Quote from: techo051 on March 18, 2014, 08:21:30 PM

Quote from: BitThink on March 18, 2014, 12:24:08 AM

I really don't think 5 XCP is a big price to a serious issuance now. the problem is just that it is burnt. However, even there will be 10k assets, 50k XCP is still a small part of 2.6M. Moreover, the fee can be reduced later when XCP appreciate a lot.

Please don't low the fee too much and otherwise there will be a lot of rubbish asset names.

I completely agree. BTT I think what you are doing is interesting but I don't understand why you need to issue assets with unique names. If someone wants to redeem a silver coin what difference does it make which one they send to you for redemption?

We issue asset with unique names for the following three reasons which may not be exhaustive, but should give you a view into why we are trying to grow:

1. Asset diversity is massively immense: Our business objective is to digitize EVERY possible valuable hard asset in existence onto the Counterparty Protocol. As such, we need a very large name space because our owners of these assets number in the millions and their valuables are very unique. For example, there are thousands of types of silvercoins with different make, quality, size, and ownership histories. We use generic catalog names to make these assets easy to identify in our catalog and easy for our customers to discretely digitize and trade. We respect this diversity and don't aim to constrain it as we didn't create it ourselves.

2. Our customer holdings are infinitely diverse: We have many potential customers who want to issue 1 silvercoin, 100 silvercoins or even 5 GoldCoins + 100 Silvercoins. Valuable hard assets come in infintitely diverse holdings that we do not control. However, we do not aim to comingle customer physical assets into 1 asset issuance called SILVERBTT. That would devalue the uniqueness of their holdings and force them to issue these assets on their own. We want to ensure that all our customers believe that BTT will customize their digital assets as per their needs to maintain control and with as many degrees of freedom as they desire.

3. Counterparty is a Protocol: We see and want to use Counterparty as a protocol, like TCP/IP or HTML/SGML. Our objective is to build many digital asset applications and businesses on this protocol. We truly believe that millions of businesses can survive, but only if the protocol is neither too restrictive nor expensive in allowing companies to experiment, build, and eventually scale. Yes. If you are an XCP holder, you should be begging more companies to come and build on protocol by touting the lowest asset issuance fees, the fast and rapid dev team responsiveness and the amazing community here willing to give feedback and help.

If our protocol is not attractive to build an experiment, people will simply find other protocols or fork their own protocols to achieve their business objectives. Ripple, Mastercoin, Bitshares, NXT, Ethereum, and many other protocols yet to launch will gladly accept the companies we discourage because of our fears.

I hope this helps?
BitcoinTangibleTrust