Slowing ADA price decline

Can anything be done to decelerate ADA price decline? Yes, all altcoins are declining but it seem like ADA is declining at an accelerated rate. For the record, I am both a believer and an investor in ADA. February 2018 we were ranked 5th. Today we are ranked 13 with an even better ecosystem. Since we got booted from the 5th rank, Cardano ecosystem has only gotten better. However our ranking got inversely proportionally worse. Something needs to be done to address this issue. Thinking we will recover when Shelly is released is a folly. We might just make up for lost ground. Other competing projects are learning from us to be better. A great protocol sometimes does win the race. Sir Charles always use the example of PGP. It was excellent but abandoned by the masses.

Confidence lost. Ppl moving to Algo where you can stake already.

1 Like

(Moved to trading)

Do you realize it hasn’t even gone mainnet yet? Do you realize the blockchain is moving from the experimentation phase (bitcoin and ethereum) to actually solving real-life problems? This phase is just beginning and it will take some years to permeate through the developer community. Cardano is being built to be a development platform to solve real-world problems and not a platform to turn a quick profit. It is a development platform built on the backbone of a blockchain (cryptocurrency).

The target audience for Cardano is not investors (speculators) but developers, institutional investors, and governments.


The mainnet has ben released, its just that its running in federated mode. From everything that has been said, staking should be live by end-of-year.

1 Like

As much as I can understand the price will rise again once the people from non seen contries will start to use It in current exchanges. Then how more use It will have, more the price will encrease and richer these contries will be.
It needs time, education and tecnology.

It is a social-economic revolution cooked on slow fire! :grin:
Like Zapatistas say in Chiapas (México): “we go slow, because we go far”


Well Algo is not doing better either, they halted the planned auctions till 3rd quarter, announced an early refund for the first auction buyers, announced a reward program coz community found out that the Algo nodes are selling their reward algos like hot cakes on the exchanges, and after repeated request from their community members to be “transparent” like Cardano and make the Algo teams wallets public they finally give in after more than a month of community pressure. They actually have a very high inflation like planning to release 10B token in 5 years, but after the 1st auction and nodes selling large amount of Algos in exchanges they are now planning to change on how tokens will be distributed.

1 Like

When most people realize what you are saying, prices will explode。

  1. A refund is offered at 90% in a year, a 85% refund is available now, a guarantee 100% return on the first 200 million algo over two years (with conditions) is an offer too great to pass up. The main net hit out of the gate before Shelley and eligibility to stake from wallets is already available at toughly 13% annum.

Please explain to me how this is bad.

Algorand cannot be compared to Cardano in terms of development, technology and scope. Time will tell.

1 Like

The refund itself is not bad, it is the high staking rewards that the foundation/team enjoy and also node runners that the team “selected” enjoys. also since its just Algo team and their “friends” that currently can run a node, they control basically almost all except those 25M auctioned tokens out of 10B, thats how bad Algorands tokenomics at the moment that they need to pospone the succeeding auctions as the rate of their current token distribution, they will be more centralized than EOS when all the 10B tokens are distributed in 5 years.

@smurf123444 hey men, have you checked that the volum of women in this community is not that Big than it should be?
One of the goals should be built secure cyber spaces where everybody can feel free to give their opinion.

This kind of “comments” doesn’t help… doesn’t help to us to feel confortable, doesn’t help to you to evolve.
In addition It s oldfashioned and here, we are the future :grinning:

1 Like

When someone in crypto “ecosystem” [1] is selling “superior technology” which will solve, “real-world problems”, than my advice is - forget about it.

[1] “ecosystem” - maybe algorithmic ecosystem because most of alt coins use very similar algorithms for distributed ledger programming,

Yea whatever you say. All I know is that they started later, they have a main net and wallet up where I am currently staking, and the transaction speed is faster than shite. And from Charles’ own words, “Finally, we have some competition!”

Incorrect, FUD. Better do some more research. Ppl said similar about Cardano. They were proven wrong like you will be. Do you honestly think Silvio would mention decentralization only to create a centralized product? Where are you getting your info from? OK so Charles talks about decentralization but he really doesn’t know Cardano will be centralized? Do you think these “smarter in cryptography than both you or I” people think then act this way? C’mon now.

Besides have you seen XRP lately? I’m assuming I don’t need to explain the similarities with regard to coins held. There is a rationale behind holding for the period of times referenced.

Unfortunately for many, Algo has a patent pending on the base functionalities quantified in their algorithm and algorithmic sequence.

Glad I don’t listen to you for trading. No offense.

I’ve been curious about Algorand but can’t get passed the tokenomics. I thought about bidding in the Dutch auction but the $2.40 token price when squared against 10B eventual supply gave them an insane valuation … the token then lost 80% of its value in about 6 weeks. I’m glad I didn’t buy. They’ve had a recent bump with massive volume, but it’s difficult to sort out why this is happening. Their refund policy also just seems… well a bit odd.

The 2-4x return for early staking over a two year period seems great on paper but gets wiped out by their very aggressive inflation rate. The central organization owns 2.5B or 25% of the total supply, but the supply is not distributed yet in the market meaning the project currently is incredibly top heavy and advantaged towards the org (they currently own 99% of the tokens). This poses an obvious liability should stakeholders chose to dump coins. Is there transparency regarding Algo’s big wallets?

