Quote from: tomkat on May 08, 2017, 11:13:13 AM

Quote from: mr.coinzy on May 08, 2017, 10:54:58 AM

Quote from: 13Darko on May 08, 2017, 10:41:36 AM

I will be speaking in terms of Elastic price. As someone said "people are more willing to pay for expectations", than for a ready product, because it gives an opportunity for future profits.
If we release a fully ready product, the initial price will be very high, which is, of course, very good for early donators, but is it good for newcomers?

So cons releasing just a Lite client at the moment:
- low price at the beginning (but constantly rising when new features are coming); //"Waves" is a good example. They had only a LiteClient for a ~year, so the price fell almost x2 times below ICO once. Now, when they released token creation, decentralized exchange, Leased PoS, - features expected as an MVP - the price rose x2,5 times the ICO.

Pros:
- good chance to come in for new investors, developers, exchanges; //This is important. If big exchanges like Bittrex or Poloniex will have a chance to buy a stake early for a low price, Elastic will be most probably listed on them
- great trade volume // This will also attract big exchanges
- ability to create a foundation and attract more devs, bug hunters (like HunterMinerCrafter).

Releasing an MVP will give a higher price and won't be so attractive for newcomers as releasing a LiteClient, IMO.

An MVP as the name implies means that there will be more features and functionalities released later on to give a fully featured working product - I believe that this should be the minimal starting position for xel when launched. In regard to attracting more people to the project, I have no doubt that many will join especially if we show that we have a working product with more innovation and features to come instead of being just another coin with no viable substance.
Regarding people not joining if the price of the market of xel is high - i think this is complete nonsense, this project will attract 1000 times more attention if we launch with some meaningful meat on the bone and not just a promise. Investors will invest (especially if we show we already deliver something but aim to deliver even more) and devs seeing the potential and wanting to join will flock.

Well, this is all fine and you seem to be right BUT please try to answer the following:
-what do you consider "fully featured working product" ?
-what is "some meaningful meat on the bone" ?
-when do you think the "meat" will be ready for the launch - weeks, months, years?

I really don't get your idealistic and actually utopian approach. For me, coralreefer is right

Quote

I believe the more we test, the more we realize better ways to provide more flexibility / value to xel job authors and it becomes a never ending cycle. Ideally, I think it would be best if a solid version that includes basic ElasticPL functionality is deployed...but even with that we now have a couple question...do we stick with the POW model we have?, EK identified some issues with the underlying memory model so we need to determine if changes are needed there, etc...and this was just in the last 24 hours.

What's wrong with such approach? Why not launch with solid base version now? No one in this world is waiting for fully featured products - what if Zuckerberg was waiting with FB launch until it's perfect? FB wouldn't be launched even now...

Let's agree what is required for stable base version, and try to launch it finally.

I definitely do think that we do need to reach an agreement on what is required for stable base version and what we should strive to supply in the future as a fully viable system, and I think that the most eligible person to give insights to this matter is EK.

EK can you please give us your opinion on these important issues?