[ANN] [ICO CLOSED] Inchain - insurance for the crypto economy - page 33.

rubiprojects

sr. member

Activity: 240

Merit: 250

Quote from: puremage111 on November 09, 2016, 12:16:13 AM

Just one question there

For ico bounties, if the 1.75 is not raised, we still get paid right?

Thanks and regards

No, not raised, ico will be refunded, this coin is worth nothing

puremage111

hero member

Activity: 1568

Merit: 511

Just one question there

For ico bounties, if the 1.75 is not raised, we still get paid right?

Thanks and regards

ttg43

full member

Activity: 518

Merit: 100

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 12:22:22 PM

Quote from: ttg43 on November 08, 2016, 12:07:47 PM

Every market with blns of cap and with no insurance services at all - attractive direction.

yes, drugs and weapon trading markets are all - attractive direction (they all have blns of cap).

if you can insure their risks and if they need it - you are welcome

SpacemanOne

full member

Activity: 336

Merit: 101

icowidgets.com

Quote from: ttg43 on November 08, 2016, 12:07:47 PM

Every market with blns of cap and with no insurance services at all - attractive direction.

yes, drugs and weapon trading markets are all - attractive direction (they all have blns of cap).

ttg43

full member

Activity: 518

Merit: 100

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 11:58:32 AM

Quote from: ttg43 on November 08, 2016, 11:41:02 AM

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 11:21:20 AM

Usually the business is made for profits. The main goal of any business is profit, not doing business itself. So that's the reason I'm asking my question.
If a part of the business can generate the same or greater profit than the whole business itself why not to run the business part only? At least from the start?

Maybe because insurance market in crypto is still not occupied and it's more attractive direction? What for should Inchain start investment fund if Iconomi already did it?

How do you know it's more attractive? Do you have any numbers or comparison analysis?

Every market with blns of cap and with no insurance services at all - attractive direction.

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 11:58:32 AM

For example,
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-bitcoin-cyber-analysis-idUSKCN11411T

Quote

In the most recent study, the rate of closure for bitcoin exchanges in Moore's research edged up to 48 percent among those operating from 2009 to March 2015. Hacking did not necessarily trigger the closure in each case.

Are you ready to pay 8% (48% divided by 6 years) for your insurance? What bond buyer will take 10% bond if his total loss risk is about 8%?

This is just an example, I didn't perform any serious analysis.

I agree there are many scum exchanges, but as you know (i hope so) not every exchange and web-wallet will be insured by Inchain.

SpacemanOne

full member

Activity: 336

Merit: 101

icowidgets.com

Quote from: ttg43 on November 08, 2016, 11:55:40 AM

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 11:27:45 AM

Quote

Usage investment funds - usual practice in traditional insurance models

I can also tell you why insurance companies use investment funds.
Because they want more profits. They have the money. They can just keep them untouched or invest to generate some profit. They choose to invest.

Did i somewhere said they don't?

I just wanted to stress the traditional insurance companies may or may not use the investment funds. It's their decision. But their business won't fail if they don't use the investment funds. But InChain MUST use the investment fund and is fully dependent on its performance.

SpacemanOne

full member

Activity: 336

Merit: 101

icowidgets.com

Quote from: ttg43 on November 08, 2016, 11:41:02 AM

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 11:21:20 AM

Usually the business is made for profits. The main goal of any business is profit, not doing business itself. So that's the reason I'm asking my question.
If a part of the business can generate the same or greater profit than the whole business itself why not to run the business part only? At least from the start?

Maybe because insurance market in crypto is still not occupied and it's more attractive direction? What for should Inchain start investment fund if Iconomi already did it?

How do you know it's more attractive? Do you have any numbers or comparison analysis?
For example,
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-bitcoin-cyber-analysis-idUSKCN11411T

Quote

In the most recent study, the rate of closure for bitcoin exchanges in Moore's research edged up to 48 percent among those operating from 2009 to March 2015. Hacking did not necessarily trigger the closure in each case.

Are you ready to pay 8% (48% divided by 6 years) for your insurance? What bond buyer will take 10% bond if his total loss risk is about 8%?

This is just an example, I didn't perform any serious analysis.

ttg43

full member

Activity: 518

Merit: 100

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 11:27:45 AM

Quote

Usage investment funds - usual practice in traditional insurance models

I can also tell you why insurance companies use investment funds.
Because they want more profits. They have the money. They can just keep them untouched or invest to generate some profit. They choose to invest.

