During the AMA #123, on June 9, 2023, Colin informed us that with the new Foundation, upcoming DAO structure, and this community forum, the project could grow very fast based on community-driven input. Just listen again to his description of “Decentralize governance vs centralization”, and this example he gave about “monetization”. Below is the transcript (a little bit adjusted for readability), starting in minute 57 (about advertising/monetization)…
"Main thing is just again kind of getting to a point where we’ve got a team or an agency. Somebody who’s specifically focused on driving that out. Again not trying to just develop yet another search engine… and to build this huge centralized team here in Midland, from where we’re gonna go out and do all the selling.
No, what we want to do is to have external “groups” come in and help develop us with all aspects of advertising (ad units).
So, helping to determine what the basic capabilities are, what are the requirements, or we need better reporting, or hey we need some other type of functionality, whatever it is that’s kind of like polishing that offering to make it exactly what the customers need.
And then identifying those customers, and then developing the campaign to go out and onboard them all into the system.
Trying to have somebody responsible for all those different facets.
So, one might facet may be the execution of that plan. Or let’s say the community proposal might be… hey we’re going to put a proposal out or the community is going to identify a proposal that goes out that says hey we’ve got this homepage ad unit or ad takeover and we need to develop all of the best practices around the creative determining how to best generate results and which types of projects/businesses groups would be the best fit for. And then that becomes public information something that is available to anybody who wants to then kind of take that information, and go do the outreach, do the kind of work to onboard people, and then set the system up.
So, it’s a commission-based model where if you end up in this type of role (where you are doing outreach to crypto projects bringing them into the home page takeover ad unit), you get X percent of the PRE that they spend to run that ad.
And then it enables anybody to go out and build a business around onboarding all the different advertisers.
I know to some people probably it feels like we’re going slow and we could go faster.
But as all these pieces start to come into play, it’s gonna start going so quickly because it’s not waiting on one centralized company, one group of people to do this.
This can be an open competitive marketplace where we could have “tons” of different ad agencies going out and doing this thing.
And then ultimately that real estate becomes very scarce. There are tens of thousands hundreds of thousands of potential people that ultimately could want that ad unit and there are only you know X number of slots as that becomes more competitive then the pricing gets realized within the ecosystem and so that’s just kind of a micro-cut.
It will be awesome how the whole system is intended to operate. It just takes a while to kind of get those core things in place and then you know get that next level of the system in place where we can start to identify all these opportunities, enable people to fill in the gaps, and enable many different people to ultimately compete within a Marketplace to earn from the value that is present, that can be sold and offered out to the General market."
All in line with the Vision Paper (October 2020), a “community-driven project”… just one quote that explains the core concept …
Re-read chapter 9 of the Vision Paper about Tokenomics, and especially the last paragraph…
“Given that the leading search platforms today spend billions each year to operate their search businesses, it would be foolish to believe that Presearch (or any company) could reasonably ever raise enough money or hire enough smart developers, product managers, and data scientists to compete at that level. That’s why the Presearch model is drastically different. When Presearch earns advertising revenue, instead of being a big, for-profit corporation trying to take advantage of users, Presearch funnels that earned value back into the platform, leveraging PRE as the unit of accounting and value transfer between the various stakeholders. Presearch has no traditional shareholders expecting a return on investment, as for-profit corporations do; therefore, PRE represents and holds all value over and above that which is required to operate the Platform.”
Now, 2 months later and after this Forum is live for 6 weeks…
The team did expand with Tim Enneking and his team members in the roles of COO, CFO, and CMO who took over the project completely.
And we have to believe that the project was running out of cash and strongly needed a capital injection.
First, we have no clue about the current financial status. All we know is that the ICO dollar proceeds (November 2017) were $20M (donated in BTC and ETH), and the original PRE war chest consisted of about 400M PRE tokens.
But what’s left in “cash” and the number of PRE tokens?
All of a sudden without any community input… the project now became a “centralized” organization controlled by Tim and his team, which will be funded by A) additional Venture Capital and B) via increment of the maximum number of PRE supply (probably from the current 500M tokens to 1B tokens as “leaked out” in the presentation sheets of AMA #131).
The whole idea of the Presearch “built-by and for the” community was to have a not-for-profit Foundation where the decisions would be made via the DAO governance structure. The foundation should be registered in a “crypto-friendly” jurisdiction. So, it became Panama (yes crypto-friendly, but with less “legal user and investor protection”)…. And now, the working company will be located in Delaware (not that crypto-friendly but with more legal protection for VC funders).
Of course, this creates a “conflict of interest” between this new “profit” working company (its shareholders) and the PRE token holders.
