Jump to content
russelscout

What has Willie Saylor done that was so great?

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Billyhoyle said:

Here's how the model works. 

1. They only accept payments in USD.  This money is used to support the website and presumably pay equity holders if the company becomes profitable.  

2.  They pay out to content creators in rokfin points, which they print at a predefined rate, and can be exchanged for USD.  

3.  They claim that they buy a rockfin point for each dollar that they bring in from a subscriber, which is supposed to keep the value of the currency.

It's a brilliant, since they get paid in USD and pay out in a currency they get to print.  The only problem is that if content creators ever want to actually get money the price of rockfin points is going to plummet, since right now they are only "worth" 20 cents a point.  So the amount that rokfin pumps in to maintain the price wouldn't be able to sustain any type of actual exchange. There isn't a reason that the average person would actually want to buy Rokfin points, since they don't do anything.

 

It begs the question why a content creator would want to be paid only in Rokfin points when they can get actual money from youtube, patreon, or twitch.  I'm curious whether the marquee content providers there (Willie, Ben) are really only being paid in the crypto or if they have some other contract where they get a salary as well.

Only being paid in crypto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lurker said:

That wasn’t an answer to my question. I didn’t question whether or not you’re allowed to. My question was why you feel the need to continue to tell everyone over and over again. It’s just a question 

And I responded to your question with another. I asked if I am not allowed to because the obvious answer is I do it bc I can. Just like those who defend him, I am taking part in a conversation here. I dont bother asking why they defend them bc that is not what my OP is about. You clearly have an agenda by asking me and its just gaslighting. You dont like my opinion and since you have no ability to confront me in good faith you insist on trying to play these little games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TFBJR said:

You've been beating on him for the last 45 hours like it is a job.  Why attack a guy you've never met who is just trying to make his way in the world?  It is tough to make a buck out there.  Even harder to string together 40 years of a career.  I say good luck to him and to everyone else who is working to get ahead. 

Bc I think Willie against Flo is bad for wrestling. The idea that he deserves exclusive rights is not serving the community, it serves him. I see an egocentric loud mouth, making himself the center of attention and is willing to continue to do that with zero consideration for anyone else. It is one thing if he had a ton to offer, but if we want to make things more digestible for most, IMO Willie is not the future. I think he views himself as having a huge part in that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Billyhoyle said:

 

It begs the question why a content creator would want to be paid only in Rokfin points when they can get actual money from youtube, patreon, or twitch.  I'm curious whether the marquee content providers there (Willie, Ben) are really only being paid in the crypto or if they have some other contract where they get a salary as well.

Wrestlers in business, and therefore prominent wrestlers in general, have a strongly peer-driven positive view of crypto as an asset class (if you can even call it that). This is in large part due to Princeton alum and patron Michael Novogratz’s own views and experience with crypto. Novo is arguably the most famous crypto bull (and certainly one of the few famous ones) and has a lot of sway in the wrestling community for good reason (Beat the Streets, Wrestlers in Business, NJ RTC, etc.). He personally made a fortune buying and then dumping Bitcoin at the right time (whether lucky or good is very much in debate) and has since reinvented his career through crypto. 

With regard to the Rofkin scheme, it is at best a risk-free way for Rofkin to give equity-like upside to its contributors (risk-free because the contributors don’t actually get anything of intrinsic value, and certainly not stock in Rofkin) and at worst a Ponzi scheme that generates cash inflows for Rofkin without any cash outflows required to produce content. It is not technically defrauding anyone since the content creators have to agree to take the Rofkin shtcoins as payment in lieu of cash and/or real equity (stock or stock options in Rofkin). But the people agreeing to that form of payment are generally not businessmen or investors and are generally confused as to what they’re really getting. 

Any asset that is valued in a real currency like the US dollar but is either illiquid (not convertible to cash at face value) or not highly liquid (not easily convertible to cash) should be very heavily discounted. Case in point: pump and dumps. Take a highly illiquid security, promote the crap out of it to raise demand, then sell it as demand is peaking and leave the guys doing the buying with a hefty bag to hold. When the buying stops, the smart money is out and the poor souls who bought what they sold are left unable to get out even though technically, what they hold “can be converted to cash right away”.... yes, but converted at what cost....

