question now, for me, is how SMTs will affect small accounts like mine. You might say that is selfish and maybe it is. I'm looking after my interest and that of the blockchain but mine a little more
At the moment whaleshares is giving the most to content creators. So yes I agree with you there. I'm really not sure if Steemit inc is pro-Content Creators. It seems more as many Stake holders want to implement some communist 50/50 system that would crush content creators in the long game.
I'm so tired of lazy entitled high stake holders that has too much free time and comes up with: "You know what would be great? Let's take 25% more from the already poor content creators! They never detect it.. let's just say to them that the system is broken and that we have a fix" They try to sneak it in at the moment. So produce on whaleshares atm I would say. You will earn Stake 15-19x faster.
I tried opening one recently but I dunno, I did not get the said email notification. I would like to experiment on other platforms, but steem is where I want to make my home.
On a lighter note, I support one of those communist pushings for the 50/50. He has done a lot for me in terms of upvotes but I do not agree with the 50/50 reward ratio proposal. It will not solve the fundamental problems here, rather it will increase and there will be more rewards for these said bidbots. I don't speak codes but common sense tells me: more curation rewards, more incentive to rape the reward pool
Posted using Partiko Android
You are right!
lol
How are content creators better off with no curation at all? How did you not learn anything by being all over the posts where this has been discussed?
Please make your own posts if you want to shill a fork with retarded inflation and no liquidity in the markets. Don't buy bid bots on comments to get the visibility on someone else's post.
It's amazing how much anti-capitalism is going on in here. Can Steem thrive with being anti-capitalism? I don't think so. To think people have a hidden agenda when they give a tip...
Do you really think I wrote that to "shill" something? Just lol, I always speak from my heart. If I tip someone and someone comes and steals that away well I have a hard time to see it thrive in the long term. If it's anti-capitalism and panics over a small tip ---> Will fail, as it's not empowering anymore. But about policing every word to create a yes men comment section. That will completely make the whole place non-vibrant and boring. It becomes about "mine", instead of a shared thing.
And I'm not saying you don't need curators. But it's a logical fact that Content Creators is doing most of the work. Curation will mostly be automated. It's not many that do it manual. Even if they did they are doing 10x less energy spend than a content creators. Yes there are exceptions. But Creators they should have the most wealth. Or it's communism. History has proven communism always fails.
"How did you not learn anything by being all over the posts where this has been discussed?" I wrote a 300-400 word comment to smooth. Never got a reply, @lordbutterfly still has authority on this question as he has been writing the most clear way why it will fail. He also never got a reply. That tells me everything I need to know. People care more about their Stake than human relationships and empower creators. Click upvote and only give around 50% is not a loving act. It's a selfish act as you know you get most back.
What I see is Stake holders getting pissed off at a few dollars here and there. They should be in thriving mode. Not realising that it will cause a brain drain effect as it's leech energy.
What will happen is low effort content creators + high stake holders will win. They want to cut off the healthy upcoming Middle Class of Content Creators.
I think you acidyo is one of the best high Stake holders in terms of integrity, but in the end I don't think this place can thrive on other high stake holders as human behaviour shows most will be selfish. You are not but the majority is. 50% would make it 10x worse.
...
Well this would sure change the game if you had moderators.
That would put content creators as the highest authority. By putting content creators at a higher authority than what it currently is. Now it's just that people create whatever without really focusing on 1 niche or community. As those systems hasn't been built. So at the moment it only exist Stake holders that are a bit over powered and then smaller content creator accounts at a few thousand Steem.
It all comes down to making it a bit more serious then and have people in proper roles. And that all play their role well. With the current system it's just a game where everyone tries to grab a big slice with no accountability. But then it seems still that a proper system is at least a couple of years away. I do agree that ideally 50/50 could work potentially in the future and as people reach a higher level of abundance. But with the current way things are being run I would say stick to 75/25. People will surely just automate more with a current 50/50 plan.
And I can get a feel of many high Stake holders that they are not really caring that much about real content and never will. They only have limited Tokens. Content Creators have limitless material. They are what creates the magic, they are what pulls in people to the system. When you empower these content creators a long time and nurture them they will be the best authority to curate new material. As they have earned their role and position. They have made themselves vulnerable by producing something real.
