where can i buy my waves
Wait till 12th April. ICO hasnt started yet.forget about April 12th. on April 8th the Gamebet ico is complete. Better pick up a few before you miss the train!!
Topic: WAVES. Ultimate crypto-tokens blockchain platform. - page 2089. (Read 2389392 times)
forget about April 12th. on April 8th the Gamebet ico is complete. Better pick up a few before you miss the train!!
where can i buy my waves
Wait till 12th April. ICO hasnt started yet.
where can i buy my waves
As you might know Ethereum has been spending about 300 k monthly on development.
WHATT?? That's way too much. That amount should be enough to mine the necessary metals and oil, build a factory, produce computers and then develop the system.
Or the developers eat nothing but caviare.
300k per month for a billion business is not much at all
Their ICO was a success. Their concept seems cool - though I still don't believe anyone has an idea what real good it will actually be used for. But ETH in toto is not yet a success imo. But in my opinion even bitcoin is not yet a success. But you know what? I believe the WAVES will show an unprecedented success in 4 years.
>>- First ICO day bonus. Users who buy WAVES tokens on April,12 receive a bonus of 20%
Is this coming from the pool of 1m set aside for early supporters or from the 85m itself?
Is this coming from the pool of 1m set aside for early supporters or from the 85m itself?
I would like to know this also
As you might know Ethereum has been spending about 300 k monthly on development.
WHATT?? That's way too much. That amount should be enough to mine the necessary metals and oil, build a factory, produce computers and then develop the system.
Or the developers eat nothing but caviare.
300k per month for a billion business is not much at all
As you might know Ethereum has been spending about 300 k monthly on development.
WHATT?? That's way too much. That amount should be enough to mine the necessary metals and oil, build a factory, produce computers and then develop the system.
Or the developers eat nothing but caviare.
300k per month for a billion business is not much at all
Of course I know. Some Chinese thing, right?
https://www.google.com.hk/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiIiafonPLLAhVDx4MKHUrUAQYQjRwIBw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ibm.com%2Fweb%2Fportal%2Fanalytics%2Fwatson-analytics-cn-zh%2Findex.html&psig=AFQjCNFcm_UNPFb5w4sQXoMvu5SCvNbLNg&ust=1459764519144552
You must have - Member status. Now you - newbie
Hi,anyone here knew the WMCoin?
Of course I know. Some Chinese thing, right?
You must have - Member status. Now you - newbie
Of course I know. Some Chinese thing, right?
https://www.google.com.hk/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiIiafonPLLAhVDx4MKHUrUAQYQjRwIBw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ibm.com%2Fweb%2Fportal%2Fanalytics%2Fwatson-analytics-cn-zh%2Findex.html&psig=AFQjCNFcm_UNPFb5w4sQXoMvu5SCvNbLNg&ust=1459764519144552
Hi,anyone here knew the WMCoin?
Of course I know. Some Chinese thing, right?
http://www.wemcoin.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/微盟2.jpg
Hi,anyone here knew the WMCoin?
Hi,anyone here knew the WMCoin?
As you might know Ethereum has been spending about 300 k monthly on development.
WHATT?? That's way too much. That amount should be enough to mine the necessary metals and oil, build a factory, produce computers and then develop the system.
Or the developers eat nothing but caviare.
Afaik, Bitshares accepts creation of all kinds of assets, not just pegged ones? The BTS fiat-pegged assets are backed against 6x collateral, I think, value doesn't come just from what 'people believe'. Anyway that was just an example; have you looked at NEM mosaics for example? I'm sure there are many more colored cryptos out there, I'm not off to make a thorough list. In the end, if you value above all control and the ability to do things your way, a new project is the only option, I guess. Have you checked on what Maker DAO is trying to do? (it only a part of Wave's ecossystem). What exactly are the 'severe limitations' of other colorored coins you could compare Wave to?
You guys will bring more people, complete a successful ICO and achieve a good initial distribution of coins if the workings of this project hit that sweet spot where people see something new, with potential, fair and backed by competent and trustworthy people. My perception is that the team is solid, but I get a feeling that most people around here don't understand exactly how this project's approach to fiat and assets will result in a much larger adoption than other projects that have been trying to do the same for a while now. I read a few sound bites about this in the thread, repeated a few times, but I don't see a critical, well explained factor that will for sure tip the balance in your favor.
