pull down to refresh
102 sats \ 3 replies \ @justin_shocknet 3h \ parent \ on: Revenue model of wallets bitcoin
I think the more appropriate question to ask first is, what value do these wallets add beyond just using Bitcoin QT directly
If a wallet is little more than a UI wrapper for things QT already does then yea there's no monetization vector
Additional services beyond that are what would get monetized, then the wallet itself is just a distribution channel for those services
I get your point. However, there are different types of added values that are kind of necessary. For instance, mobile wallets. Then, the very fact of having alternative desktop wallets is an added value to the ecosystem imho.
Therefore, it seems to me it's already necessary to have more of these UI wrappers.
reply
Many of the wallets make it easier to do multisig (Blue, Liana, Bitcoin Safe, Nunchuk, Keeper, Specter, Sparrow) and some of them make it easier to interact with hardware signers. But even these features are difficult to monetize, imo.
Monetizing services can lead to situations like Theya, which seems now to be going hard into selling people a bitcoin loan collateralized with their house (Horizon).
I'm hopeful that the lightning wallets find monetizing more straightforward.
reply
Yea I think those could be monetized like publishing tools in a conventional vertical, but the open source requirement of dealing with Bitcoin tx excludes that.
I think inevitably these are more features than products, I've considered adding vaults to shockwallet just for my own use
reply