Greetings Fellow Bloggers,
After a long hiatus from Steem, and a new return to Hive, I have taken the time to look around and see what has changed. Although there have been some meaningful updates such as the creation of communities, it seems that Hive has inherited and yet to overcome the design flaws of Steem. There are also other issues that I would like to point out that if addressed will raise retention of new users.
I’m going to start with the largest problem I see first and I’m going to be thorough. This problem has existed since the beginning of Steem and it is an economics problem that won’t be solved with just code or more users on the platform alone. Users come to Steem/Hive because they like the idea of getting paid to create content. This means that they are the initial demand for HIVE cryptocurrency. When the content developers get paid typically they exchange their HIVE rewards, therefore they are the main distribution of HIVE tokens into the market which creates a downward force on the market price of HIVE via people wanting to exchange their HIVE due to the fact that other cryptocurrencies/USD are valued higher than HIVE. This trend is reflected by the market.
(Source: Bittrex 5/28/20)
Why do content developers want to exchange HIVE in the first place? The evaluation of placing higher value on other cryptos/USD is not the result of any sort of a disdain for HIVE, it’s the practical reality that unless one trades for something different we can’t purchase anything with HIVE. That doesn’t mean that there are no people in the world that would accept HIVE as payment for a service or a good, but I don’t think any of us could go to a local store and swipe a card to pay for something with HIVE. This practical reality forces us to exchange HIVE for that which we can use in our day to day lives.
The next problem that comes with this set up is incentive on the market to purchase HIVE. If I know nothing about HIVE and I’m a crypto trader, I have no incentive to invest funds into HIVE unless I see an attractive trend signaling me to make a purchase of HIVE. That means that HIVE is dependent upon the market not only to research Hive the platform but also to agree with what it is so strongly that it influences a purchase. Most people on Hive strongly support the decentralized concept of this platform. For someone with only an understanding of centralized institutions this concept of how a decentralized entity functions can be confusing.
(Source: sadhguru.org)
The next largest issue centers around several issues that have been long known so although I’ll mention these things I’m not going to spend a lot of time on them, but I do wish to convey how these issues tie into the larger economic issue.
What are these issues? Scaling the platform, bringing on more users, content rewards, curation rewards, user friendliness, ease of use ect. These topics are frequently discussed but here is the economic problem with solving them all efficiently. The solution to these problems will bring on more users, incentivize them to stay, and make the platform more popular which in turn attracts more users. Obviously the platform wants to effectively address these issues but the end result is issuing a larger volume of HIVE and increasing the supply of HIVE tokens.
Economics says if you increase the supply of a given item, you will reduce its price. Also, and oppositely, if you reduce the supply of a given item, you will increase its price.
The single most important issue Hive needs to address is this economic issue. Obviously that encompasses several spectrums of lesser issues but solving the issue will have a MASSIVE positive impact on the platform. What is the solution and what will the positive impacts be?
The simple answer is that Hive as a platform needs to reduce the amount of HIVE tokens in circulation. But how? This can be done in many ways and I highly encourage Hive as a platform to discuss, generate ideas, and implement the best/most popular ideas.... But a simple solution is for Hive to offer services and or merchandise to Hive users in exchange for HIVE tokens. This can’t be arbitrary, these have to be services/products that Hive users actually want. This can be discovered easily with discussions and polls. If enacted successfully, this reduces the overall amount of HIVE tokens that go into circulation as it happens at the first layer of distribution, the content creator. This has a similar impact on the market as a Bitcoin Halving, the more efficient the achievement of offering products/services to content creators, the higher the reduction of HIVE tokens going into circulation and the higher the upward force of valuation on the HIVE token. If I were a business attempting this I would shoot for a 30% rate of currency retention but whether or not that’s viable depends on what the platform can offer its users (which is typically placement and advertising in the case of media/social media) and whether such demand is present or can reasonably be created.
(Source: rmafed.com)
But this is only half of the equation. This does not address the tokens actually in circulation. Hive as a platform needs to find a profitable way to remove tokens out in circulation from non-platform users. The simplest way this can be achieved is by purchasing HIVE in exchange for USD below current market rate, This can easily be directed with a fixed percentage. In the presence of a long term upward trend this only makes money for the platform. Dollar Cost Averaging can then be used as a long term strategy to bring consistent liquid assets into the Hive platform while minimizing negative impacts on the HIVE token market valuation which means mitigating negative impacts on the market price against the average Hive content creator as well as the greater incentives attracting users to the platform.
