I think the fall in satoshi or CMC value is more to do with investors and speculators realizing the ninja mined stake is a big issue, when steemit inc is selling at a constant rate. I think they've recently stopped but they haven't burned a single token, they could start tomorrow again if they want.
Also there are more competitors coming up like meos.
At the end of the day, steem is not an investor friendly coin.
Steemit stopped powering down awhile ago and we are at ATL in satoshi. I know many cryptos are in the same ballpark but we can just look at CMC ranking for that. We have seen coins like BAT, even dogecoin hodl more stable then STeem has. Me, as an investor, never cared much about Steemit's stake TBH. I care about the long run and viability of the system which relies first on a working economy and token distribution (current release of tokens not initial).
I don't agree. Steem will never become a bitcoin type of coin. It is social media. And right now steemit inc is not profitable.
What needs to happen is steemit inc becoming profitable. Buying back steem and burning it, much like what binance has done. Look at the Binance price vs satoshi.
I'm strictly talking about token price, and what would attract more investors. And the long term viability.
I don't think the profitability of Steemit has any relevance to the userbase - as long as some mechanism to develop Steem remains nominal. Social media has proved to the the most profitable business model in the world today, and Steem failing to capitalize on that is extremely telling.
It is the failure of the social media that has caused the decline on CMC, and this is due to financial manipulation negatively impacting the value of Steem. This failure results from incentives to profiteer and extract resources necessary to increase the value of Steem, rather than investing and improving the value of the investment vehicle to generate capital gains. Capital gains are the single most compelling reason to invest since prehistory, and Steem not only fails to encourage that with the rewards model, but inculcates a rewards model contrary to that.
Stakeholders best mechanism to attain ROI is presently extracting rewards, and not capital gains. That encourages profiteers, and eliminates investors. Worst of all, it discourages content creation, by encouraging financial manipulation of rewards with substantial stake that directs rewards away from creators.
I flag trash (and morons). You have received a flag.
What we basically have now is steemit inc selling their stake to keep the ship afloat which is not long term viable for their company. If steemit inc left the blockchain tomorrow I don't think steem is in a decentralized enough state to handle that and thrive. It might survive but it wouldn't thrive. Most blockchains are going to need profitable businesses backing them to thrive. Steem is not a bitcoin.
Can't really muster a good argument, I disagree but you are stating facts. I have been for a burn for awhile now, I think you should have the option to power down stake instantly but take a % hit that is burned. I have 100k Steem, I power up today, and price moons tomorrow. I want to take out after one day, 5% fee so I would get 95k Steem and the 5% is burned. Every bull market a shit load of Steem would be burned and price discovery will actually happen. Going up so fast and having a bunch of people racing to power down and dump for profits isn't ideal. Every time one coin is burned, everyone's steem becomes more valuable, regardless of price.
I like that option of a 5% burn for early takeout. I'd keep my steem powered up if that was the case. I started my power down 2 weeks ago. Almost anything that burns coins will help the price in the long run, and right now we aren't burning any that I know of.
Is @burnpost no longer extant?
I flag trash (and morons). You have received a flag.
Make SP transferable between accounts and let the market decide.
I'll happily buy your SP directly at a 5% discount if I was just going to power it up anyway.
Or take it back to 104 week power-downs. My local bank offers a 5 year term deposit, so I don't know why 2 sounds so outlandish.
would not be a good idea, transferable SP will equal zero powerdown time
we give almost >2% to exchanges per trade anyways, 1% to trade, 1% to withdraw
might be worth introducing 5% burn to null for faster powerdown up to a certain limit, say 50% so it limits entire account powerdown during every bull market
You have 1000 SP and you transfer it to me, it's still powered up. In order to sell it I'd need to power it down.
There might be a couple of hired goons coming to break your legs and you need the money now.
I want to buy STEEM and power it up.
You advertise 1000 SP available for 750 STEEM. I accept.
I get a 25% discount on STEEM I already planned on powering up; you get instant liquidity.
as an account holder that really want to shorten the power down period, i can't agree more than a shorter powerdown, which is to my advantage
i used to have like 20+K powered up, and i used to upvote 95% of others, and about 5% for myself, then i got auto-flagged because i don't use an alt account to upvote...the flags came from some good intention dev w stakes from transisto, etc, and i discuss with them in discord that there is diminishing return in their algo as a fellow dev along with better ideas for flagging
today i've holding liquid most (>90%) of my Steem, reason I'm keeping it liquid has alos changed, helps with trading and not just be under the self-flag bot radar, etc.....basically no other way to convience them to stop flagging curatiors who only self-upvote themselves a small %, so basically that's like saying I@m 90% left Steem as a steempower stake holder...which was good for me, as my trade has increased my stake by some 130% higher than my highest SP stake
so yeah, i'm all for shorter powerdown....but that's not the point
it seems to me that in DPOS, powering up is a big indicator for others to pay attention to wealth, status, whatever, but if we're going to attract investors and content creator alike, we have to have some incentive for investors to show curation support as well as exit quicker, and some incentives for content creators to show their commitment, success, and to attract viewers, and be fair in the process of time staking
the moment we can transfer SP like transferring liquid Steem, for a reasonable amount upto a point (easily 1000 SP) SP transfer will be equivalent to liquid Steem transfer and then we break the DPOS model experiment, the only exception will be for very large amounts say 100K or 1Mil SP (even then, perhaps not)
in time arbitrage, time has value, 13 weeks is worth easily 5-15% easily depending on volatility, see options time decay, like the Black Scholes model (as few investors/traders would want to risk capital lockup for 13 weeks before selling very large amounts)
anyways, the idea of time staking for possible distribution sharing (PoB or Investor Stake Selling, whatever) requires some commitment, we can't negate staking by enabling SP transfer, UNLESS, we can make it happen with a cost eg. 3% burn to null in SP transfer (that 3% might still be to low, but i suppose you can buy it for some % discount say >5%...but i think if that happens, would probably be worth less as now the DPOS proof of stake is now in question)
think of it this way, why do you think EOS only has a 3 day powerdown?
5% burn for faster powerdown sounds brilliant, but perhaps with some limits like 5% 24hours, then scaled, like 1% every 2.x-3.x weeks.
you should propose that to be included in the EIP