Dash Business Model upgrade: Invest in start-ups

I just don't see much of a point, when the current dao budget isn't being utilized. What's the point of having a larger budget when we don't use the one we currently have? Money talks and bullshit walks. Why isn't evolution out yet? Why aren't people's concerns about IX being taken seriously? Because the dao doesn't have a clue about how to allocate the budget. Giving it a larger one won't make a bit of difference, until they start making more progress. Like I said I'm not completely against the idea, it just may be premature.
 
The main reason why our budget is unused is because the DASH proposals are way too expensive (and because few people know about DASH). We should reduce proposal prices to 0.1 DASH and by word of mouth gain more start-ups interested in getting funding.

I want to get a lot of proposals for every DASH coin we have available in budget.

Please vote for my proposal :
https://www.dashcentral.org/p/Reduce_proposal_fees_to_dot1_DASH
 
Technologov said:
The main reason why our budget is unused is because the DASH proposals are way too expensive (and because few people know about DASH). We should reduce proposal prices to 0.1 DASH and by word of mouth gain more start-ups interested in getting funding.

I want to get a lot of proposals for every DASH coin we have available in budget.

Please vote for my proposal :
https://www.dashcentral.org/p/Reduce_proposal_fees_to_dot1_DASH
Click to expand...
I liked 1 dash I'm not so sure about the .1
 
And while we are on the subject, the dao is currently, basically an (npo) not a business.. the mission being to further the good of dash community. To become a for profit investment group, is a whole different idea altogether. So maybe propose to make a private, secondary, for profit investment group,, that could invest in dash projects for a profit. I just think it's apples and oranges my friends.
 
A separate entity is possible, of course. Ethereum DAO tried to do exactly that. Become a for-profit holding company of Ethereum and Blockchain-related start-ups. But it was hacked, and FAILED.
Anyway it may be much simpler to implement on top of DASH, rather than totally separate entity. Besides the DASH budget will grow huge and fairly soon.It can grow beyond $100 million a year and we must have a plan to use that kind of capital efficiently. We better prepare of what to do with the money.
Do we want to donate our money or to invest it for-profit? I vote for the latter.
 
Megahashman said:
I just don't see much of a point, when the current dao budget isn't being utilized. What's the point of having a larger budget when we don't use the one we currently have? Money talks and bullshit walks. Why isn't evolution out yet? Why aren't people's concerns about IX being taken seriously? Because the dao doesn't have a clue about how to allocate the budget. Giving it a larger one won't make a bit of difference, until they start making more progress. Like I said I'm not completely against the idea, it just may be premature.
Click to expand...
There was a time when there were a number of good proposals and they would be approved for the budget, and one of them would "knock" other(s) down. We just didn't get enough good proposals this month (not at the eyes of the MN majority anyway). Evolution isn't out yet because 9 women can't produce a baby in one month. And I would absolutely vote for any freelance programmer (with credibility) that proposed to fix IX, there were none.

But even if it was really the case that "we don't need more budget money", I see no problem in redistributing dividends as regular block rewards for MNs (or Dash holders post Evolution).
 
I don't think this is possible because the DAO/Blockchain isn't a legal entity. There needs to be a legal entity to 'own' the shares.

What you'd have to do to make this work is something like:

• start a company and offer shares in that company to masternode owners for free (but they'd have to disclose their identities of course)
• create a proposal to capitalise that company and post it on Dashwhale
• get enough votes to activate the proposal so that an address owned by the company gets funded
• have the company then invest in startups

However the 'company' still wouldn't really be owned by the network as such. It would be owned by the individuals who happened to be masternode holders as well and they could still choose to sell their shares independently of their masternode collateral (unless there was some kind of binding condition in the terms of ownership, but they would be almost unenforceable because cryptocurrency is a bearer token with no counterparty to endorse ownership).

I'm afraid that's just the other side of the 'decentralised' equation. The DAO cannot own anything because it itself does not have a legal existence.

The Dash DAO and corporate shares are oil and water. They are unmixable and invisible to each other. Parallel universes that are unaware of each other's existences.
 
We can pretend as-if it's a working system and hope for dividends being paid in the end. Masternode owner would be able to sue companies that distribute profits to other shareholders, but not to Dash. Let's just try it.

There is zero downside anyway as compared to the current situation where we simply donate funds.