Here is the net result of both of these strategies if employed simultaneously with a reasonable degree of success. It creates value for HIVE tokens in the form of raising the value of HIVE’s price by reducing the amount of supply. This increase in value creates long term market trends that signals traders to purchase HIVE tokens further reducing the supply and increasing the value of HIVE. Purchasing HIVE tokens from non-platform users raises awareness of the platform that it exists and that it is something beyond the letters “HIVE” on crypto exchanges. This also attracts more users via raised awareness but also via a higher valuation of HIVE tokens which translates to greater rewards per post, imagine if a post evaluated on Hive at 30$ actually brought $60USD. This also concentrates funds within the Hive platform which allows the platform to invest in its own proliferation in whichever way it sees fit be it resource acquisition, marketing, enhancing existing resources, offering new/existing products/services, increasing HIVE circulation reduction pool ect.
How HIVE tokens travel to the market via its users in and of itself is not a problem. Doing nothing to counteract this economic reality is. Hive did not create this problem, it was inherited. Solving this problem however will create the proper economic incentives necessary not only to retain existing users, but continue to attract new ones and do so at a much greater rate than right now. The attempts by the platform to draw more people to get involved in Hive essentially should be viewed by the platform as talent acquisition. Most people will choose to generate content for Hive and that’s great but along with those people will also come others who will like to become developers or host their own nodes or provide services and resources in other ways like me right now providing economic information to improve the existing community. More People = More Skills and Resources.
Right now this second with the system being as it is, if a billion people came to Hive and became active participants generating all kinds of content and rewards the net result would push the market valuation of Hive tokens into the ground as you would have a massive flood of HIVE tokens into the market meaning a giant increase in supply and the inevitable loss of value as the result of said increase in supply.
The counterintuitiveness of economics via the
incentivisation of individuals currently stands in opposition to Hive’s most important goals as a community/platform. But this is anything but unfixable. The magic of economics is that people respond to incentives and if those incentives are brought into harmony with the goals of Hive as a community/platform it can be viewed as similar to jogging with the wind to your back, you still have to do the work but it’s easier than if you had to run into a headwind... which is what the platform is doing right now economically speaking.
-Kush Freeman
Content is a product we refuse to sell. Attracting creators but refusing to market the platform and content to paying consumers is much like hiring a performer but forgetting to put butts in the seats that surround the stage. Staking Hive is how the consumer buys our product. If you look at everywhere else in the arts/entertainment/information industry, you'll have thousands of consumers to every one content creator.
Look around. Where are the consumers? Why are there thousands of posts and barely any comments under majority of them? This community focuses on attracting more and more creators. The role of the consumers is almost always overlooked, yet when you have a product, the consumer plays the most important role.
People hit 'like' buttons all day. They spend hours writing comments under articles and videos. Thousands of people daily donate to content creators. They buy subscriptions. Always spending money. Hive offers them a better deal. The consumer no longer has to throw their money away. The consumer gets consumer rewards; they get paid to consume, provided they paid, much like buying a membership. They can have their money back if the token doesn't tank. They were going to burn that money anyway so it's no real loss.
We can continue marketing and attracting creators, filling up the stage with performers, but without people in the seats filling the stadium, this is a waste of time. Lack of dedicated consumers has been one of main problems. Any other business that operates like this knows you need to bring money in the door. Again, content is a product we simply refuse to sell. We just keep making more product.
Have a nice day.
Perfect analogy :-)
This is a very important topic that can be streamlined with the economic issues defined in this article. This is also going to be the topic of the next article I’m working on. I won’t go into everything right here but I can give you the general idea of that article.
As you state here who are the consumers of the content that is generated by Hive? How does this content serve the greater community of Hive? What are the incentives currently in place and how do these incentives promote or oppose the ambitions of Hive as a platform. Can anything be done about this? Is it good or bad? What are the solutions? What can or should be done if anything?
My response here was actually a snippet from this post.
Follow up article here:
https://esteem.app/hive-139531/@kushfreeman/how-hive-can-encourage-growth
This is such a great and extensive article, raising a lot of good questions that usually most Witnesses like to run away from...
