An interesting discussion is unfolding in ~econ right now about the economic viability of territories - in short, about how it's a money-losing proposition for everybody (?) so far, and suggestions for what might be done about it, etc. @jeff had a number of suggestions for features he thought would be useful in turning the tide.
Here's another potential way to look at it: the most foundational thing about btc, according to most, is digital scarcity. Digital scarcity transforms an abstraction that is inherently worthless into a valuable resource whose value corresponds to the coordination power it offers to users, which in turn is based on its distributional limits. Other inherently worthless [1] things (baseball cards, art, etc) nonetheless wind up as objects of veneration and desire based on the social signaling that comes, in part, from their rivalrous status, and the ecosystem that's grown up around them (art dealers, promoters, collectors, etc.)
Is there an analogous opportunity for territories?
In other words, the current (obvious) way to look at territories is as a venue for earning sats by making use of the assorted tools SN provides to curate a space that, under the SN rules, can turn a profit. Call this the economic form of territory capital.
But could territories also serve as a kind of cultural form of capital that's valuable in its own right? Like, owning a territory is a high status thing, and owning a territory for a longer time becomes even higher status, like a Jordan rookie is worth more than a Jordan 91 or 96?
The nature of capital is that its different forms can be transformed into each other to some extent -- cultural capital can be converted into economic or social capital, and vice versa -- so a territory that had high cultural value could exploit that for economic benefit. But though related, these two capital types are distinct, and the manner to curate that particular form of capital also would likely be distinct.
So: if you were trying to maximize the cultural form of territory capital, what would you want? I think that's a different question than the one @jeff attempted to answer.
I'm not a territory founder/owner/custodian for profit. That's not where my fun is. But I'm sure struggling to see it as viable to keep up with the fees. I'd be happy just breaking even. And going NFP by donating any profits to rewards pool. But taking a L every month on it... That's a hard pill to swallow.
But could territories also serve as a kind of cultural form of capital that's valuable in its own right? Like, owning a territory is a high status thing, and owning a territory for a longer time becomes even higher status, like a Jordan rookie is worth more than a Jordan 91 or 96?
Sadly clout doesn't pay the fees.
With BTC sitting at ~40k that means it's ~40per month to host a forum page... That's steep.
But like I said I'm not here for profit, nor for clout. I'm here to Talk Music. Share Tracks. Zap Sats.
And so far I'm enjoying it enough to keep paying to do so. Because that's whats happening I'm paying to do so. I am hoping that I won't be priced out of continuing to provide a space that I and others enjoy using.
reply
I will make a bold statement here Territories and Territories will leapfrog SN big time, here's why. It helps create NEW peers, NEW clear thinking from comments and other communication received indirectly from the posts.
I have received great "business leads" via SN that I would not have. The key for me is my goal is to interact with those existing B2B businesses that are just starting to use Bitcoin for buying and selling goods, or for other B2B people that somehow found SN and perhaps are stronger in programing, go to meetups, etc. but are not really hard core merchants. It's in our blood for myself, limited formal education, BUT started working in both retail and wholesale at 16 years old, traveled outside of the USA, learned export paperwork the hard way, learned how to deal with other cultures.
But that started back in 1969. I'm probably the oldest aged SN user, which is cool, because I'm probably more optimistic than most, and can "feel" upcoming market opportunities in this case it's the synergy between above average "technical" people and new merchants, business owners that will be coming to SN.
They will come to SN, because they will see they ALREADY understand that they have to learn, use in a circular fashion Bitcoin, Lightning, Nostr, They will read the content from territories that are more business connected to gaining the knowledge of all of the above. The quality of most posts and users on SN helps directly and indirectly.
reply
This seems related to the sentiment @siggy47 has expressed about operating these territories as a sort of bitcoin activism. It may not be directly (or even individually) profitable to operate these territories, but the mutual benefit to the whole bitcoin community of having these spaces may be socially profitable.
