Yes it would be very important feature for network. But the without some premium placing in the browser he would not be interested. This guy has yearly profit as big as current safenet market cap. He doesn’t take startups anymore. It has to be very promising long term deal with pottencial to earn really big money long term. Safenet itself can easily grow to hundreds of billions of $ market cap but it does not mean fiat to crypto exchange will be profitable. Let say he set up company for this and he does not have any support from browser. How would he target users to use his service? Safenet has no adnetwork. Ads on old internet by definition can’t work since users are on different network. There is no way how to promote the business. and in the beginning there are no webs, no search engines, nothing. No sane person would open such company with so many costs at that state. But if there were some premium deal, that is another story.
Would it not be easier to have a phone app and use the payment system on it. Just like in game purchases.
Also anon CC cards are possible. Our post office sells them to send as gifts which can be used online and worldwide.
I have zero experience with KYC and CC. So I can only guess. I would expect such anonymous CC would be restricted.
I am not sure when we’ll see MS coin price hike. So much technical update every week. Although i hardly understand most of it but it seems like strong progress.
Only problem i really see with your proposition is maidsafe would basically be endorsing a company they know nothing about.
Well, premium deal can have many forms. I can imagine even a company where maidsafe has 49% of shares in exchange for very premium GUI native integration. Those big guys usually prefer not to spend their time only money in such business. So they prefer to have some director motivated by shares to handle the company. They never want 100%. Their time is too expensive to spend it in a risky project. In fact he usually does exactly this. He delegates 1 person he trust + he wants 51%
and the rest is for motivation of the partners doing the hard work for him.
That makes more sense to me and is what i was getting at when i said yesterday
Id have thought once things were ready it would be the other way around.
Companies bidding to be the “official” retailer, rather than them requiring a sweetener.
But maybe i misunderstand you
This is maybe akin to MaidSafe taking VC, and that is not something they have wanted (for good reasons) before.
But at another stage of development (after realease, and when going commercial in app development), maybe things are different, and again for good reasons.
And also, cooperations surely must exist in some form. But if there is another option to get something, other than where capital gains interest (which is implicitly not primarily focusing on the network interest) can facilitate, then I think MaidSafe would prefer it. But becoming a bank might not really be within the scope of the company, so when comparing the benefits to the downsides, maybe it will be possible to go into such cooperations as well. Probably noone knows right now
Well this is chicken and egg problem. Network needs users, users need coins, coins has to be bought somehow. If coins can’t be bought extremely easy, network will suffer with adoption. On such network any company offering exchange services will have very small income, since there is very few users and such business will not sustain. It is very risky business. Creating company which can handle Fiat to crypto is very expensive, requires lot of skills and strong bank behind. Try to open such business and you will find out soon that banks will deny to even open you bank account. Of course in case network is already running and has many users it will be different and companies would bit for such premium spot. But this is the point, sell that future cool spot when network launch and get that service from the beginning and help the adoption.
What about (and slap me down if this is a stupid idea), but the company itself providing a service?. You buy with a CC over Maidsafe’s website, they buy an equivalent amount off the exchanges and withdraw to an escrow until the CC payment clears and then send it on to the designated wallet. The company could charge price+all service fees+a convenience charge.
Obviously at current volumes the convenience charge and the carrying cost of exchange reserves would probably not make up for the labor to set it up, but later it could be a nice little revenue addition (and something like this will eventually be necessary to onboard people I think). The instant win would be in buy side potential liquidity and onboarding.
Did you ever wonder why bittrex, poloniex and many other crypto only exchanges never had FIAT to Crypto trading? Earning millions on fees and still were not able to add FIAT to Crypto. If that were so easy every exchange would have it. Even bitfinex had to create tether and had problems with blocked bank accounts. They were forced to use some Mongolian bank since others rejected them. You need heavy bureaucratic machinery to comply.
EDIT: poloniex had to be bought by Circle to solve that problem. I don’t know what is the state with bittrex, but they have been operating years without FIAT.
Fair point. I do understand that it is a heavily regulated area. I don’t know enough to evaluate how something like maid sells its ‘use tokens’ (safecoin) from it’s own reserves, then replenishes from corporate cash when prudent … i.e. selling future services is potentially different from the ‘money transmitter’ thing. Like I said, it could be a completely infeasible idea.
In the simpler instance, perhaps a gateway crypto service that does btc->safe swaps, with the exchange stuff handled on the backend?
Bitfinex does not ask for fees, supports OMNI protocol and has ongoing vibrant open source and permissionless decentralised exchange projects. I suggested it before but it was shot down, prematurely IMO, due to “bad press”.
The banking cartel hate this sector and Tether in particular as it is the stablecoin market leader and erodes bank cartel control over USD pairings required by worldwide cryptocurrency exchanges. All your usual big finance linked mass media properties pump out negative news non-stop, but nothing of consequence has proved true after Bitfinex’s 7 years in operation. Same goes for Kraken another exchange that shows some non-bank-cartel integrity but has experience much more mass media bad press since it told the NY Attorney General to take a hike, making it a good recent example to view reputation inside the crypto community (very good) vs what mass media says about it (very bad).
Personally i dont see a chicken and egg problem.
If ppl need coins they would just farm them.
Sure, just compare how many people is using bitcoin and how many is farming bitcoin. 99%+ of them never ever tried to farm. Argument about profitability of farming does not count, since 99% of those 99% does not know it is not profitable:) People are simply lazy and most of them never ever installed any software other than browser or game. You can’t count with mass adoption if the simplest option is to farm a coin. Sure it can work as some small niche network for tech enthusiasts.
In Bulgaria, at the end of 2017, a programmer launched a fork of Monero called Levcoin (in the name of the Bulgarian national currency Lev)
Several hundred people began mining it. I follow the Levcoin facebook group and I can say for sure that most of these people are barely getting into facebook… But they mining because there is easy guide in Bulgarian …
If farming is easy as torrents everyone will be a farmer…
I really really hope so:) We will see. There is too many unknowns right now, so it is almost impossible to predict any user behavior.
Never wondered, it was an easy answer.
Being in the USA they had to get a financial license in order to trade in FAIT and at the time they were operating under exceptions in the laws and maybe even at times skirting the edge. Basically they did not want to have FIAT. Really simple answer.
It was Circle that wanted FIAT trading so they introduced it by doing the requirements to get that financial license. The changes to allow them to get the license might have been a little difficult with all the guarantees and compromises they did with the government bodies, but the ability is easy by getting the license. The trading in FIAT is actually less of an issue than trading in the more volatile trading pairs.
Tether etc was seen as a way for the exchange itself not to get a license off their government and have a separate (structure wise) entity to get the license (if they even needed it with the separate entity) with the associated easy requirements and then trade tether rather than fiat.
Yes but also things like phone APPs buying coins will be easy enough and if people want coins they will search APP, install and then buy coins via “in-app” purchases. People do similar to buy movie tickets and so not a foreign concept at all. And there will be plenty of other avenues. It could even be incorporated into the SAFE’s browser (or fork of it) APP for the phone and satisfy the original desire (on phones at least)
This is not legal according google play and Itunes rules and since google and Apple charge 30% fee plus they collect VAT, developers get on average 55-65% of their sales, based on which country their customers did purchase. No way there willl be ever any app selling virtual currency for FIAT via in app purchases. And selling virtual products via another option is agains TOS. The best I can imagine is that google will allow cryptocurrency purchases as classic goods with custom payment wall provided by developer. Apple is out of question, they reject crypto apps by default. And custom payment option is what I was talking all the time. FIAT to Crypto payment processor is rare and very expensive service.