Well I can't really think of anything besides my Magic the Gathering manabase collection, or the BTC themselves as a price, or ASICs 
I can think of a myriad of products that would make this endeavor viable and, at the end, nobody can lose.
Topic: (w/POLL) BTCZ51 (expanding upon maxmint's idea) - page 2. (Read 1817 times)
I can think of a myriad of products that would make this endeavor viable and, at the end, nobody can lose.
Well I can't really think of anything besides my Magic the Gathering manabase collection, or the BTC themselves as a price, or ASICs
Original idea do not steal 
How much are you willing to bet to take everyone elses money?
The pot starts at 0+1(or X)BTC
the next person can put in 2 or 3 BTC to take whatever the initial X is
then someone may 'steal' the first bidders BTC by tacking on a larger ammount like Maxmint's BTC
when the pyramid is unsustainable either of 2 things happens, the initiator of the pyuramid runs with the money or the last person to bid takes all the pot minus 10% which goes to whomever started the pyramid, as a 'fee' of sorts?
In my head it made much better sense.
But at least the prize is actual BTC not some 'gem'.
How much are you willing to bet to take everyone elses money?
The pot starts at 0+1(or X)BTC
the next person can put in 2 or 3 BTC to take whatever the initial X is
then someone may 'steal' the first bidders BTC by tacking on a larger ammount like Maxmint's BTC
when the pyramid is unsustainable either of 2 things happens, the initiator of the pyuramid runs with the money or the last person to bid takes all the pot minus 10% which goes to whomever started the pyramid, as a 'fee' of sorts?
In my head it made much better sense.
But at least the prize is actual BTC not some 'gem'.
I still say this is a viable endeavor, provided a physical item is the end result. Don't you think so?
Original idea do not steal
How much are you willing to bet to take everyone elses money?
The pot starts at 0+1(or X)BTC
the next person can put in 2 or 3 BTC to take whatever the initial X is
then someone may 'steal' the first bidders BTC by tacking on a larger ammount like Maxmint's BTC
when the pyramid is unsustainable either of 2 things happens, the initiator of the pyuramid runs with the money or the last person to bid takes all the pot minus 10% which goes to whomever started the pyramid, as a 'fee' of sorts?
In my head it made much better sense.
But at least the prize is actual BTC not some 'gem'.
How much are you willing to bet to take everyone elses money?
The pot starts at 0+1(or X)BTC
the next person can put in 2 or 3 BTC to take whatever the initial X is
then someone may 'steal' the first bidders BTC by tacking on a larger ammount like Maxmint's BTC
when the pyramid is unsustainable either of 2 things happens, the initiator of the pyuramid runs with the money or the last person to bid takes all the pot minus 10% which goes to whomever started the pyramid, as a 'fee' of sorts?
In my head it made much better sense.
But at least the prize is actual BTC not some 'gem'.
Maybe I'm tired, but I'm not sure what argument you're trying to make. You clearly know that the price increases only 10%, and you're using an example of it doubling, but to what end?
No, not doubling, just going up by 10% each time.
We start with 1 BTC. The next price would be 110% of 1 or (1.1) * 1 = 1.1.
The next price is 110% of (1.1) * 1, or (1.1) * (1.1) * 1 = 1.21.
The next price is 110% of (1.1) * (1.1) * 1 or (1.1) * (1.1) * (1.1) * 1 = 1.331, etc.
...
That is, the Nth price is (1.1)^N.
Make sense?
At one time, I would have seen the light without it even being brought to my attention, as you so kindly done, hackj. And to think I got a perfect 800 on my SAT in math.
After careful thought, this project is still viable, albeit needs tweaking. I'll come back to this at a later date.
Maybe I'm tired, but I'm not sure what argument you're trying to make. You clearly know that the price increases only 10%, and you're using an example of it doubling, but to what end?
No, not doubling, just going up by 10% each time.
We start with 1 BTC. The next price would be 110% of 1 or (1.1) * 1 = 1.1.
The next price is 110% of (1.1) * 1, or (1.1) * (1.1) * 1 = 1.21.
The next price is 110% of (1.1) * (1.1) * 1 or (1.1) * (1.1) * (1.1) * 1 = 1.331, etc.
...
That is, the Nth price is (1.1)^N.
Make sense?
@hackjealousy
Maybe I'm tired, but I'm not sure what argument you're trying to make. You clearly know that the price increases only 10%, and you're using an example of it doubling, but to what end?
Look forward to your reply, bud.
~Bruno K~
Maybe I'm tired, but I'm not sure what argument you're trying to make. You clearly know that the price increases only 10%, and you're using an example of it doubling, but to what end?
