There is an ongoing and lively debate among token holders as to whether or not AICoin should yield dividends from profits achieved. SInce this is of great concern to token holders, we will be voting on this issue during our first official vote. However, this vote will only direct how dividends are handled at the present time. This will be a question we will revisit regularly as the situation in the marketplace, the history of AICoin develops and opinions of token holders change.
- DO not issue dividends at this time. Continue with current profit distribution of 40% return to coin pool trading, 50% into the investment pool with a 10% Management Fee
- 10% dividends, 40% Coin Pool, 40% Investment Pool, 10% Management Fee.
- 20% dividend, 30% Coin Pool, 40% Investment Pool, 10% Management Fee
- 20% dividend, 40% Coin Pool, 30% Investment Pool, 10% Management Fee
- 30% dividend, 30% Coin Pool, 30% Investment Pool, 10% Management Fee
How dividend voting will be counted
Two of our token holders very sagely pointed out that splitting the YES-DIVIDEND votes over five choices and concentrating all NO DIVIDEND votes in one choice is very likely to produce a NO vote. Therefore, voting for dividends will be counted as follows. All YES DIVIDENDS votes will be added together and if together they number more than the NO DIVIDEND votes, AICoin will immediately start to issue dividends on new equity highs. If the vote is YES, then the level of dividends will be based on the choice in the ballot that receives the highest number of votes. If NO DIVIDENDS receives a higher number of votes, then no dividends will be issued for the next 6 months, afterwhich time we will revisit the issue.
AICoin Management urges choice 1; voting NO on the dividend issue.
This is very early in the history of our strategy. Management believes that devoting as much capital as possible to increasing the value of the coin at this point is the strategically sound decision.
Options 2 and 4 maintain the flow of profits back into the Coin Pool, thereby leaving the very important compounding feature of the ICO intact. There are lots of very large ICO´s investing in start-up projects in the block chain space so I am only moderately optimistic that our small ICO will be able to fund the best projects. However, I am very optimistic about the ´bot´s future performance so I will be voting to have that funding maintained at the 40% level.
I agree with your comments about the compounding benefit of keeping the coin pool growing. I do, however, believe that we will, over time, develop an edge over the funds looking to invest in other ICO’s. By structuring the company with the capability to make regular investments as well as ICO investments, our token holders will be able to select from a broader universe of potential investments.
Consider a re-look statement added to Item 1 to revisit items 1-6 each Q4. This would allow for a potential future dividend statement in marketing going forward and soften the immediate urgency of the dividend question.
The dividend question will be re-raised on a continual basis (regardless of outcome) we would probably anticipate every 6 months or so rather than quarterly. This definitely won’t be a single time question.
In case the collective chooses for dividend based mechanism, what will be the instrument & timeline for dividend ? For example, the ai buys 1 bitcoin at $4000 and sells at $4300 with a 7.5% profit. Now , what will be the instrument for dividend in this case – will it be in terms of bitcoins ( or whichever currency has been traded) or will it be in form of ai-coins. I understand there is a limit on the number of ai-coins which will be released. Secondly, what will be the timeline for dividend – will it be for each trade or for a pre-decided timeline (say 1 year as happens in traditional stock market).
We don’t need no stinking dividends! Let the coins value pay off later on!
A vote will answer that question, as for your opinion it’s not needed as some investors came here for a dividend so keep your bias opinion to yourself!
As I see it, the definition of a ‘collective’ is everyone has a say in the direction it takes. So I would make the argument that all opinions regarding the subject should be considered. Personally I became a member of the collective in anticipation of the growth of the Net Asset Value, and the premium it would produce in the trading price of the token. I never in my wildest dreams would think at this point it should pay a dividend. This is a pure growth of capital opportunity. The more we can invest back into AICOIN the faster it can grow.
If we take dividends too soon it will increase the length of time by years that it takes to create wealth (because we are keeping the investment pool small) But we will have to take dividends, lots of dividends soon enough.
For sake or discussion, lets assume that the test run results will be what we see for a while (135% in 15 months, or 433% per year, lets round off to 400%) Too high? maybe, but that’s why we joined right? Sure it could be lower, but it could be higher as well. Don’t discount that AICoin is based on two technologies that abide by the law of accelerating returns, or Moore’s law. (see Ray Kurzweil) Both AI and Blockchain are computer based information processing technologies that are bound by this law. That means that the AI and Blockchain tech used by AICoin will become better, faster and cheaper at what they do year over year. Coupled with what may foresee as a surging bull market in crypto for a number of years forward. So, lets just say 400%.
You can run your own spreadsheets, but starting with $3 million, and a 40% re-investment into trading pool, by end year 3 our trading pool would be 32 million, or 219 million end year 5. As Gavin Smith points out its not good to have a fund so big that it moves the market. Plus there is the other side of investments in AI and Blockchain companies (smart category choices by the way). Lets say that starting year 3 we realize a 5X return on first year investments (not 100X or 1000X, but only 5X), then in end year 3 we have an additional return of 30 million on top of the invested 61 million to date in companies. So a collective 119 million fund. 3 million to 119 million in year 3.
