MaidSafeCoin (MAID) - Price & Trading topic (Part 1)

I think that’s rather the point being made. You can’t really find these bets in the volume you would need to use proper bankroll/portfolio management. If you could find lots of things like safenetwork then absolutely, bet small on all of them… and tell me about them please!!!

If, however, you come across a handful of things that have a real >5% shot at doing many, many thousands of % in your lifetime, then from a gambler’s/profiteer’s perspective I would suggest you bet what you can afford to lose on them. They are very rare opportunities and it hurts much more to see what you could have made (feel sick having 1btc in iota right now). I’ve never heard of anything quite like safenetwork and don’t expect I will again in my lifetime.

The reality is that really good risk/reward punts are very difficult to find, despite there being countless projects that would like to think they had as much potential. Rare things with great potential, that take a lot of effort to understand, deserve more consideration and greater risk tolerance.

I guess it all depends what you want, how you feel about risk and the investments you are making. Personally I have more than 60% of my liquid capital in crypto and I feel ok with that. I see a potential upside that makes the risk quite easy to tolerate imo. We always bounce back and do what we need to do when we need to do it, I don’t mind a bit of risk.

Given the general risk/reward pickings on offer in the world of crypto I think you would have to be pretty daft to have as little as 2% in the game (unless you were some kind of billionaire whale and the volume was too low for you to care).

The 2% rule is fine for consolidating and protecting wealth… it’s pretty useless if you’re trying to make a load of money though. I don’t think many people here are rich enough to use the advice tbh. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:


Well, there’s quite a lot of these kinds of bets happening and they are accelerating. The cliche is that we are in the early 1990s of the web era again for crypto-currency tech - I think it’s apt.

This should give your some idea:

The 2% rule on high octane speculative investments is plenty say you have $100k as your nest egg… $2k on 100x is $200k. If you had invested $2k into Bitcoin in 2011 when markets opened around $1 for the first half of that year you would have $1.2m.

Now if you try all in betting, the chances are you’d lose your portfolio before you strike gold if you ran a ROI simulation.

1 Like

Feels a bit like you missed my points willy :wink:

I’m going to go ahead and say this is where we seem to disagree most strongly (although it’s not the end of our difference of opinion). I don’t think any of the other bets you might consider are actually anything like this one or have anything like the same kind of risk-reward profile. Even BTC in 2011 pales by comparison and that was an infinitely better bet then than most other alt coins are now.

Again, I think you are analysing this opportunity in the wrong context. You are describing just another investment tool instead of what this really is - a very rare opportunity that is not really comparable with other developments in this space. It feels to me like perhaps you have not had as many eureka moments with SAFE as some of us yet. SAFE is nothing like the other projects that might look similar at first glance, so although 2% might be applicable for some, it is certainly not just another 2% shot to add to your portfolio imo.

Of course, one does not bet all of ones spare capital on one long-shot, but avoiding going ‘all-in’ very much depends on what you mean by ‘all’ and what you are trying to do with what you have (make quick money, make the world better by supporting the project etc, make diversified portfolio etc).

I’ll give you an example of what I mean from my own experience as a poker player to make the point a little clearer.

If I were in a casino with a few grand on my poker roll then I would likely be sitting on a small table playing for pennies and hoping my edge played out over time to a decent hourly rate and with enough bankroll management to handle the inevitable swings and downturns. The LLN (law of large numbers) dictates how I should handle my bankroll management to cope with the swings… once again I’m going to want 50-200 buy ins, so from 0.5-2% per table and quite similar to your recommendations above as every new game is a high risk proposition.

If a whale walks in with no idea how to play and a huge wad of cash then the context has changed and so must my decisions as a poker player. if I want to maximise my expectation for the day I need to adapt my usual bank roll management limits to account for this new opportunity… good gambling is all about opportunism, not just being cautious/sensible.

If you can’t sit at the table with the big opportunities then you will have to try to earn your way there from just playing the smaller tables… I’ve never met a poker player who really succeeded in a meaningful way like that (although many make some money doing it); all of the successful ones jumped on the bigger opportunities (in-game or game selection) and rode the wave to new levels. I have noticed that ‘truth’ also reflected in the world of investing, although reality is a complicated thing full of grey areas ofc.