Look forward to your reply, bud.
~Bruno K~
I'm having a hard time to understand your logic.
Site owner profit < Last player bid
The last bidder would be paying more than the prize is worth, since the money used to fund the prize is less than the amount paid by the last bidder.
Unless the guy running the campaign is willing to lose money, it's not viable.
Site owner profit < Last player bid
The last bidder would be paying more than the prize is worth, since the money used to fund the prize is less than the amount paid by the last bidder.
Unless the guy running the campaign is willing to lose money, it's not viable.
Keeping asking questions, all, for I'm sure I'm able to come up with a unique answer.
For sake of argument, suppose the last person to purchase was planning on buying this Vette anyway. Further suppose that the dealership is offering some undisclosed discount.
Even if the last person to purchase doesn't get the above, the premium paid may be worth it for the right to be known as the guy who received the Vette via this route. The domain and hosting would be paid for five years to guarantee the maximum mileage on this particular campaign, of which would be linked via the subsequent campaigns.
What I'm trying to relay is a completely new form of advertising/marketing. No Ponzi. No pyramid. No scam. Period! To be clear, this is also not an auction, hence refraining from using the word bid.
[...]
It only works if you are willing to sell the final object for half its worth. Or, equivalently, if the purchaser is willing to purchase the object for twice its worth.
Consider the following. In round 0, the current option is 1 BTC. When sold, the house gets 1 BTC profit.
In round 1, the option will be a BTC, where a is the ratio that we are using. (For example, if the price increases by %10 each time, then a = 1.1 .) When sold, the house receives (a - 1) / 2 profit and the option owner receives (a - 1) / 2 profit. (In our example, the profit is (1.1 - 1) / 2 = 0.05. That is, the house gets 5% of the profit of each sale and the option owner gets %5 of the profit of that sale.)
In round 2, the option will be a^2 BTC and the house (and option owner) profit for this round is ((a - 1) / 2) * a.
Continuing in this fashion, we have in round n, the option is a^n and the profit is ((a - 1) / 2) * a^(n - 1).
The total profit for the house is the sum of the house profits for each round:
H = 1 + ((a - 1) / 2) + ((a - 1) / 2) * a + ((a - 1) / 2) * a^2 + ... + ((a - 1) / 2) * a^(n - 1)
= 1 + ((a - 1) / 2) * (1 + a + a^2 + ... + a^(n - 1)) = 1 + ((a - 1) / 2) * ((a^n - 1) / (a - 1))
= 1 + (a^n - 1) / 2
To summarize, the option will cost a^n to purchase and, when it is sold the total house profit will be 1 + (a^n - 1) / 2.
If the value of the final object is V, then it does not make sense to purchase that object for more than V. That is, we would expect a person to participate in round n if a^n <= V.
At this point though, we have 1 + (a^n - 1) / 2 < a^n <= V. Or, roughly, the house profit is about half what is needed to actually purchase the object at that point.
I guess it is possible that people would play beyond the time when a^n > V. (Actually, of course they would given the magnificent gem as an example.) However there is little difference between the gem and this example. The last person to hold the gem just gets ripped off and feels like an idiot. The person to get the Vette just spent twice as much as he should of to get it and feels like an idiot. *shrug*
I'm surprised to see maxmint has the original up for sale. I'm toying with the idea of obtaining it.
You're surprised? It's over and done - the profit has been made already.
The site would take a couple hours to code - you are going to see copy-cat sites in a few days.
An exact copy-cat sites won't cut the mustard. They would have the potential to bring negititivity to Bitcoin, whereupon my idea, implemented corrected, would bring positive awareness.
Now, I'm seeing funds are being returned. Not sure why, but can surmise. I'll have to get up to speed and read the latest on the other thread, plus take a look at what's going on at Reddit.
I'll do that after I address concerns over at the Bitcoin 100 thread.
I'm surprised to see maxmint has the original up for sale. I'm toying with the idea of obtaining it.
You're surprised? It's over and done - the profit has been made already.
The site would take a couple hours to code - you are going to see copy-cat sites in a few days.
It would still involve in giving away the 'prize' almost for free.
The only advantage for the sponsor would be advertising/marketing.
The only advantage for the sponsor would be advertising/marketing.
I'm having a hard time to understand your logic.
Site owner profit < Last player bid
The last bidder would be paying more than the prize is worth, since the money used to fund the prize is less than the amount paid by the last bidder.
Unless the guy running the campaign is willing to lose money, it's not viable.
Site owner profit < Last player bid
The last bidder would be paying more than the prize is worth, since the money used to fund the prize is less than the amount paid by the last bidder.
