Applications leveraging clones for multiple inflation pool revenue (possible?)

This is going to be a bit of a half-assed post and I do not even know how possible it is but, let's see.

@exyle just posted about if applications could offer a better return than bidbots for delegators, people would stop delegating. As said, previously, I see the option for Stake Lock in for 100% passive return the way to go in this regard as it frees up the platform usage for those who want to actually use it actively. However, that is unlikely to get legs at this point in time, unfortunately.

So, let's have a look at something else I have been thinking about lately instead, leveraging the Steem clones by applications. Due to the cloning of the systems, I am 'pretty sure' that an application built for Steem would be able to be used on any of the clone platforms with minimal development other than things like the algorithms for voting. What this means is that while the bidbots are only able to draw from the Steem inflation, an application could reskin itself to draw beneficiaries from all clone platform inflation pools, as well as curation in various ways.

For example, if @dtube had a skin that localized for Steem, Whaleshares and Smoke, users from those platforms could log in with their local platform key and use a tailored version of @dtube that offers a consistent experience integrated with their particular platform, including the look, voting mechanisms and algorithms in play. For example, while Steem has 25% curation, a vote cast through the Smoke platform would have 50% factored in. What this effectively does is to make @dtube capable of drawing in from several inflation pools in several different coins. The more clones there are with their own coin, the more revenue streams available.

This reduces the cost of development significantly over time and it incentivizes investment into creating applications that are able to cross not only community boundaries, but blockchain boundaries. As the beneficiary returns come in, they could be handled in several ways, such as converted into Steem or another token through a dex, or left in their native form and powered up. This would make the clones somewhat SMT-ish, without SMTs and while the application can have many streams, the users get their return in the token they logged in and voted with.

At the moment, there is a problem as for example, if someone wants to use @dtube embedded, they have to have a Steem account but posting it onto Smoke will mean that the audience is able to watch it but, they can't upvote it unless they too have a Steem account and watching the video takes them off platform into an ecosystem they have no power. This is an issue because having a Steem account isn't really enough, they need stake too. While they might have a lot of stake on Smoke, on Steem they may have next to nothing. The longer this goes and the more decentralized communities become, the less likely users are going to maintain large stakes across multiple platforms.

These apps are decentralized (kinda) by design so their business model should also include ways to leverage all places they could possibly have a base upon. From an investment perspective, investors could delegate in Steem and the application can use the stake to vote and earn curation as well as take a staked percentage of the beneficiaries across all platforms. This might not sound like a great deal at the moment but, the more successful the Steem clones become, the more the beneficiaries are worth.

If there were 10 semi successful clones with the app taking 10% beneficiaries and returning it to the delegator/investors, that might be quite a decent return. But, when SMTs do finally arrive, the application will be developed to be spread across more networks and instances and could be bringing in dozens of revenue streams in dozens of SMTs of various sizes. Essentially, the applications that can crossover are able to monetize themselves in a decentralized manner and spread the risk so even if many points failed, it will still offer decent returns.

This possibility could further help lock Steem up if successful because not only could it provide a high return, it encourages distribution and engagement without users needing to pay for votes. The platforms that have the possibility might even delegate additional local stake (like Steemit does) to these applications to aid in attracting and retaining users as well as distributing from their own inflation pools. They could negotiate contracts about how much of the stake earned by the application can go back to investors and how much gets staked by the application to further aid distribution.

But, a model that is able to do this might not need delegation at all as it might be able to take direct investment in and then live completely off the various community beneficiaries. The investment model could include staked percentage of profits returned and could include the purchase of local coins to upvote the local community too with a percentage continually rolled back into the localized stake to increase curation.

As said, I haven't thought much of this through in entirety and have no idea about the development requirements but, I am wondering if Steem could become a project incubator for all Steem applications as well as for the Steem-ish clones and SMTs. That way, applications could leverage the staked users on Steem in various ways (like delegation or direct votes) to take percentage ownership of the application with returns that come from many platforms. It could mean that for investors, even if Steem fails, they will still be taking revenue from other sites in other currencies on different blockchains.

I don't know, maybe the idea is impossible, maybe it is too complicated, perhaps it just sucks.

Personally, I think StakeLock for return would be much easier, offer better returns than bidbots and could be leveraged in many ways by the community while leaving the visible parts of Steem open for active users who choose to participate. But, that is just me it seems.

Taraz
[ a Steem original ]