If you are trying to protect the wealth you already have then certainly, be cautious, diversified and cynical. If you are trying to turn a modest amount of money into a large amount of money then you will likely never achieve that without being an opportunist. You can get lucky with a couple of 2% bets on things you don’t really understand, but you can equally achieve it with few larger bets on things you have put more effort into.

Things like BTC and NXT (and many more) have shown some crazy ROI. You can find examples in them to show how a couple of % gamble could yield a great return if you bought the bottom and sold the top… which never happens to anyone ;).

If you only have $2k in the bank and no portfolio then you give yourself a much better chance of success by jumping on really interesting opportunities with larger %s than you would chucking $40 at 50 things that all look similar but actually don’t offer anything like the same opportunities. In that context the 2% rule becomes terrible advice and I would suggest anyone doing that will likely lose it all over the long term.

Roger Ver went and stuck his whole $20k life roll into BTC and spun it into many millions that he reinvested into a load of BTC startups. He did that because he believed in it, not because he cared about being rich. Now, I would never recommend those kinds of life choices to others, but it is misleading to make out that there is a ‘best practice’ decision here or a one-size-fits-all investment solution. What you put in depends very much on your ability to tolerate risk, your objective, your future income opportunities, your current responsibilities, your interpretation of the competition and the market etc.

Personally, in my own situation, it would be pretty daft for me to stick 2% into something like SAFE given what I know about it and the crypto markets. I’ve been balls-deep at 60%+ and then able to hedge with trading etc to get myself into a position where I am already freerolling a bet that could have cost me more than 30% of my liferoll if I’d bought and held off the bat. /brag

My only point is this really… context is everything and there are NO sensible or blanket rules when it comes to gambling/investing/taking advantage of risk-reward opportunities that present themselves to you. The 2% rule is vague and perhaps useful advice designed for people who are new to bankroll managing/investing, but it still completely depends on how you have invested the other 98% and what the opportunity is that draws your 2%… if you were to stick 2% into 50 crypto projects you’d be taking on HUGE risk because they are all linked and could all fall together with a few legislative changes.

Context is EVERYTHING and there are no magic numbers to help you on the road to sound financial decisions. As with everything in life, common sense, luck and a lot of effort are required to make decisions that look ‘good’ with hindsight ;). The 2% rule is sensible in the right context, and for some people that will apply here… it doesn’t apply to most people though imo.

/degenerate gambler out :smiling_imp:


Great post! I fully agree and I say this as someone who rode bitcoin from pennies and funded my house deposit from the gains. It is a shame I didn’t wait another 6 months, as that would have been the house bought outright! My excuse is, my wife was fit to drop a baby and it was the bottom of the housing bust - one in the hand vs two in the bush as it were!

Maidsafecoin has a familiarity about it though. The potential is there, just as the then radical bitcoin had. In many ways, safe coin itself could show similar gains to bitcoin, with the final market cap dwarfing that of bitcoin right now - the level of innovation is that high, IMO!

The last big bitcoin ramp up went from literally dollars to over $1000 in the space of weeks/months. Sometimes, with this sort of tech, it just happens that way. Something sparks and you get a forest fire. All you can do is look… look really hard… for where that next spark may be. Expending that effort from 2% really isn’t worth it… but 50%+ can make a poor man, wealthy!

This isn’t any sort of advice of course, but just a saying what did and didn’t work for me. Bitcoin has certainly made a huge difference in my life already and much of those gains are now riding on safenetcoin and the steady hand of @dirvine and the team. I feel they are in safe hands (as it were!), but fully accept it is my gamble.


well said @Traktion. Let’s see what the future holds. I have been reading about Ethereum a bit last few days and it kind of seems they are trying to roll in the direction maidsafe have been for the last 10 years. I wonder with all this talk of proof of stake e.t.c whether they are not just saying hey - we need to be more like safecoin…


Have you been as aware of btc’s potential and the possible financial gains back then when you bought for cents like you are now with safe?

