This shit will fly from everywhere soon

I not understand. The dash volumes in May were over 2 billion and the price 500 dollars while in 2017 not even 1 billion volumes and the price 1500 dollars. There is anyone who keeps the price low to blow it up later?

It is the biggest growth of DASH masternodes in the last one year.

It is only half of the plummet from 5000+ MN to around 4600 MN but it is very impressive. I don't know it is a growth from past investors who had to shut down their nodes and just upgraded theirs and come back to the network with their nodes or they are really new DASH investors

For such a "big platform" it doesn't seem to be seeing much use does it ?

There's always #pumpiscoming

Because we're getting a tiny bit of growth from the massive capital inflows to bitcoin and crypto in general.

But nothing that does justice to Dash's unique technological innovation that allows it to absorb as much mining interest as bitcoin while supporting a service protocol at blockchain level which bitcoin cannot.

The reason for that is that the protocol has been rigged to give away more than half the supply for zero dollars rather than exposing it to competitive bidding as all our contemporary fully-mined competitors did (and have therefore ended up with better store-of-value performance and consequently more blockchain use than we have).

Could be yes, could be not. I see 4516 nodes. You see ~4700 using your metrics. Either way it's the change in MN count that causes the price rise. Once it reaches the new equilibrium stable nodecount that's when we get the problem again - of cancerous free monetary issuance tanking the price as it spills onto exchanges.

i.e. you're proving my point - that it's the 1st derivative of masternode count that causes the marketcap growth, not the count itself. Therefore a strategy is needed to optimise marketcap when masternode growth rate is zero. That is the strategy I outlined here (and quantified here) so that we could more intelligently target the "sweet-spot" optimal store-of-value performance point illustrated here.

Did you read a single thing I wrote above ?

We're not rewarding masternodes for their investment if they don't hold their dollar value after the nodecount stabilises. We're penalising them for their investment.

(Note I said after the nodecount stabilises, so your reference price for store-of-value metrics - according to your own criteria - is the Dash price once the new nodecount equilibrium is reached. Not some "got in early" pre-pump price).

This only works if you measure your wealth in Dash. Nobody does that. They measure their return against whatever currency they invested to acquire the holding and against other assets that they "might" have invested in (opportunity cost).

Dash therefore cannot "pay ROI". Only the market can do that (by revaluing the masternode collateral which has far more to do with "ROI" than masternode rewards do). Lets say an investor buys a masternode for $200. Then the price drops to $170. It would take more than 2 FULL YEARS of masternode rewards just to recover that loss and break even again assuming the price didn't correct any further.

So the protocol should be optimising ROI from capital gain, not from masternode reward *. Then the rewards will take care of themselves. The two are completely distinct concepts to the extent that increasing masternode reward beyond the optimal point, DECREASES ROI by having an adverse impact on the exchange rate (which in turn devalues the collateral). This is what we always see once the nodecount reaches equilibrium.

* There are a whole host of other advantages from this, not least that ROI from capital gain does not attract tax whereas masternode rewards do, so we'd be ditching a whole lot of statutory compliance selling pressure which we have now

To this point:


Ok, lets "think of it like a bank". Here you can see exactly the problem. You don't earn interest just by having a balance. The bank has to re-invest your balance in some economic activity that generates NEW WEALTH. That activity has to be profitable to the extent that there is a surplus to pay your interest. So that could be road building, oil extraction, commercial services whatever.

Masternode collateral is only "invested' to the extent that the role of the node generates economic activity that revalues that collateral. In Dash's case there is no such onchain token-burning activity (like De-FI tokens have) so it has to be monetary velocity. But you can see from the above trends that that that has dropped to near nothing. So we're back to Dash original inheritance from bitcoin - store of value. We are offering scarcity and we should just admit that. Scarcity is optimised through mining (because competitive mining maximises the cost of acquisition from the primary supply). To compete against bitcoin we then add back in services but not by compromising scarcity the way we are at the moment, rather by selecting the reward ratio that optimises capital gain (described a couple of posts back).