Why cryptoinvestors invest in DIY: “Society has a need for piece, indie products”
Oleg Gusev is a cryptoinvestor with experience, one of the first to boldly support the idea of a decentralized marketplace for DIY at St. Petersburg Haipaton in August 2017.
We asked Oleg to share his experience and assessments of the current and future state of the cryptoinvestment market.
I have been investing in blockchain-based cryptographic projects since 2011. It was around that time when I first heard about Bitcoin - at that moment he “punched” another ceiling, it seems, at $ 30. Now this figure looks funny, but then, six years ago, it was a fantastic success for cryptocurrency. About that time I bought my first bitcoin and began to delve into the very idea of the blockchain. As I familiarized myself with this technology, I came to the conclusion that the future awaits it, which is not limited to exchange speculations alone - definitely this area should grow not only “up” by the course and volumes of funds being poured, but also “deep down”.
Yes, blockchain is far from ideal technology. I will say more - she has a lot of very serious flaws. In the past, I taught information security, and when blockchain and cryptocurrency appeared in a wide information space, we discussed the pros and cons of technology with students.
In my opinion, the only and main trump card of the blockchain is the possibility of building decentralized systems. Otherwise, this is a very cumbersome structure, and the concept of a “chain of blocks” is one big crutch, at least in its classic version. This crutch leads to a slowdown of the entire network, as it turns out to be tied to the recording time in the block and its complexity. And with a decrease in the complexity of the block, we increase the security risks. And from this circle there is no simple, obvious way out.
Although bitcoin is now a stock exchange, financial instrument, its inherent vices, the legacy of its creator Satoshi Nakamoto, prevent it from becoming a global payment instrument. He is too slow! Will you stand at the checkout for half an hour and wait for confirmation of the record in the block? I do not think that is generally acceptable in the current realities. At the same time, I do not deny the significance of the blockchain and projects based on it. You just need to sensibly assess all the strengths and weaknesses, without fanaticism.
Let's be fair: there is a lot of cheap money in the world, that is, there is a certain amount of money that simply has nowhere to invest. I am absolutely serious now: in the world there are dozens of funds that have an excess of money in their hands, which do not bring any profit. ICO, like cryptocurrency, is a new opportunity for the financial sector to diversify its portfolio.
And this is no longer a marginal story. I’ll say more: “Wall Street guys” watched Bitcoin from the start. If you think that “moss-grown” grandfathers are sitting on the classic stock exchanges - you are mistaken. Just for now, cryptocurrencies and ICO projects are investments with a high degree of risk. But any fund has a place in the portfolio for extremely risky assets. This is a small percentage, but it is from it that many ICOs are now funded and thanks to this money the cryptocurrency rate is growing: funds are invested as the situation in the sphere stabilizes. The ICO has become an excellent tool for “dumping” a small part of the previously mentioned “cheap” money, with the prospect of multiple profits. But there is one problem: the ICO is in a gray legal zone and, from the point of view of some states, participation in them is unacceptable.
In general, it is a very convenient tool for authors of projects: near-zero regulation, minimum responsibility. All obligations of people launching ICO fit into a small “we will try to do it”. The laws of some Western countries, for example, raise any promises to investors in the status of obligations, so they say very carefully about what will be done and how much profit it will bring. In the field of ICO, you can promise the golden mountains - just carry the money. And all this is on hand to those who collect money in this way.
Therefore, it is extremely difficult for a potential investor to find a project in which one would like to invest. What happens to a potential ICO member? He hears about a new project, goes to the site, reads a roadmap and white paper . And there - the numbers, but so nice! Deadlines - six months. Profit - one hundred, two hundred, three hundred percent. But everyone wants to be rich: both investors and the authors of ICO. As a result, we have a situation in which almost every first ICO misleads people, and they are happy to be mistaken.