Their inflation rate to 10B total supply is meant to happen over the course of the next 5 years I believe and so you’re looking at an aggressive supply increase which disadvantages supply/demand dynamics for investors.

Their tech is really interesting but they’ve black boxed their POS model. I’ve checked out their github which is rather paltry and essentially an API for their blackbox POS system. They’ve written some papers but as far as I’ve seen the implementation is guarded. Their penchant for patents might look good to traditional investors but it also means that accountability in terms of code audits are only done internally if at all. It’s a ‘trust us, we know what we’re doing’ model in a space that has not yet solved POS in any reasonable or meaninful way. Their high TPS/throughput is suspect in the sense that speed always sacrifices decentralization in any of the current models. High throughput with decentralization is the dream but it’s still very much a ‘have your cake and eat it too’ endeavor. Perhaps they’ve cracked this. I don’t know.

I think they’re an interesting project and might do very well… but between their tokenomics and blackboxed tech I remain skeptical.

1 Like

In short, I am aware of everything you babbled about and more. Been in this game for quite a while so I’m confident with my trades. And as far as governments and enterprises, they all have an interest in money and capitalization.

POS is not black boxed. It is in fact detailed in the patent filing. I’m. It sure wth you’re talking about when you refer to black boxed.

Inflation goes up and goes down over time. There is minimal issue if you’re given money for free. Here’s a piece of advice. Never turn down free money. And let’s not get into the semantics of the word free. The funds are provided for staking in a two year period so if you’re going to argue that point the. Argue against all staking models.

Throughput is suspect. Are you serious right now or are you a Turing award winner? The model is completely different even so much that Charles himself has said “Finally some real competition!”

Can you point to their github that shows the full implementation of their POS system/patent? “Blackboxed” means we can’t see all their code. This is a critical difference between opensource and patents protecting a design which can obscure the implementation. I code for a living and would love to see how they’re implementing their tech and if it follows their design principles and if/when they decide to change things. Software tends to be iterative, mutable and agile in response to market needs. If you can show me their POS github, I’d more seriously consider investing.

From my understanding they’re releasing total supply at an aggressive rate over the next 5 years. 2.5B is owned by Algorand and 25M was recently sold to the public via a Dutch auction. How will inflation fluctuate over time if they’ve promised to release supply on a schedule? If I have the supply and distribution mechanics mixed up or if I’m off here, please let me know.

I find this a bit funny in the sense that you’re arguing for a “free lunch”… but let’s forget that for a moment. I’ve read through their reward program shown here:

The token dividends are certainly favorable, but you still haven’t addressed the basic notion that with token inflation squared against fiat, the rewards might be irrelevant or too drastically deflationary in the short run. If another 7B tokens are coming online in the next 5 years, I don’t really care if I 4x my stash in 2 years as supply/demand dynamics work against me. This would be a sweet deal if price was static, but it’s actively traded, so I fail to see your ‘free money’ argument. At least with Cardano all but 13B of the supply is distributed and the remaining titrated via a staking log distribution spanning the next hundred or so years. Cardano price has been shit, but I can see the wallets and am not worried about 99% of the tokens getting dumped should stakeholders decide to exit. That sort of differential is worrying. Largest ADA wallet belongs to IOHK at 2.4B or ~5% supply and nothing has moved. Can we see the Algorand wallets and witness their spending behavior? If so, please show me the link. Again, if I’m missing something salient about Algorand, please point it out.

Eh… this is a basic appeal to authority. I don’t need to trust a Jesus figure to feel good about my investments. I want to know who’s building the next gen system and see their work so I can place my bets accordingly. Frankly it’s very challenging to parse out what the top level players are actually doing in the POS space (and yes I’ve read many of the papers) only because I don’t have a long career in cryptography and I get lost in the minutia (likely 99.99% of people in the space). I have worked in tech for a long time however and can follow the main themes. The downside to open source, of course, is that anyone can steal the best ideas - but the notion that this is the Achilles’ heel in this competitive nascent environment proves to be superficial when one realizes that only a small subset of very competent engineers, scientist, programmers, and implementers can actually do the work. So the team and their capacity to leverage the tech, along with their financial runway, connections, partnerships and track record is important when measuring potential winners in this space. I’m not suggesting Algorand is absent of these things… but more pointing out that the patent stuff is an ill-fitting emblem of the old guard in a space that is yet to hatch.

Silvio Micali is a heavy hitter and very interesting… they have some very smart people on their team. But again I will repeat that I remain cautious due to their tokenomics (heavy weighted distribution for founders at current time, along with aggressive token sell cycle), along with their interest in guarding the code in a space that, by nature, flourishes due to opensource. Decentralization is about everyone having access and not just a small subset of early owners - the choice to guard implementation is anathema to this emerging theme. A traditional investor would balk, understandably, but this new wave of tech is operating differently both philosophically and economically. If you disagree then I wonder what you think about Bitcoin as it continues to dig out a track for economic opportunities in a collective and opensource framework.