I see you've promoted it. I hope it catches the attention it deserves. 😉
I completely missed the logic of how selling items reduces the supply. Do you expect someone to make items, exchange them for Hive, and then burn the Hive out of the goodness of their heart? What did I misunderstand?
There is a good chance somebody will exhange this Hive for HP instead of dollars. This is the only answer that comes to my mind.
The idea here is that someone who has the capability to manufacture a product or has access to sub-wholesale products be able to create and sell Hive products/merchandise on behalf of the platform in exchange for HIVE tokens rather than USD creating a new form of token retention and reducing the supply of Hive tokens further.
Unfortunately, that manufacturer would have to be independently wealthy because they would essentially be paying for all the labor and supplies for the merchandise without turning around and selling the Hive they were paid in to pay for those costs. This would just be a round about way of buying Hive from the open market.
This is the issue. All the use cases that exists have to operate using fiat In one way or the other. As a result, they need to turn around and sell their Hive to pay for those bills. This is why many witnesses are constantly powering down to pay for bills. It isn’t their fault, just the truth.
This is exactly why Steemit Inc sold steem monthly. Even the devs who believed in the platform needed to be paid in fiat because their bills need to be paid in fiat.
There needs to be a major reason to hold Hive that independent people are willing to invest more than the businesses, etc are selling.
Not really, it really is cheaper to manufacture products than one would assume and it is even easier to purchase for distributor price and sell for wholesale/retail. Certainly the word manufacture invokes the mental picture of a factory and vastly expensive resources but a motivated individual on a surprising modest income could easily take advantage of such an opportunity if they dug around on where to find what for reasonable prices in reasonable quantities.
Now if the individual in question did happen to be independently wealthy they would certainly be well poised to engage in such an endeavor. But it’s certainly not required. But for this idea to have the maximum positive impact on Hive this would pretty much need to be a motivated Hiver who believes in the platform rather than just approaching some company and having them make goods that way.
The idea is for the majority of the margin made on the products to benefit Hive so I’ll use hats as an example. Hats are secured by the dedicated Hiver at $3.50 ea in bulk. The hats are sold for retail to Hive users for say $20.00 including shipping. It’s also specifically made know to the Hive platform users that margins made on these products go specifically to support Hive. The Dedicated Hiver can opt to be paid by the platform in Hive tokens which can be transferred directly to their account at market rate.
Now fiat certainly is a reality that we need to deal with as mentioned in the article we trade Hive currencies for fiat because we can’t purchase things with Hive, yet. A good merchandising campaign enacted by the platform changes this. It’s of little consequence if one or a couple merchandisers on behalf of the platform exchange the Hive they earn for another currency.
Now bringing USD into the platform. This was what the article was talking about with Dollar Cost Averaging. Let’s say I’m sitting on a ridiculous sum of Hive. I want to get the most out of selling my currency, but I don’t want to negatively impact the market price of the currency by selling such a large volume all at once. So instead of just selling it all at once everywhere I can, I perform controlled dispersions into the markets at regular intervals, let’s say every two weeks. Every two weeks I sell a predetermined and consistent sum of Hive for USD on as many exchanges as necessary directly proportional to the sum of Hive routinely being sold in question. This allows the platform to have access to as much or little USD as it needs to operate while still being able to enact the long term economic strategies on the Hive currencies.
A quick “fix” would be to over incentivize staking so people really want to stake their token which dries up Hive in exchanges.
I am not exactly sure what that would look like. I am sure there are many clever ideas out there.
Shooting from the hip here but .... maybe longer staked Hive earns more RC weight over time for the same amount of Hive. In the future when RC become more valuable, the user will earn more passive income from longer staked Hive then someone who just stacked because they can rent out more RC, etc. That make any sense
Or really crazy idea is somehow each token gets a unique identifier tied to the block it was created. Earlier dated tokens should have more influence, value, whatever it would be than more recent token. The incentive would be to hold onto token and not get rid of them. So when you stake it isn’t just how much but what type. It would be like holding 2009 bitcoins vs 2020 bitcoins if the 2009 bitcoins had unique traits.
Like a good wine. I like it
This could be used as a vehicle to try to reduce the supply of Hive tokens in circulation but the easiest available way to do that without making drastic changes is to increase the rewards of having a large stake of Hive Power which comes in the form of increasing the weight of people’s ability to distribute rewards proportional to their Hive Power balance. That has the result of making whales more powerful.