Therefore, selecting projects, I do not look at the profit figures, but at the very concept and implementation timeline. Many ICOs are now raising money for outright nonsense, especially when it comes to blockchain projects. It's like a project just for the sake of a project, no more. Any product, including an ICO product, must solve a specific problem. If I plan to invest in some kind of ICO, I estimate the potential of the final product and the team that will do it. The latter is extremely important, because if the team does not understand anything in the area where it climbs - this is most likely scam. If I am satisfied with the team, the goals, and the deadlines for implementation, which should be adequate to the amount of work, and not the traditional “half a year and a year is ready”, then I’m investing in this project.
I met the Hamster Marketplace project in August of this year on “Haypaton” in St. Petersburg, where I came in search of new acquaintances and projects, having decided, finally, to look at the crypto-community live. And you know, I was disappointed. A great number of scam projects and teams that do not understand what they are going to do or offer products that do not solve any unique problems were broadcast right from the stage. And the concept of marketplace for indie producers, which the guys from Hamster Marketplace performed with, seemed to me, on the contrary, viable.
Let's explain with an example. In the city where I live, agricultural fairs are held in the fall. This is actually the same “indie-marketplace” - private farms and small farmsteads bring their products to the direct implementation of the “urban” ones. For them, manufacturers, this is an additional profit from direct sales. The population is very actively attending these fairs, there it is not overwhelming, although it would seem that the entire range is in the nearest supermarket at the same price or cheaper, because retailers reduce prices in an attempt to compete. But people still go to the fair. That is, society has a need for boxed, indie products. I believe that the same principle, the same need, is relevant for the field of electronics and devices. Centrally, at some agreed site, offer the consumer a unique product that he will not find among large retailers, and the consumer will follow him. The concept of marketplace for small producers of unique products is initially viable, the problem is real, and not far-fetched. And how this platform will be implemented is already a matter of technology.
The second point is the team. I said that I appreciate the team. In the case of the Hamster Marketplace, I saw that the people who are creating the platform for the sale of indie electronics themselves worked in this area. Founder Denis Bulavin is engaged in the production and sales of a niche product, PlayPad children's tablets - that is, he understands how this market is organized from the point of view of an indie manufacturer, has felt it for himself. I will say more, the Hamster Marketplace is the first non-crypto project I have decided to invest in.
Before that, I invested in the Ethereum, Factom and Augur ICO projects. There was also a number of others. Hamster Marketplace, although it will use the tools of cryptomir in the form of ICO and blockchain for organizing work, is a business from the sphere of trade. But I see in it the potential and need of potential consumers.
Already, not only as an investor, but also as a technogic, I consider the development of artificial intelligence technologies to be the most promising area. They are applicable in the widest range of products - from translators and autopilots to create a full-fledged AI. Imaginary perspectives are enormous, but in terms of investment, this area of development is extremely unpredictable in terms of assessing the final result of a particular project or startup. I also pay more attention to data mining . His future, in my opinion, provides an extremely wide scope - and, accordingly, the market. At the same time, it is still at the start of its development, since its degree of penetration is small.
If we go beyond information technology in principle, then I would single out 3D printing and medical technologies that are based on DNA analysis. Estimations of experts concerning these technologies which I heard, were very positive.
But the prospects for the development of Mars, which have become mainstream in techno-media, and augmented reality technologies promoted by such giants as Apple, do not seem to me to be as rosy as usually presented to the townsfolk. And if everything is more or less obvious with Mars, then I will say a little more about augmented reality. Let us remember the fate of 3D TVs: almost all large companies have discontinued similar devices. That is, over the past ten years we have witnessed an amazing situation: a technology appeared that offered the consumer a completely new experience in watching video content, a sensation quickly arose around it that led to its almost universal introduction - and then just as quickly it passed its positions.
In fact, everything is quite simple. The scope of AI is mass, and therefore work in this direction has been going on for decades and is not going to stop. There was no need for 3D in the first place - and it has sunk into oblivion. I think that in the future we will see a stable development of precisely those technologies that are already solving existing problems.
We asked Oleg to share his experience and assessments of the current and future state of the cryptoinvestment market.
Blockchain's big future
I have been investing in blockchain-based cryptographic projects since 2011. It was around that time when I first heard about Bitcoin - at that moment he “punched” another ceiling, it seems, at $ 30. Now this figure looks funny, but then, six years ago, it was a fantastic success for cryptocurrency. About that time I bought my first bitcoin and began to delve into the very idea of the blockchain. As I familiarized myself with this technology, I came to the conclusion that the future awaits it, which is not limited to exchange speculations alone - definitely this area should grow not only “up” by the course and volumes of funds being poured, but also “deep down”.
Yes, blockchain is far from ideal technology. I will say more - she has a lot of very serious flaws. In the past, I taught information security, and when blockchain and cryptocurrency appeared in a wide information space, we discussed the pros and cons of technology with students.
In my opinion, the only and main trump card of the blockchain is the possibility of building decentralized systems. Otherwise, this is a very cumbersome structure, and the concept of a “chain of blocks” is one big crutch, at least in its classic version. This crutch leads to a slowdown of the entire network, as it turns out to be tied to the recording time in the block and its complexity. And with a decrease in the complexity of the block, we increase the security risks. And from this circle there is no simple, obvious way out.
Although bitcoin is now a stock exchange, financial instrument, its inherent vices, the legacy of its creator Satoshi Nakamoto, prevent it from becoming a global payment instrument. He is too slow! Will you stand at the checkout for half an hour and wait for confirmation of the record in the block? I do not think that is generally acceptable in the current realities. At the same time, I do not deny the significance of the blockchain and projects based on it. You just need to sensibly assess all the strengths and weaknesses, without fanaticism.
ICO is only a means, the main thing is goals
Let's be fair: there is a lot of cheap money in the world, that is, there is a certain amount of money that simply has nowhere to invest. I am absolutely serious now: in the world there are dozens of funds that have an excess of money in their hands, which do not bring any profit. ICO, like cryptocurrency, is a new opportunity for the financial sector to diversify its portfolio.
And this is no longer a marginal story. I’ll say more: “Wall Street guys” watched Bitcoin from the start. If you think that “moss-grown” grandfathers are sitting on the classic stock exchanges - you are mistaken. Just for now, cryptocurrencies and ICO projects are investments with a high degree of risk. But any fund has a place in the portfolio for extremely risky assets. This is a small percentage, but it is from it that many ICOs are now funded and thanks to this money the cryptocurrency rate is growing: funds are invested as the situation in the sphere stabilizes. The ICO has become an excellent tool for “dumping” a small part of the previously mentioned “cheap” money, with the prospect of multiple profits. But there is one problem: the ICO is in a gray legal zone and, from the point of view of some states, participation in them is unacceptable.
In general, it is a very convenient tool for authors of projects: near-zero regulation, minimum responsibility. All obligations of people launching ICO fit into a small “we will try to do it”. The laws of some Western countries, for example, raise any promises to investors in the status of obligations, so they say very carefully about what will be done and how much profit it will bring. In the field of ICO, you can promise the golden mountains - just carry the money. And all this is on hand to those who collect money in this way.
Therefore, it is extremely difficult for a potential investor to find a project in which one would like to invest. What happens to a potential ICO member? He hears about a new project, goes to the site, reads a roadmap and white paper . And there - the numbers, but so nice! Deadlines - six months. Profit - one hundred, two hundred, three hundred percent. But everyone wants to be rich: both investors and the authors of ICO. As a result, we have a situation in which almost every first ICO misleads people, and they are happy to be mistaken.
