Topic: What is the potential of projects with earning features (Read 217 times)

I agree, since basically there is no point paying people to do something unproductive so also there is no point trying to attract unproductive people.

Do bear in mind though that "investors", who simply put in money and sit back expecting or even hoping other people will do all the work, can also be viewed as somewhat lacking in productivity depending I suppose on how much of an investment they initially "produce" meaning contribute, invest.

Essentially they are passive, they provide a buy-side asset with which a good strong buy-side can be built, and often do not even actually build that buy-side themselves but expect the active participants aka "team" to do it for them.

Especially when looking to "cash out": that is when they will really appreciate all the work someone put into building a good strong buy side that they can proceed to "destroy" by "dumping" on it!

This is why I try to encourage people to "invest" by building a column of buy-offers; they would thus be investing in building a good strong buy-side to help sites like CoinMarketCap and coingecko see the asset as valuable, since buy-side offers are important to such sites' evaluation of assets.

They would be more-active participants than so called "investors" who simply buy once then sit back waiting to destroy a good big chunk of hard-built buy-side by "dumping"...

By helping build a strong buy-side they help defend against such "dumpers", by hopefully building the buy-side so strong all the "dumpers" can go ahead and dump then everyone else can keep on keeping on growing the project, growing the asset(s), building the buy-sides higher...


-MarkM-

Depends on the project, I have never heard the one OP talked about, so I can easily say that it is going to be not that much at all, because if it was a good one, it would have been heard a long time ago, and look at how low ranked it is, that tells you everything. But if we are talking about just the general idea of earning features? Then I can tell you that it could make a lot of money for people because people like that kind of approach.

This is very important, and because of that we need to focus on how to make money with these projects at optimized levels. Most of the time just being invested in isn't enough, so that is the most important part of these projects, to be fully in and actually spending time on them.

Nope, I've been into so many of these concepts, and it did not give me a good yield, and I even cut my losses.
A platform's success depends on its use cases, but this kind of concept can be abused. People are more interested in doing those tasks for a free coin to dump in the market than buying it for their use case.
There was a lot of play to earn in the past; get paid to walk, but no platform of this concept reached a significant success, and many of them are gone.
Staking features are far better than these get paid to coins.

Majority of these earning projects make money by monetising user data. Please remember one thing, when something is freely available in the market, you become the product. Otherwise, think logically, why would anyone reward you just for walking?

Now the practical problem here is that, due to the high competition of data providers, the price for such data has decreased to a very low level. So it is almost impossible to hardly make any money. So the chances are high that such programs will eventually fail.

Did any of you take a look at the Galactic Milieu?

If so I am interested in your take on how it compares...


-MarkM-

But yeah, not all projects are the same. Crypto projects where you can make money are kinda trendy right now. I mean, earnm isn’t the first project like this I’ve found on Telegram; I’ve even tried a few. Some of them are totally sketchy, though—like you dig into them a bit, and it’s like a sandcastle that’s gonna collapse any second. But with earnm, it’s all about the business model and how they handle their tokens. I’ll be honest, I’m still learning about this stuff, but I can definitely tell the difference between a deflationary token model and ones where they just make unlimited tokens, which causes inflation and makes the token worthless. With earnm, it seems like everything’s clicked into place: a more stable, reliable model, plus super simple ways for users to earn passive income. Honestly, I think this project has a future.

a project has prepared everything in it that has been arranged, in an investment there is a need for vigilance and caution when starting it, and that is what needs to be considered in a project, especially when it has just emerged, they want to be trusted by investors, but Bitcoin which is a real and convincing choice.

Very few of them are good investments, and it really depends on the moment of the project you are investing on it. Axie Infinity is an example: those who invested before the hype were successful on their investments. But for investors who entered in the peak of the hype it was a bad move.

In general, it's better to avoid this category of investment, because it's just too risky and unstable. Crypto investors should focus in Bitcoin currency, while sparing only a small percentage of their total budget to altcoins and similars.

Most projects just want to milk money from investors without giving anything in counterpart. Their concepts are weak, don't have real usage and are copies of another products available on the internet. There isn't anything original and unique about most of them, so there isn't real value attached to the projects. It's all about temporary and speculative hype.

While investing in these kinds of projects, it is important to do our research and hold for as long as the season lasts to avoid being caught up.

That isn't bad, we can throw a small amount of USDT into it. It listing on BG hasn't been bad.

the thing with crypto is, the first OG project will always be such a jackpot but the project that follows and replicate the same concept always become disappointing, same thing with tap-to-earn, or any other with earning potential, back then defi was a thing, everybody getting some big reward from just doing few swaps, right now such thing is nowhere to be seen.

the one thing that you need to do to maximize potential from these projects that offers opportunity to earn is just find the OG project, get big allocation through collecting as much point as you can, and when TGE happen and you get some big money, ditch it and move on to another project. that's the meta right now, just like how latest telegram project like tomarket or not pixel giving nothing but just a dust in return for months of hardwork.