Unless there is a popular trend floating around that I’m currently ignorant of, Its my understanding that most users leave their default reward settings on 50/50 which creates a fork in this flow of distribution, but the strategies suggested in the article to achieve token retention can target HP, the issue with this is most people favor instant gratification over delayed gratification so people still have to choose on their own if they want to power down their HP, but the simple inclusion for this is into the strategies suggested in the article to accept HIVE tokens as payment for goods and or services which would serve the purpose of cutting into the percentage of tokens that are traveling to the market before they leave the platform.
What? More content doesn't generate more inflation. There's no direct production of Hive as a result of production of content. This is fallacious.
I disagree with your thesis. I appreciate you considering this topic, but do not agree with your analysis.
Thanks!
I addressed this earlier in the thread but it is worth reposting. I will address all the other unanswered comments in this thread later today when I get more free time.
“I’m glad you pointed this out as it helps define the message of the article. Another observant reader pointed this out on an attempt I made at a cross post, and this was the answer that I provided him:
https://steem.com/steem-bluepaper.pdf
This brings us behind what is described in the article as “the first layer of distribution” meant to identify the content creators as the primary distributors. Whether or not HIVE has (it obviously does) a rewards distribution pool prior to content creator distribution to the markets is somewhat irrelevant but I’ll explain why. It doesn’t however negate your observation as this pinch point has its own economic implications which I will list here.
How the currencies are received by the markets as described in the article are correct. However, with the setup of the rewards pool the impact this has on the intended users is that the more users come on to the platform the more scarce these rewards become between the users as a finite amount of rewards are distributed across the population of users on the system who are performing the incentivized activities. If those billion users showed up and all actively participated in incentivized activities finite rewards would be few and far between in that large volume of users. This still works against Hive’s greater goal of growing and maintaining a community as less users on the platform will see more rewards provided the incentivized activities are being performed.
Hive would still massively benefit from the strategies suggested in the article or other similar actions performed by the platform for the reasons pointed out in the article. Using strategies to ensure long term upward market trends in the valuation of Hive currencies would serve the greater Hive community rather than the negative up and down that has been seen in the market performance of Hive currencies.
I would also like to point out that whether or not there is a finite pool or infinite stream of HIVE behind the performance of incentivized actions is not the critique of the article. The critique certainly is to bring all the economic incentives in harmony with the goals and ambitions of the platform regardless of what Hive felt was the most preferable way of distribution of its tokens from their origin to the markets.”
Well, I appreciate your considered response, but must acknowledge that the finite pool of inflation would produce price pressure in response to an influx of users. My own observations of the history of the blockchain over several years has revealed that distribution is problematic due to legacy financial mechanisms supplanting rhetoric supporting decentralization, and this is what prevents price appreciation.
And that’s essentially why it’s not really important whether or not the finite rewards pool or infinite rewards stream is present, although they have their own economic implications, they essentially are subject to the same reaction by the market upon distribution, a downward market force on the given valuation.
This is so important.
How about running a Hive Agency, similar to what influencer agencies do? The agency makes a deal with the content creator to promote or display a product for X amount of dollars paid in HIVE.
This can be a temporary solution, before rolling ads in the platform, and probably less obtrusive in the long run.
CTA's can be added to posts and tracked in the normal way with Google Analytics, or platforms like @3espeak can add a CTA button Overlay.
I personally like the idea of being able to advertise on the platform and not just in the form of boosting posts.
Simple example, I wish to begin selling Hive Hats with the Hive logo on them in a variety of colors for both men and women and I’m willing to accept payment in Hive currencies. I should be able to advertise on the platform to users on the platform and if the platform didn’t want to open advertising to the totality of the internet, they could choose to only accept payment in hive currencies rather than hive currencies and USD.
That would be great, and the potential is infinite.
I can't wait to click a button and buy something using Hive. LBRY just launch something like that for digital content.
I’ve said this elsewhere in the thread but there are other cool things that could be done too like charging a small fee of Hive to hide or edit posts older than 7 days.
yeah, great ideas. Is all of this going into suggestions or you reckon that the only way to implement those changes is by having the ability or the team to code and submit an MVP?
