There is a lot of truth to this statement. I don't like HIVE being promoted as "come post and get rewards". Starts users off with the wrong mindset. But we do have to ask ourselves...is HIVE better or worst from the users that aren't able to contribute financially? I think the answer is better. A large % of the content created here comes from these environments. Content and attention is the primary fuel for social platforms. For example, as of today, I think MAUs is way more important than price...even though one could argue that positive price movement can eventually increase MAUs
With all that said, you are spot on about how onboarding efforts need to be created for different classes of users. I don't even think the money that is being "sucked" out is that substantial (correct me if I'm wrong). Seems like the bigger issue is a lack of new investor and developer types you mentioned coming in.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
These are good points and yes I believe increasing users and paying out and having that as a focus can be good. However hive has to generate that revenue some how. It generates zero on it's own right now.
I would much rather see the $300,000 that was just extracted from the DHF to fund development on hive. Development would bring users because there would be products they want to interact with and naturally market themselves if they were good.
But if your going to promote that you can come here and get paid for your content then you need to generate revenue otherwise you're simply extracting from the only source and that's investors. Of which investors are not going to see hive as a good investment if the general idea is to only keep extracting and have nothing to fill it back in. The price of hive this year purely reflects this.
Indeed. Especially the “generating zero on its own” part. That’s the last thing an investor wants to hear