Quote from: yeXIABC on September 16, 2014, 12:34:18 PM

Quote from: cryptodance on September 16, 2014, 12:03:11 PM

Quote from: ChrisSommer on September 16, 2014, 11:59:23 AM

Quote from: cryptodance on September 16, 2014, 11:49:17 AM

Quote from: michaelb87 on September 16, 2014, 11:48:30 AM

Quote from: PondSea on September 16, 2014, 11:12:10 AM

Quote from: ChrisSommer on September 16, 2014, 09:51:49 AM

Quote from: PondSea on September 16, 2014, 09:45:06 AM

I will respond later to the posts above but I hope James rejects that offer. I will elaborate as soon as I get the kids off to bed.

You have hopes which are against investors interest.
Why are acting like this? I don't get this at all.

You elaborate? Like this? "Right now, Chris has leveraged off the supernet brand to promote his websites. Now I cannot see anything substantial apart from sites anyone could make given enough talent and a few hundred dollars."

Please, at least raise conclusive concerns, based on facts and written clearly for everybody to understand.

Thank you,
Chris

Hello Chris,

Sorry i do apologise for not elaborating earlier.

My understanding of the agreement between supernet and evolve was purely for profit sharing. Since this agreement was done you have been able to sell 1.4million assets at 0.6 NXT each meaning you received about 60BTC. This is a huge figure since your sites were not able to pull in even 10 BTC in a failed IPO previously.

The only reason why it brought such a big figure was due to people inferring incorrectly that the asset sale was endorsed by James.

Here is the current status of your sites.

http://cryptohire.com/ (You have 1 ad from 3 days ago)

http://coingigs.com/ (You have 2 ads)

http://http://coinexplorer.net/ (You have test items)

http://http://coinevolve.com/ (Under construction)

I dont think any of them are generating any revenue let alone any profits to be shared. Now i know that it will take time and that is fine but today you turn around and present a new project outside of this profit sharing agreement. This was done so you can raise more money as confirmed by yourself.

Now since James has not endorsed the new site, you are probably unable to sell the asset and you are going back to the revenue share to try to get him to agree. 100% revenue of a site generating 0 BTC is still 100% right? But then again you would have the NXT from the asset sale so it would be ok. This is why i think James should not accept the new partnership regardless of the percentage.

My questions to you would be the following:

How do you plan to generate a revenue stream? We are past the age of build a nice looking website and they will come.
How do you plan to use the 60BTC you have made by selling 35% of your revenue to actually generate revenue?
How can you use your time to produce 2 different assets when not even the first one that has been sold out is actually generating any revenue?

+100

No investing in ideas without a solid business case. Even with explanation it's a weak case...

I am glad I did not see the Evolve and Evolve2 offerings until they were all consumed up; otherwise, I likely would have invested. I am glad I put more BTCs into the SuperNET ICO instead. I, and I assume many others did as well, thought Evolve and Evolve2 were a part of SuperNET.

You mean you are glad that you lost the chance to make 4x your investment. True that, very legit post.
Come on now, why do people love to troll everything?

Chris

I did not realize I was trolling. My bad ... by the way, I am confident that I will see a 4x ROI (long term) or more from my SuperNET investment; otherwise, I would not have invested. Honestly, I wish your project much success.

intel

So many bots in here recently... Roll Eyes