The advertisement group is a regular Telegram group, where you forward a short message (with a set fee) to the admin, who then manually posts your comment.
This is not the AE. It is not even a cheap imitation of what is described in the white paper.
I suspect the ad group was an unplanned development aimed to appease coinholders while the CEO of PayKey focuses on other things.
Waiting a year for this ad group is an insult, and calling it the AE is an insult to my intelligence.
Topic: [ANN][GEMZ] GetGems - Social Messaging App That Pays - Live on Android, iOS, Web - page 31. (Read 597201 times)
February 20, 2016, 09:35:23 AM
February 20, 2016, 07:52:10 AM
With all this negativity and bashing of Gemz in favor of PayKey, maybe the devs could give us Gem holders a boost of confidence by releasing a statement about how they plan to leverage both, or one product's success to ensure success over all. PayKey is a great idea, and I can see that taking off, but Gemz has it's own potential as well. In fact, the potential of Gemz is bigger.
February 20, 2016, 07:32:39 AM
My question is
If PK becomes very successful does that at all translate to GG becoming successful?
If PK becomes very successful does that at all translate to GG becoming successful?
Imagine if Getgems was a car company that promised to build an exciting new engine that would only run on their special blend of fuel.
To fund the project, they sold fuel tokens.
But a year later, they announce that they’ve built an engine than runs on standard gasoline for their new customer, Toyota.
Well, you might expect that (still useless) token to take a dive in value.
And it has...
But as you’ve heard, some hope that the company's new product (PayKey) will be such a success that they’ll use profits from it to make their old product (Getgems) a success.
I’m sure you can see that this is a naive and desperate fantasy.
If GG/gemz is a success, it will get there on its own merit — not some convoluted path that hinges on Paykey’s success and the company’s outright charity.
Gemz was created to be the fuel for the engine that is the Attention Economy; it serves no other purpose. So if you want insight on what the token could be worth, take a look at the AE.
After 14-months, it’s still nowhere in sight.
Your right on some issues but actually very wrong also. Sadly AE already is out, the bad news is it's lame ass. Didn't you see the advertising channel in your app? It on web and Android version already. You are also wrong that value depends on the AE model, yes if gems got huge and ae was implemented brilliantly then yes but we are looking at an app that probably will top out at a few million users.
Now value is actually based on demand and supply, economics 101, amazing I have to school people in this. Why does Dogecoin have value? It's just a clone of btc after all. It gets value cause it's has lots of users i.e. Demand. Getgems has the potential to have a massive demand more even than btc but if it doesn't convert those holders to real demand then you have an app which is essentially a white elephant.
February 20, 2016, 07:31:36 AM
My question is
If PK becomes very successful does that at all translate to GG becoming successful?
If PK becomes very successful does that at all translate to GG becoming successful?
Imagine if Getgems was a car company that promised to build an exciting new engine that would only run on their special blend of fuel.
To fund the project, they sold fuel tokens.
But a year later, they announce that they’ve built an engine than runs on standard gasoline for their new customer, Toyota.
Well, you might expect that (still useless) token to take a dive in value.
And it has...
But as you’ve heard, some hope that the company's new product (PayKey) will be such a success that they’ll use profits from it to make their old product (Getgems) a success.
I’m sure you can see that this is a naive and desperate fantasy.
If GG/gemz is a success, it will get there on its own merit — not some convoluted path that hinges on Paykey’s success and the company’s outright charity.
Gemz was created to be the fuel for the engine that is the Attention Economy; it serves no other purpose. So if you want insight on what the token could be worth, take a look at the AE.
After 14-months, it’s still nowhere in sight.
This is the most accurate assessment of the situation imo. AE has started, but I hope its just a trial of some sort as now it just appears to be a channel set up that advertisers pay the moderators. Not very efficient. (Not 100% on this though). One thing going for gems though and its a big thing is the number of users is rising fast. If you can get a million + users, it dosnt matter what you are running, it is worth money
February 20, 2016, 05:47:49 AM
My question is
If PK becomes very successful does that at all translate to GG becoming successful?