Edited by wrestlingnerd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, wrestlingnerd said:

Wrestlers in business, and therefore prominent wrestlers in general, have a strongly peer-driven positive view of crypto as an asset class (if you can even call it that). This is in large part due to Princeton alum and patron Michael Novogratz’s own views and experience with crypto. Novo is arguably the most famous crypto bull (and certainly one of the few) and has a lot of sway in the wrestling community for good reason (Beat the Streets, Wrestlers in Business, NJ RTC, etc.). He personally made a fortune buying and then dumping Bitcoin at the right time (whether picky or good is very much in debate) and has since reinvented his career through crypto. 

With regard to the Rofkin scheme, it is at best a risk-free way for Rofkin to give equity-like upside to its contributors (risk-free because the contributors don’t actually get anything of intrinsic value, and certainly not stock in Rofkin) and at worst a Ponzi scheme that generates cash inflows for Rofkin without any cash outflows required to produce content. It is not technically defrauding anyone since the content creators have to agree to take the Rofkin ****coins as payment in lieu of cash and/or real equity (stock or stock options in Rofkin). But the problem agreeing to that form of payment are generally not businessmen or investors and are generally confused as to what they’re really getting. 

Any asset that is valued in a real currency like the US dollar but is either illiquid (not convertible to cash at face value) or not highly liquid (not easily convertible to cash) should be very heavily discounted. Case in point: pump and dumps. Take a highly illiquid security, promote the crap out of it to raise demand, then sell it as demand is peaking and leave the guys doing the buying with a hefty bag to hold. When the buying stops, the smart money is out and the poor souls who bought what they sold are left unable to get out even though technically, what they hold “can be converted to cash right away”.... yes, but converted at what cost....

Wow I learned something today.

You seem fairly educated on the topic. Can you recommend any reading?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t have a specific book to recommend on crypto, but there is plenty of free research you can access via Google. Some terms to guide your research:

blockchain (the technical innovation that enables crypto)

Token

Coin (and how it’s different from a token)

ICO (like an IPO, the mechanism by which a crypto project raises real money, i.e. cash). N.B. The key difference here is an IPO raises cash by issuing stock in a regulated exchange like the NYSE or Nasdaq. An ICO raises cash by issuing a currency that has no intrinsic value and is not tied to equity in any way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 1032004 said:

Are you sure?  I just listened (that guy is brutal to listen to BTW), and Askren said “you can convert it,” but he didn’t really specify if Rokfin actually converts it for you.   

Yea I only listened to Ben part and he kept getting cut off but guys like Willie can convert through rofkin right away if they choose 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another issue with Rokfin is that the content creators are paid by the click/view. So if there are 100 subscribers that want to watch Willie and only Willie he gets more money because they click his stuff. However, if those subscribers also click on Askren's stuff or the others content Willie's share will go down. On top of that it seems some state sites are joining up with Rokfin and going to be in for a surprise. The subscribers they generate will also look at Willie and Ben's stuff thus hurting their clicks. Rarely will Willie or Askren's subscribers be looking for state specific stuff unless they are from that state specifically.

This puts the creators in a pickle as they want the site to grow, but also don't want the others to get more clicks than them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cryptocurrency is ALL garbage at this point - the value and value fluctuations are based on trust of the people who use it (rather than something relatively 'hard' like gold, etc.) and are wildly unpredictable.

Nobody, except some 'get rich quick' sketchy characters, give it any legitimacy.

Facebook made an attempt at a legitimate 'Libra' cyber currency with a basis on actual stored cash by their partners group, which started to look like it had potential with partners such as PayPal, Visa, Mastercard, eBay, etc. UNTIL many of those partners pulled out and left the attempt in limbo. (Coincidentally, the US Gov was starting to take a close examination of it at the time.)

The only current 'reason' for using cryptocurrency is anonymity. You can pay a vendor anonymously - no record exists of the transaction for 3rd parties to view - no audit trail. Which is great for terrorists and criminals looking to get paid ransom (as one example - and which is the primary use right now.)

