At 7:45 AM -0400 6/26/03, Robert S.Z. wrote: >So your argument is that this is right because "everybody does it" and >because "it's always been done that way"?.
Those are only 2 of the argumentS, but I did invite you to find a real- world system that does it your way, and so far you have not... >Your counter-argument against my point that the current system does not >enhance usage and entice new users *as good as it could* is "plenty of >people pay to read e-mail the world over" and "there is plenty of >circulation"? No. My counter arguments were the examiner and stats pages. You may wish to re-read (or quote, as I have) the message. I mentioned get-paid-to-read stuff because it's what's behind the stats-mystery, and the smell of BS/wishful-thinking has been around that lately, as I also mentioned. The use of e-gold is growing because these people have experience with it in their get-paid-to-read programs. >As you said yourself, those email readers are outexchanging their revenue. >Where does that help the system? http://stats.e-gold.com these users may be very poor, for example, so an account that goes from .01 to 1.5 grams over and over may SEEM not to be much, but it's making a big difference in a real life. >Now, I was suggesting to charge punitive fees on outexchanges, remember? >Would an exchanger benefit more from those people who read emails all over >the world and then outexchange if those people were paying 5% discount on >outexchanges or not? I'm not sure what you mean here. Punitive fees on EITHER end lead to much wailing & gnashing of teeth (which usually happens while the real-world price of gold makes said spread irrelevant, but who wants to stop a good argument?!?). >Also, I did suggest a flat fee for in-exchanges. So, if someone >in-exchanges $100 and another outexchnages $100 then your spread would be >a whopping 10% !!! And this would be more-popular than what's done now, how??? I literally can hear the moans now, if this were to happen... ... >Do you really not see that what I'm proposing is designed to keep the >money in gold? It's designed to foster trade inside the community and to >attract others to it. Of course, the current system can go on forever and >exchangers make a few bucks and we make a few bucks off exchangers on top. I don't want to "keep the money in gold" if that's not what the customers want to do, though. I may think it's a rational thing to do, but that's a job that doesn't require high prices, it takes convincing instead. >In the end, I'm trying to sacrifice parts of my very own cash cow in order >to enlargen everyone's herd, so that we all have more to milk - and me >more cream to take off the top. I would never suggest that I'm willing to >give away parts of my own profits if I didn't expect that the benefits of >doing so would multiply my profits. I'm not sure how your math works. It's either a whopping 10%, or a sacrifice that exchangers must make -- which??? >Traders in Asia hide their daughters and shudder in angish when I enter a >bazaar. I haggled a 10% discount in a department store in Australia >because everybody said it can't be done. Oh, it CAN be done, it even WAS done, it just *won't* be done! >So hey, I'm suggesting something that I believe will give us all more >profit. And the argument that "we don't do things that way" has cost >shareholders of a department store 10% off the revenue of my purchase ;o) But I'm not one of 'em. :) ... >Of course it takes guts and cash to pull it off against the others, but >it's doable. It would take no guts and next to no extra cash if the >majority of exchangers saw the light from the onset. >What difference does it make to an exchnager if he charges for inexchange >or for outexchange - the spread is still there - and I never argued >against a spread, quite the opposite. ... Again, find ONE real-world currency exchange that operates in this way. I can't think of one!! People are ALWAYS going to be unhappy with exchange spreads, whether you hit them softly on both ways or hard on the way in or hard on the way out doesn't matter a bit -- they'll still scream about 'em, even while changes in the actual price of gold make the spread/spreads irrelevant. On the subject of high-end ads, I think those don't work. I give you Superbowl ads as an example. What works is low-tech and deceptively simple-sounding (but it's actually hard work!). I do NOT think that e-gold can be easily explained in ads, and IMO exchange services need to sell themselves along with e-gold to make long-term profits. Everyone wants to do it with someone else's wallet, and *EVERYONE* is an advertising-expert...I say if you have a good ad idea, the e-gold list is ideal to discuss it, without the need for any committee. JMR PS Everyone gets 7 messages/day, including me. --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
