Separate names with a comma.
Please sign up to discuss the most innovative cryptocurrency!
Discussion in 'Pre + Budget Proposal Discussions' started by dmitriybtc, May 8, 2017.
Made an update in form of a video on some clarifications, check it out:
1.Would you be able to get him to confirm it publicly? Maybe he could make a post on linkedin, official facebook account or something along these lines.
2. How will you profit from this?
1) Michael is not on facebook or linkedin but here's his business card. I masked phone number because this is a private info. But you can absolutely verify his website and email. But please don't spam there, it won't look professional.
2) All of the transactions will come through our exchange fork.sale. Thus some small commission will be taken to keep the maintenance.
So as you can see it's not as much for profit solution. We won't sell any software or product which is the main key here.
Thanks a lot for your question.
This is exactly what we do. We integrate with existing Point-of-Sale solutions as an external terminal. The external terminal is a dash-branded hardware terminal....it seems like you haven't thoroughly researched your options.
It's a lot different. We are not going to use ANY external terminal. The beauty of our system is that it does not need ANY external equipment. The only equipment we MIGHT need is to provide the QR code as a bill.
OR, if you're right and we can simply use your software, than how can we install your app into Profit Solutions' system?
Have you successfully implemented you system somewhere and so it actually works somewhere now?
If it is a lot different, then I sincerely apologize. My goal here is not to stop you or your proposal, but only to let you know it is your duty to make it clear to the masternode owners how you are adding value to the network and what you are doing differently.
Not using an external terminal is a fine solution, if you expect all merchants to use Profit Solutions' system. What about merchants who do not use this system? They will not be able to accept Dash? Something to think about if you want an all-encompassing solution - but if that is not your goal, then consider this point moot.
It seems as if you're suggesting that you provide the merchant with a single QR code in order to process payments. There is a flaw in this logic. Now, while you can send multiple payments to the same address, that is not generally an accepted practice due to privacy/security concerns.
So, if you're indeed suggesting that they pay the same address every time, then I can only question your competence on how the system functions.
I'm not familiar with Profit Solutions' system, but as I've said - it is fairly standard practice. If you read the post I've linked for you above, you'll get an idea of how we implement into other systems and then apply that same logic to their system.
For more in-depth technical support with our system you can message me here or on Dash Nation slack.
Yes, we are currently nearing the end of our BETA testing phase where we are working with real merchants and their current in-store systems.
If you are interested in beta testing, please message me here or on the Dash Nation slack.
I am a payments professional that gets pitched lots of 'New! Exciting!' payments methods every year. I even sign contracts with some, but they have to wait for integration because they are not the most profitable use of our Tech resources. Has this proposal shared ANY written contract details with anyone? Maybe I missed it? What evidence is there that this is not well structured and worded Vapor ?
Err.. Contract with whom?
And what specific details are you looking for?
I may go and set up a meeting with them next week.
Project Evaluation Committee - Evaluation for proposal
PROPOSAL “BUSINESS_INTEGRATION_INTO_RETAIL_SECTOR“ (ACTIVE)
Disclaimer: I am a normal forum member, and I am not (as yet) part of any (as yet non-existent) PEC. However, I thought it would be helpful to post an evaluation of sorts for this proposal, the scope of which falls under my area of expertise.
This is to demonstrate how a proposal might get some feedback and assessment from someone who has at least some experience in the proposal area. It is very simple, as I don’t have the necessary time to dedicate to a full examination.
(I won’t quote the entire proposal, but I will break this down into my simple understanding what it appears the proposers hope to achieve)
- The Ukrainian public will be able to use DASH to pay electronically at many outlets for goods and services that are processed using Point of Sale terminals provided by Profit Solutions, initially within the restaurant sector.
About USD 25,000 (255 DASH)
After looking over the proposal and reading the questions posed and the responses from the proposers I offer the following opinion;
'Profit Solutions' looks like a real company providing POS terminals.
Dimitry Baimuratov (dmitrybtc) appears to be a real guy, and is a likely genuine cryptocurrency enthusiast.
HoReCa (Restaurant sector) is a good first vertical for integration of DASH POS
No independently verifiable or documentary indication that the proposers have met or have an agreement with anyone.
The exchange site that the proposers ‘run' (fork.sale) "that will be used as a fiat gateway for our local currency” purports to exchange Paypal USD to Bitcoin, but doesn’t work. (I was unable to complete a transaction). It also doesn’t support DASH (coming soon!).
https://app.hyfy.io/v/abxEhN8Xb8U/ for a video walkthrough of the site not working.
No documentary evidence of an API that might be used in the $10 000 integration into 'Profit Solutions’
@dmitrybtc has a previous proposal supported and concerns have been raise as to its fulfilment by @alex-ru
Too many unclear details and unanswered questions to be able to recommend this proposal for consideration.