Governments aren't really big on not being able to tax these types of transactions either... so once that slow moving government 'ship' starts to catch up, crypto use will likely be relegated to basically criminals and other undesirable pond scum types.

That's how it stands right now. These things can (and inevitably will) change.

 

Edited by GreatWhiteNorth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BobDole said:

Another issue with Rokfin is that the content creators are paid by the click/view. So if there are 100 subscribers that want to watch Willie and only Willie he gets more money because they click his stuff. However, if those subscribers also click on Askren's stuff or the others content Willie's share will go down. On top of that it seems some state sites are joining up with Rokfin and going to be in for a surprise. The subscribers they generate will also look at Willie and Ben's stuff thus hurting their clicks. Rarely will Willie or Askren's subscribers be looking for state specific stuff unless they are from that state specifically.

This puts the creators in a pickle as they want the site to grow, but also don't want the others to get more clicks than them.

Is that right? They put freelance content creators in direct, zero-sum competition with one another based on clicks and impressions? What a crazy way to incentivize them and run a site.

Edited by pamela

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, wrestlingnerd said:

Wrestlers in business, and therefore prominent wrestlers in general, have a strongly peer-driven positive view of crypto as an asset class (if you can even call it that). This is in large part due to Princeton alum and patron Michael Novogratz’s own views and experience with crypto. Novo is arguably the most famous crypto bull (and certainly one of the few famous ones) and has a lot of sway in the wrestling community for good reason (Beat the Streets, Wrestlers in Business, NJ RTC, etc.). He personally made a fortune buying and then dumping Bitcoin at the right time (whether lucky or good is very much in debate) and has since reinvented his career through crypto. 

 

Not the ones that I know, outside of a few who are into "get rich quick" type of things.  Most are more into mutual funds or real estate (Minnesota has some great land).

 

In terms of Novo, he made his fortune with Fortress.  That is well documented.  He claims to have made money in crypto, but it is only his claim. He actually got into it very late in the game (2017), so he wasn't one of the people who profited from the 10000% increase.  What he has actually had to publish shows that he has in fact lost a lot of (presumably other people's and some of his own) money.  272 million in 2018 (https://www.coindesk.com/novogratzs-galaxy-digital-crypto-fund-lost-272-7-million-in-2018).  And the past year has essentially been even.  So, yeah, Novo gets to run a fund again because of the crypto craze, but he's essentially running it into the ground.  

Edited by Billyhoyle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, BobDole said:

Another issue with Rokfin is that the content creators are paid by the click/view. So if there are 100 subscribers that want to watch Willie and only Willie he gets more money because they click his stuff. However, if those subscribers also click on Askren's stuff or the others content Willie's share will go down.

Would someone please explain the last couple sentences?

Are content creators paid by click? Or are they paid by proportion -- e.g., clicks(Willie) divided by clicks(Willie+Askren)?

If creators paid by proportion then it makes sense that Willie loses out when viewers click Askren's links. But if creators paid by click (not by proportion) then I don't understand. In this case Willie loses out because in the time viewers spend watching Askren's stuff they could have been clicking Willie's links?

Edited by jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, jon said:

Would someone please explain the last couple sentences?

Are content creators paid by click? Or are they paid by proportion -- e.g., clicks(Willie) divided by clicks(Willie+Askren)?

If creators paid by proportion then it makes sense that Willie loses out when viewers click Askren's links. But if creators paid by click (not by proportion) then I don't understand. In this case Willie loses out because in the time viewers spend watching Askren's stuff they could have been clicking Willie's links?

Every set period of time, rockfin points are released and divided among the content creators. How this division happens exactly we don’t know, but presumably it’s based off of clicks. So if Willie gets 80 percent of clicks, he should get 80 percent of the rockfin points. The result is that this division is a zero sum game (for every increase in % that content creator a gets, this is taken from the other creators. In essence, as more content is created, the size of the pie remains the same, but there are more people trying to get pieces. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Billyhoyle said:

Every set period of time, rockfin points are released and divided among the content creators. How this division happens exactly we don’t know, but presumably it’s based off of clicks. So if Willie gets 80 percent of clicks, he should get 80 percent of the rockfin points. The result is that this division is a zero sum game (for every increase in % that content creator a gets, this is taken from the other creators. In essence, as more content is created, the size of the pie remains the same, but there are more people trying to get pieces. 

