Topic: [ANN][GEMZ] GetGems - Social Messaging App That Pays - Live on Android, iOS, Web - page 66. (Read 597186 times)

I'm in London now, will have time to answer questions tomorrow evening.
A lot of misinformation and trolling, hope to clear what I can.

Few quick points:
- Everyone should read the Gems purchase agreement + Koinify platform agreement. The sell, token, milestones etc were very clear and transparent.
- It was not possible to speak about PayKey publicly until we filed the USPTO patent on the technology (in the EU public information can't be patentable, in the US there is 1-year grace period).
- We're very much dedicated to deliver the last milestone and the AE vision.
- Today we understand that GetGems users are very different than the bitcoin "only" users and even more different than most regular fiat users. In order to grow faster with need to tailor our solution to the different markets.
 

There is only one question that needs to be answered:

Is Paykey going to benefit getgems and if so, how?

Edit to add: if the answer to the above is "no" I hope you consider using a portion of Paykey profits to buy Gemz from the sell wall. That would raise the price of Gemz and in so doing it would hugely help the GG app to grow.

Nearly two days have passed without any accepting of the situation. I don't want to be around for the Politicians prepared answers......


Project wise I'm out.

If what you are saying is the case, this will end in a lawsuit by GEMS holders. If in fact he mislead investors by naming the company "GetGems" and the app/token "GetGems" then used the invested funds to build a product and attempted to cut investors out, it simply won't fly. I am continuing with an open mind and trusting Daniel but I will be the first to file suit if this is actually what has happened.

Daniel, you should just lock this thread.  If your goal is mass adoption, then you don't need bitcointalk.  There are plenty of other channels to discuss getgems.


-tb-

The rich Jewish kid (Dad is Kibuttz financial controller) gave up his principles first opportunity arose. He should of used his dad's money and worked a job to fund his start up and not got 780,000 dollars off gems buyers....and then dumped them first opportunity came. All he had to do was control one Paykey app and have fiat, btc and gems in the app. He choose to sell out to the banks. I'm glad I sold out of gems a while back, I predicted this would happen. GET this shitty Ann off bitcointalk, at least the scams on here never destroyed Bitcoin, this shit just gave the best chance of btc going mainstream to the banks. The fuckers have been playing international tech pioneers with our fucking money. Now they are fucking PayPal with the big banks, fuck em. Also Daniel is funny about how well getgems is doing, it's doing shit, why won't he give us the numbers? Still under 10,000 after one year but he tells us they are picking up a 1,000 users a week, bullshit!

There is going to be a bloodbath on Polinex. 

After chatting with Daniel and reviewing his answers today, my understanding of recent events have boiled down to this:

Daniel has the freedom to spend the crowd funded money on anything he wants. Incredulously, he spent it on divorcing his company from gemz.

In doing so, he removed the only safety net investors had that the company wouldn't abandon its own token.

Without a commitment to gemz, GG has now been demoted to a side project. Its new role is to be the test platform for future products like paykey.

Sadly, GG without a functioning AE makes it worthless to users. Boasting that the team has met various milestones, and even over delivered with surprises like the giftstore, ring hollow.

GG remains just a telegram skin with various buggy and incomplete features. No wonder it has failed to attract any interest.

Daniel, is there a compelling argument why anyone should still be holding gemz?

I'd love to hear it.

If u aint got haters u aint doin it right, getgems great app, just got my airdrop raised. Seems inviting users that are active who in turn invite active users i think is the key to a nice air drop.

The GEMS wallet used to be on chain and you did have access to your seed. However, everyone complained that i was too slow so they moved the GEMS off chain.

If you want your GEMs on the block chain, move them there. I only carry a bit of money in my wallet, the bulk of it is in the bank. Same concept.

Oh, and you do have access to your BTC seed and can import it into some other wallet if you need to.

Haha I hope you all get the irony of getgems making a one size fits all payment solution......and then makes 3 completely distinct apps separating Bitcoin gems and USD. Brilliant! They actually went out of their way to screw you guys. They went for the money grab and screwed you gem fools good. No one will use gems when there is one for fiat....retarded.