If PK becomes very successful does that at all translate to GG becoming successful?
Imagine if Getgems was a car company that promised to build an exciting new engine that would only run on their special blend of fuel.
To fund the project, they sold fuel tokens.
But a year later, they announce that they’ve built an engine than runs on standard gasoline for their new customer, Toyota.
Well, you might expect that (still useless) token to take a dive in value.
And it has...
But as you’ve heard, some hope that the company's new product (PayKey) will be such a success that they’ll use profits from it to make their old product (Getgems) a success.
I’m sure you can see that this is a naive and desperate fantasy.
If GG/gemz is a success, it will get there on its own merit — not some convoluted path that hinges on Paykey’s success and the company’s outright charity.
Gemz was created to be the fuel for the engine that is the Attention Economy; it serves no other purpose. So if you want insight on what the token could be worth, take a look at the AE.
After 14-months, it’s still nowhere in sight.
February 20, 2016, 02:15:38 AM
Here is another fact for you all to think about as most of you dont do your research before buying I will do it for you.
Magma VC the largest backers of GEMZ is actually owned by Google....that in its self should convince you all not to sell but to buy plenty more as I am doing now
Magma VC the largest backers of GEMZ is actually owned by Google....that in its self should convince you all not to sell but to buy plenty more as I am doing now
Unlike coinholders, Magma owns an actual stake in the company. They chose not to buy any GEMZ, even though their $400k investment was announced during the ICO period.
On Magma's website, it doesn't mention Getgems' social network, attention economy, or token. Instead, it describes another product, PayKey, which is an app for bank customers to transfer fiat.
In short, the VC's backed PK, and coinholders backed GG. Magma doesn't care about the value of GEMZ, and coinholders have no claim to PK's future revenues.
Furthermore, these two distinct products compete with each other for development time and resources. That is, the same two devs that are working on GG are working on PK.
So saying that Magma's involvement with the company should bolster the confidence of coinholders could not be more ignorant of the situation.
It's ironic how you scold people for not doing their "research before buying".
Been reading through this thread... that is critical information.
My question is
If PK becomes very successful does that at all translate to GG becoming successful?
The answer is yes and no. If paykey using gems was massive then yeah people would seek out how to actually get gems and also if gems as a currency developed a lot then people who own gems would seek out paykey to send them over social networks. This is a similar story with BTC version of PK but obviously they already have the developed currency. So the real money maker in paykey in my mind is when they sell the white label to banks (i.e. use fiat i.e. the whole point crypto is fighting against just ended giving an olive branch to) and if they use it then Getgems the company makes a ton of money. This pisses me off cause money from the investors here obviously launched get gems and gave them a new focus away from get gems however much they say it doesn't.
So in conclusion it could in theory help because if GG the company make a ton of money then they have resources (if they want to) to put more development into get gems app. But also at the moment I see it sapping energy away from GG the app. But no PK the gems version is a non starter and you only need to see the lack of downloads to know that.
Just keep in mind there is no way getgems investors are not rewarded if paykey is a success. Investors are the ones who gave them the kick start money to start both project. If they make money with paykey they will eventually have to invest enough in getgems to get it promoted on a bigger scale. The way i see it is if paykey is a success then getgems will also be. But if paykey isnt that doesnt mean getgems wont be. One doeant depend on the other but one of them could profit more from the other and that ine is the getgems app.
Thats pretty much what I said, but you assume the get gems team will throw more money into the app when they might not see the value to and have no obligation to if they don't think it will bring rewards. And also you don't fact that if time energy and more importantly risk is spent on PK rather than GG then it DOES have a negative impact. Otherwise I agree.
*And anyone dreaming that the team would move coins to poloniex and pump the price when they have banks working with them and regulators is dreaming cause they would be committing a criminal act in theory and sure as hell wouldn't want to do that.