Did i somewhere say they don't?

ttg43

full member

Activity: 518

Merit: 100

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 11:36:01 AM

Quote from: ttg43 on November 08, 2016, 11:23:36 AM

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 11:12:17 AM

Quote from: ttg43 on November 08, 2016, 10:34:26 AM

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 09:23:55 AM

About the business model.
In general I don't fully understand why you need the insurance products in your initial business model. Because the profits are generated by the investment ('insurance') fund. Simplified, the difference between the bond coupon and the fund performance is the company profit.

Your model is not correct. The main profit is generated by insurance premium. Roi from investment fund needed for bond coupon's payments (they are approximately equal to each other). So the full company's profit looks like this: insuruance premium + roi of fund - bond coupon's payments. Usage investment funds - usual practice in traditional insurance models.

My model is correct. And it is the same as yours. I wrote 'Simplified' if you didn't notice.
Profit = insuruance premium - bond coupon's payments + roi of fund
In numbers (example):
insurance premium = 3%
bond coupon's payments = 10%
So we need to compensate the difference. 3-10 = -7%
The fund performance should be more than 7% to generate profit. Yes, 7% is not 10%. But the greater part that needs to be compensated is the bond coupon.
You don't understand for some reason that the profit depends on the fund performance only. Because without the investment fund the company has LOSS.
As you can see the main (and the only) profit is generated by the investment fund. After the fund ROI reaches 7% the whole company profit depends on the fund performance.
The insurance premium generates not profit but loss, as you can see from your own model.

You just playing with numbers and words. Insurance policies and bonds, investment fund - all parts of one system. You want to concentrate public attention only at one part of model. If you want to sell insurance policies you need to have fund, if you want to have fund you need to attract big money, if you attract big money you should pay % for using it. Where is the problem?

The problem is that you don't understand the financial model essence.
If I want to sell the insurance policies I DON'T need to have fund. At least as big as the total insured amount of money at wallets/exchanges. I sell the insurance policies at a higher price than they really cost. This way I have profits without any funds.
The InChain model is different, they transfer the insured events risks to the bond holders. The only risk they work with is the fund performance risk.

i know that i DON'T need funds, but only at markets with deep liquidity. At markets with low capitalisation you need additional sources of income to reduce the costs and risks.

ttg43

full member

Activity: 518

Merit: 100

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 11:21:20 AM

Quote from: ttg43 on November 08, 2016, 10:34:26 AM

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 09:23:55 AM

So why not just create the crypto investment fund and attract investors? I can assure you the demand is much higher than the supply at the market now. There are thousands of investors with millions of dollars waiting.

So why all traditional insurance companies not just create investment funds and attract investors? Answer: "Because insurance - the main goal. Investment fund - just a tool".

How do you know why the InChain team decided to use such a business model? I think you are not authorized to speak for them.

What? There was no one word about Inchain in this comment, i was talking about traditional insuruance.

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 11:21:20 AM

Usually the business is made for profits. The main goal of any business is profit, not doing business itself. So that's the reason I'm asking my question.
If a part of the business can generate the same or greater profit than the whole business itself why not to run the business part only? At least from the start?

Maybe because insurance market in crypto is still not occupied and it's more attractive direction? What for should Inchain start investment fund if Iconomi already did it?

SpacemanOne

full member

Activity: 336

Merit: 101

icowidgets.com

Quote from: ttg43 on November 08, 2016, 11:23:36 AM

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 11:12:17 AM

Quote from: ttg43 on November 08, 2016, 10:34:26 AM

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 09:23:55 AM

About the business model.
In general I don't fully understand why you need the insurance products in your initial business model. Because the profits are generated by the investment ('insurance') fund. Simplified, the difference between the bond coupon and the fund performance is the company profit.

Your model is not correct. The main profit is generated by insurance premium. Roi from investment fund needed for bond coupon's payments (they are approximately equal to each other). So the full company's profit looks like this: insuruance premium + roi of fund - bond coupon's payments. Usage investment funds - usual practice in traditional insurance models.

My model is correct. And it is the same as yours. I wrote 'Simplified' if you didn't notice.
Profit = insuruance premium - bond coupon's payments + roi of fund
In numbers (example):
insurance premium = 3%
bond coupon's payments = 10%
So we need to compensate the difference. 3-10 = -7%
The fund performance should be more than 7% to generate profit. Yes, 7% is not 10%. But the greater part that needs to be compensated is the bond coupon.
You don't understand for some reason that the profit depends on the fund performance only. Because without the investment fund the company has LOSS.
As you can see the main (and the only) profit is generated by the investment fund. After the fund ROI reaches 7% the whole company profit depends on the fund performance.
The insurance premium generates not profit but loss, as you can see from your own model.