Perhaps some jurisdictions will call it a legal fiction, some others will treat it seriously. As long as there is zero downside and a huge upside, worth at least hundred million dollars, I'm willing to support the idea.
 
Last edited:
We're not ready for that leaven of DAO yet, but it is good to have these discussions and start looking at how we will eventually accomplish these ideas.
 
Remember MNs get a portion of the transaction fees also. So even if we don't get an explicit dividend from funded projects, we still gain from the additional activity they create on the network.

However, if we did get a dividend, my preference would be for those DASH to be burnt and taken out of supply.
 
Burning Dash is fine, causes deflation for all users.
But even better and faster growth effect would be achieved by redistribution of profits into new start-ups. This will allow for compounding interest.
 
I like the idea of giving proposals the option between requesting a donation or an investment with potential for return / loan to be repaid.
 
Loan denominated in DASH is a bad idea. Start-ups will go bankrupt instantly. Dash is ultra-deflationary currency, even more so than gold and more so than Bitcoin, due to the way Nodes work and take currency out of circulation, even when nobody invests in Dash (where Bitcoin and Gold miners normally sell majority of their proceeds on the open market).

I expect the start ups to pay us dividend, that are more in fiat dollars, but less in Dash coins than what they took in. What it will create is a demand for Dash coins, and increase the dollar value thereof. It needs to be investment in stock. I would like to create an Asset-based economy, rather than debt-based financing.
 
Last edited:
I like this idea, and it's important that we think about ways that we could improve this process. Ultimately though, I believe that this would add needless complexity to every proposal, and would instead be detrimental, especially at this stage in the game, where we don't really have the market to demand an ROI from people who propose stuff to us. As an option, it seems fine, but then we'd have to work out the legality of things, which is something that seems like a bit too much of a burden. Lastly, it's important that if we are to implement something like this at some point, that all the legal issues are hammered out before hand, as trying to scrounge the last dollar and instead opening yourself up to legal issues, is foolish.
 
I think most of the problems mentioned earlier here would be irrelevant if we not try to rescue the burnt coins but just let them vanish. The supply of coins will get smaller and every dash holder will get paid his dividend in increased value of their tokens.

If it's a well known standard address the official figure of available coins could be updated too.
 
The ROI on funding DAO's / one-off projects is the value it adds to Dash as a whole. Forcing budget recipients to provide additional direct financial returns would change the dynamics a lot. E.g. the Core team (really, the Core DAO) would have to become profit orientated to return a % to the network directly. E.g. Core DAO receives 1000 Dash per month and would now need to make (eg) 23% profit and and pay this back to MNOs (230 Dash) and start thinking of revenue streams into the Core DAO to meet profit obligations (think Blockstream) instead of offering the best priced contract to develop Dash software and ecosystem with the most value. It's basically a warped incentive model for most cases.

Nothing is stopping someone setting up a DAO and offering to do this (it might be good in some cases, how the profits would be returned isn't clear though). Forcing it would create some bad dynamics for me.
 
Last edited:
toknormal said:
I don't think this is possible because the DAO/Blockchain isn't a legal entity. There needs to be a legal entity to 'own' the shares.

What you'd have to do to make this work is something like:

• start a company and offer shares in that company to masternode owners for free (but they'd have to disclose their identities of course)
• create a proposal to capitalise that company and post it on Dashwhale
• get enough votes to activate the proposal so that an address owned by the company gets funded
• have the company then invest in startups

However the 'company' still wouldn't really be owned by the network as such. It would be owned by the individuals who happened to be masternode holders as well and they could still choose to sell their shares independently of their masternode collateral (unless there was some kind of binding condition in the terms of ownership, but they would be almost unenforceable because cryptocurrency is a bearer token with no counterparty to endorse ownership).

I'm afraid that's just the other side of the 'decentralised' equation. The DAO cannot own anything because it itself does not have a legal existence.

The Dash DAO and corporate shares are oil and water. They are unmixable and invisible to each other. Parallel universes that are unaware of each other's existences.
Click to expand...

Then the law better get its shit together and figure out how to accommodate DAOs before it finds its self replaced by one :p Things like paying dividends and returning loans with interest will become a key component of DAOs at some stage and Dash could potentially set the standard but I'm against anything like that as part of Dash governance, proposals that offer benefits to Dash don't necessarily offer benefits to masternode operators pockets and expecting them to would be a step backwards imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top