February 20, 2016, 02:12:28 AM
Here's the bottom line for get gems. So BS just facts, no hype, no FUD. I'm a holder of gems.
The get gems project has one thing going for it, numbers, i.e. numbers of newbie users. The app already has nearing 100,000 users across iOS, Android and Web version. That is almost certainly by laws of multiplication going to quite easily get to 250k and then 500k and 1M probably within this year even. Great awesome jump up and down the project has more users than any other alts (even put together) and in fact heading toward as many users as Bitcoin. Now that is an AMAZING opportunity. But I don't think the team want to affect their cosy relationship with banks to go taking risks on converting those users to buyers of gems. So how can this opportunity be turned into massive crypto story?
You have to convert users of the app who are faithfully collecting gems to either use them, buy more, or trade. My first thought is getting users into trading is actually the easiest. Polonium and trading sites may look complicated but after 5 minutes any fool could join and be buying and selling. So there needs to be some youtube education and you have the advertising channel to communicate it as I again doubt the get gems team will do anything in this area and have anything on their main site. As gems grows in price and users you can expect retailers to accept gems more and more, thus you build a micro economy.
So its the community that has tho make this coin a success now, a massive opportunity actually is at this moment untapped which isn't based on pipe dreams and rainbow unicorns of most alts. i.e. Gems really does already have a lot of users.
The get gems project has one thing going for it, numbers, i.e. numbers of newbie users. The app already has nearing 100,000 users across iOS, Android and Web version. That is almost certainly by laws of multiplication going to quite easily get to 250k and then 500k and 1M probably within this year even. Great awesome jump up and down the project has more users than any other alts (even put together) and in fact heading toward as many users as Bitcoin. Now that is an AMAZING opportunity. But I don't think the team want to affect their cosy relationship with banks to go taking risks on converting those users to buyers of gems. So how can this opportunity be turned into massive crypto story?
You have to convert users of the app who are faithfully collecting gems to either use them, buy more, or trade. My first thought is getting users into trading is actually the easiest. Polonium and trading sites may look complicated but after 5 minutes any fool could join and be buying and selling. So there needs to be some youtube education and you have the advertising channel to communicate it as I again doubt the get gems team will do anything in this area and have anything on their main site. As gems grows in price and users you can expect retailers to accept gems more and more, thus you build a micro economy.
So its the community that has tho make this coin a success now, a massive opportunity actually is at this moment untapped which isn't based on pipe dreams and rainbow unicorns of most alts. i.e. Gems really does already have a lot of users.
February 20, 2016, 02:11:46 AM
Here is another fact for you all to think about as most of you dont do your research before buying I will do it for you.
Magma VC the largest backers of GEMZ is actually owned by Google....that in its self should convince you all not to sell but to buy plenty more as I am doing now
Magma VC the largest backers of GEMZ is actually owned by Google....that in its self should convince you all not to sell but to buy plenty more as I am doing now
Unlike coinholders, Magma owns an actual stake in the company. They chose not to buy any GEMZ, even though their $400k investment was announced during the ICO period.
On Magma's website, it doesn't mention Getgems' social network, attention economy, or token. Instead, it describes another product, PayKey, which is an app for bank customers to transfer fiat.
In short, the VC's backed PK, and coinholders backed GG. Magma doesn't care about the value of GEMZ, and coinholders have no claim to PK's future revenues.
Furthermore, these two distinct products compete with each other for development time and resources. That is, the same two devs that are working on GG are working on PK.
So saying that Magma's involvement with the company should bolster the confidence of coinholders could not be more ignorant of the situation.
It's ironic how you scold people for not doing their "research before buying".
Been reading through this thread... that is critical information.
My question is
If PK becomes very successful does that at all translate to GG becoming successful?
