Hear me out... Maybe I'm a bit off with this title, as maybe the better wording would be "...whales SHOULD be...", but you will get the point... The topic sounds like an easy one, but it has many variables connected and maybe some wrongly interpreted premises...
I have to say that the idea for this lies behind the last #HHHLive show where we had an interesting discussion about profit-taking, but in one moment @felixxx said something that was partly a trigger for this post... It was, probably, said differently, but I got this conclusion... It's not important how long you have had an asset, or how you get it, it is important that you have it!
Created in Canva.com
One of the main "selling points" of HIVE is that it is decentralized (is it?), and another point that many like to emphasize is that HIVE doesn't have VCs (Venture Capitalists)... Sometimes that is shown as a strongly positive thing, but is it really like that? I mean, I'm one of those weirdos who can't stand banks and all those traditional finance staff that have enslaved people for decades (or even centuries), but not every money is dirty money...
On the other side, we have a DHF (Decentralized Hive Fund), which should be a tool that is replacing VCs... When some project needs money for funding, they can create a proposal, and if Hivians like it, they can vote and funds from the DHF will be released to the project... Everything sounds great, isn't it?
So, which one of these solutions is better? Or is there maybe a third solution? Well, my title suggests that there is, but let us try to explore why and how...
Why are VCs "hated" on HIVE? Probably for the reason why I can't stand banks (lol), but what they are doing? They are providing/investing money into projects, with an expectation of getting profits from them in the future... In some situations, they can grow so big that they "OWN" the complete project, but that's another story... And that's something the project should think about when they ask for funding... Also, because of investing money, VCs create pressure on devs to create a good and profitable product...
On the other side, we have a DHF, which is fine for certain usage on HIVE... We had many discussions about it and what it should serve... We need a way to fund the core HIVE blockchain devs as it is a platform where everything is built on top of, and it is not "just a project"... So, that is the part where I would agree that part of the funds should be spent...
IMO, the second part, should be used as a platform for loans and not exactly as it is used at the moment... You have an idea for the project that you would like to develop, you create a proposal and you ask for FUNDS from DHF, but like a LOAN, and not like a money gift... Having never-ending funds for your project will create a never-ending deadline for the product launch... as... Why would you finish the product if you can be paid for "working on it", for infinite time? But, that's maybe too hard to implement...
The third option is probably the least hard to implement... You need money to fund your project, you go to HIVE whales and ask for support... You present a valid business plan and if your idea is good, you shouldn't have issues to be funded... If your idea sucks, you will not... Simple as that... The same goes with VCs... They also have risks when they fund a project, but the project developers have risks too!
Speaking of risks, it can be a very good motivational trigger... And somehow, getting funds from the DHF "lacks" that risk... Developers, project owners, and managers have risks when they take funds from DHF, but what are the consequences of bad decisions and bad developments? Discontinuation of funding? What are the repercussions?
IMO, without having that counterbalance, we will have lousy projects being funded, breaking deadlines, and asking for more funds, without giving results... No motivation to finish the product, no repercussions if it's not finished...
Having HIVE whales involved, funding projects with their own HIVE, or HivePower, we will get people who will MONITOR project developments as they have a direct interest in project success! When we, with @achim03 founded @liotes, our main idea was to help small projects with funding at the beginning... We are slowly getting there as we are collecting funds that could be enough to begin with that...
Would creating these Hive Whale VCs harm the decentralization of HIVE? Maybe it would if they make good moves and invest in good projects that will bring them more money! On the other side, good projects on HIVE would benefit "ordinary" Hivians too, so it is a win-win combination! If whales make bad moves and fund bad projects, they will be those who will pay the price, but that's how risks work... If you risk, you can win big, but you can lose too...
With the current situation we have with DHF, the price of funding bad projects is paid by all Hivians, and not by investors... The benefits of good projects are split among all Hivians, that's also true, but that would happen with "VC-funded" projects, too...
In the end, we ALL want to see the HIVE price going up! We work for the same team! If someone brings value to our token, he is welcome! It doesn't matter when it came to the platform, how he invested money in it, or does it has BTC or STEEM in the wallet...
Thank you for your time,
-ph-
👉 Vote for Liotes HIVE Witness HERE 👈
Don't forget to follow, reblog, and browse my Hivepage to stay connected with all the great stuff!