Hey @davoice321 @raz found interesting website with earnings of different coins. I think it will be very useful for the fee structure research. Please take a look https://bitinfocharts.com/monero/
After I found this website and read a thread again I instantly got a question in my mind, guess what 
Despite this I have to say that ETH and BTC have quite high % of transaction fee 7 & 4 accordingly.
Just link it to Monero reddit)
I saw the default network fee of pDEX trading increased! I am satisfied with this direction, currently 0.004 PRV network fee / trade.
Damn, a recent update just dumped it back to dust…
I feel like the development starts to become a bit chaotic. A few weeks ago the app developer tram started to change the design of the mobile app. Now it is still half-complete, but meanwhile the full brand went legacy. We have a mobile app now with inconsistent design decisions and rushed updates.
I really like how hard-working the core team is, but please keep focus & synergy with the community.
Thanks. That’s the average fee, so actual per transaction fees may be higher, which appears to be the case.
This chart shows recent monero vs bitcoin fees.
The median fee in usd is about .0022$.
The usd amount of the fee is higher for both because these assets are much more expensive compared to prv
One model that might work is to adjust the transaction fee amount (in prv) depending on the usd price, so that perhaps it matches monero’s median fees (within a range) taking into account users’ ability to adjust the fees. Prv fee goes down as prv’s price goes up, so that fees in usd are always stable.
I think we are talking about different numbers. I talk about % of the total reward earned from TX fee. You talk about absolute numbers of TX fee.
Yes. It’s the average tx fee per individual transaction that interests me the most.
That was some quick bugfixing. The devs pushed an update within 20 minutes after being notified. Pretty impressive.
@davoice321 i’m catching up on this long thread. but i wanted to point out that by design min_tx_fee is set by validators, not by the core dev team.
line 48 in run.sh, you can modify the parameter LIMIT_FEE=1 with the min_tx_fee you want to accept. 1 here is 1 nano or 10^(-9) prv.
say there are 4 validators: alice, bob, charlie, and ducky who set their min_tx_fee as 1, 6, 3, and 4 respectively. alice won’t accept any tx with min_tx_fee < 1, bob won’t accept any tx with min_tx_fee < 6, etc. so the network will eventually reach the consensus that the min_tx_fee must be 3.
i think min_tx_fee should be set by the open/free market. this is definitely something we don’t want to be decided by a few people’s opinions in a forum discussion.
@duy Very interesting detail, I believe most of us didn’t know about this.
So basically if I raise min_tx_fee on all my validators It could effect the consensus & increase tx earnings globally?
Great news!
@raz… yes.
i was just reading your reply a few days ago (above) that we can’t change a cryptonetwork after it’s launched.
true… there are things we don’t want to change. but there are things that we can change if that’s better for the network.
in fact, i would argue that the more we can change / re-configure the network the better. this will make the network more adaptable over time. who knows what the world will look like in 50 years? 6 months ago, i didn’t expect 2020 to be the 2020 we’re in now.
by design the incognito network has a bunch of parameters that can we modify on-chain – whether that is the number of validators (see @dung’s self-configure dynamic committee size), simply trading fees on DEX (as we discussed in another thread), or network tx fees (in this thread).
the key question now is who gets to decide when to change these parameters and change to what values? i’m not entirely sure yet, but there are a couple of ways to do this for now.
free market. let the users of the network reach consensus on these parameters autonomously. min_tx_fee is a good example for this.
on-chain voting. i think dex trading fees would be a good example for this. the pool holders can vote on the trading fee. or the prv holders can vote on dao split rewards from block rewards. i guess one close example from another network would be something like the mkr holders from makerdao votes on the dai stability fees, which is an on-chain parameter.
as we’re refactoring our codebase to be ready for a bunch of v2 stuff like consensus v2 and privacy v2, we’re thinking through what else we should “parameterize” so that we aren’t locked into bad decisions forever but rather given the opportunity to update these decisions later. this enables us to move fast, make decisions fast, ship products fast, and iterate on the products fast. at the same time, if we make a bad decision… oh well, let’s see what we can learn from it, and make a new decision that overrides it based on the lessons learned.
Dumbing down this thread here a bit for myself.
I thought that the transaction fees would increase subtly to the point it would hardly be noticed per the amount of nodes that were coming online. That the PRV, regardless of price, unless it went down to $0.01 was supposed to “hold the line” as node purchases increase to allow a passive type of income over time.
