Regarding information fragmentation; I totally agree on that one. Topics which touch the ecosystem and not just one single chain should have a place as well where communication and conversation is bundled and not fragmented per chain.
Regarding IBCX, now I think I start your meaning of IBCX… Which is kinda confusing, since IBCX is an index token on Osmosis:
Are they? Since my last information I have been reading is that there is no legal framework for it, so the amount of interactions is quite limited due to a missing set of guidelines.
IBCX is an pretty forward thinking solution that includes multiple cosmos chains. I don’t think other communities would be insulted of Osmosis’s lead in this effort to highlight a core technology of the cosmos stack. IBCX, the Interchain Index Token (ion.wtf)
I don’t know what you are confused about. I’m suggesting that multiple chains contribute to investing in analogue businesses that operate internationally, and revenue that is made in those businesses are used to create buy pressure on cosmos tokens … maybe even just the index token???
Furthermore - marketing can be pitched for things like Akash or Regen doing other analogue business. People would wear branded Cosmos or Cosmos IBCX apparel in their work operations - just like other businesses brand themselves in performing their work.
Overall, several divisions that allow for flexibility in services, like a Mary Kay of direct sales. Using a CMS would help recognize/reward those growing those other types of value add services ect…
I think in general it would bring awareness to the ecosystem and maybe even other kinds of opportunities.
I hoped you intended with IBCX more like a cooperation of IBC-enabled assets utilizing IBC…
Going for IBCX is diluting a potentially good idea with a terrible experiment imo. And looking at the liquidity and the volume many people have the same opinion. Coming up with a scenario where crypto is doing good in the world with investments and getting a return on that should not be used to add additional utility on an asset which people don’t trust to start with… If something like an investing business would be ran from a DAO, the DAO would need its own asset without potentially not-interested current holders and without history. It should be fresh and owned by the people supporting the investment initiative.
This is actually good feedback. I give that thought reservation myself, but like anything new - it could be super charging an excellent idea too and it would lead to the kind of expectations that are on par with the example of the ecosystem.
Again this is pretty reasonable and practicle feedback. There is legislation in Germany that was passed to allow - 20% of the their potfolio to be invested in crypto.
I’m sure this will become more common at the institutional level internationally. It’s where I suspect the bulk of growth will come from.
Germany to Allow Institutional Funds to Hold up to 20% in Crypto
Law would let billions of euros flow into crypto assets
Spezialfonds effected currently manage 1.8 trillion euros
The people supporting the investment initiative are the induvial chain treasuries. Exactly my point. There could be a new coin to represent that, but maybe this kind of effort will make something like IBCX an attractive investment for those instituonal investors.
There is a lot of competition and technical analysis that I myself would even do - before investing any institutional funds. What are the strengths and weakness of different investment opportunities - ect…there’s a lot of noise and noise makers in the market, but where is the long term value? Not the pump and dumps, but real products with real market fit that can realize continuous growth with return.
I really like Kujira. I think their platform is really innovative with organic yield, being propositioned as part of IBCX too though.
I am a bit afraid that the current IBCX-holder prove to be more than a burden than a blessing. They bought IBCX for a different reason and might not be so attached to the real-world investments as you like.
Whereas a new asset with the sole purpose of doing real-world investments and getting a result out of it might attract a completely different audience and active participants of the DAO. Where they might actively help growing as well, instead of a bunch of holders which might be passive.
An index fund is just that, an index of assets. The businesses that operate with those funds provided by the index fund chains should be cash-flow positive relatively quickly. Instead of those businesses building a cash reserve - the cash taken in would be used to buy the index token (or whatever else), and since there is a business functioning with Cosmos/CosmosIBCX branding interfacing with their clients - it’s an opportunity to represent all those different index tokens chains.
What burden do these people represent exactly - since as you state, this is proven? IBCX can be minted by any one at anytime. This is relatively a new asset. As time progresses other chains that adopt IBC could possibly be included in the index fund. It’s actually a wise choice for what I am seeking to accomplish and I think creating a new speculative asset for this effort would be less enticing to chains to…
Provide start-up funding
Have a dedicated community member/participant relay messages
The IBCX token centering that effort is better. People selling off tokens is a problem for individual chains, but in the long run IBCX should be more reliable that get rich rug pullers.
I guess you are aware that in the current environment the chains which are in the basket of IBCX do not need to provide funding?
So what will happen when out of the x chains serving as basket for IBCX only a small portion will provide funding? How will that look like? Will the share of their asset in the determination of the value of IBCX grow? Or will it stay the same?
In the form you propose I will certainly vote against it when it goes to governance; since there are 2 totally different topics being discussed for IBCX in that:
being an index fund which allows you to track the price of a basket of assets
an investment fund
They have purposes which are so far apart, you should simply not mix them. It feels more like that you are an IBCX-holder and are desperately trying to find a market-fit for an asset for which demand is low to none-existing… But mixing purposes only complicates things, whereas adoption needs to come from easy to understand assets and purposes.
Part of what needs to occur is building consensus among the communities of the IBCX index chains to invest in analogue businesses. We need a common comms channel to have a more robust dialogue involving all the communities of said chains.
There is ION in the ION community pool that could be traded for IBCX chains tokens. Those community pools then would own that token and the analogue business that generate positive cash flow would them mint more IBCX.
IBCX already exists. What I am proposing is the chains in investing in analog businesses that take in cash and use that cash to convert to IBCX while simultaneously introducing/marketing the Cosmos IBC brand in a brick and mortar B2B kind of way.
It’s posted in this thread because we’d want auditors auditing those investments.
The entire IBC ecosystem is seeking recognition and growth opportunities. What I’m really proposing is a strategy for the different communities to work cooperatively to cross-polinate the value of the solutions in the Cosmos/CosmosIBC in an analogue business approach.
BTW - anyone can mint IBCX at any time. There was no distribution or anything for IBCX. ION is a different stroy, but this is a good use case for ION that is in the ION community pool.
For a vote with your wallet business proposition for international sales. I run a 501(c)3 non-profit called Good Faith Paradigm. My non-profit could revenue share on sales of music to generate a revenue stream.
From what I am reading you are a holder of IBCX hoping to get some use-case so it can get actually get some value. But forcefully searching for it, and even ignoring the fact that product-market-fit of what IBCX now is and would become is totally different… And that it would be quite weird to change from an index tracker to an investment fund…
And then plugging your own non-profit project
If we do not get back to the original topic it would be better to close this thread, since no useful content is being generated related to the Community Audit SubDAO proposed in the first post.
IBCX is an index token and will always be an index token. The chains that the IBCX token represents need marketing and exposure to gain traction. There is an assortment of services - like Regan and Akash - which people developing business relationships doing analogue business could cross pollinate these services - for example: suggesting Akash as a hosting service or selling carbon credit offsets to an organization.
As for the plug for my non-profit - it was done in a humorous fashion - hence the vote with your wallet. We can close the thread, but the this topic still needs further review and auditing these use of funds would be in scope.