A content creator has usually way more influence than a high stake holder as they daily can create new connections with others that has invested equal buy-in. I am still very skeptical about a high stake holders that wonders about ROI every single second when they already have enough to live in abundance for the rest of their life. Clearly the highest ROI is to invest in people producing quality content and leverage human energy.
Lavish abundance should be re-invested into people with massive buy-in and that can master leverage. I'm just too worried 50/50 would create more mediocre stuff. When I came into Steem Jan 2018, it was the lavish abundance of a dtube vote that made me invest thousands. If 50% would have been taken away I'm not really sure if I would have had buy-in. Some content creators are a million times better than others. So they should have way more for that. As that will inspire others to act the same and aim up. People have always loved the idea of a hero.
Yes this is very much true! Thanks for a great logical comment that covered some stuff I never would have thought about. This is what makes up big value on a Blockchain. Real comments with great input.
Thanks for your more professional in-depth comment on this subject. I will think about it a bit to see what my views are.
Thanks for taking the time to respond to him, I couldn't bother after seeing that pointed out all over the place.
See, thats exactly whats wrong with this proposal. It makes people jump to what could be best described as the "most intuitive conclusion" without actually having to look deeper into their arguments.
Its great that you have a lot of faith in "humanity" but the facts point into another direction.
We need to try and analyze behavior patterns before making such a drastic change.
Im sorry to say but not a single thing you said here is likely to happen.
I appreciate your positive outlook but everything points in another direction..
Under 1. you just put all your faith into the hands of a few whale curators that might or might not know whats best. Might or might not increase their effectiveness. You widened the overall wealth gap between have and have nots.
Under 2. that standards will be raised? Not really. If people dont leave they are actually more likely to increase their content volume because you just cut their earnings. Instead of putting hard work into a 1-2 post/videos per day... They will put in less work per post and increase the number of posts made.
... high, low quality, etc, it doesnt matter. .. What matters is increased centralization in token distribution.
On the 3. point.... This proposal makes upvote buying cheaper and completely destroys the trending page. Trending will actually look far worse then it does now.
Unfortunately no one is willing to even consider that, because large accounts, even if they are nice enough to curate, like @acidyo here, the prospect of having such a big boost to earnings just closes their mind to any valid criticism. Witnesses follow in suite because these curation accounts are vocal and have indebted thousands of people with their work over these last 2 years..
Not until passive investors start taking back their witness votes will witness resolve start to buckle.
anyways...
This comment is supported by $2.85 @tipU upvote funded by @phoneinf :)
@tipU voting service guide | STEEM Monsters Lottery | Quick SBD <-> STEEM Exchange | For investors.
Thanks @phoneinf :)
Posted using Partiko Android
This is why I don't like bid bots on comments, now it seems like he did it to shill whaleshares.
Well, the comment can be downvoted :)
Posted using Partiko Android
Flagged your first comment due to manipulation of order int he comments to receive visibility on shilling in the next comments, voted up this comment to make up for the reward you lost.
Too much conclusions. I didn't boost my comment response as you try to make it sound like. You are speculating that I did a tip for other reasons. Can people not tip each other these days for just kindness? Please... Visibility is just how this Blockchain works. Just because I mention something in the crypto industry doesn't mean a person has a massive conspiracy plan.
You are welcome
It's something I thought I understood, but seeing it written is sometimes needed for it to really make it 'click'. Pretty epic right? Finally the power is in the hands of those who invest, and those who 'receive' have a lot more 'proving their worth' to do, which makes Steem the Blockchain of 'survival of the fittest' - and less vulnerable to becoming a 'Blockchain of shit projects and failed ICO's'.
I'm pretty sure I won't sleep a lot the coming few months, years, I don't want to miss the opportunity to witness all the stuff that will happen on Steem :-)
Fantastic article. If done right SMTs offer a lot of hope. I hope some new developers will join us that do not come from the cryposphere and i hope they bring with them a business and marketing team too.
Posted using Partiko Android
Right on brother, seems like an accurate perdiction of what might end up happening with SMT investing.
Stay tuned for the Sandwich Coin lol
Time will tell 😎🤘
I think that there will be some of each, potentially within the same projects. The amount of SMTs you could obtain with a direct investment should be much higher than that available from a delegation or curation with the same level of capital.
I'm hoping that this will be the next era of Steem. The spare capital that passive investors currently delegate to vote buying services will start to seek a potentially better (long-term) return through investing or delegating to SMT projects. We will move from the bid-bot era to the SMT era.