You just playing with numbers and words. Insurance policies and bonds, investment fund - all parts of one system. You want to concentrate public attention only at one part of model. If you want to sell insurance policies you need to have fund, if you want to have fund you need to attract big money, if you attract big money you should pay % for using it. Where is the problem?

The problem is that you don't understand the financial model essence.
If I want to sell the insurance policies I DON'T need to have fund. At least as big as the total insured amount of money at wallets/exchanges. I sell the insurance policies at a higher price than they really cost. This way I have profits without any funds.
The InChain model is different, they transfer the insured events risks to the bond holders. The only risk they work with is the fund performance risk.

SpacemanOne

full member

Activity: 336

Merit: 101

icowidgets.com

Quote

Usage investment funds - usual practice in traditional insurance models

I can also tell you why insurance companies use investment funds.
Because they want more profits. They have the money. They can just keep them untouched or invest to generate some profit. They choose to invest.

ttg43

full member

Activity: 518

Merit: 100

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 11:12:17 AM

Quote from: ttg43 on November 08, 2016, 10:34:26 AM

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 09:23:55 AM

About the business model.
In general I don't fully understand why you need the insurance products in your initial business model. Because the profits are generated by the investment ('insurance') fund. Simplified, the difference between the bond coupon and the fund performance is the company profit.

Your model is not correct. The main profit is generated by insurance premium. Roi from investment fund needed for bond coupon's payments (they are approximately equal to each other). So the full company's profit looks like this: insuruance premium + roi of fund - bond coupon's payments. Usage investment funds - usual practice in traditional insurance models.

My model is correct. And it is the same as yours. I wrote 'Simplified' if you didn't notice.
Profit = insuruance premium - bond coupon's payments + roi of fund
In numbers (example):
insurance premium = 3%
bond coupon's payments = 10%
So we need to compensate the difference. 3-10 = -7%
The fund performance should be more than 7% to generate profit. Yes, 7% is not 10%. But the greater part that needs to be compensated is the bond coupon.
You don't understand for some reason that the profit depends on the fund performance only. Because without the investment fund the company has LOSS.
As you can see the main (and the only) profit is generated by the investment fund. After the fund ROI reaches 7% the whole company profit depends on the fund performance.
The insurance premium generates not profit but loss, as you can see from your own model.

You just playing with numbers and words. Insurance policies and bonds, investment fund - all parts of one system. You want to concentrate public attention only at one part of model. If you want to sell insurance policies you need to have fund, if you want to have fund you need to attract big money, if you attract big money you should pay % for using it. Where is the problem?

SpacemanOne

full member

Activity: 336

Merit: 101

icowidgets.com

Quote from: ttg43 on November 08, 2016, 10:34:26 AM

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 09:23:55 AM

So why not just create the crypto investment fund and attract investors? I can assure you the demand is much higher than the supply at the market now. There are thousands of investors with millions of dollars waiting.

So why all traditional insurance companies not just create investment funds and attract investors? Answer: "Because insurance - the main goal. Investment fund - just a tool".

How do you know why the InChain team decided to use such a business model? I think you are not authorized to speak for them.

Usually the business is made for profits. The main goal of any business is profit, not doing business itself. So that's the reason I'm asking my question.
If a part of the business can generate the same or greater profit than the whole business itself why not to run the business part only? At least from the start?

SpacemanOne

full member

Activity: 336

Merit: 101

icowidgets.com

Quote from: ttg43 on November 08, 2016, 10:34:26 AM

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 09:23:55 AM

About the business model.
In general I don't fully understand why you need the insurance products in your initial business model. Because the profits are generated by the investment ('insurance') fund. Simplified, the difference between the bond coupon and the fund performance is the company profit.

Your model is not correct. The main profit is generated by insurance premium. Roi from investment fund needed for bond coupon's payments (they are approximately equal to each other). So the full company's profit looks like this: insuruance premium + roi of fund - bond coupon's payments. Usage investment funds - usual practice in traditional insurance models.

