Interesting... how this relates I'm curious... have the supplies of any of these cryptos been adjusted by moving the decimal point right or left to demonstrate the opposite of the point I was making?

To cite another example besides DOT... how about Elrond, which reduced their supply 1000x by moving the decimal point 3 to the left. Before the re-denomination, ERD was trading around 2.5 cents, now eGLD is trading around $17 to 19 (not $25)

Or how about VEN to VET, where 1 VEN was swapped for 100 VET, and despite being in the beginnings of the bear market, managed to increase its marketcap shortly after the swap...

BTW, to be clear I'm not necessarily pushing that DASH follow DOT or VET in re-denominating. I'm merely pointing out an observation that more people will be drawn to own a whole coin at a lower price point. How many people are studying marketcaps when buying an asset, whether gold, stock or crypto? The price invariably gets the most consideration. More interest, more buying pressure, more decentralization in ownership. There are 7+ billion people in the world, at some point if any crypto wants to compete as a global currency, it's going to need a perceived supply much higher than in the millions. People don't want fractions of or partial ownership of things as much as the satisfying sense of full ownership...

And it doesn't necessarily need to be at the protocol level... In the future I could fully see BTC being priced in something else socially made up, let's say bits where 1 bit = 0.01 BTC or something just to make it easier on the average person's mind...


Are you sure you know what cognitive dissonance is? It seems to me that you yourself are in this state more than anyone else here for you believe that DASH is a bad store of value yet remain invested in it...

Investor will invest into what he thinks is important : whether that is with smart contracts (Coin A) or with transaction speed (Coin B)

Investor buys either 10 coins from Coin A or buys 10 coins from Coin B on public exchanges. If Fiat price is lower with Coin A, then that simply means investor can buy
more crypto coins from Coin A, but the amount of Fiat investor puts into crypto is the same for both Coin A and Coin B as investor dedicates a certain fiat amount for crypto.

Return on Investment is the raw percentage return of Coin A or Coin B from the beginning of the year to the end of the year.
Investors do not fund mining. Investors just buy coins or invest in coins or save up on coins.

1 Dash = 1 Dash everywhere, on all exchanges.

Miners fund their own mining, have their own expenses, carry their own expenses. Miners can not forward their mining costs onto exchanges, making 1 Dash more expensive then another Dash.
Mining costs are solely for miners, just like masternode costs (renting servers) are solely for masternode operators.

Miners know exactly what the mining reward and their ROI will be.
Masternode operators know exactly what the masternode reward and their ROI will be.

Both mining rewards and masternode rewards end up in the circulating supply. Some (most) will go to exchanges to be sold off, some will be kept in personal possession and saved up.

If you are trying to convince the NON-Dash holding community, then are you not doing that in the wrong place ?
This is after all the Dash ANN, maybe you should try to convince Non-Dash users in other ANN threads ?
Convert them there ?

May i suggest you try Monero's ANN thread ? They are such an energetic friendly Non-Dash community, worthy of a convert. I am sure they will have no problem keeping this coin alive.
Just don't mention my name there please.

I think you are confusing costs with revenue. Revenue is what attracts investors. Revenue is what grows the user base.
Revenue is basically what drives cryptocurrency.

Congratulation on discovering that the masternode network has a separate revenue stream.
Oh wait, you are a masternode operator... you already knew this.

Quick question : why are you running a masternode again ? could it possible be for the exact same revenue ? If masternodes are so terribly costly as you put it,
why not simply disband your masternode(s) ? Or better yet, donate all your masternode rewards to miners ? Be our shining example, lead the way forward !!

 

Are you not the one that constantly talks about revenue without cost though ? Free coins ? Leaving out the renting costs for masternode operators ?

I have heard nobody else claim that Dash Masternodes can have revenue without costs. And i know of no Dash promotion that does claim revenue without cost.
Costs that is getting more expensive by the way, as Dash Platform will require higher server hardware specs, driving up the costs for masternode operators.

Ever heard of a "free lunch" ? Well just because it's not paid for at the point of consumption doesn't mean the ingredients don't have to be bought & cooked by somebody.

Dash "free lunches" are not paid for by masternode holders (at least over hosting cost). They are paid for with a loss of marketcap.

That is why I've advocated margin parity.

Only if you subscribe to the 2+2=5 theory of accounting.

A second hand car may sell for 10% of its new value. Nobody may have literally "paid" the cost of the 90% depreciation but it's accounted for as a cost all the same and ends up being a real cost when I sell it due to the capital loss.

Similarly, the gap in your calculations (between hosting cost and MN revenue which amounts to around 95% of revenue) gets accounted for in real terms over time. If Dash primary investors are undersupplied compared with competing assets (which they are, by 55%), the market will go elsewhere. That competitive deficit devalues the capital value of your holdings over time.

That capital loss represents an unrealised "cost" that has to be offset against the masternode ROI and drastically reduces it if not cancels it altogether. If we restore a competitive supply to primary investors (by recovering the mining reward) we can address both issues. 1: arrest the haemorrhaging of investment to competing assets and in doing so 2: stabilise and grow masternode ROI in real terms instead of "Dash" terms

Some think the issues that ETC is having is from the new ETH miner that is under development.

https://medium.com/@Linzhi/linzhi-e1400-architecture-overview-6fed5a19ef70

Host talks about it at the 8 minute mark - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmxqtr7FRnI

Dash Core Group CEO Ryan Taylor Provides Some Updates



Dash Core Group CEO Ryan Taylor, the leader of the Dash decentralized autonomous organization's largest development contractor, took to Twitter on Friday afternoon to provide some much anticipated updates. In a series of tweets, he informed the community that the next iteration of Dash's software will be hitting testnet imminently.

Version 0.16 of Dash's core software will include many enhancements, and will feature the new block reward allocation that has been discussed at length in the Dash community and approved in a recent governance vote. Mr. Taylor indicated that the product brief will be updated early next week, and there was only a few odds and ends to clear up before we will see a testnet release...

Read more: https://www.dashnation.com/media/news/dash-core-group-ceo-ryan-taylor-provides-some-updates/

Thanks for reading!