You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Post-Hardfork Steem - Calm Before the Storm?

in #hardfork8 years ago (edited)

And that number will be more and more insufficient as price and number of user rises. Which was my initial point.

Yes, and as i said originally, its not about "even" distribution. Its not about what percentage of the user pool controls what percentage of the steem power. Its about getting enough significant stakeholders so that 5 people don't control more than half of the steem power. 100 people controlling half of the steem power, or 500, is better than 5. Even if that 100 or 500 actually represented a far smaller percentage of the user pool than the 5, it would still be better. Especially if they were real, non-ninja investors.

That said:

If the number of users was rising (its not), then a higher price would be reasonable for the same stake. If steem had the same number of active users as facebook, id pony up the $500K to be the next smooth in a heartbeat.

That is to say: yes, if the number of users goes up, the price of steem will probably go up, but since the reach of the site has also gone up, then investors will be willing to pay a higher price for the same stake.

SO no, it wont always be a problem. It will only be a problem for precisely as long as steem overvalued enough so that no rational person would want to spend the money to have a significant amount of influence.

Those with the most steem dictate the market.

So how are they going to force people to buy steem? Theyre not. Theyll put asks on the books for (according to you) more than 10 cents, and theyll just sit there on the books and not get filled.

This ridiculous notion that people have to buy steem even though there is no rational reason for them to want to is a big part of the reason why were down about 98% from july. The pepole with the most steem will only get to dictate the market if they participate in the market. And theyll only get to participate in the market if people are willing to buy what theyre selling.

Also, if what youre saying was true (its not. In fact, its patently absurd) then the whales, those with the most steem, have dictated the market from $5 to .13 cents. Which seems kind of contrary to their interests.

Sort:  

Its about getting enough significant stakeholders so that 5 people don't control more than half of the steem power. I'd be much more comfortable with 100 people, even if that 100 people represented a smaller percentage of the user pool, especially if they were real, non-ninja investors.

100 will look tiny when hundreds of thousands of users use steemit. So in terms of problem solving we are back to square one.

then people will be willing to pay a higher price for the same stake.

And what happens when the bulk of the users pay a higher price for the same stake? The early adopters become the new whales and so we have the same distribution problem.

It will only be a problem for precisely as long as steem overvalued enough so that no rational person would want to spend the money to have a significant amount of influence.

Gaining influence is not the only incentive to want steem power, financial incentives are also a big part of it. Also upvote value increases when the price increase, for these reason they will buy steem power at any price, if they don't the project would fail anyway as rewards would go down while user base is still growing.

This ridiculous notion that people have to buy steem even though there is no rational reason for them to want to is a big part of the reason why were down about 98% from july.

As I said above influence is only one incentive, many people buy steempower to earn profit with curation rewards. A good curator with $ 10000 stake can earn $200 per month doing nothing just by running a bot, this is arguably the main reason people are buying steem power.

We are down 98% from july because the whales decided the price was overvalued, simple as that. There was just too much pressure from them but don't assume there was no buying. If the price went to $4 in the first place it means there was buying.

The people with the most steem will only get to dictate the market if they participate in the market

Sorry I meant to say people with the most money dictate the market . So yeah the whale have the most influence in the market because they can move it both ways.

So how are they going to force people to buy steem?

They can't force volume, but they can maintain price. If people don't see the point of selling below 0.05, then the price just won't get to the 0.01 that might be attractive to many buyers. It will stagnate at 0.05 with few sellers and few buyers. i.e. low volume. That's actually what we've been seeing for a long time, but with a more or less steady declining trend. There is, however, no guarantee the declining trend will continue or that the price would ever get low enough for you or others like you want to make large purchases.

This is why many coins, even almost completely worthless ones, almost never go all the way to zero. They get stuck with existing holders unwilling to sell, buyers unwilling to buy, and volume cratering.