Unless the guy running the campaign is willing to lose money, it's not viable.
Keeping asking questions, all, for I'm sure I'm able to come up with a unique answer.
For sake of argument, suppose the last person to purchase was planning on buying this Vette anyway. Further suppose that the dealership is offering some undisclosed discount.
Even if the last person to purchase doesn't get the above, the premium paid may be worth it for the right to be known as the guy who received the Vette via this route. The domain and hosting would be paid for five years to guarantee the maximum mileage on this particular campaign, of which would be linked via the subsequent campaigns.
What I'm trying to relay is a completely new form of advertising/marketing. No Ponzi. No pyramid. No scam. Period! To be clear, this is also not an auction, hence refraining from using the word bid.
I'm surprised to see maxmint has the original up for sale. I'm toying with the idea of obtaining it.
The one aspect I would not allow is something like the following: Butterfly Labs sucks balls. It's not that I condemn or condone said practice, but it simply won't work for a viable entity, one of which would bring further awareness to Bitcoin, for the use of Bitcoin is the only way this model would work. All other means of transferring money would simply take too long, coupled with the other known negativities.
Toss me some more questions, for I'm on a roll here. And don't be afraid to express any drawbacks as well.
~Bruno K~
I'm having a hard time to understand your logic.
Site owner profit < Last player bid
The last bidder would be paying more than the prize is worth, since the money used to fund the prize is less than the amount paid by the last bidder.
Unless the guy running the campaign is willing to lose money, it's not viable.
Site owner profit < Last player bid
The last bidder would be paying more than the prize is worth, since the money used to fund the prize is less than the amount paid by the last bidder.
Unless the guy running the campaign is willing to lose money, it's not viable.
Bumped, to state that I just voted yes to see the current tally.
Max 2 votes in poll and allowed to change.
What if maxmint's idea was expanded to include the following?:
Basically, all else remains the same, regarding how the site's currently structured, albeit minor changes if, or when, warranted. A physical product is provided at the end.
Purchase is made with bitcoins residing in escrow. If the total cost is less than the pool, then the remaining bitcoins will be returned to last purchaser.
All early purchasers will have their desired linked paged readily available. Example, BFL, as the first purchaser, would have a linked image on a page for only BTC1.1 initial cost, with coins returned once the next spot is purchased.
Prominently displayed on the main page would be BitPay, a Z51, the name and image of the dealership, the escrow service, and possibly some other viable Bitcoin entity, of which the latter would pay for placement at a nominal cost, basically to only cover actual domain name and hosting cost for one year (~$100 USD, I'm thinkin').
Bottom line, there would be minimum lost for most, if not all, involved during each transaction, for all will be getting value during the entire process. At the end of the day, some lucky person will own a 2014 Z51 Corvette, and the dealership will forever be known as the entity who sold the first automobile accepting Bitcoin as payment.
During the course of the campaign, the dealership could use social media as a marketing tool at zero cost, to coincide with this virtually zero risk campaign.
More insight as discussion ensues.
If the model proves viable, imagine the possibilities: BTCMansion; BTCF350; BTC40Acres.
What if maxmint's idea was expanded to include the following?:
- First amount is BTC1.
- Escrow is used after BTCX.
- A dealership would already be in place to take the order, of which must be used.
- BitPay is used to convert BTC to $ at time of sale, thus them earning their .99%.
- The final amount is locked in if no buyers at the end of 30 days from last purchase.
Basically, all else remains the same, regarding how the site's currently structured, albeit minor changes if, or when, warranted. A physical product is provided at the end.
Purchase is made with bitcoins residing in escrow. If the total cost is less than the pool, then the remaining bitcoins will be returned to last purchaser.
All early purchasers will have their desired linked paged readily available. Example, BFL, as the first purchaser, would have a linked image on a page for only BTC1.1 initial cost, with coins returned once the next spot is purchased.
Prominently displayed on the main page would be BitPay, a Z51, the name and image of the dealership, the escrow service, and possibly some other viable Bitcoin entity, of which the latter would pay for placement at a nominal cost, basically to only cover actual domain name and hosting cost for one year (~$100 USD, I'm thinkin').
Bottom line, there would be minimum lost for most, if not all, involved during each transaction, for all will be getting value during the entire process. At the end of the day, some lucky person will own a 2014 Z51 Corvette, and the dealership will forever be known as the entity who sold the first automobile accepting Bitcoin as payment.
During the course of the campaign, the dealership could use social media as a marketing tool at zero cost, to coincide with this virtually zero risk campaign.
More insight as discussion ensues.
If the model proves viable, imagine the possibilities: BTCMansion; BTCF350; BTC40Acres.
Jump to: