Quote from: crickets on November 12, 2017, 03:58:17 PM

Quote from: BTCMILLIONAIRE on November 11, 2017, 08:04:20 PM

Quote from: tokenZ on November 11, 2017, 07:56:03 PM

Quote from: BTCMILLIONAIRE on November 11, 2017, 05:15:59 PM

Quote from: WE.MISAYA on November 11, 2017, 04:39:09 PM

Quote from: BTCMILLIONAIRE on November 07, 2017, 04:24:02 PM

Quote from: WE.MISAYA on November 07, 2017, 04:12:08 PM

But this would then also make me wonder about VISA. Wouldn't they do their due diligence and try everything they can to not partner with a company that might get sued for shady operations?

Visa is not legally liable if MonaCo ends up deliberately manipulating the token price (which I am not saying they will, but they definitely can with the current model).

Despite my responses, I actually like the idea of the card. I'm just not going to let shills post bullshit and make it appear as if everything is rainbows and unicorns in here when it clearly isn't. And right now there's a massive problem with the removal of the asset contract, which so far still doesn't have any replacement solution, as well as the issue with the card reservation once the token price gets too high for normal people to care.

I agree with you but still it is a bit weird how the whole process is going. You would expect VISA to be very careful before engaging in contracts with a crypto startup like this one. But who knows maybe they don't even care as much as we would think.

Visa cares about one thing, money. If they can create a scenario in which they can profit while keeping their name clean, they will most likely go that route. And if it came to public attention that MonaCo baited and switched investors with the asset contract, Visa would simply play oblivious to the fact and get off scot-free.

By the way, with 20000 cards and an average of $1000 transaction volume per year, that would make the dividend of a single token $0.7 per year.

And that's only the amount of cards that was ordered since the ICO. At the same rate there should be more than 100k cards at the end of next year, so each token would give a yearly dividend of more than $3.5 per year. Imagine you bought 10k tokens at $2 for $20,000, then you would be getting $35,000 for your investment every year from 2019.

And this number would grow very quickly as the amounts of cards increase. If cards kept getting ordered at the same rate, in 2020 the same investment would return $70,000 in dividends, and in 2025 the dividend would be $245,000. In 2030 this would be more than $500,000 per year. So in total we'd get a return of at least $2,730,000 at the end of 2030 out of a $20,000 investment with at least $500,000 of extra income per year from that point onward.

And in reality the amount of cards should be going up much faster because of active marketing, which so far MonaCo didn't really do.

Dividends?
No.
Super-speculative.

Nothing speculative about an extremely conservative estimate. Thanks for showing that all the shills have no real arguments by the way.

I think Kris said the math works out for token holders because of token scarcity once card volumes increase (best card in market for travelers, and crypto users, MCO required as transfer mechanism)...not sure if they will do dividends because of securities laws.

I know what Kris said and I can guarantee you that it's bullshit. He said that the revenue is too low to be relevant, which at worst is a complete and utter lie or an indicator of his lack of competence at best.
Scarcity was a factor originally on top of the asset contract. And every serious investor joined for the asset contract, not for the scarcity.

Check my Math in the quoted post for a low end estimate given the current data to see that the asset contract is crucial for any serious investor.