Right now I’m kinda just testing the waters seeing what people think and seeing if the devs are open to suggestions. Users seem to enjoy the ideas and the devs muted my follow up article that I posted in their community as a suggestion. (That link here) Attracting More Bees
So for right now the impression I have gotten from them is that they are not open to ideas/suggestions but it only takes one admin to block a post and that doesn’t speak for the greater community who never seen the piece that was written.
Hopefully more interest builds around and there's a chance to be heard. I'm wondering why muting the post.
I've just went and found the post in Peakd as I'm not using Esteem. Voted and reblogged it.
Cheers
Excellent article :)
In my opinion, for a start, we need one thing - ads. Hive should allow advertisers to buy ads and use not only Hive/HBD as payments but also USD/other crypto - those would be auto-exchanged to Hive/HBD so the payment can be distributed to content creators and burned in some degree. On other words - we need demand :)
One thing though:
The amount of Hive created each day is constant no matter how many users generate content .
I’m glad you pointed this out as it helps define the message of the article. Another observant reader pointed this out on an attempt I made at a cross post, and this was the answer that I provided him:
https://steem.com/steem-bluepaper.pdf
This brings us behind what is described in the article as “the first layer of distribution” meant to identify the content creators as the primary distributors. Whether or not HIVE has (it obviously does) a rewards distribution pool prior to content creator distribution to the markets is somewhat irrelevant but I’ll explain why. It doesn’t however negate your observation as this pinch point has its own economic implications which I will list here.
How the currencies are received by the markets as described in the article are correct. However, with the setup of the rewards pool the impact this has on the intended users is that the more users come on to the platform the more scarce these rewards become between the users as a finite amount of rewards are distributed across the population of users on the system who are performing the incentivized activities. If those billion users showed up and all actively participated in incentivized activities finite rewards would be few and far between in that large volume of users. This still works against Hive’s greater goal of growing and maintaining a community as less users on the platform will see more rewards provided the incentivized activities are being performed.
Hive would still massively benefit from the strategies suggested in the article or other similar actions performed by the platform for the reasons pointed out in the article. Using strategies to ensure long term upward market trends in the valuation of Hive currencies would serve the greater Hive community rather than the negative up and down that has been seen in the market performance of Hive currencies.
I would also like to point out that whether or not there is a finite pool or infinite stream of HIVE behind the performance of incentivized actions is not the critique of the article. The critique certainly is to bring all the economic incentives in harmony with the goals and ambitions of the platform regardless of what Hive felt was the most preferable way of distribution of its tokens from their origin to the markets.
All right, I still find some contradiction here:
... and what we talked about. So, imagine just one in a thousand is interested in powering up and investing into curation power which is also attention control. Basically, you promote any chosen content by being a powerful curator. If you're new, you have to buy this scarce token on the markets.
How the currencies go to the market is correct as of now but the flow cannot exceed the reward pool even if all the users wish to dump their rewards immediately. And users who have learned the power of powered up Hive will not be so quick. Also, a billion new users will need RC to perform upon the platform. If they want to compete for rewards with old users, they will need to invest. Time or money.
Other suggested mechanisms in the article might be ok, I have no experience in that regard.
this is really an important point.
Let's not say a billion people came to HIVE. Let's say 500,000 did. For one thing, unless they invested in and staked a lot of HIVE to begin with they wouldn't make much on their product (articles). And even if they did invest, it would still take some time for people to get to know them and want to vote for them. All that investment would seem to me to increase the value of HIVE.
And what if their was very little investment but still 500,000 new people? Only a few of those people would stay dedicated and put in the time and quality to succeed here. And don't forget, most of the rewards we earn here (at least half) are paid in HIVE staking.
Another question. Have you read the white paper? Does more people mean more blocks will be produced? Does HIVE have interest? Is there a certain amount of coins produced like Bitcoin and then a halving? How many HIVE will be mined before we've reached the final coin to go into circulation?
Just some considerations that fall outside the typical economic scenarios.
In that case you have low user retention as a result of the difficulty level in relation to obtaining rewards which although on a different topic (user rewards) furthers the point of the article that the economic incentives are not aligned with the goals and ambitions of Hive as a platform.