The first conflict is already visible… with the token buybacks.
Tim wants to make us believe that we should be happy with a 1% up to a maximum of 20% of buybacks of PRE tokens if the “working company” earns revenue (from advertising). The original and whole idea was that “all” the revenue would funnel back into the platform (ecosystem). Yes, I agree that not many buybacks were done by the team… but the team had sufficient PRE tokens from the ICO (500M minted PRE tokens) to reward searchers and node operators. The underlying idea was always that the project should become “sustainable” (in the initial phase founded by the ICO receipts) and that later earned advertising revenue would be used to buy PRE tokens on the open market. Nothing new… as an “investor” I have waited for years to get to the point where all tokens would be in circulation… and the team needs to start the buy(backs) of PRE tokens on the open market. That’s when the “scarcity” starts to play a role, and should be the main driver for the token price appreciation… until that moment… the token would be suffering from token inflation (the gradual release of all the “not sold during ICO” PRE tokens, i.e. from 100M tokens to the maximum of 500M PRE tokens). Now, Tim wants to increase the total PRE token supply… and the inflation won’t stop but will increase. (And no, we don’t need additional PRE tokens to fund the research and node operator rewards… we need “monetization” with the help of the community)
Completely ignoring the Vision Paper where inside was stated that the current 500M tokens were the absolute maximum, no more tokens will be minted ever…
The current contract smart contract was meant to give us stakeholders the “guarantee” that this couldn’t be changed ever…
In hindsight, a worthless promise as it may seem now…
(And as it seems so easy to “technically” adjust… who says that a new increase in tokens supply won’t happen again in the future if the project is running out of money again?)
You know, a change in the smart contract to allow multi-signature (as this is what CEXs are requesting?) can be a good initiative… but to combine it with the (sneaky) increment of the maximum total supply, and to add a minting and burning feature without discussing this upfront with the community in official chat/community groups, doesn’t give me any trust in Tim and his team.
Side note: it’s just ridiculous that the only feedback and explanation about the capital refunding and smart contract adjustment is given by Colin and Tim in the “PRE (Unofficial) Trading Telegram Channel”.
An unofficial channel dedicated for discussing charts, TA, and the PRE token (and other tokens) price behavior.
Instead, this community (or the official Discord channel) should be the place to discuss about these important topics.
So far, Tim and Collin as far as I can see, have never commented or replied to all discussions and proposals inside this community.
Speaking about taking your community seriously…
I can continue with the new roadmap…
It was set up in a relatively short period of time via internal discussions by the (new) Presearch team (initiated by Tim Enneking with a focus on fast “execution”). But there was no “community input”… (very strange if the project aims to be “community-driven” and just has introduced this “community” where stakeholders posted several good ideas that could have been included in the roadmap).
So, is it a coincidence that no new proposals were made by community members since the new roadmap was presented?
Normally, if “we” were taken seriously… the new roadmap should lead to additional “communication” and new ideas or additions…
Wasn’t the roadmap meant to be “dynamic” based on community input?
And what about…
Postponing the first DAO vote to Q3 2024… giving Tim and his team all the “control” for the next year.
So, long story, this project has been transferred from a community-driven project into a “centralized” project where major important discussions are/were made without any community feedback or discussion.
Hence, I’m waiting for Colin, Tim, and the other new management members to step into this community and answer discussions and proposals.
Moises and other administrators try to do their job inside this community… but the real answers should be given by management team members… (also don’t ask people to replace good ideas… you know, first, you ask people to place discussions/proposals in this new community, and now they should be added to the AMA… there should be one place for discussions/proposals… and all unanswered questions should be included in the upcoming AMA).
A community-driven project starts with discussion before important decisions are made…
No, “just wait and see what the team will decide” (f.e. Search Staking, cutting down the regular search rewards by 90% from 0.1 PRE to 0.01 PRE).
So, please let the management reply to this discussion… no need for an admin to answer…
BTW, the last time I asked Tim personally to reply in the main Presearch Telegram chat about the token supply increase… the discussion/answering was taken to the unofficial price chat group… this is not the group where I want to be a member of… I want answers (from Colin and Tim) in official groups…
I used to be a big fan of this project, always defended Colin and the team (especially in Alexandre Maksky Telegram channel), and I do own a significant number of PRE tokens… but I was fully surprised by what happened in the last 2 weeks and I’m upset (to put it mildly) how this has been communicated, let alone that I don’t agree with many important changes…
So, I still have many ideas/suggestions about how to improve and scale up this “project” but I want to spend my time, money, and energy on a project where this kind of input is being appreciated and taken seriously…