The 3 distribution methods where the coins cost money:
IPO - Definitely costs $$$
Proof of Burn - Definitely costs $$$
PoW period then switched to purely PoS - Costs money in the electricity used and time mining in which someone could of mined other cryptocurrencies
As long as the entry is free and everyone with enough resource will get enough coin, the coin's cost will rise, and also comes the risk of one entity controlling more than 50% of hash power, this is how free market works. If you artificially create some barrier to prevent new joiners to dominate the market, then very quickly new people will abandon the game, since they have no chance to win majority.
I don't get what you are alluding to in this paragraph, as the entry to owning/mining PoW coins is not free, you have to buy coins or buy mining hardware. Someone investing a lot in an IPO is no different than someone buying a lot of Bitcoins or buying a lot of mining hardware. Someone investing a little into the IPO is no different than someone buying a small amount or Bitcoins or a small amount of mining hardware. The barriers are the same, the important part is that everyone has an equal chance. IPOs are generally announced way ahead of time and everyone has a fair chance to invest or not invest, there no barriers to entry.. none more than exist with Bitcoin. This is like complaining about early adopters to Bitcoin and I don't see how this fits into the PoW vs PoS debate. Just because someone didn't know about Bitcoin in 2011 does not make Bitcoin unfair, the same curtesy in your reasoning should be rewarded to purely PoS coins.
Actually this is also a worry for bitcoin, which have less and less coin generation every 4 years. What is the purpose of investing in one asset while most of this asset is controlled by a few? The good thing with bitcoin is that no matter how much coin you hold, you don't gain more than the coin itself. This will force people to spend the coin sooner or later, thus flattening the coin distribution. If the coins holding will grant you some kind of privilege over new comers, then it becomes a kind of private elite club, and kill the coin over time.
@ The past few posters in this thread, please read this so I don't have to type it multiple times: All PoS implementations do not function in the same ways, in some cases they function drastically different, so you cannot simply form your opinions on the Nxt or Peercoin's form of PoS. Please take the time to educate yourselves on the different variants of PoS before talking about them and spreading misconceptions.The past few posters ITT, you including, don't understand that PoS has been improved upon recently. You are referring to the Peercoin and Nxt implementations of PoS where you must hold the coins in your wallet for a certain amount of time or a certain number of blocks before minting or forging is possible. Bitshares' Delegated proof of stake doesn't have these issues, you can spend your coins whenever you would like and still receive similar benefits as Nxt or Peercoin. Furthermore, Peercoin's PoS results in monetary inflation, whereas Bitshares' DPoS is deflationary (unlike pretty much any cryptocurrency out there, Bitcoin included.)
In delegated proof of stake that is not the case, as the amount of stake you own is proportional to the amount of voting power you have to select who will secure the network. These people are called Delegates, and are voted into and out of power by stake holders. Whereas Bitcoin prints new Bitcoins to incentivize miners to secure the network, a delegated proof of stake coin pays delegates a portion of the cryptocurrency's fees from transactions (like Bitcoin will way past our lifetimes when all 21 million Bitcoin's are mined.) Furthermore, delegated proof of stake provides more security in less amount of time than with other PoS currencies, Bitcoin included as by the time Bitcoin transactions are considered irreversible (6 confirmations), a DPoS transaction is already confirmed by 100% of the shareholders through their elected delegates.
In BitsharesX, the cryptocurrency that first implemented DPoS, there are 101 delegates who all split each block's transaction fees evenly. Each delegate then decides for themselves what percentage of their portion of the fees they will keep as payment for their services to secure the block chain, and a delegates "pay rate" can affect their campaign to get voted in as a delegate or not as some (a lot?) of voters take it into consideration. The percentage of fees that each delegate has decided they won't keep are destroyed. Every stake holder benefits from this destruction of fees equally proportional to the amount of stake they own, as no more coins will be printed other than what was conceived in the genesis block. This is why BitsharesX is one of the first truly deflationary cryptocurrencies (if not the first.)
Furthermore, it is believed within the Bitshares community that DPoS is immune to the "nothing at stake" attack that people harp on PoS for so often. Anyone feel free to prove us wrong regarding the NaS attack, as you will save me a lot of time supporting something that isn't genuinely secure.
More about DPoS:
http://bitshares.org/delegated-proof-of-stake/Even more about DPoS:
http://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/DPOSOld discussions on DPoS:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4009.0Discussions regarding "nothing at stake" attacks:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6584.0More discussion about NaS attack:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6638.0The real demand for oversea transaction and merchant acceptance are relatively small compared to investment and speculative demand. Financial investors are usually very smart, any weakness in the distribution design will shun those people away.
No cryptocurrency, FIAT currency, or any currency or commodity for that matter is distributed evenly. It is impossible to distribute ownership of currency in a fair manner, someone will always feel like they got the short end of the stick.