I think the joint ownership idea that @jeff has put forward helps with this. It's worth something to me to have access to the territories I frequent, but it might not be worth 100k per month. However, there may be a small group for whom it is worth that much.
reply
@jeff makes valid points. My so far feeble attempts to make a go at a dog and cat territory is completely directed at trying to foster adoption. I wouldn't totally discount these territories making financial sense some day, though, even if the SN income split doesn't change . If an owner times it right and buys a territory outright during a big price crash they might look like a genius five years from now.
reply
If an owner times it right and buys a territory outright during a big price crash
That is my ownership plan, unless some kind of partial ownership is implemented.
reply
That's once @ekzyis makes it possible to switch payment options for already existing territories. HINT!!!!
reply
482 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 4 Feb
Intangible value is all that's on offer currently. I understood that when we launched them knowing we'd work hard delivering more tangible value as time went on.
I'll add a big red banner at the top of the territory creation page warning people away from creating them if they need to recoup the money immediately. I expected the price to do that for me but I don't think it did and that's a failure on my part.
reply
11.2k sats \ 0 replies \ @supratic 4 Feb
not your fault, some people are greedy and no one can make everyone else happy. There gonna be always enemies and complainers... unhappy people!
SN has been always pretty transparent and everyone knows what was included signing up as territory founder.
Ignore the noise, take just what's needed to make SN great. Stay focus!
reply
627 sats \ 5 replies \ @kr 4 Feb
In other words, the current (obvious) way to look at territories is as a venue for earning sats by making use of the assorted tools SN provides to curate a space that, under the SN rules, can turn a profit. Call this the economic form of territory capital.
there is one other way to monetize territories that i haven’t seen anyone talking about yet.
everyone is assuming the revenue needs to come from stacker news, but what if revenue also came from an external business?
for example, if the ~econ territory owner also ran an economics newsletter, they could use their territory to drive traffic and revenue to their newsletter.
reply
1382 sats \ 2 replies \ @jeff 4 Feb
There are many other extrinsic channels for revenue one can do with a brand. But, at that point, the territory becomes more of a sponsored ad for a different product, which is an operating cost like line item rather than a revenue driver. All of which, require additional resources.
If 100k + Other Costs < 5k + Other Revenue ...then territories make sense. But...as of right nowo, there isnt really tools to even integrate or measure.
reply
31 sats \ 1 reply \ @kr 4 Feb
yeah there is still a trade-off to consider, but i think the revenue potential from getting in front of thousands of visitors each day (especially if the product is adjacent to bitcoin/tech) can far outweigh the cost.
definitely worth adding tools so territory owners can measure and more formally integrate external links.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Car 4 Feb
This is not a bad idea. Actually, it would make sense; we will definitely think about it.
reply
That's a good point. There's also the more mundane possibility that some of the difference is made up via nostr cross-posting. For the time being, nostr users are pretty miserly, but that need not always be the case.
reply
In my nomenclature, that's still economic capital: using the territory to generate revenue using some means, on or off of SN. But it does seem like many fruitful methods could be available, like the one you described.
reply
I think viewing territories as anything that might generate revenue is the core problem. It's essentially an ICO NFT with the expectation that later it might be a useful profit generating utility that's mostly based on whether or not SN decides to work on it more and if your unique name grab was successful.
I see it more about community, but it's FAR too expensive to keep that up. If nostr had better community based functionality, I would use that instead. But for now, I'm preparing for more community/resources to come later with ~fedimint
It's trying to be two different things and far too overpriced for either. I have no interest in having a territory be a security based yield generator and I'll probably eventually be priced out of not being able to afford the community upkeep.
reply
I think viewing territories as anything that might generate revenue is the core problem.
That's an interesting take -- so you think wrapping a business model around these community features is foundationally broken?
reply
Charging for territories makes sense, as a business model for SN. I don't think territory owners should be looking at it as a business opportunity, at least for a very long time. However, it's advertised as something people can make money on, whether it is or not.
IMO removing all revenue opportunities until territories is built out further as a money maker would make sense to me. @k00b surely has insights into when a territory owner would make a profit, and I'm sure currently it's miniscule.
However, charging a lot of money is currently his way (I would imagine) of disincentivizing a lot of people just buying one and being disappointed. He's hinted at being surprised as many people bought into it as they've done. There could be other ways at making it a higher barrier of entry, such as user registration date, cowboy hat count, etc.
It's all hard and he's figuring it out, just giving my random perspective as someone that doesn't care about territories as a profit and will probably stop paying for my territory at some point in the future (6m-12m depending on where it's at)
reply
Interesting question. I think the cultural capital of Stacker News is showcased in the real life accounts of people detailing their situations. I have read about the Bitcoin situation in Germany, how to orange pill merchants in New Zealand and how Bitcoin is empowering the masses in Nigeria, El Salvador and Argentina, among others. Reading such accounts is interesting because I just can’t find them anywhere else. And of course, the discussion that these posts generates is another gold mine on its own. People share advice and swap stories - and I’m often left uplifted by the social glue of Stackers and the humanity they espouse.
If SN can build on this unique selling proposition, it can market itself as a one-stop hub for not just Bitcoin, but other aspects of life. How parents in different countries raise their kids? What is the rural-urban migration like in various cities? How policies that work wonderfully in one country may flop when transported to another context? I think many Stackers hope to share about their lives and be enlightened by others.
One more thing, I feel that if SN were to be taken seriously, it has to broaden its scope besides Bitcoin. Sure there are tons of shitcoins out there, but ETH and Polygon are collaborating with multiple businesses, organisations and governments. To focus on just Bitcoin is like seeing one side of the coin, I feel.
My two sats’ worth
reply
One more thing, I feel that if SN were to be taken seriously, it has to broaden its scope besides Bitcoin.
I think I saw in a presentation once that the SN business model is: we're building a platform that supports certain features of media and community and takes full advantage of btc and its ecosystem to deliver them; and its original focus will be btc bc of the natural fit in doing that; but it's not really dependent on btc as a topic.
(I think that's pretty close to what I saw but I don't have time to dig for it now.)
Point is, I don't think SN gets bigger or more relevant (or profitable) by more than a constant factor when you have to care about btc to be here. I have a fundamental assumption that, just as you don't have to be a car enthusiast to want to drive to the grocery store, a very small number of people in the world will ever want Saifedean Ammous's face tatooed on the small of their back. That market is tapped out already.
Either btc is money, plain and simple, or it isn't, and if it isn't, this is all going away, and it's only a matter of time.
reply
110 sats \ 3 replies \ @mo 4 Feb
Noticed a lot of folks left SN time ago, and this territories experiment was kind of the drop making the cream overflow.
What I can see now, it's all just pure revenue driven conversations... no more valuable knowledge around for bitcoiners (that supposed to be the main goal here). Just people angry for sats placing traps and fishing hooks all around, trying to get stackers attention. Shame on you!
The 100k per month did not stop cheap sharks to swim around, and they also have the courage to complain that is too expensive. F off!
Where are the valuable conversation and open exchange of ideas and opinions SN was made from?
reply
10 sats \ 2 replies \ @Car 4 Feb
Leave it to the one guy/gal who has already figured out revenue + what I consider the most valuable territory to chime in on revenue. 🤣
reply
31 sats \ 1 reply \ @mo 4 Feb
It maybe look's contradictory, I know... my aim was not to profit from it in the first place, but to create a safe P2P marketplace for stackers and bitcoiners, where people could connect safely because part of a trusted community, even for IRL trades. Doesn't look like that any more (two months later)
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Car 4 Feb
This Territories talk is actually a good thing, in my opinion. It's much better to experiment early, find the things that are not working, and remove them fast before they begin to fester.
I have seen this in real life community building, a couple bad moves is all it takes to get people to defect. The more important thing is to adjust on the fly, give time and attention to your community and to always be recruiting.
The overall goal with community building is to bring more fruit or bounty to everyone. My goal is to try to do that in the ~builders community. Building community is not hard it just requires a level of sacrifice most people are not accustomed to.
reply
Three words:
Golden. Cowboy. Hats.
reply