/biz/ - Business & Finance

Can someone fud this please, so i can buy more

>>15924401
You cannot validate real-world items on the blockchain. No artworks, no photographs, and no photographs of real world items. You can only validate binary and lossless documents, such as PDFs, Powerpoint projects, executables, and audio files. The Rembrandt etching on the blockchain was a marketing ploy to boost the credibility of the project. Good one at that. Fooled me as well. In the end you would still need a third-party examiner painstakingly verifying every single inch of the artwork and play "spot the difference" between a real Rembrandt and a fraudulent one to see whether you have pulled a switcheroo, rendering V-ID's validation process pointless. The artwork is going to be validated by an art examiner, not a blockchain solution. V-ID is as useful as a certificate of authenticity. Both can be forged enough to fool a notary.

Taking photos of a rental car and then uploading to V-ID is also pointless, because your car rental service would first need to recognize V-ID's services as legitimate before you have signed the contract. Said contract would also need to mention V-ID. You cannot escape a charge/fine by pulling up your phone to show that some no-name website says the photo hasn't been altered.

You can validate a scanned document and save it as a PDF and then validate against that same exact scanned PDF, but you could not validate against the original document. Medical and government documents are often printed out, scribbled on, then scanned back in. But even if nothing was scribbled on, a duplicate scan would not match. You would need to verify with eyes.

Cos you know I'm all about that VID
All about that VID
No dashes

>>15924401
Dubious marketing strategy encouraging mass spamming and washtrading. Scam tokenomics. Useless worthless token. No unique tech. Operating at a loss. Partnered with LTO. Small side project of another company.

Let's look at the white paper and do some math. They will need 1,500,000 files validated to break even. One file validation costs as much as $2.20, $1.65 on the middle plan, and even less on the bulk volume plan. Let's go with an average of $2 per file validation.
>1,500,000 Files X $2 = $3,000,000
>$3,000,000 / 5 Years = $600,000
$600,000 is their estimated annual revenue as file validations are a one-time fee and not reoccurring. The verifications are free. V-ID sold $3,400,000 worth of tokens in the ICO with a white paper outlining a plan for five years, so the numbers so far are reasonable.

V-ID is a tech company with no unique tech or first mover advantage. Supposedly uses algorithms that cannot be patented, according to bagholders. Multiple competition exists, including Acronis Notary, IBM Blockchain Trusted Identity, and Bitcoin.com Notary to name a few. V-ID's potential advantage is a user-friendly design, which can be had for $10,000. V-ID is in the software industry, so let's value the business at an incredibly generous and delusionally optimistic 3X revenue. In which case the company can be estimated to be worth $1,800,000 as of today.

If VIDT will convert to VIDS, which represent shares in the company and the total supply is 62,391,039 VIDT, then one VIDT is realistically worth 2 cents today. 5 cents if we only use the circulating supply (30,800,318). Of course that's with the 3X multiple. At 2X annual revenue (and only looking at circulating supply), one VIDT is worth one penny. And currently, it's even worth less.

Will the largest VIDT whale with his tokens locked up in a smart contract want to sell or convert to VIDS next year? Will "he" also do cursory math before making his decision? Coin is overvalued and worthless.

>>15924429
>>15924436
You guys convinced me, thans bought 50K

>>15924436
Oh yeah thays the good shit fud some more I'm gonna coooooommmmm

>>15924436
Is this FUD? If this shitcoin has a floor that would unironically make it one of the safest coins to purchase in crypto.

>>15924391
Niggas iffy, uh,
bitch, I got the VIDTy, uh
Got the VIDTY, uh,
wallet holds fifty*, uh

*30K

Comfy

are we ever going back above 100k

>>15924391
vidt was unironically another sent, lit, etc. you got pnd'd from a phd. cut your losses and join on dag.

>>15924430
hahah nice one. exactly. who the fuck cares about VIDT when there is VID

Nice -10% today

Exploding up soon.

>>15924391
Best fud I ever read. I didn't know you all were retarded

>>15924430
>>15924709
Nobody is going to buy your bags of trash. Would rather have the chronic fudder in the thread than you faggots.

should i buy more

>>15926755
LOL no, it's going straight to 0, just like all of crypto. It's a useless piece of shit. Any cretin can check the MD5 hash

>>15925759
I'm touched.

>The only reason bagholders are holding onto their tokens is because they're unable to sell it. They accumulated too much up to this point without doing their research and there aren't enough buyers. They were hoping the five days of announcements will have them double or triple their money. Now they're balls deep with no way out. Sad tale when someone cannot admit to being wrong and instead double-down by buying more and more.

>>15924391
I sold my vidt with profit
and went all in on UOS :)