Do you really need to reserve so many coins to pay for development? Maybe the focus should be to give investors the sweetest deal possible (and they will front more BTC), with a well explained, compelling project instead of taking such a big cut from investors to devs 'just to be safe'. My other point with the bots and bounties was simply that the project could do without that reserve because those resources could come from market trading, later. And the ICO funds are not going to be spent/distributed all at once, right? A part could be put to use, to generate income while it is waiting to be disbursed in due time.
At this point I'm not so much worried about tx transparency - ppl tend to take that as a given when discussing blockchains - but more about why the 'partners and backers' need to be paid in the first place. That's the kind of thing I'd like to see examples of. If in the future you need to add features, why not make an asset for each of those features, sell the asset to investors and distribute any income from the features among those asset holders. Once Waves is up and running and showing how it works and how solid the connections are to the 'outside world'.
How much money do you (estimate) need for development, can you be transparent about that?
Like someone else posted early on, this thread is full of support and excitement mostly from accounts with a very low number of posts. I'm not trying to bring this project down, I just see too many posts just pledging support blindly and nobody really asking any questions. Well, apart from the ones about the free coins to early supporters...
Actually I'd recommend you DO a list of all colored coins projects. That could be really instructive You guys will bring more people, complete a successful ICO and achieve a good initial distribution of coins if the workings of this project hit that sweet spot where people see something new, with potential, fair and backed by competent and trustworthy people. My perception is that the team is solid, but I get a feeling that most people around here don't understand exactly how this project's approach to fiat and assets will result in a much larger adoption than other projects that have been trying to do the same for a while now. I read a few sound bites about this in the thread, repeated a few times, but I don't see a critical, well explained factor that will for sure tip the balance in your favor.
Do you really need to reserve so many coins to pay for development? Maybe the focus should be to give investors the sweetest deal possible (and they will front more BTC), with a well explained, compelling project instead of taking such a big cut from investors to devs 'just to be safe'. My other point with the bots and bounties was simply that the project could do without that reserve because those resources could come from market trading, later. And the ICO funds are not going to be spent/distributed all at once, right? A part could be put to use, to generate income while it is waiting to be disbursed in due time.
At this point I'm not so much worried about tx transparency - ppl tend to take that as a given when discussing blockchains - but more about why the 'partners and backers' need to be paid in the first place. That's the kind of thing I'd like to see examples of. If in the future you need to add features, why not make an asset for each of those features, sell the asset to investors and distribute any income from the features among those asset holders. Once Waves is up and running and showing how it works and how solid the connections are to the 'outside world'.
How much money do you (estimate) need for development, can you be transparent about that?
Like someone else posted early on, this thread is full of support and excitement mostly from accounts with a very low number of posts. I'm not trying to bring this project down, I just see too many posts just pledging support blindly and nobody really asking any questions. Well, apart from the ones about the free coins to early supporters...
The thing is we have a very clear sales pitch, the fact that you don't get it shows us that we have to work some more on it.
We are really focused on mass market adoption, and will be offering a product unseen in crypto before. Imagine an online bank with integrated crowdfunding platform, very simple to use and intuitive, but running on the blockchain technology. Also we'll be tackling some more fundamental problems of blockchain tech along the way.
In a nutshell our vision is very different from existing tech, and the fastest way to build it is to have full control
As for the the premine - 15% is a very modest premine. And you know you have to have partners
especially in our case, when we're bringing banks and payment systems on board. All our ICO funds will be used for development, infrastructure, and marketing. There will be full transparency. As you might know Ethereim has been spending about 300 k monthly on development. Of course we'll do it with much less money, but QUALITY development in crypto is costly.
Updated my sig. Hope I am not late for this.
I signed up in the signature campaign and Subscribe news letter.
and I have already added a signature.
and I have already added a signature.
I joined WAVES Facebook, follow WAVES account on Twitter
and sign up for subscribe to WAVES newsletter.
and sign up for subscribe to WAVES newsletter.
Looks interesting, good luck.
