Let's just tweak your example to make things absolutely clear:
The bid is $66.
Front run votes value $15.
The vote comes in at $100
The bidder gets 75% = $86.25 payout = profit of $20.25 = 30.6%
Leaked curation to others = $10.38
The bot gets $18.37 curation + $66 dollars and returns $84.37 to delegators.
total sends = $660
total payouts = $862.5
total curation = $183.7
delegators get $843.7 / authors $202.5
leaked $103.8
This is under the current 75/25 split.
Under 50/50 all things remaining equal to get the 10%(no other voters):
The bid is $44.
Front run votes value $15.
The vote comes in at 100 dollars.
The bidder gets 50% = $57.5 payout = profit of $13.5 = 30.6%
Leaked to others: $20.77
The bot gets $36.73 curation + $44 dollars and returns $80.73 to delegators.
total sends = $440
total payouts = $575
total curation = $367.3
delegators get $807.3 / authors $135
leaked $207.7
So that appears to be in order. Interestingly, a bot operator that takes a cut of the curation is more well off. Authors certainly aren't going to like it.
Now if you throw in more curators that want to front run, I'm not sure that it will offset the cut to authors. It's an interesting dynamic here....
So, what do people do with the leakage once they have higher curation? What does that do to vote values over time? Will the gap for the authors close the more distribution goes to powered up Steem? will there be a wider range of support for more niche topics?
what we do know is that more Steem needs to be held in SP and used for voting. Currently, that is not happening and a shitload has gone out to the exchanges. Hopefully it sells to people who want to power it up as they see it a safer bet than speculation...
I am just speculating :D
Edit, and also the authors who are powering up can vote too remember. participation.
All I see from here is that it's slightly less desirable to delegate to a bot (although they be able to recover from passing it in the form of offering less ROI to buyers, or probably an equilibrium in-between).
That's quite good in my opinion, when it comes to the bid bot ecosystem. However, lazy is lazy and it may not actually change any behaviors.
We should see if this affects the lease market and the self-voting situation (self farmers that try to hide everything). I do recall that in the same vein it will cut into self-farmers a little as well. But it's hard to tell by how much.
I like that the general principle is easy to remember-- whatever the 'leakage' to others is, it doubles in 50/50. But there's no getting around the fact that authors are going to get less. Authors are already not getting much though, would it lead to less published blogs? My head hurts.
Yes, so then, how many buy and with effectively cheaper flags (as it takes less to give them a loss) how many take the risk?
For those coming in fresh to the system, do you think they will have as much issue with it?
Perhaps. dunno. might be a good thing :D I do think that once curators got a little bit more, more would power up and in time, they will increase the values they add to posts, making the value higher. From what I have seen, the people from @abh12345's engagement and curation leagues are among the most active and fastest growing.
I'm here to say that I've read the post and much of the commentary, and now my head hurts!
To bring new money to SP, I think a switch to reward the investors with more would be a good incentive. Authors who are just authors, have no risk and would need to produce 'quality' to receive support.
I do see less posts, but that's good for those who continue to do so isn't it? :)
Yep.
I think it would
... Having trouble with comments through steemit.