My model is correct. And it is the same as yours. I wrote 'Simplified' if you didn't notice.
Profit = insuruance premium - bond coupon's payments + roi of fund
In numbers (example):
insurance premium = 3%
bond coupon's payments = 10%
So we need to compensate the difference. 3-10 = -7%
The fund performance should be more than 7% to generate profit. Yes, 7% is not 10%. But the greater part that needs to be compensated is the bond coupon.
You don't understand for some reason that the profit depends on the fund performance only. Because without the investment fund the company has LOSS.
As you can see the main (and the only) profit is generated by the investment fund. After the fund ROI reaches 7% the whole company profit depends on the fund performance.
The insurance premium generates not profit but loss, as you can see from your own model.

ttg43

full member

Activity: 518

Merit: 100

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 09:23:55 AM

About the business model.
In general I don't fully understand why you need the insurance products in your initial business model. Because the profits are generated by the investment ('insurance') fund. Simplified, the difference between the bond coupon and the fund performance is the company profit.

Your model is not correct. The main profit is generated by insurance premium. Roi from investment fund needed for bond coupon's payments (values are approximately equal to each other). So the full company's profit looks like this: insuruance premium + roi of fund - bond coupon's payments. Usage investment funds - usual practice in traditional insurance models.

Quote from: SpacemanOne on November 08, 2016, 09:23:55 AM

So why not just create the crypto investment fund and attract investors? I can assure you the demand is much higher than the supply at the market now. There are thousands of investors with millions of dollars waiting.

So why all traditional insurance companies not just create investment funds and attract investors? Answer: "Because insurance - the main goal. Investment fund - just a tool".

wavespump

hero member

Activity: 728

Merit: 500

Quote from: puremage111 on November 08, 2016, 09:22:44 AM

Quote from: pawel7777 on November 08, 2016, 09:09:18 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: ttg43 on November 08, 2016, 03:54:01 AM

For now raised $197000.

good

> $197k
> good

Pick one.

That's merely ~11% of the minimum goal, and the most attractive period to invest (20% discount) is over. I wish the Inchain team all the best, but things are not looking great. The only hope is that couple of whales will show up and save the day. But logic dictates that anyone who is interested has already invested in 20% discount period. Hope I'm wrong.

Agree, whales who wanted to invest would invest earlier, and 20% is a huge amount if huge deposit, but seems that 1.75 is hard now :/

Yes, whales invested, and with decreasing of bonus, they will unlikely invest more, 1.75 is very very difficult, I see impossible to hit that.

Kazadar

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: puremage111 on November 08, 2016, 09:22:44 AM

Quote from: pawel7777 on November 08, 2016, 09:09:18 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: ttg43 on November 08, 2016, 03:54:01 AM

For now raised $197000.

good

> $197k
> good

Pick one.

That's merely ~11% of the minimum goal, and the most attractive period to invest (20% discount) is over. I wish the Inchain team all the best, but things are not looking great. The only hope is that couple of whales will show up and save the day. But logic dictates that anyone who is interested has already invested in 20% discount period. Hope I'm wrong.

Agree, whales who wanted to invest would invest earlier, and 20% is a huge amount if huge deposit, but seems that 1.75 is hard now :/

Some people prefer to invest at the end of the ICO.
Recently Stratis was at around 150 BTC until one or two days before the ICO ended and another 750 BTC was invested with 0% bonus.

Funds are looking low now but its not too late yet (though it will be hard).

SpacemanOne

full member

Activity: 336

Merit: 101

icowidgets.com

About the business model.
In general I don't fully understand why you need the insurance products in your initial business model. Because the profits are generated by the investment ('insurance') fund. Simplified, the difference between the bond coupon and the fund performance is the company profit.
So why not just create the crypto investment fund and attract investors? I can assure you the demand is much higher than the supply at the market now. There are thousands of investors with millions of dollars waiting.
Probably you are hoping to collect more funds from the bonds and have a good investment fund performance. Maybe such approach can generate more profits. But did you perform any calculations? The answer is 'No'.

puremage111

hero member

Activity: 1568

Merit: 511

Quote from: pawel7777 on November 08, 2016, 09:09:18 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: ttg43 on November 08, 2016, 03:54:01 AM

For now raised $197000.

good

> $197k
> good

Pick one.

That's merely ~11% of the minimum goal, and the most attractive period to invest (20% discount) is over. I wish the Inchain team all the best, but things are not looking great. The only hope is that couple of whales will show up and save the day. But logic dictates that anyone who is interested has already invested in 20% discount period. Hope I'm wrong.

Agree, whales who wanted to invest would invest earlier, and 20% is a huge amount if huge deposit, but seems that 1.75 is hard now :/

Topic: [ANN] [ICO CLOSED] Inchain - insurance for the crypto economy - page 33. (Read 109154 times)