Quote from: Reggie Middleton on February 09, 2018, 02:08:09 AM

Would you burn the tokens that you have, now? I likely feel the same way. I don't have time to engage in a debate with you, I just want you to think in terms of economic value and not supply games.

I would have no problem burning all my tokens IF their values can be regenerated over and over and over again thru renting and recycling for reselling.

While my tokens cannot be regenerated, yours can (thru renting and reselling).
So it makes an unequal comparison.

Update:
In case of misunderstanding, my tokens rented out (temporary forfeiture of ownership) is not the same as the tokens rented out (to an end user) to be used in the platform.
My tokens earn a tiny fee from renting them out, but as they are used for the platform, it gets recycled into Veritaseum's inventory for reselling.

When you asked if I would burn my tokens, you are asking from the perspective of a seller to a buyer.
I am not a seller, and thus I have no advantages that the seller has.
For me (as a buyer) to burn my tokens is totally not the same as for Reggie (as a seller) to burn his.
A buyer cannot have spent tokens recycled back into his MEW wallet to be used again.
A seller can have spent tokens recycled back into his inventory to be resold again.
The amount of time a token can be used to a BUYER is one time (1).
The amount of time a token can be used to a SELLER is unlimited (~).
Similarly...
The amount of time a token will generate economic value to a BUYER is one time (1) per use, unless it keeps being rented out repeatedly for a tiny fee.
The amount of time a token will generate economic value to a SELLER is unlimited (~) regardless of the number of time it is being used.
Thus, for a BUYER to burn his token is NOT THE SAME as a SELLER to burn his.
A BUYER burning his token results in destroying his own economic value.
A SELLER burning his token results in NO destruction of any economic value, because existing supply can be resold over and over again to generate unlimited economic value to the SELLER.
By right I should not need to be saying all these because they are obvious to those already in the know.

Update #2:
The system is good, but can be perfected further.
Why not strive for perfection?
But of course perfection can still be attained without absolute necessity to burn any unsold token, provided the below is in place.

Quote

Update #2:
The only one thing that can make the price to be equally just as bullish as if the unsold tokens are burned without actually burning any unsold token is by making sure those who buy in bulk from Reggie will actually be the direct end user of the platform, maybe by signing an agreement that the bulk sold will be spent for actual use, i.e. getting exposure, and not for trading/speculating.
Or a system/platform mechanism in place whereby tokens bought in bulk from Reggie would be almost immediately/automatically be used/spent for exposure.
Unless such assurance is in place, there is always the risk of VERI getting overvalued due to manipulation, exploitation, or pure foolishness.

Update #3:
The economic value relates to the commercial industries that Reggie is tapping into thru professional means and services.
The supply game relates to how such economic value is being sliced and diced between Reggie and the rest.
I am not here demanding Reggie to forsake his own economic value for the benefit of others.
I am here suggesting Reggie to expand the economic value of others while at the same time has no impact to his own economic value.
Nobody is at loss here by following my suggestion; not Reggie, not Veritaseum, not the team members, and not the direct end users.
But the one that stands to benefit far more are the token holders.
If my suggestion to burn unsold token (or put in place assurance that tokens from bulk purchase will be used immediately for exposure) is a form of manipulation, then I say it is a manipulation where absolutely ZERO victim is involved.