Proposal: Dash ATM Master Compliance Program - Phase I

Can somebody please convince me that pushing ATMs (with or without compliance framework) is an idea we should pursue? "it will increase marketcap" is not a strategic plan. "we have to go after all avenues" is not a strategic plan. What is the vision?

How many "users" or "transactions" are done at ATMs versus other methods? Here's a clue:
E3ykpKYfE5EUSM6g.png


I'm serious, can somebody convince me, because at the moment I am not convinced.
 
GrandMasterDash said:
How do you know that without some kind of work to ascertain the potential cost-of-acquisition-per-user? Even if there were a few hundred ATMs in the US, that's still highly targeted. I mean, no one is going to travel a couple of hundred miles just to buy dash. And what if, despite all our best efforts, the public at large decide that bitcoin (or ethereum) is the better option to buy? (more widely known and accepted). There are way too many assumptions built into this proposal. At least offer us a backup plan if it doesn't pan out as expected.

As camosoul said, the whole point of crypto is to cut out the middle man. This proposal takes away everything that crypto was meant to stand for. A widely accept Dash in this form would mean AML / KYC for the majority of people. It would mean the continuation of charges based on percentages (instead of flat fees). It would mean a more volatile currency than the dollar (great on the way up, disaster on the way down). So why, as a regular Joe, would anyone use this other than speculation of a price rise?
Click to expand...

You are right, it might not work and that is why the plan is to start small. Its an experiment. That is what start-ups do. Conversely it may work and we scale up. Of course there are assumptions, there are assumptions in every business plan.

I can understand the philosophical objection to KYC/AML, but it will only ever be an optional layer sitting on top of the network. If you choose not to use it then you aren't affected. If you choose to use it, then you have to pay the fee.

If we want mass adoption then we have to cater for everyone, but that doesn't prevent the rest of us using the technology in the same private, decentralized way that we always have.

Its just one more customer acquisition channel that is being explored.
 
halso said:
You are right, it might not work and that is why the plan is to start small. Its an experiment. That is what start-ups do. Conversely it may work and we scale up. Of course there are assumptions, there are assumptions in every business plan.

I can understand the philosophical objection to KYC/AML, but it will only ever be an optional layer sitting on top of the network. If you choose not to use it then you aren't affected. If you choose to use it, then you have to pay the fee.

If we want mass adoption then we have to cater for everyone, but that doesn't prevent the rest of us using the technology in the same private, decentralized way that we always have.

Its just one more customer acquisition channel that is being explored.
Click to expand...

You're talking about a $10k experiment with zero risk to the proposer. It's a whole new world when people put their own money on the line as an "experiment".
 
GrandMasterDash said:
You're talking about a $10k experiment with zero risk to the proposer. It's a whole new world when people put their own money on the line as an "experiment".
Click to expand...
Its about 1% of the annul budget. Its worth a punt. Besides, even if it doesn't gain transaction, we are building on our KYC/AML knowledge base which will no doubt become useful in the future when if comes to other channels.
 
Coincidence? - not sure - but the price of dash has been dropping since this proposal was made....
 
@Solarminer nailed it. If you want to do something silly because you're too afraid to sack up and do the risky, bold moves that need doing; at least find a simple, cheap way to dick around in silliness...

If the #1 complaint is waiting for the ledgercto run double-duty as TX security, IX. The idea that existing ATM operators wouldn't want that is absurd. How many times has been t been said that backwards compatibility has been maintained so DASH can plug into BTC infrastructure? IX clearly requires a bit of extra... But not a ton. So, do it already...
 
Has there been any update on the progress of this first Phase proposal ?
- I understand the $10,000 funding was to cover the following:
babygiraffe said:
The first phase would consist of the following:
  • Establish the Principal Compliance program (the compliance program of a legal entity running the service)
  • Establish the Agent Compliance program (the compliance program the affiliate ATM operators would need to implement)
  • Create Operator Agreement documents to establish the Agent / Principal relationship
  • Banking packages which would allow operators to apply for bank accounts in an orderly fashion while meeting all bank documentation requirements
  • Creation of a compliance education and training program for the agents
  • Assessment of risks and potential mitigation steps
  • Planning for Phase II of the program
Click to expand...
And was actually going to be completed fairly quickly:
babygiraffe said:
How long will the program take to create?

Once funded, it should take approximately 3-4 weeks to create all the legal, training, and banking packages required. We will also receive a more detailed plan for Phase II.
Click to expand...

And will there soon be another proposal requesting the next $30,000?
babygiraffe said:
The costs beyond Phase I are dependent on the research which will be conducted as part of the work. Because a master compliance program has never been set up before, and the exact functioning of the program will depend on feedback and guidance the states provide us on their requirements, it is impossible to know with certainty the costs of running a sub-scale Phase II pilot. Informally, we expect Phase II will cost no more than $30,000 to conduct, including the services from BitAML. Please remember even at the pilot stage the machines are an income generating service.
Click to expand...
 
oaxaca said:
Can somebody please convince me that pushing ATMs (with or without compliance framework) is an idea we should pursue?
Click to expand...

Crypto ATMs are what the unbanked use. It's how crypto gets into the hands of those who are unable to link their phone to a regulated exchange. Unfortunately, they often come with costly regulations that increase the expense to the customer. The Dash network should be involved with crypto terminals because they help spread Dash to those who need it most and would be unable to get it without the cash-to-crypto conversion. They are also an important part of needed infrastructure to support and grow the network beyond more developed countries. For example, here in El Salvador only a small percentage of the more privileged population have a bank account and in neighboring Honduras the amount of debit and credit cards actually fell 2% last year.

They are an important service and regulatory expenses can prevent new machines from coming online, especially where they are needed most.
 
Only way Dash ATMs appeal to me is if the fees were damn near spot price.

Like 1-2% charge

I see the average buy fee on ATMs to be 8.5% and sell fees 6.25%.

That doesn't solve remittance issues in my mind nor investors. Not people lining up.

Set them up all around Arizona, California, Texas and Mexico with EXTREMELY low fees though and I see the vision.

Otherwise, to me, it starts to feel like Wells Fargo 2.0 or Western Union Lite.

Extremely Low Fees-Yes
5-6% fees- Sorry, I'll go person to person through Dash Ambassador in area funded to sell at spot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top