Topic: Steem vs Synereo, which one will lead the decentralized social media revolution? (Read 7049 times)

Well, well, well, TPTB_need_war and iamnotback have been vindicated!

Synereo fo'sho me thinks.

Also MEWN

I liked the steem concept, but it was poorly implemented.. so i'm with synereo now.

How the father of the internet plans to reclaim it from Facebook and Google


That is my comment quoted.

I've been thinking more about advertising and its impact on these concepts for decentralized social networks.

Remember I had originally criticized Synereo some months ago, because I noted that the average revenue per user for social networks that generate revenue from advertising is approximately $20 per year on average (much less in 3rd world countries).

That hardly seems like a worthwhile income for content producers, although I guess per the power-law distribution of income/wealth it gets 85% concentrated to say the top 20% of content producers and roughly 38% to the top 1%. Thus, mathematically that $20 per user in site-wide revenue, is $85 and $760 per year for each user among the top 20% and 1% (respectively) of the users on the site (and $4 per year for the rest of the users). And that still seems far too low.  (sample calculation is 85 × $20 ÷ 20 = $85)

Synereo's monetization model is to have advertisers pay curators to employ their REP power to push ads onto viewers (which may cost the curators some REP power if the ad is not well targeted and received). Whereas, Steem's monetization model is to attempt to ramp up demand for STEEM for microtransactions (transfers, not voting transactions) and debase those STEEM to pay content producers, i.e. effectively (a combination of some debasement on everyone and) transaction fees will pay for content production long-term.

The key insight I want to add now is that content producers can also avail directly of advertising revenue by embedding ads in their content and especially when these ads are inconspicuous links and mentions. Although they might be paid for the display (e.g. CPM tracked ads), they might more likely be paid by a referrals such as pay-per-click and/or pay-per-conversion (sale). So it seems to me that advertising can be earned directly by the content producers who develop a following in both Synereo and Steem, but the Steem model adds another potential revenue source. This is important because the demand for the Synereo AMPs is only to come from demand for advertising, which might be largely cannibalized by the content producers selling direct to the advertisers thus bypassing the AMP token. In Steem, the token's demand is planned to come from demand for the microtransaction ecosystem (although this isn't even developed at all yet and Steem has other critical problems to solve first).

However, I still see advertising revenue as a small priority for content producers (refer to the math above), unless they are a superstar that gets branding advertising from a major corporation (e.g. Nike). Rather I think they will generate more income from selling paraphernalia to their audiences where they take a large percentage of the sale, e.g. T-shirt sales.

I still see more value from the social networks from commerce than from advertising.

September--can't wait....

It's funny to see a lot of the guys which were smart enough to get involved in NXT in the beginning are also getting involved in Synereo.

Voting or Synereo, excited to see their alpha product in September!

Apparently not steem. Seems like Steem is a pyramid scheme. But either way, I'd vote for Synereo

I am not sure how Steem even uses the word decentralised. I think it look interesting, but not decentralized. Please let me know how I am wrong.

I have heard the rumors that the Monero officially endorses STEEM.

So I would say its a pretty safe bet to say that STEEM will be is pumped hard and the Synereo not.

~CfA~

Steemit has the head start, but can they execute the innovation?

https://steemit.com/steemit/@generalizethis/the-case-for-market-sustainability

*I'll gladly plug sysnero when they offer similar production tools.

Steem is an interesting project with several major flaws. We will have to wait and see. From what I have heard and read about the Synero project, it is more clearly decentralised from the outset.

Synereo is actually a decentralized social networking platform.  Steem is just the Larimer's latest centralized scam.

I would choose Steem, I have never heard of Synero before. Although Steem seems to have some issues at present, almost all altcoins do sooner or later.

Hey Shelby, I hear you.  You aren't just yelling at a deaf room.  It is likely that Steem is not sustainable in the long term without a massive revenue injection by advertisers, and they will have to figure out a way that advertisers can buy ads solely with their token.  That will be the only way to maintain this momentum.

They are adding 3000 signups per day. These new bloggers dilute the available money for payout which is roughly 3.875% of the marketcap per year (actually less than that, was $2 million total recently). This 3.875% is shared amongst all bloggers, so as the number of bloggers increases, if the market cap doesn't increase proportionally, then the payouts decrease.

Also the payouts are mathematically structured such that the most popular get quadratically more payouts than the average ones. So there are some blog posts with $100s of payouts, but the average is only a few dollars each (many only $0 or pennies per blog). And these payouts will decline per the math I showed.

Eventually there will be many pissed off SP investors (who can't sell while the price is crashing) and many pissed off bloggers who don't earn what they expected to earn.

It is not suprising that 3000 bloggers per day are rushing to signup to get their free $10 of STEEM. Because blogging is not a very profitable job any more in the general case (posting photos yourself and your vacation, nobody gives a fuck to pay for that). So by showing these $100s payouts for the few most popular blog posts, Steemit is creating a false expectation of hype that blogging has suddenly become an easy profitable endeavor. This has implosion of the fantasy written all over its future.

Dan is going to destroy the image of crypto-currency is the minds of bloggers. Their first exposure to CC will be being sucked into a lie.

---

If one is holding SP, you are I suppose betting that Steemit will manage some transition either to be acquired by another social network at some valuation per signed up user, or that Steemit will be able to develop an income model. We've seen that estimates of revenue per user from advertising for Facebook average around $15 per user per year.

So with a million signed up users, this will be $15 million annual income from advertising, so with a 20 P/E ratio then roughly a $300 million market cap (7.5% x $300m = $15 million divided by million users = $15 per user per year in payouts+curator rewards). At 3000 signups per day, they project a million signups (costing $10 per signup at least not including payouts) within 4 months.

But it is also not clear what the retention rate is given users on average won't earn that much from the site, and especially after the number of bloggers reach million users with only a $300 million market cap. In other words, at some realistic P/E ratio, then the payouts have to drop dramatically which means the usership might not be sticky, which then means the market cap valuation must be lower. And that begins the downward spiral because as market cap falls, then payouts fall, so usership should fall. Circling the toilet bowl all the way down.

Does anyone see any way this outcome can be averted? The math seems to show there is no way this can work out.


So $20 per day incentivizes you to spend some of your time on that site. How many minutes a day you spend to earn that $20? (Readers note that he is a college student)

Will you stay when that drops to $20 per year per my calculations above?

The downward price will remind those who converted to SP, that they need 2 years to remove their investment. 

Those who invest and don't convert to SP, are losing 0.19% per day due to debasement.

The problem with Steemit is they have no income model, thus once the price is not going up, there is no valuation where it has an P/E ratio. And the system is designed to incentivize cashing out. I just don't see where the buying demand will come from except for a bubble while the price is moving up fast. There is no incentive to HODL this token.

smooth i am too sleepy now to digest your last post. If what you say about 2N is correct, perhaps that will moderate my view on fairness. I will respond after I sleep. First day I had the energy to go 28 hours without sleep in a long time. I added to my prior post as usual.


So you mean that all votes stakes are summed, before the square to form R value? Instead of squaring each stake and adding the squares to form R sum value?


So @dantheman's personal stake is not the largest of the voting stakes?


You holding SP are receiving 9 new tokens for every 1 new STEEM, which is also the rate of payout of the posts. So I guess the dilution are these payouts?