Very interesting, although not totally surprising.
The 12 whales who aren't witness voting, are they still active on the platform?
I guess it is up to no. 38 on this list ?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Very interesting, although not totally surprising.
The 12 whales who aren't witness voting, are they still active on the platform?
I guess it is up to no. 38 on this list ?
That list is a little confusing.
For my analysis, 500,000 SP + is a whale. So 36 and up on this list.
https://mysteemitfriends.online/ownSP.php
12 of those, minus the 4 at the top have 0 votes cast for a witness.
Some are delegating, some are staff, some are mysteries.
can i get get this broken down into 3 lists please? :D
Define active? Posting, not really, probably not ever for most.
But with an investment of 2/3/4 million, i'd certainly be actively checking in on the 'sub management' levels :)
Not necessarily. Many (online) investors do not care about 30-40%, especially not in the crypto space.
Additionally, we would have to check when they acquired their stake. Their investment may be much lower than $1m. Riding it out until one year after SMT launch is definitely smart and can happen without any form of micromanaging or short term ROI even.
Some may even not be too keen on becoming “the next freedom”.
Especially not if they bought at $0.07-0.2.
As far as content creation and voting/curation, I can see what you mean.
But I would expect most med/high stakeholders to show interest in the node owners and people who can force changes which can massively impact direction, and thus their investment.
Put me on the list for 'the next freedom', cheers :D
There is no need for them to show interest yet, that because of two main reasons:
The market is still not too dependent on more traditional evaluation principles. Cryptoes itself have not gone mainstream yet and a larger userbase still means massive value growth. Remember that most tech IPOs have happened based on years of negative numbers but massive user growth. Some of those companies did not even make a profit when going public yet became member of the elusive most valuable companies. Thus as long as Steem somehow follows the market’s average performance it is fine.
The second reason would be the large stake held by Steemit Inc. While that stake isn’t used to vote, it also is a sword of Damocles at the same time. Imagine governance doesn’t approve of SMT implementation? What happens with that stake? What happens to the value of Steem? Did Steemit Inc just waste two years doing nothing with any return? Additionally, so far, they are the only ones capable to deliver a HF (knowledge level based).
As long as those two elements are the status quo it is ok for some of those larger stakeholders. If things change tho, expect their interest to be piqued.
Yeah I understand your points.
My angle is from a slightly frustrated newer witness, who is on the lookout for accounts interested in our approach.
https://steemit.com/witness-category/@steemcommunity/introducing-steemcommunity-a-witness-project-by-abh12345-and-paulag
Whilst some of the accounts not voting are likely Steemit owned, and passive investors waiting for the herd, I do see some accounts interacting with votes - these ones i'm a little confused by. It's a bit like taking out, but not putting in - especially when the votes are focused on few accounts, some of them witnesses.
Cheers for the perspective.