RE: Is Steem The Underrated Underdog? Trying To Find Some Answers
I agree - I believe Steem is underrated, too. It's been a mystery to me why the price is not rising, when we have a decent amount of daily active users and so many dapps!
While prominent people might do well in bringing more awareness to Steem, I do not agree that it's the trust in them that would (well, should) have any influence on investors or the price. The whole blockchain space is about being "trustless" - meaning you trust in code and the network, rather than in individuals.
However I came to the conclusion recently that this EXACTLY is the problem: Ned (or Steemit Inc) and their large stake, which he/they can power down at any moment. Ned has shown the community (and the world, and any potential investor) that he's ready to do that. To me, he's holding Steem hostage, to be honest. If I were a large investor, I wouldn't invest for this one single reason. I do not trust him/them.
As long as this is not solved, as long as Steem is not truly liberated from that - I don't think we'll see Steem truly taking off.
It's sad. I love Steem, but I believe that this one issue - which proves the lack of decentralisation and "trustlessness" of Steem - is the main reason why potential investors are waiting for something better to come along, that is truly decentralised and has a higher chance for survival long-term.
Oh, I'm happy you commented here, Anja! That's a quite interesting and also new perspective which hadn't been mentioned so far, but I feel that there's a lot of truth in it.
The (theoretical) centralized control might indeed be a major issue, and that would also explain why there haven't been any larger investments lately.
Do you really think most investors base their decisions on code rather than people?
If EOS had been created by someone else than Dan Larimer, do you think they would be where they are today?
Exciting times! We're lucky to be part of them :-)
They base their decisions on “fundamentals”. The team behind a project is only one item of a whole list of points. Code, scalability, costs, transaction speed, level of decentralisation, daily active users, and “does it solve an actual problem, and will there be increasing demand for a solution in the future” are other items on the list.
Steem scores pretty high on many of them. But if “the team” suddenly loses interest and stops working on it (or actively destroys it) then all the other items won’t matter and go to zero.
Unless it’s truly decentralized. If we get to a point where Steemit Inc. is not needed anymore to maintain the Steem blockchain (and carry the apparently high costs) - if, say, everything can be run by the witnesses and the network somehow - then things could shift.
Mind you, it wouldn’t solve the issue of Ned’s large stake. So I don’t know ;)
EOS has many many haters, specifically because of Dan. “Because he abandons every project” LOL. I don’t think like that, but I believe small investors of a few hundred or few thousand $$ tend to go more by the people (Me: “I’ll invest in anything Dan Larimer does!” LOL) But the larger the funds, the more important the fundamentals.