The answer is yes and no. If paykey using gems was massive then yeah people would seek out how to actually get gems and also if gems as a currency developed a lot then people who own gems would seek out paykey to send them over social networks. This is a similar story with BTC version of PK but obviously they already have the developed currency. So the real money maker in paykey in my mind is when they sell the white label to banks (i.e. use fiat i.e. the whole point crypto is fighting against just ended giving an olive branch to) and if they use it then Getgems the company makes a ton of money. This pisses me off cause money from the investors here obviously launched get gems and gave them a new focus away from get gems however much they say it doesn't.
So in conclusion it could in theory help because if GG the company make a ton of money then they have resources (if they want to) to put more development into get gems app. But also at the moment I see it sapping energy away from GG the app. But no PK the gems version is a non starter and you only need to see the lack of downloads to know that.
Just keep in mind there is no way getgems investors are not rewarded if paykey is a success. Investors are the ones who gave them the kick start money to start both project. If they make money with paykey they will eventually have to invest enough in getgems to get it promoted on a bigger scale. The way i see it is if paykey is a success then getgems will also be. But if paykey isnt that doesnt mean getgems wont be. One doeant depend on the other but one of them could profit more from the other and that ine is the getgems app.
February 20, 2016, 01:59:00 AM
Here is another fact for you all to think about as most of you dont do your research before buying I will do it for you.
Magma VC the largest backers of GEMZ is actually owned by Google....that in its self should convince you all not to sell but to buy plenty more as I am doing now
Magma VC the largest backers of GEMZ is actually owned by Google....that in its self should convince you all not to sell but to buy plenty more as I am doing now
Unlike coinholders, Magma owns an actual stake in the company. They chose not to buy any GEMZ, even though their $400k investment was announced during the ICO period.
On Magma's website, it doesn't mention Getgems' social network, attention economy, or token. Instead, it describes another product, PayKey, which is an app for bank customers to transfer fiat.
In short, the VC's backed PK, and coinholders backed GG. Magma doesn't care about the value of GEMZ, and coinholders have no claim to PK's future revenues.
Furthermore, these two distinct products compete with each other for development time and resources. That is, the same two devs that are working on GG are working on PK.
So saying that Magma's involvement with the company should bolster the confidence of coinholders could not be more ignorant of the situation.
It's ironic how you scold people for not doing their "research before buying".
Been reading through this thread... that is critical information.
My question is
If PK becomes very successful does that at all translate to GG becoming successful?
The answer is yes and no. If paykey using gems was massive then yeah people would seek out how to actually get gems and also if gems as a currency developed a lot then people who own gems would seek out paykey to send them over social networks. This is a similar story with BTC version of PK but obviously they already have the developed currency. So the real money maker in paykey in my mind is when they sell the white label to banks (i.e. use fiat i.e. the whole point crypto is fighting against just ended giving an olive branch to) and if they use it then Getgems the company makes a ton of money. This pisses me off cause money from the investors here obviously launched get gems and gave them a new focus away from get gems however much they say it doesn't.
So in conclusion it could in theory help because if GG the company make a ton of money then they have resources (if they want to) to put more development into get gems app. But also at the moment I see it sapping energy away from GG the app. But no PK the gems version is a non starter and you only need to see the lack of downloads to know that.
February 19, 2016, 01:22:02 PM
Here is another fact for you all to think about as most of you dont do your research before buying I will do it for you.
Magma VC the largest backers of GEMZ is actually owned by Google....that in its self should convince you all not to sell but to buy plenty more as I am doing now
Magma VC the largest backers of GEMZ is actually owned by Google....that in its self should convince you all not to sell but to buy plenty more as I am doing now
Unlike coinholders, Magma owns an actual stake in the company. They chose not to buy any GEMZ, even though their $400k investment was announced during the ICO period.
On Magma's website, it doesn't mention Getgems' social network, attention economy, or token. Instead, it describes another product, PayKey, which is an app for bank customers to transfer fiat.
In short, the VC's backed PK, and coinholders backed GG. Magma doesn't care about the value of GEMZ, and coinholders have no claim to PK's future revenues.
Furthermore, these two distinct products compete with each other for development time and resources. That is, the same two devs that are working on GG are working on PK.
So saying that Magma's involvement with the company should bolster the confidence of coinholders could not be more ignorant of the situation.
It's ironic how you scold people for not doing their "research before buying".
Been reading through this thread... that is critical information.
My question is
If PK becomes very successful does that at all translate to GG becoming successful?
February 19, 2016, 12:42:17 PM
I had the same problem and Polo had to cancel and refund the transaction. I am glad to see it is not on GEMZ end, but it is somewhere inbetween or a google policy issue so GEMZ has to make the adjustment. I really dont want to sell my position in GEMZ because I see the potential. Thanks to Gemz for working on this.
issue has been solved by POLO
February 19, 2016, 07:42:25 AM
I had the same problem and Polo had to cancel and refund the transaction. I am glad to see it is not on GEMZ end, but it is somewhere inbetween or a google policy issue so GEMZ has to make the adjustment. I really dont want to sell my position in GEMZ because I see the potential. Thanks to Gemz for working on this.
February 19, 2016, 05:07:59 AM
Thanks Daniel for help me and solve my problem!
Regards
Regards
on the trollbox and mod say that they are still working on this issue ....i have sent also to Bittrex and it seams to have the same issue ....
February 18, 2016, 10:12:47 PM
Paykey wins a competition! https://www.finextra.com/pressarticle/63133/paykey-wins-santander-pitch-slam-in-tel-aviv
This is good exposure for both paykey and Getgems
This is good exposure for both paykey and Getgems
Quote
Daniel Peled, CEO and co-founder of PayKey said: “Winning the Fintech Venture Day Pitch Slam in Tel Aviv is hugely exciting for us and further validation of the secure mobile payment technology we’re taking to market. We’re seeing that banks are more open to innovation and willing to push the boundaries when it comes to delivering a great customer payment experience that’s also highly secure.
Good exposure for GG?
February 18, 2016, 07:18:56 PM
Paykey wins a competition! https://www.finextra.com/pressarticle/63133/paykey-wins-santander-pitch-slam-in-tel-aviv
This is good exposure for both paykey and Getgems
This is good exposure for both paykey and Getgems
February 18, 2016, 04:58:55 PM
Just saw one of the guys sharing this link in the app groups, GetGems on Bloomberg Business website.
http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=281560288
http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=281560288
February 18, 2016, 04:27:59 PM
Thanks Daniel for help me and solve my problem!
Regards
Regards
February 18, 2016, 04:15:29 PM
Same for me...i have sent a PM to daniel with details ...polo asked for me for the transation ID but nothing is showing at the chain also ....
Unfortunately this is a Counterparty issue and it's being resolved.
February 18, 2016, 03:56:45 PM
I don't know why the team have been so quiet and unresponsive on the issue of in app buying of gems. Its a no brainer, simply sell packages of coins in various amounts 100, 1000, 10,000, 100,000 and do it through google play just like a million games sell their app tokens. It strikes me as an easy job to set up and you don't go asking google if its ok you just do it and ask questions later.
The problem isn't with the buying, it's with the withdrawal.
"In-app virtual currencies must only be used within the app where they were first purchased": https://play.google.com/about/developer-content-policy.html
February 18, 2016, 02:19:41 PM
I sent 177 from getgems to poloniex and nothing arrive.
Doesnt Even Show At The Chain!!
Ohh my god! Thanks god that is only 2 dollar...
What can I do???
I sent the gemz here
1FcfKdL5gqvhFscQz62Pe49fqnTpsfVrwK
Doesnt Even Show At The Chain!!
Ohh my god! Thanks god that is only 2 dollar...
What can I do???
I sent the gemz here
1FcfKdL5gqvhFscQz62Pe49fqnTpsfVrwK
Same for me...i have sent a PM to daniel with details ...polo asked for me for the transation ID but nothing is showing at the chain also ....
Too dificult to contact with him...
Jump to: