Discussions about changing Zcashs emission curve/ issuance can be debated here.
i’m thinking if we’re open to discussion on changing ZEC monetary structure for rewards; considering ZEC will still have comparatively high inflation even after the halving; reduction of emissions should also be on the table.
the one thing i believe almost the entire community can agree on is ZEC has an inflation problem. so bad - ZEC inflation has become a meme. for a meme to be successful needs to be reality based.
we’re working with “programmable money”, so why continue damaging ourselves with gross inflation!? it’s basically a form of self harm.
imo, this statement remains true. exchange rate would jump by only posting this comment. even if nothing actually changed with emissions.
Completely agree with you. I’m trying to stay positive about Zcash future, but my point of view changed right after bubble burst in 2018, inflation(as you mentioned)gets me worried a lot.
Interesting that you two bring up inflation. @kek, as far as I can recall, this is the first time that I’ve seen someone actually suggest changing Zcash emissions.
I can imagine different people having different strong feelings about the prospect of changing anything that affects monetary base dynamics. All sorts of angles for coming at the idea.
What do y’all think? Open question for anyone.
I crying for longer than 6 months about inflation and the impacts of it, including that the Founders Reward and thus the funds available for the Development/ECC/Foundation and get less and less this way, even more as the Founders Reward expires with the first halving… It’s somehow i flawed design.
Seriously, i think i made at least 10 posts suggesting in various topics that changing the inflation rate is one thing that should be seriously conisered. I think even in this thread i mentioned it 1 or 2 times allready…
Whatever we as a community post about ideas doesn’t help much if neither the foundation not the company even reads it …
surprised there’s only a couple responses to this so far. emission schedule has been a thorn in ZEC’s side. this subject has been brought up several times since 2017, but we’ve never had a serious discussion in regards to slowing the emission schedule. would love to see more peoples’ opinions on this!!
plz don’t ignore this! even if you love massive inflation, and don’t want anything to change; post your thoughts!
It has long been necessary to reduce inflation.
I don’t understand why so many people are concerned to the inflation. The inflation is not a problem for a fixed circulation crypto in the long term. A stable emission expectation is enough.
Inflation sucks, but being honest the project is so young it doesnt really worry me. Right now it really sucks, a year ago it was even worse but after we halve (not too long now) it’ll suck a lot less.
Having said that it sure would support the price if the emission was slowed - which would make all the current holders happy. You (kek) are more trader than I but it looks like the ZEC/FIAT pairs have found a level with the current inflation rate, which suggests its not a huge issue.
Its a market/economic’s thing & not my speciality. Interested to see what others post, even more so if they can detach their opinion from how a change would affect their holdings.
You see news getting pushed all the time about Bitcoin Halving in 2020, but nothing about zcash halving Maybe zcash foundation and ecc official twitter account could announce it once in a while.
here’s the main issue. most cryptocurrencies are like the two examples i’ve posted, but let’s take a look at our top competition. notice how dash/monero’s market cap/exchange rate basically shadow one-another.
now take a look at zcash market cap/exchange rate. you should notice a huge difference. if we had more normalized emissions, our market cap/exchange rate would more closely track each other. ZEC would’ve hit 4 digits by now if we didn’t have massive inflation.
@kek - can you post a simliar chart for BTC? We have the same emission rate so would be interesting to compare (yeah, market is different etc but am still curious)
I think the previous poster was asking for BTC’s chart during it’s first 4 years, which would be the most comparable to Zcash’s current emissions.
If we notice the volume of ZEC before halving, there is nothing need to worry about.
What reasons other than trying to influence market value would we want to change the emission curve?
Perhaps emission curve discussion deserves it’s own thread, separate from the majority of discussion here about the founders reward/future development funding.
EDIT: thread has been moved.
It’s not a problem in the long term, absolutly right, but it’s a problem for the founders reward and the funds going for development as these are in the first 4 years and not in the longer term. As it seems due that flawed by design emission/inflation rate the product Zcash won’t have the funds to finish the product until the end of the founders reward in 2020, at least that’s thought. Not arguing here that enough funds have been generated so far which should ensure a top notch finished product, but … obviously not.
I agree IF no funding is attached to it. But as the Founders Reward (Funding) is running out in 1.5 years and such emission change for sure would take time i tend to agree that it’s too late allready and doesn’t make much sense to change it now after the Founders Reward allready suffered from the inflation and continues to suffer of course…
I personally wouldn’t take this uptrend caused by BTC as a given thing for longer, even not with FIAT. As you can see if BTC drops ZEC/FIAT follows more or less .
Mostly because the ZEC halving will have little impact while at BTC it has a serious impact. Or in other words there are still around 14M ZEC to mine but only 3M BTC, this makes the difference.
It wouldn’t change much or anything at all. Every interested investor will check how much ZEC are to be mined/minted/issued. I mean everybody is checking the circulating and max. supply and inflation rate anyway so announcing an upcoming halving 1.5 years away would look even not very serious.
You mean the ~90-95% ZEC fake volume on the exchanges? If you are talking about that volume, just forget about volume at the moment.
It would had an impact on the founders reward as well. The 20% FR for the first 4 yers would have had more value, means more money for development/wages/whatever. But as the FR is expiring anyway it mostly would only influence market value. Changing the emission curve should have been done when it was clear that prices aren’t staying at “moon level” but drop.
Maybe include it into the Ycash announcement. Seems they are going to make the same mistake (not sure!), at least they can think and learn from Zcash mistakes and avoid such emission rate if a founders reward is tied to mining.
Because nobody took it as a serious issue, for whatever reason. It’s amazing that now, when the FR comes to an end folks begin to discuss it. The right time was when we noticed a price drop early in 2018. Today an emission change with a late release date right bevor the FR expires doesn’t make much sense and eventually would cost more in research, development, implentation than it would benefit ECC/Foundation…
Leave alone the fact that Ycash had another point and broken promise justified…
It’s just too late in my opinion, like most things are when you didn’t see them coming until it hits you. It’s just too late when something hits you allready, lol.
exchange rates will have a huge affect over how future funding is done. outside of exchange rate; lower inflation will attract more people. zcash emission schedule this is the one of the top valid complaints i’ve heard from people in regards to ZEC.
problem is, after the 2020 pump-n-dump we’ll still have comparatively off-the-charts inflation. if people enjoyed the last couple years of market performance, we should continue doing what we’re doing. imo, market crashes hard again between 2021-22.