Therefore, selecting projects, I do not look at the profit figures, but at the very concept and implementation timeline. Many ICOs are now raising money for outright nonsense, especially when it comes to blockchain projects. It's like a project just for the sake of a project, no more. Any product, including an ICO product, must solve a specific problem. If I plan to invest in some kind of ICO, I estimate the potential of the final product and the team that will do it. The latter is extremely important, because if the team does not understand anything in the area where it climbs - this is most likely scam. If I am satisfied with the team, the goals, and the deadlines for implementation, which should be adequate to the amount of work, and not the traditional “half a year and a year is ready”, then I’m investing in this project.
I met the Hamster Marketplace project in August of this year on “Haypaton” in St. Petersburg, where I came in search of new acquaintances and projects, having decided, finally, to look at the crypto-community live. And you know, I was disappointed. A great number of scam projects and teams that do not understand what they are going to do or offer products that do not solve any unique problems were broadcast right from the stage. And the concept of marketplace for indie producers, which the guys from Hamster Marketplace performed with, seemed to me, on the contrary, viable.
Let's explain with an example. In the city where I live, agricultural fairs are held in the fall. This is actually the same “indie-marketplace” - private farms and small farmsteads bring their products to the direct implementation of the “urban” ones. For them, manufacturers, this is an additional profit from direct sales. The population is very actively attending these fairs, there it is not overwhelming, although it would seem that the entire range is in the nearest supermarket at the same price or cheaper, because retailers reduce prices in an attempt to compete. But people still go to the fair. That is, society has a need for boxed, indie products. I believe that the same principle, the same need, is relevant for the field of electronics and devices. Centrally, at some agreed site, offer the consumer a unique product that he will not find among large retailers, and the consumer will follow him. The concept of marketplace for small producers of unique products is initially viable, the problem is real, and not far-fetched. And how this platform will be implemented is already a matter of technology.
The second point is the team. I said that I appreciate the team. In the case of the Hamster Marketplace, I saw that the people who are creating the platform for the sale of indie electronics themselves worked in this area. Founder Denis Bulavin is engaged in the production and sales of a niche product, PlayPad children's tablets - that is, he understands how this market is organized from the point of view of an indie manufacturer, has felt it for himself. I will say more, the Hamster Marketplace is the first non-crypto project I have decided to invest in.
Before that, I invested in the Ethereum, Factom and Augur ICO projects. There was also a number of others. Hamster Marketplace, although it will use the tools of cryptomir in the form of ICO and blockchain for organizing work, is a business from the sphere of trade. But I see in it the potential and need of potential consumers.
Where else to watch investor
Already, not only as an investor, but also as a technogic, I consider the development of artificial intelligence technologies to be the most promising area. They are applicable in the widest range of products - from translators and autopilots to create a full-fledged AI. Imaginary perspectives are enormous, but in terms of investment, this area of development is extremely unpredictable in terms of assessing the final result of a particular project or startup. I also pay more attention to data mining . His future, in my opinion, provides an extremely wide scope - and, accordingly, the market. At the same time, it is still at the start of its development, since its degree of penetration is small.
If we go beyond information technology in principle, then I would single out 3D printing and medical technologies that are based on DNA analysis. Estimations of experts concerning these technologies which I heard, were very positive.
But the prospects for the development of Mars, which have become mainstream in techno-media, and augmented reality technologies promoted by such giants as Apple, do not seem to me to be as rosy as usually presented to the townsfolk. And if everything is more or less obvious with Mars, then I will say a little more about augmented reality. Let us remember the fate of 3D TVs: almost all large companies have discontinued similar devices. That is, over the past ten years we have witnessed an amazing situation: a technology appeared that offered the consumer a completely new experience in watching video content, a sensation quickly arose around it that led to its almost universal introduction - and then just as quickly it passed its positions.
In fact, everything is quite simple. The scope of AI is mass, and therefore work in this direction has been going on for decades and is not going to stop. There was no need for 3D in the first place - and it has sunk into oblivion. I think that in the future we will see a stable development of precisely those technologies that are already solving existing problems.
All Articles