Yeah but one would assume if the total views are going up, the total “payments” should be going up too right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, wrestlingnerd said:

With regard to the Rofkin scheme, it is at best a risk-free way for Rofkin to give equity-like upside to its contributors (risk-free because the contributors don’t actually get anything of intrinsic value, and certainly not stock in Rofkin) and at worst a Ponzi scheme that generates cash inflows for Rofkin without any cash outflows required to produce content. It is not technically defrauding anyone since the content creators have to agree to take the Rofkin shtcoins as payment in lieu of cash and/or real equity (stock or stock options in Rofkin). But the people agreeing to that form of payment are generally not businessmen or investors and are generally confused as to what they’re really getting. 

Any asset that is valued in a real currency like the US dollar but is either illiquid (not convertible to cash at face value) or not highly liquid (not easily convertible to cash) should be very heavily discounted. Case in point: pump and dumps. Take a highly illiquid security, promote the crap out of it to raise demand, then sell it as demand is peaking and leave the guys doing the buying with a hefty bag to hold. When the buying stops, the smart money is out and the poor souls who bought what they sold are left unable to get out even though technically, what they hold “can be converted to cash right away”.... yes, but converted at what cost....

del

Edited by TBar1977

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, russelscout said:

And I responded to your question with another. I asked if I am not allowed to because the obvious answer is I do it bc I can. Just like those who defend him, I am taking part in a conversation here. I dont bother asking why they defend them bc that is not what my OP is about. You clearly have an agenda by asking me and its just gaslighting. You dont like my opinion and since you have no ability to confront me in good faith you insist on trying to play these little games. 

Honestly, you’re wrong (about why I asked). I just simply wondered why you feel the need to continually tell everyone you don’t like him over and over. There really wasn’t anything more to it than that. 

But you did answer this time: “because I can”. Good stuff. Thank you. 

Edited by Lurker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1032004 said:

Yeah but one would assume if the total views are going up, the total “payments” should be going up too right?

The payments will be higher aka more RAE tokens created as the site grows, so yes as the site grows the pieces of pie becomes bigger, but also more people are getting pieces. One of the main arguments for Rokfin is that with YouTube the creator's payouts are leveling off while the site continues to grow and make money for everyone but the creators.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Billyhoyle said:

Not the ones that I know, outside of a few who are into "get rich quick" type of things.  Most are more into mutual funds or real estate (Minnesota has some great land).

 

In terms of Novo, he made his fortune with Fortress.  That is well documented.  He claims to have made money in crypto, but it is only his claim. He actually got into it very late in the game (2017), so he wasn't one of the people who profited from the 10000% increase.  What he has actually had to publish shows that he has in fact lost a lot of (presumably other people's and some of his own) money.  272 million in 2018 (https://www.coindesk.com/novogratzs-galaxy-digital-crypto-fund-lost-272-7-million-in-2018).  And the past year has essentially been even.  So, yeah, Novo gets to run a fund again because of the crypto craze, but he's essentially running it into the ground.  

Maybe in Minnesota but there are a lot of prominent wrestlers who are drinking the Koolaid. Harvard NCAA champ Jesse Jantzen, Penn 2xAA Yoshi Nakamura (who went to work for Novo, last I heard), etc.

I didn’t say Novo made all his money in crypto. It didn’t exist when he was already a billionaire so of course he made money before that. He made a lot in Hong Kong as a Goldman Sachs partner then even more as a cofounder of Fortress. He then had an epic downfall and left Fortress and found crypto. At one point, something like 1/3 of his net worth was crypto, so it’s not inaccurate to say he made a fortune with it. He may have lost a lot of that too but I can assure you it wasn’t all of it  

You don’t need to have found crypto early to have made a lot of money. It is incredibly volatile so even in a few days, you can make triple-digit returns with modest leverage. It is basically gambling to trade it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...