The series of questions you have, yes I’ve read the white paper and encourage all to read it. The link is here:
https://steem.com/SteemWhitePaper.pdf
With the other questions, most are answered by the white paper. What do I think about these things? I’m not going to publish those opinions at this time due to the fact that if Hive were my own business and I was looking at modifying it I would try to make subtle rather than drastic changes within the existing systems to alter the economic circumstances to bring the incentives in harmony with the ambitions of the platform. Think scalpel rather than chain saw.
Interesting. I know back in 2018, marketing at all was difficult at best. What with the complete censorship of Crytpo by Google and Facebook. I'm not against marketing but I think some of HIVE's greatest attractions are its lack of censorship and decentralized nature (or at least an attempt at decentralization).
I wonder where a site like HIVE might benefit from marketing? It seems counterintuitive to market on the mainstream media, offering exactly what they don't have. If the ads were successful, it's hard to think they wouldn't just censor them again. Of course, there's always marketing within the cryptosphere and on Twitter.
Also I wonder if marketing could be done through the process of creating a proposal? Seems it would have to be well thought out and written accordingly. That's a little beyond my solo abilities. 👍😁
I’m actually working on another article right now that covers how this can be done effectively but in a nuanced fashion.
Marketing is key but I’ve found a way to properly align it with economic incentives that would strongly encourage users to participate in this form of marketing but the end result wouldn’t be the obnoxious spamming of ads either here on Hive or elsewhere. Placement is good but this form will be received as word of mouth advertising in an effective form.
When I finish this article I will be sure to link it in this thread so you can share your opinion on what you think about it.
Nice. Looking forward to reading it.
Follow up article here:
https://esteem.app/hive-139531/@kushfreeman/how-hive-can-encourage-growth
great insights, so how do we do this?
This is where politics enter the mix, essentially these ideas need to be presented to those who have a say in the actual governance of Hive. Then more precise and definitive models/plans need to be discussed and created. This essentially would cover all the “How do we do this? What resources do we need to do it? What is the best way to make this a thing? What results can we reasonably expect? What will have been improved as a result of this implementation?” Once all the hows and whys and what’s are worked out then a plan for implementation can be designed and from there it’s put in the work of actually making the agreed upon changes.
why don't you join the Hive governance and make this happen?
I can’t say I’m against that idea at all.
good!
The sellable product we have at our disposal here is paid promotion but unfortunately the 'community' has decided that it's not acceptable to buy promotion, or upvotes but autovoters which exacerbate the problems you describe are used with aplomb.
Sadly this will never change because the top producers are doing Ok being supported by their peers and thus have zero incentive to change what for them, is a profitable system.As @nonameslefttouse put so eloquently, we just have a load of product and no buyers except of course other producers.
As for mass adoption, the same big earners, who are linked to developers don't want that because there would be less to go around so to thwart adoption, they simply refuse to create mobile Dapps which of course what the masses use to consume with these days.
Nothing has changed in 3 years, nothing will ever change despite the best efforts of a number of people fighting against the tide.
This just comes back to polling the community for what it would like to see offered as a product/service, for instance adding a hide button for old posts and allowing users to pay with Hive currencies to hide that old post or update it.
As for the other issues mentioned, this is where the decentralized nature of the platform makes certain decisions/actions difficult. Who is going to be responsible for X funds/operations? Why should they be there? Furthermore if a group of people work together and are effective at what they do as a unit they are going to be monetarily incentivized to maintain productive relationships and resist change unless it enhances the results/rewards. With that said, a decentralized entity is still a great place for an individual, it just means that groups of individuals need to compete with other groups of individuals. This competition is a good thing like businesses competing to sell similar products to a consumer, it’s just under the decentralized entity this looks more like two departments of the same corporation competing to more effectively market products to the same consumers rather than different companies ie, we all work together as a community under the same banner but we are all still in competition with one another.
Seems you care about the numerical exchange rate of one token in Hive platform, which is taken care of in various ways. Primarily, one does not earn HIVE, but HBD and HP.
Secondly, in cryptocurrencies the exchanges are pretty free-market based, so the number of mined coins is not a thing any rational investor looks at. You can count yourself, how many BTC would everyone have, if it was split evenly?
And the main point, the real value is in everything, on resources. Technical, physical, talents etc. For quick profits, you need to scam some rich guy, that's how they got their wealth in the first place.
So few issues here I’ll address them point by point in the order presented.
Point 1) The same trend is present with HBD for the same reason.
The idea behind HBD is to keep it pegged at 1$. But this idea, although good for content creators does not provide any incentive for long term investors and only for short term investors if there happens to be attractive market behavior present. So really, HBD is wanted to be sold by content creators the vast majority of the time and as for buyers there’s no real incentive for them to get involved unless one is a day trader reacting to recent market behavior. Long story short: market incentives good for content creators, bad for market buyers
As for HP that accumulates within your account, if you ever choose to power down your account you will receive HIVE which you will find right now is only is trading somewhere around $0.26 per HIVE at the time of this reply.
Point 2) The point that rational investors do not consider the amount of coins mined before making a purchase I would have to guess is a fair assumption. But this assumption misses the point of the article. The article is suggesting that the laws of economics be used to enact a strategy that raises the value of the HIVE currencies in the form of positive long term market trends to make HIVE both as currencies and a platform more attractive and more valuable to platform users and prospective investors via the crypto markets.
Point 3) The final point touches on the second point. Resources certainly factor into an evaluation of something’s worth but the final point presented misses the message the article is trying to convey. My point number two above mentions the strategy presented as it relates to cryptocurrency marketplace investors. The totality of the article is not suggesting anything that has to do with a get rich quick scheme. The strategies if successfully enacted use the laws of economics not only to attract investors in the crypto markets but also to help Hive achieve its most important goals within by monetarily incentivizing individuals to engage in behaviors that achieve and or expand on Hive’s greatest goals such as growing its community and keeping its users.
I would be very cautious while applying traditional economics to crypto world, obviously I don't deny supply and demand law but system is more complex and I see showing last month chart as plain manipulation.
We are still in early development phase and entangled in broader market cycles and price of Hive is inevitably tight to price of other crypto assets.
However, all the new potential usecases, services and goods availabe to purchase with Hive will make the whole ecosystem stronger. This is open sandbox, just bring your tools and build!
The posting of the chart was intended to show the downward force on the market price of Hive as the result of content creators looking to sell their Hive currencies in exchange for other cryptos/USD. The point here is if this economic reality is addressed there can be a continuous upward market trend rather than a downward one imposed by the design of the platform.
I think you capped off your comment perfectly, “This is an open sandbox, just bring your tools and build.” Unlike mainstream social media platforms where you get what you get and if you don’t like it leave, here one can opt to become a builder and create that which they feel is needed.
This post right here, (link below) is exactly what my article seeks to address.
https://esteem.app/hive/@lyubo19/hive-thoughts-and-future
Follow up article to Massive Hive Problem:
https://esteem.app/hive-174578/@kushfreeman/attracting-more-bees
Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the price pool per day/week/whatever remains the same and stake distributes it. A billion content creators will split the same amount of rewards that are now being split by thousands. So, less Hive per person, more demand because of the HP curation incentive (mining capabilities), better price. Those who chose to sell now (I have done so from time to time) should be aware that they are selling too low in comparison to what they can receive in case of a critical mass of users.
We're either content with the low price we sell at now, or we hodl. Personal choice. If there's a demand for HP, there's plenty of relatively cheap Hive on the market. Our choice, our risk, our fears and doubts...
Your understanding of the current Hive rewards distribution is correct. I speak on this specific point early in the thread, check out my reply to Cardboard.
I’ve also posted a follow up article that follows this one, view that article here
Attracting More Bees.
Thanks. Will do :)
Nothing has really changed after the creation of HIVE after STEEM.
No reason to really create content to an empty audience. No incentive for people to sign on
As of now unless there are facts I’m currently ignorant of, Hive is simply a clone of Steemit with all the same benefits and detriments.
Hopefully this community is open to change and improving upon the platform.
I have wrote a follow up article to this one that provides solutions to some of the flaws in this platform and this solution addresses the problems you mention here.
Attracting More Bees.
I speak from my own experiences of buying BTC in order to get my hands on STEEM at the time. Where I made a purchase at local ATM that raped me for a service fee.
@iliyan90
@kushfreeman
Great topic my man it’s a really big problem that value comes out of the sellers of Hive...
That’s unfortunate many people are just doing living out of it...
I don’t know and don’t get it why...
We should hold together and grow stronger and stronger not selling...
———
I’m also teaching yoga online Bulgarian/English if you think you can find it interesting or just something new to try more then welcome 🙏
Project info:
Bulgarian / EnglishI'm here to stay #bgn