Tbh these looks great on paper. Just checked on Twitter and it's a Depin with socialfi integration and they've also raised $40M. That's a lot of money for a socialfi. So I'll throw in some quid probably via staking EarnM Poolx and see how it goes. 

All these concepts are kind of concepts that distract you from real project for example if you were holding Bitcoin and you see such project you would want to utilize your opportunity to hold some shitcoin and then loss your Bitcoin. But on the reverse I have to think what is the main purpose of these project owner, what are they deriving to and their reason for creating such coin or shitcoin, at first to me it seems to lured people into their scheme of move to earn, play to earn and dance to earn till whatever the case maybe. To me, why not just hold your asset and keep accumulating bitcoin gradually than hold shitcoin.

In 2022, there's a token I invested into because my friend convinced me to and the project was also about play to earn and they give reward to their token holder for every transaction that was carried out on the token contract. The project seem legit from the start but on the long run, the project just collapsed and the project owners disappeared with investors funds. So, while investing in any of those play to earn project, is better to do a research.

That simply circles back to what income do they have, if any, with which to buy back their tokens?

The thing about any source of income is it is always limited.

Often it operates like bitcoin's difficulty in a way: there is a certain total volume of profit to be made in a given field and the more people who go after that profit the less profitable that field becomes, ultimately all competing for a slice of the same pie as it were so less and less each the more participants.

Also generally in investments the larger the capital you are trying to make a profit on the less percent per year you will typically be able to get.

So even if you are some kind of massive centralised investment service offering to make profit on other people's money there is likely to be a diminishing returns factor.

That is why in designing play to earn games a lot depends upon finding the right kind of players, and even trying to avoid folks who are not actually interested in the game but just in trying to leech all its potential out of it without contributing to making the game more interesting, more playable, a more congenial community of fellow-players to play with, and a good solid market for the game's coins and tokens.

The right players can build up a game very strongly, but just masses of takers who are only out to take seems likely to doom a game from the outset; thus maybe better to throw obstacles in the way of potential players so only those genuinely interested get in than to draw in endless crowds of takers who will probably in the long term just try as hard as they can to trash the game's currency as fast as they can as hard as they can in a "race to the bottom" and move on to the next game that fails to recognise that or is simply a scam designed to capitalise on it.


-MarkM-

With the bull run season most of the developers of this newly built projects are just here to make money with the momentary wave of excitement of the season. It started with "tap-to-earn" and now it is "dance to earn" isn't that weird enough to know where a project like this is headed to?

Many of these projects are mainly created to rake money to the developers as participants carryout activities in form of tasks performance on YouTube and other social media platforms and with the growing rate of participants that's how they make profit only to finally distribute dusts as token to participants. These projects designed in way that it can only financially benefit it's owners so it's just a waste of time to participants.

one thing for sure most of these project are just short lived project because their entire economy isn't sustaining ones and they just gonna make a hype for a few weeks and then vanish.

dance-to-earn on its own is just simply a ridiculous concept I mean, you basically pay people to dance, where did the money come from? from hype where people gonna buy coin made out of thin air with no underlying fundamental at all and zero product.
I think it's just a fad, though I know tap-to-earn or something like that been going for almost a year, at the very least these tap to earn project actually shifted to have some good product after their TGE, not entirely stuck on the concept of tap to earn forever.

so i see no potential for a project with earning feature as long as they don't create sustaining product.

Are they good investments? No, I don't think so. Why? They are being abused by people who can create many accounts and then just earn away those freebies and I don't really like it. For them, it's all about just earning it and they will probably sell whenever they want after listing, unlike a true investor who would wait for a good time to sell and will keep on holding if he thinks the project is going somewhere good. The abusers won't do that, they will simply sell it without even thinking twice. I've seen it happen to many projects with a free earning feature and we are not far actually, the new Telegram applications did it too.

Since likely most people trying to earn through such systems likely tend to just "dump" their tokens onto existing buy offers, not even placing them as sell offers above the highest existing buy offer, do they even care what the future of the token is going to be?

If they can simply do some clicking or whatever and immediately cash out the resulting tokens by selling them for something more liquid like BiTCoin or Stellar Lumens or ETH or even some stupid so called "stable" coin, why would they care what the price is going to be later compared to what they can get right this moment?

Unless maybe they somehow expect it will be worth a lot more tomorrow?

I didn't mention selling for actual fiat as generally it is only rather well-established coins that sell directly for fiat.

I am assuming here also that by earnings projects you mean anything that already long survived the initial scam-abundant "airdrop" phase that scams people into working for tokens that aren't even sellable anywhere yet.


-MarkM-

A "get paid to" website sounds great! However, not in tokens! Such kind of websites only attracts novice people who have just started out in their online money making journey. Now if that program is rewarding through tokens, a lot of people won't be interested because no one knows what the future holds for that token.

This is my personal opinion though! People want to make money but the earning is extremely less in such websites. So if  you website is able to offer them a sizable earning, then it might see some success.