Change the name to getfiat with Daniel Peled. Lol

I am trying to mask my disappointment, but I agree that the solution to all of the frustration here would be more communication... the more time that goes by without a word from Daniel, the more frustration will come out of this forum. I understand people are feeling forgotten in the wake of the PayKey revelation. Given the foundation of a kibbutz is to share the profits evenly with everyone in the community, perhaps the right thing to do would be to announce some type of profit sharing, where a percentage of the profits from PayKey would be used to buy up Gemz off the sell wall. At $400,000, I don't know how much of a percentage of profit the VC was guaranteed, but perhaps something similar could be announced here. They obviously don't have to do this, but it seems like the right thing to do to support the people who supported them.

"For the upset people, i think you need to use a simple approach and say this to Daniel: "Hey Daniel, WHY are you giving the banks PayKey too???". just keep bugging him to explain and to give details. Because i too want to know HOW it will benefit GETGEMS and as for the upset people, they want to know WHY banks are getting it too. That's our common goal, we are looking for the same answers and information. let's just keep it simple that way. Instead of any of us trying to be smart about what is right or wrong or what's going to be, or finding loopholes or faults here and there and everywhere, finding signs of dishonesty...really...no evidence, no say, no show."




I think this approach is fair enough, but people will always voice their concerns when there is a lack of information or proper communication from the devs. Its easy to say wait for Daniel to clarify things, but we already did when we waited for the blog, then the AMA and even after that there is more confusion than ever. As I said in my previous post, all this could be cleared up easily. Daniel obviously reads this thread and is imo  avoiding answering big issue

I hate to say it but you understand what most on here aren't, they are in crypto pumping, shit coin mode I think they can't grasp what is being said now.


The really sad thing is maybe even the team don't know what they have been persuaded to do. You are right, people dont just hand over nearly half a million dollars if they don't want something for it.

sorry bottom line not to include gems or even Bitcoin in one Paykey app is going out of your way to avoid crypto being used by the masses...it's really that simple. Opportunity officially squandered.


Plus of anyone thinks getgems which has around 20,000 downloads and will the only have a certain portion of those users into it enough to one use the app to send gems to people who don't use gems and hope they can build an advertising platform on the strength of a few thousand user needs professional help. Using only gems to send through Paykey is a non starter.....you guys must see that? It's literally a token effort...while the real project is the hook up with banks and the fiat version.

The Magma investment was the first major warning sign.

Daniel waited until after the crowd sale was complete before announcing that he accepted VC money. Magma of course passed on the coin sale and bought a direct stake in the company. VC don’t care what gemz are worth, and their investment wasn't made to give gemz value.

This was clearly a sneaky move, especially after all the talk of transparency and accountability with GG using Konify, milestones, etc.

The way GG was marketed was that the token would exclusively fund the attention economy, and the company would live or die on the network's success (perhaps through making a commission on transactions).

In other words, everyone’s interests would be aligned: We’d all want the broad adoption of GG so that the token would retain a high value.

Well, a year later we have the surprise announcement that “AE can’t be rolled out (at) this stage”, but we’ve developed a new revenue stream for the company that’s completely independent of GG/gemz/AE.

And we did it with your money.

That's how you interpret it to be. Here's the source. Everyone, please read it for yourselves.

Taken from: ZapChain GETGEMS AMA
https://www.zapchain.com/a/GW8js0C1ML

Ctrl + F and search for "in the last 11 months". Read what Jerome Colley had typed and read how Daniel has responded.
Jerome asked: "First, what was the financial cost to bring GetGems to market and how much of the company is owned by venture capitalist?"
Daniel answered: "We are still bringing GetGems to market and in the last 11 months we we have used 25% of the funds raised in the crowd sale and some of the $400K investment made by MagnumVC."

Now, what i can understand from this alone is that funds from both crowdsale and MagnumVC were used for GETGEMS. PayKey is nowhere to be found. I have absolutely no idea what makes you say "some of the crowd sale money at least was used in the development of paykey" in those few words. UNLESS, you were thinking of the first few words of what Jerome had typed "GetGems yes. Airdrop and PayKey no.". Having read that, i don't even understand what he meant by "yes" and "no" (no offense meant to Jerome. Excuse my rudeness). EVEN IF lets say Jerome was referring to the whole entire GETGEMS Project (GETGEMS App, Attention Economy, PayKey) and Daniel gave that answer, we still can't specifically say that crowdsale funds were used to develop PayKey because Daniel was also referring to the entire GETGEMS Project and GETGEMS will also have PayKey and that holds true.

whoever has a problem with how funds are used, you want clarity? just ask Daniel directly: "Hi Daniel. Did you use any funds from the crowdsale to develop PayKey?".
I'm fine with everything so far with how the funds are being used. so whoever wants clarity on this, just ask. why beat about the bush and come up with your own conclusions??? just ask Daniel.

come to further think about it, asking about it or saying funds from the crowdsale were used for the development of PayKey...honestly in this case, its stupid. if GETGEMS isn't gonna get any PayKey for itself at all, then i will agree that funds were PROBABLY misused. We still need evidences at the end of the day. want to get down to it, that's how we get down to it. But GETGEMS will have PayKey. what you are upset about is that banks and other financial services will ALSO have PayKey. That's something we need more details and information because we dont exactly know how its going to work out in the end and how is it still going to benefit said parties. Otherwise, let me agree on this then: YEA! crowdsale funds were used for the development of PayKey! ---> to pay employees, to pay office rental, to pay anything else that has nothing to do with PayKey or GETGEMS but important for business operations, etc.

First you say we shouldn't interfrere with the team plans and try changing their mind and roadmap, now you are trying to do the same. I feel for Daniel while people is freaking out on him, while he has worked so hard, no alt has done half the job he has done. Majority here are not being realistic and talk with dollar signs in their head but dont see the big picture, it's ridiculous that people are criticizing them for trying to sign up parthners for their product and expanding their company into the real world. Not to mention how Gems will benefit from this.

I'm still seing GetGems on the screen with the Gems token on it, you got to be ignorant if you don't think this is great marketing for GetGems.



Nitpicking on them using crownfunding money that makes Gems token global on every social media platform while also delivered 90% of the milestones at the same time comes close to a pot sterrir, many arguments here are just narrow minded and can't grasp how genius this all is. Bigger media outlets tend to post more on well known banks getting into Crypto then just posting about a rather unknown GetGems, if a big bank integrated this technology and wired magazine posts about it and mentions powered by GetGems will you all still freak out? Imo whitelabling this gives GetGems more exposure and marketing from the media, people here only think within the crypto circle and dont want to see the bigger picture.

You are mistaking this as some kind of bottom feeding FUD or coin competition. It's not, it's about principle along with investments made. Only dumbasses cheerleader coins without engaging their brain stem...or someone scared they will baghold. I'm heavily invested and I couldn't give a crap about the price, I care that this project seems of lost its way.....If this Ann said Paykey making fiat payments easy I wouldn't be annoyed but sorry but the only way to make messaging pay if you own the rights to the container. So this not only becomes a different project but a different set of principles which really don't even need to be in a crypto forum honestly. Since when has a project sending  fiat while giving up the idea of using Bitcoin at the very first chance as a councious choice....a crypto project?


I'm asking questions that have to be made. And still hoping for an answer...


And I lay most blame at the feet of banks that have probably swarmed on new tech ideas to shaft the customer...yet again. I mean I can almost see their thinking....ok you do one for gems your little coin and then one for Bitcoin .......and then we will do a proper one for real money.....bye bye. I don't get why the team gave up this leverage for crypto in such an obvious way? I mean was it a technical limitation cause I can't see how they couldn't of made just as much money on payments with the one app rather than separating the paymnet options....such a poor decision.

From the horse mouth-
"To cater to different user bases we will release different versions of PayKey with different payment methods. The first will be Gems with bitcoin and fiat to follow."
Multiple versions = dilution, confusion, paykey with fiat wins.
One way out of this mess would be if all versions had the paykey advertising space only available by purchasing gems which are returned to users. In this way, all users would be exposed to gems/bitcoin.

"- We are still bringing GetGems to market and in the last 11 months we we have used 25% of the funds raised in the crowd sale and some of the $400K investment made by MagnumVC. "

So some of the crowd sale money at least was used in the development of paykey. Maybe MagnumVC are pulling the strings here and realize fiat paykey is going to make them rich whatever Daniels philosophy is about crypto