In life a game studio might gather funding using GoFundMe. Countless times, people have been ripped off. One can do the same with HP, and if the project turns out to be a flop or scam, the supporter still has their money.
Problem solved.
In life a game studio might gather funding using GoFundMe. Countless times, people have been ripped off. One can do the same with HP, and if the project turns out to be a flop or scam, the supporter still has their money.
Problem solved.
Not really because the selling of the hive of HBD puts negative pressure on the tokens price thus you would have less dollar value for the tokens you hold.
The content creator seeking support could function in the same way. Those in support, staking tokens, offset the sell pressure created by the content creator attempting to make money. Consumer still has their money if creator goes away.
Only if you eliminate the chance of the token value going up or staying the same. The point is, the risk has been mitigated.
these are fair points. Lots of dynamics to #crypto and tokenomics for sure
In life, investors are often attracted when they see consumers dumping their money into supporting products. Could be potentially millions of products here and billions of consumers, if one simple concept stopped flying under the radar.
Fewer risks attract more money, naturally.
Current stakeholders showering every new face with support thinking "more people" is what's needed don't seem to realize with each new face the existing support must be shared with all other faces. That's called "stagnation."
Those keen on bailing out SPL rather than encouraging supporters to get in with their own HP are contributing to said stagnation. If I vote, all that does is encourage 1000 people to not be in support, yet still have what they want.