A post was merged into an existing topic: MaidSafe rebuilding secure decentralised internet with BnkToTheFuture equity fundraising

Yes, absolutely. The financial crisis fascinated me at the time and I went through a self taught education on economics, what money is, what credit is, what statism is, philosophy in general, etc. Bitcoin seemed like a response to these issues and also being a software developer, the technology fascinated me.

There are still some threads on my old haunts, for anyone who is interested. Some great debates back then!

There was an older one somewhere, but I can’t find it right now.

I believe safe net could have a similar impact, if the team can make it a reality. Hold on to your hats if it does start to take off though!


Thank for sharing! I read the thread a bit. Almost realised its Potential a year before it took off when you mined a few, then just stopped :wink: But I guess it’s find either way haha

1 Like

Btw, have you seen the big short? Great movie about that. It’s on Netflix, fyi.


Has anyone else wondered about things like SAFE Network becoming massively adopted, and then everyone (giant billion dollar companies also) starts thinking in terms of decentralized internets, and then another super crazy funded group rips some of MaidSafe’s code and makes something else (GoogleCoin) and SafeCoin goes to zero?

I mean it really is a numbers game, because 12 people in Scotland competing against 31,000 full time coders of all languages just wouldn’t add up.

Or do you see everyone else using SAFE code only, and therefore SafeCoin instance as well?

I don’t see it like that. SAFEnetwork has every independent open source app and systems builder as a potential developer, not just the MaidSafe team.

This doesn’t guarantee success. There are two competing models here, and SAFEnetwork / open source / fully decentralised is the disrupter. Encumbents do get disrupted by things which start out small. That’s a fact proven many times, by Google for example :wink:


Not if it’s well adopted enough and honestly they would most likely alter the code to the point to gather data that it probably wouldn’t be anywhere near anonymous and at that point it’d be clear that if you want privacy, security, and freedom you stick with the safe network. Plus once the market picks up when safecoin is live it will be a juggernaut like bitcoin is. Alt coins can’t seem to shake bitcoin even though something like dash is more than likely superior in many ways. But safecoin is so different and part of a greater ecosystem that is all it’s own but will still welcome bitcoin and the likes. The safe network will literally swallow all digital services in time. It’s truly a pity that the equity raise is going so slowly I’m starting to have crazy thoughts like there is a collusion going on against maidsafe from the bitcoin and other tech spheres. I’m legit going nuts haha


It is a risk, for sure. I suspect safe coin will be left until last as a result, in fact. However, maidsafe are best placed to deliver, based on their experience and knowledge.

Many altcoins have tried to capitalise on the success of bitcoin and ethereum and have so far failed. I think there is a certain draw to a non-corporate entity working on the code too.

When it comes to launch, maidsafe need to be careful how they release safe coin to the world though.


But google didn’t open source any or all of it’s search code (I think it still hasn’t?) when it was starting out / doing the actual disrupting, so nobody actually could steal it and run with it early on.

Not being a negative Nilbert, but just want to make sure you understand the point I’m trying to ask about

1 Like

Nobody has understood my point thus far.

Anyone can use the inventions of open source code and run a slightly but competitive different direction with it

Ok point has gotten through. Thanks, just wanted to make sure people think of it.

I definitely think it would still have a long way up before it attracts enough attention for that to become a real possibility.

And like Mr Irvine says, who cares as long as the world gets its security!

Yes, I see the point and its a good question, but my response does still stand as well. I erred by choosing a none open source disrupter, but they exist too. Linux, Apache, OpenOffice. The difference with MaidSafe is of course it has far wider application and potential user base, market cap etc than any of those.


It is something to keep in mind though. Tbh I never understood why google (or Microsoft or whoever) went for android, but not the linux kernel. Torvalds would get serious competition in his ivory tower.

1 Like

have you seen Inside Job ? it’s like the documentary version of the Big Short-- made a few years back… and curiously with Mat Demon narrating… excellent.

1 Like