I would not be confident that the proposer could deliver in the timeframe specified in line with the proposal as it stands.
Proposal Initial Remediation steps required for re-evaluation
Documentary evidence of any pertinent agreements with Profit Solutions or any interested Merchants is required.
DASH integration into the exchange fork.sale that will be used as the vehicle for fiat > DASH exchange needs to be completed and verified as working.
Clarity on the contractual entity that will sign an agreement with 'Profit Solutions’ is required.
Clarity on the content of any pertinent commercial agreements relating to the proposal is required.
Once these initial verifications have been provided, another evaluation will commence.
Opinion Based commentary
(This section is my opinion as a Payments professional).
I am the stakeholder and ultimate decision maker in charge of payments integrations for 40-ish eCommerce websites generating €25m+ a month in transactions, and I can't justify the €4000 that it would cost us to integrate DASH at this stage in the coin lifecycle. Bitcoin is very much more developed and I can't justify the €4000 for that either (well I probably could, but I have better (=more profitable) systems on the roadmap at the moment).
If I did integrate, and I used established API integrations from an established company in the space (like Cubits), it would take at least 3 months before go-live (roadmap insertion, technical investigation, prioritisation, integration, QA testing, troubleshooting etc.), as payments is a serious business, and it has to be fully tested before it goes live. And I wouldn't expect to get 1% of transaction uplift in the first 6 months, or even year.
The average salary in Ukraine is about $250 a month (Source) and for a developer lets go crazy and call it $3500 a month (Source Source). $10k for an integration is expensive in this environment. $25k for this project, given the expected real-world impact for the DASH community is expensive.
I am happy for the proposers to respond, and even reach out if they need advice with their proposal.
- In order to process payments the reputable company 'Profit Solutions' should have a legal contract with the payment processor (the proposer) detailing the relationship. They will ostensibly be relying on the proposer to provide a fiat > DASH exchange rate, and settle funds from a DASH transaction into fiat so that it can be paid to the processor, and on to the merchant. You can't do that without a contract.
It needs to details fees, settlement cycle, service agreement, relevant law applicable, lots of things.
After looking at @Biltong 's Evaluator Guidelines https://goo.gl/bIydYX which include the completion of a Project Proposal template I will offer the following assessment on https://www.dashcentral.org/p/Business_integration_into_retail_sector:
This Proposal gets a rating of 18%
Proposal Presentation 1/2
Responsiveness to Template format 0/5
Samples of work 2/10
Technical expertise 1/10
Risk vs. Reward 2/15
Bonus Points 0
Total Score 11/60
This proposal is currently passing nonetheless...
I absolutely LOVE the @Biltong 's system for evaluation! I think it's genuinely crucial
Is exactly this evaluation by some committee? Was this based on opinions of a group of people?
As far as I see, It's you subjective and, somehow, biased opinion
We don't have a contract yet but we're working on it. Legal part is the most important in this integration so it takes the most amount of time.
I'm not sure that we can show the info of contract publicly but we'll definitely let everybody know if it is possible.
You mentioned that fork.sale is not working with Paypal, we do know that so we turned it off for some time, until our negotiations with Paypal will be solved (I suppose you know that it takes a lot of hassle to make it work legally). What is important though is that currently we have the plans of changing fork.sale's purpose from exchange into processing center that is going to work with legal entities only. In fact, that will be one of our main requirements.
I'm quite pleased that Benglian used the PEC Evaluator Guidelines https://goo.gl/bIydYX
However, to be fair I must just mention that the PEC is not sanctioned by the MNO's as yet and that the Originators were at a disadvantage:
Once the PEC is up and running, an Evaluator will be assigned to a new Pre-Proposal and the following will happen:
The Originator will be told:
Who the Evaluator will be
How to prepare the Pre-Proposal,
How the Proposal will be Evaluated,
How much time (4 days) there will be before the 1st Report is posted
Obviously none of these steps happened and especially in the case of
3. Responsiveness to Template format 0/5
They had no warning or information how to prepare.
I did urge Benglian to post his concerns on the Pre-Proposal thread, since I believe the community should see them.
The PEC will provide no input or Report for this Proposal since our 1st test run is only scheduled after the vote and this proposal will be voted on by the MNO's as per normal.
However, it won't do the Originators any harm in trying to up the marks that Benglian provided.
That is one of the main reasons of the PEC Reports - to provide concrete feedback (multiple times in the Pre-Proposal phase) of areas of concern so that Proposals will end up with the best chance possible when they finally go to the MNO vote.
And thank you to @Benglian for going to all the effort for Dash
Well done @Benglian and @Biltong
@dmitriybtc -- this is an example of how all proposals should be evaluated, and I really appreciate that you are handling this increased level of scrutiny well. It may seem unfair since much worse proposals have received much less examination and passed, but hopefully going forward all proposals can get evaluated in this manner.