Will paticipate in the ico.
When will the coins be traded on exchanges?
Will paticipate in the ico.
When will the coins be traded on exchanges?
Afaik, Bitshares accepts creation of all kinds of assets, not just pegged ones? The BTS fiat-pegged assets are backed against 6x collateral, I think, value doesn't come just from what 'people believe'. Anyway that was just an example; have you looked at NEM mosaics for example? I'm sure there are many more colored cryptos out there, I'm not off to make a thorough list. In the end, if you value above all control and the ability to do things your way, a new project is the only option, I guess. Have you checked on what Maker DAO is trying to do? (it only a part of Wave's ecossystem). What exactly are the 'severe limitations' of other colorored coins you could compare Wave to?
You guys will bring more people, complete a successful ICO and achieve a good initial distribution of coins if the workings of this project hit that sweet spot where people see something new, with potential, fair and backed by competent and trustworthy people. My perception is that the team is solid, but I get a feeling that most people around here don't understand exactly how this project's approach to fiat and assets will result in a much larger adoption than other projects that have been trying to do the same for a while now. I read a few sound bites about this in the thread, repeated a few times, but I don't see a critical, well explained factor that will for sure tip the balance in your favor.
Do you really need to reserve so many coins to pay for development? Maybe the focus should be to give investors the sweetest deal possible (and they will front more BTC), with a well explained, compelling project instead of taking such a big cut from investors to devs 'just to be safe'. My other point with the bots and bounties was simply that the project could do without that reserve because those resources could come from market trading, later. And the ICO funds are not going to be spent/distributed all at once, right? A part could be put to use, to generate income while it is waiting to be disbursed in due time.
At this point I'm not so much worried about tx transparency - ppl tend to take that as a given when discussing blockchains - but more about why the 'partners and backers' need to be paid in the first place. That's the kind of thing I'd like to see examples of. If in the future you need to add features, why not make an asset for each of those features, sell the asset to investors and distribute any income from the features among those asset holders. Once Waves is up and running and showing how it works and how solid the connections are to the 'outside world'.
How much money do you (estimate) need for development, can you be transparent about that?
Like someone else posted early on, this thread is full of support and excitement mostly from accounts with a very low number of posts. I'm not trying to bring this project down, I just see too many posts just pledging support blindly and nobody really asking any questions. Well, apart from the ones about the free coins to early supporters...
You guys will bring more people, complete a successful ICO and achieve a good initial distribution of coins if the workings of this project hit that sweet spot where people see something new, with potential, fair and backed by competent and trustworthy people. My perception is that the team is solid, but I get a feeling that most people around here don't understand exactly how this project's approach to fiat and assets will result in a much larger adoption than other projects that have been trying to do the same for a while now. I read a few sound bites about this in the thread, repeated a few times, but I don't see a critical, well explained factor that will for sure tip the balance in your favor.
Do you really need to reserve so many coins to pay for development? Maybe the focus should be to give investors the sweetest deal possible (and they will front more BTC), with a well explained, compelling project instead of taking such a big cut from investors to devs 'just to be safe'. My other point with the bots and bounties was simply that the project could do without that reserve because those resources could come from market trading, later. And the ICO funds are not going to be spent/distributed all at once, right? A part could be put to use, to generate income while it is waiting to be disbursed in due time.
At this point I'm not so much worried about tx transparency - ppl tend to take that as a given when discussing blockchains - but more about why the 'partners and backers' need to be paid in the first place. That's the kind of thing I'd like to see examples of. If in the future you need to add features, why not make an asset for each of those features, sell the asset to investors and distribute any income from the features among those asset holders. Once Waves is up and running and showing how it works and how solid the connections are to the 'outside world'.
How much money do you (estimate) need for development, can you be transparent about that?
Like someone else posted early on, this thread is full of support and excitement mostly from accounts with a very low number of posts. I'm not trying to bring this project down, I just see too many posts just pledging support blindly and nobody really asking any questions. Well, apart from the ones about the free coins to early supporters...
SaluS project will also part take in this.
Good luck!
-Kushed
Good luck!
-Kushed
Kushed in the house
Great work with SaluS brother!
Jump to: