You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Steemit Exclusive: Larken Rose On Steem And How It Is Helping Power The Mirror Project
Re: Jeff's comment about making thousands of dollars per post
When the price of Steem took one of its first big surges, from around 25c to $4, we started to see some huge payouts... One of them was for a make-up tutorial which made about $25k, much to the chagrin and confusion of certain people on Steemit.
The thing is, it's true that the more people join Steemit, the less Steem there will be to distribute. However, it's also true that the more people join, the more demand there is for Steem, and the higher the price. Perhaps we'll see the rewards stay the same, but we might even see them go up. Imagine if Steemit were paying out $10 MM a day, with 500k users... could happen.
This is true @churdtzu, and something I hadn't fully considered. If demand for Steem keeps up with growth of the audience then it should not result in lower payouts. The distribution of those payouts could become more widely diversified though (and that is quite likely), which could result in the top earners today earning less on a percentage basis.
this ^
this isnt necessarily true. Why would someone joining steemit need or want to buy steem?
the likelihood is high that they will choose to get steem if they find it preferable to creating content to earn it.
For instance...a Dr. who makes $200k per year might want to give back to people who they think write amazing content, but not have the time (nor inclination) to write their own content. This is a prime candidate for the type of person who might like steem.
or someone who is running a record label...
Many cases where it is worthwhile to buy steem to have influence in the network.
this presumes that they see utility in it commensurate with the investment. No such utility exists.
As i said in my reply to chrudtzu, i think its incredibly optimistic to believe that people will invest a huge sum for a very tiny amount of influence. I certainly wouldnt, and ive owned and run several businesses. The doctor who makes 200K a year can't really afford me, but the doctor who makes 10x that might be a client. Im the guy he goes to to find out if an investment is on the up and up.
Even absent due diligence, your doctor example just doesnt make sense. You think hes going to buy steem for the purposes of rewarding content that's published on steemit.... lets assume he he invests his entire annual salary in steem at the current price point.
Hell get about what 140K steem.... so the "reward" hell be able to distribute to this valuable content would be about two bucks. you go make that pitch, see how its recieved.
Yes, i understand that there are people who have invested money. Many (like me) already regret it (i powered up 5500 steem or so shortly after i sold the bulk of my investment in the currency)
the strongest argument against your position is simply the reality of where the price is at and where it seems to be going. Now i know there are several well-"price-hype" propaganda types on the front page every day. Maybe the whales who upvote them even believe the hype.
I just wonder if theres a reality check in the furure where you guys realize that, as things stand, people don't want to buy what you got to sell.
Im not saying this to be a douche or a hater. I actually like steem as an idea, and its already made me quite a bit of money as an investor if not as a writer. At least at one point, i thought that steem was a good enough idea to take $40k out of pocket and invest it in the currency.
At the end of the day, getting people to buy steem is about delivering utility in exchange for money. youre just not offering enough utility
I didn't say they would necessarily buy Steem; I said there would be more demand, and this is true for a few reasons.
Firstly, when they start curating or writing content, they're going to receive some Steem dollars or Steem power. The fact that they're holding that currency, and not giving it away for free, is demand. Holding is demand just as much as buying is demand.
Secondly, the more people join, the more valuable Steem becomes, because Steem can help buy people's attention. Attention is valuable, because it allows you to have influence over people's opinions.
No, just people earning SP and holding it is not demand, at least not in the economics sense as effecting price (which is the context in which you used it). Just people earning steem and not selling it won't increase price. (if they did sell it, it would decrease the price, but if they earn it and just hold it it won't have any effect on price.)
You can't really buy peoples attention with steem. Not unless youre willing to buy a couple million dollars worth. You seriously think someone is going to buy thousands of dollars worth of steem so that their vote can go from a tiny fraction of a cent in value to a slightly larger fraction of a cent in value? thats kind of optimistic
I disagree, and if you'll allow me, I'd like to make the case why holding is indeed demand in the economic sense of affecting price.
If people didn't hold gold, but instead threw it out in the street or in their garbage collection, would it affect the price or not? It would mean that the available supply would increase significantly. The fact that people were willing to throw it out without receiving any money for it, would mean that $0 was an acceptable price for them. If there were other people who did put a non-zero price on gold, any pricing mechanism would have to account for this increase in the supply.
Or to look at it another way, if the largest gold producer in the world decided, instead of selling their gold, that they were going to hold onto all of it, would that affect the price or not?
To put it yet another way, if you bought something and then immediately and extravagantly gave it away for free, flooding the market, how would that affect the price? If you buy, but do not hold, is that really a stable, established demand?
Yet one more way of looking at it, is that, if everyone in the world decided that they didn't want to hold gold, but to sell it, how would that affect the price of gold? Surely if they want to sell it, that must mean a decrease in demand, and an increase in supply, and therefore, the price will go down.
Whether you're buying something or holding something, the effect is the same - a decrease in supply available for purchase. If something is worth enough to you that you take the time to secure it, you are exerting effort to maintain it. So, from one perspective, that means you are constantly "buying" that commodity.
If a couple of million dollars' worth buys a large amount of attention, then ten thousand dollars' worth must buy a small amount of attention. With the amount of Steem power I have, if I look at a post with say 5-10 comments, I can normally decide which comment is going to be at the top. I can also decide which comments will be at the bottom, though normally I abstain from exercising that right. If a company has an advertising budget of millions of dollars, and they understand this technology, do you think it would be worthwhile to invest tens of thousands of dollars in Steem so they can have that kind of influence? Especially considering that, using Steem power, they can upvote their own posts, giving themselves more capital while expending very little energy.
It's not optimistic; it's reality. I can name a few cases of people doing this. For me personally, I could have cashed out some Steem dollars, but instead decided to power up for $1000 or more. @dollarvigilante has done the same, with all of his Steem dollars. @cryptomarket invested 6 BTC in their account when they started.
Perhaps, instead of telling me that people aren't going to do that, you should be asking, why are they already doing that? Of course, it's not purely because they think they can buy people's attention with it, but that's definitely a factor in the equation.
Thanks for your comment and have a good one
I dont like people that say they can consantly make money here.
It is pretty annoying, because your payout depends on community actually.
But we have people here that get thousands of dollars every day at their every post, comment etc.- even if it's not so good.
for example, @fuck.off
just look there, he gets few hundred for nothing... Is it fair? I really doubt it.
Yep. No different than YouTube. First there was little payout because it was an unknown (and YouTube wasn't paying.) Then there were good payouts for early adopters with high number of views. Then more creators joined as well as watchers so the pie grew but so did the competition. Markets. You know I love 'em.
The Dead Rises
https://steemit.com/coffin/@cryptocurrency1/the-dead-rises