I am sorry to say but in business if you don't have a contract you have nothing. I speak to many payment providers who are pitching their new payments systems to me and I really like some of them, and give positive feedback, but that doesn't mean I am willing to sign a contract. Even when I do sign a contract it doesn't mean that I will integrate and activate a payment method anytime soon. I have had contracts signed for two years before I actually integrated.
Can you clarify the legal entity that you will be using to sign the contract? Meaning which company will you use to sign the contract with Profit Solutions ? Can you provide evidence that the company that does sign the contract with Profit Solutions for this proposal is connected to you?
Regarding your website; Paypal appears to be the only funding source for your site, and as that is not working, then it is not a demonstration of either your technical capability or your business acumen. As you stated 'we have the plans of changing fork.sale's purpose from exchange into processing center' and that is admirable, but I believe that you under-estimate the work this involves and the timeframe needed to achieve it.
I would urge you to reconsider your own ability to deliver on your proposal in the stated timeframe, and honestly re-evaluate whether you wish to pursue the proposal as it stands.
As I stated, I am a forum user of no particular standing, who happens to have experience in the eCommerce payments space. I used @Biltong 's efforts to bring some structure and evaluation of proposals to fruition as my guide in offering my commentary on the proposal.
I am not biased against the proposal, and I think the sentiment of what is trying to be achieved is admirable. However, given my experience in this field, I do not believe that the proposal as it stands is likely to be achievable.
Can you clarify how your exchange and your POS integration proposes to comply with the 4th EU AML directive that brings with it lots of regulations and requirements and penalties and fines.
Also, the EU commission commented here and explicitly states that virtual currency exchanges are within scope.
How can virtual currencies be used to finance terrorism and what can we do to prevent this?
Banks and payment institutions fall under the scope of the Fourth AMLD, which requires them to comply with specific rules, such as verifying customers’ identity and monitoring financial transactions. Virtual currency operators were initially not included in the scope of the Directive.
Virtual currencies are developing quickly and are an example of digital innovation. However, at the same time, there is a risk that virtual currencies could be used by terrorist organisations to circumvent the traditional financial system and conceal financial transactions as these can be carried out in an anonymous manner.
That is why the Commission proposes to bring virtual currency exchange platforms and custodian wallet providers under the scope of the Fourth AMLD, in order to help identify users who trade in virtual currencies. Bringing these two actors under the Fourth AMLD and making them "obliged entities" will ensure better controls, ensuring that they apply customer due diligence and contribute to preventing money laundering and terrorist financing.
I do understand that Ukraine is (not yet) in the EU but AML regulations are in place throughout the world, and Ukraine as a prospective member of the EU will want to show its willingness and ability to comply with EU directives.
How will you tackle compliance with the regulations?
Please note that despite the fact that Ukraine is not an EU member, it has been demonstrating its willingness to implement EU directives into national legislation. Directive 2015/849 was not an exception, and I am hereby quoting the Order No 1407-p of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine dated 30 December 2015: "Implementation of the EU Directive 2015/849 of European Parliament and of the Council on the prevention of money laundering and fight against terrorism into national legislation, amending Regulation (EC) 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council and abolishing Directive 2005/60 / EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Directive 2006/70 / EC of the Council and of the Commission".
Because our activities fully comply with the legislation of Ukraine, we, therefore, see no obstacle in complying with the above mentioned Directive.
Its great that you plan to comply with the directive, but how exactly. I work in a company of 400 people who is spending a lot of time and funds on outside resources in order to comply with the directive. How many staff will you employ to comply with the necessary KYC element of the directive?
I would also ask if you have already formed the business entity that will hold the bank accounts that will be used to pay the merchants the fiat balances that result from their acceptance of DASH at the POS terminals?
And that you have passed the due diligence that is required by a bank when opening such accounts....?
Yes, we did
Please note that we have do have a compliance committee, and the KYC is currently being developed. We also fully comply with the Exclusions set forth in the Directive.
Can you provide evidence for the company you have formed? Or a link to the registrar of companies entry for the Ukraine that corresponds to your business entity?
Are you asking for scan copies of our Charter and registration documents? We are definitely not going to provide that on a forum. You can, however, look up for our company on https://usr.minjust.gov.ua/ua/freesearch under the registration number 40610345.
Is anyone able to verify the post above? My translator wont work with this page.
It's more than hard to use our gov websites. Even for native Ukrainians
What specifically you'd like to know about the company? I am Ukrainian, I've met @dmitriybtc, and I can copy-paste search results here, with some comments, if necessary
Was just looking for an English translation of their company page on the Ukrainian gov database website.
Thought its fine by me if others who speak the language can verify.
Don't have time to do proper translation, so PM'ed you version, translated by google.