Regardless of 200% or 400% annual trading returns, or 100X or 5X company invested gains, this ever improving AI driven combined model has a fast exponential. Smart money would leave it all in the trading and investing pools until it starts to pass the markets in terms of too much money being traded and invested that its counterproductive. THAT is the time to start taking dividends because that dividend value can not be effectively traded or invested. Most likely, the AI can determine that point better than any of us. That future is near.
As mentioned by others before, I believe in maximizing the coin pool as we already have proof of it’s profitable operation and compounding this is beneficial. I think the options to be entertained should be between 1, 2, and 4.
These options essentially pit the dividend against the investment pool. If one has confidence in the return of the investment pool then it would make sense to choose option 1. Less confidence would leave options 2 and 4 as more beneficial.
Confidence in the investment pool would seem to stem from the confidence in the investment board members and confidence in the wisdom of the collective to choose from their 5 options. Interestingly, we will be voting on the dividend before we learn who will make up the board members. I think this is not an ideal ordering of the votes.
In order to have confidence in the collective, I believe it is of paramount importance to have a centralized place where communication and hopefully vigorous debate can take place. Absent this, we fail to gain the benefit of the wisdom of the crowd and must naively believe in the wisdom of each member of the collective.
In short, I think the dividend vote taking place before the voting on the board members is non optimal. I also think that more work should be done to create and encourage a centralized place of communication. Absent any changes, reducing the size of the investment pool via a dividend seems to be the more conservative play.
I’m in full agreement with the above two posts. Its much to early to be considering dividends at this stage. We should let AICOIN grow organically before thinking of reducing the money pool for trading and investments. I think the true strength will lie in the investment pool and wisdom of the crowd voting which will add the most value to AICOIN. We want our trading pool to be as big as possible for our most important growth factor
I think we should keep the status quo for now to let the pools growing faster. Few years later, we could increase the divided gradually up to 25 or 30 percent.
I agree . Lower dividends for now . Let’s build the coins value .
I posted a few days ago that I had more confidence in the trading bots than in finding the best ICOs. I´ve since done a lot more research into the ICO market and I have changed my mind on this issue. There are lots of interesting ICOs out there, some of them being very interesting and worthy of investing in. And the profits, if successful, can be astronomical: for example, Stratis tokens have gone up 101,160% in a year and NXT tokens are up 673,000% over a several-year period. Even one investment by our pool that came anywhere close to these numbers would exponentially increase the value of AICoin. Is it my prediction that we will find a Stratis or an NXT? No, but it is something to think about when voting on the allocation of our trading profits.
I agree with hiltock, holding the dividend vote as a first priority is not the best idea. Ideally we should allow the investment board time to demonstrate their competence in bringing good ICO prospects to our quarterly votes. If the business plan of AICoin can be shown to be working after 6 – 12 months then there may be an inclination in the members to just leave things as they are. ´Don´t fix it unless it´s broke!´
I think monthly or quarterly dividends in Ether or Bitcoin will have a very good psychological effect on investors, which makes them keep the coin for many years, which can result in a stable price development of the coin, compared to buyback, which will not be noticed due to the daily fluctuation of the coin price. Dividends can be seen as a second income. Choice number 5 is completely fair and i will vote for it.
My opinion is to plow as much as possible back into the growth vehicles — the Investment Pool and the Trading Pool. Dividends should only be paid out when we have an established track record, otherwise we decrease the NAV. It is the trading premium to NAV what we are looking for.
ALSO what many seem to forget or not understand, if XAI pays a dividend it is no longer a ‘collective’, it is most assuredly a SECURITY. This is a cost in compliance, administration and development. Please take this into consideration.
I’m for leaving the money in the pool but have a question. Is the 10% Management fee annual ? Would the dividends be quarterly ?
Hi Holl310, The valuations are done weekly and whenever there is a new equity high a distribution is made. If dividends are agreed then they would be accrued weekly (on new equity highs) but distributed quarterly. To keep their value the money would be moved into dollars (as crypto is volatile.)
When is the management fee taken?
Is the management fee taken on all new highs?
I agree with letting thigs as they are now
and I’ll be pushing to let the coins gian value, we dont need at this time dividends
Doing the vote like this favors the “no dividend” selection. I think the vote should have been binary, Yes or No. Then a second vote if necessary to determine the initial amount.
I’ll vote for the lowest level of dividend. I think it is important for people to realize their gains won’t be trapped by the markets which can be gamed, especially when not listed many places. At the same time I think you want to build the assets under control as much as possible by reinvestment.
That’s a valid point. We can run it one of 2 ways – simple yes no first followed by which approach (if yes is selected) or run a single vote; add all the yes options together as a straight run against the no option, if the total yes votes outnumber the no vote then we select the largest of the yes vote options. This has the benefit of only needing a single vote run to determine the outcome. Thoughts?
Option 5 Dividends are important to attract more cash in the pool!
Can you explain how the votes will be calculated. In the following scenario, where the votes are splitting as following:
Option 1= 40%, Option 2= 25% , Option 3= 20%, Option 4= 10%, Option 5= 5%
Is this mean that Option 1 will win, even if the majority of the voters want dividend to be issued?