Remove the nodes for now, the incognito platform as just a trading area, that allows staking rewards and liquidity rewards with PRIVACY being the forefront will bring new investors. People are perfectly happy earning 57% APY or 62%/8%, etc. in liquidity. These additions by themselves will draw people, hopefully privacy will help them stay.
Put the nodes back into the conversation-After so many transactions are hit on a monthly basis or nodes are online, then the subtle fee increase is added. Then the node earners are happier on top of their liquidity and staking earnings, which then help drive node sales, when then drives the slots to open up and repeat. This does not constitute a ponzi scheme, but a profitable business. This does not constitute a “gamble”, because every single investment is considered a gamble just varying degrees of security on that “gambled investment”.
With all of that being said, you all can go over the tokeneconomics and everything, I love the back and forth.
The focus: Privacy; Consistent returns on Staking and Liquidity. These are the focus to pull people in, to get people to check out the project.
Nodes are a big piece but should be broached as a secondary-“hey if you love what you’ve seen already check out the node for passive earnings that may make “x” a YEAR, but keep in mind it is random. Say, 10% bite and purchase, this is sustainable growth, the point——pick an amount of monthly transactions, that when hit signal a certain level of interest and to help keep the node earners happy quietly raise the fee a discernible amount AND/OR when a certain amount of nodes are online quietly raise the fee.
Last point—Post that number, let people know the timeline. After “X” of monthly avg transactions over say 3 months, AND/OR number of online nodes.
That was my foolish way of contributing, hopefully my thoughts help in 0.0000001% of a way, if not it is all good. But there needs to be a concrete goal in terms of raising the transaction fees, abstractions help this conversation nil 
Fees and block rewards are extremely important and have a strong relationship to usage/price
I’d like to share a talk my colleague David gave at Ethereal which presents the idea of settlement assurances
The sole focus of a decentralized blockchain is to provide settlement assurances for its tx. Currently, since the team runs a large portion of the validator nodes and the beacon chain, the only settlement assurance we have comes from the team. At some point in the future, the team will ceede control and users will run all nodes.
At this point the only thing that matters is the settlement assurances of the incognito chain.
Thanks. @duy. Can pnodes set this parameter as well? This function (tx fee setting) looks like a vnode-only capability?
Sorry for reviving old posts, but are there plans for increasing the transaction fees collectively (e.g. on the app instead of just some vnode operators). To be honest I wouldn’t even mind if transaction fees were 1 cent or 0.1 cent, and I’m sure newcomers would not be discouraged as it is still better than ETH gas fees.
Yes, the question is still open. Feel free to share your math or economic models on how do you see it.
Keep in mind the Ethereum issues, when the price of coins goes up, possible TPS scale, possible number of daily transactions in 5, 10, 20, 40 years, expected number for validators at those timelines, etc.
I am more than happy to dive in.
Has anyone checked out ethereumgold.io? It’s the first fair and economically sustainable “pseudo-Ponzi”. It doesn’t quite fit the bill of a Ponzi. Here’s how it works:
All buyers pay 10% fee to buy in
All sellers pay 10% fee to sell out
Those 10% fees are divided out to all currently still holding as dividends and paid in ETH
No fees (other than gas) are charged for withdrawal of ETH dividends
So if early adopters dump, newcomers reap rewards for holding via ETH dividends. And as price of coin falls it becomes more attractive to new money and the cycle continues. I don’t see why people wouldn’t continue to speculate on this. I just bought in on Monday and have already made 10% of my original investment via dividends. That’s not including the appreciation of the coins value. It’s completely scam proof as it has been through 8 audits and 2 hackathons.
What do you guys think? I’ve spent all week trying to poke holes in this one but I can’t think of any downside to this other than it becoming a dead contract that nobody continues to buy or sell which I don’t think human behavior will allow for 
Was any decision taken on this subject?
This is my understanding :
With the increase of validators the reward per month in PRV will decrease. And to maintain the earnings of validators we hope the increase of validators will increase the demand for PRV and so increase the price of PRV and so lead to an even amount in USD for validators.
Those past few months the increase in price (mainly due to general crypto price increase from my point of view) maintain the total reward in USD but the reward in PRV is already dropping. So can we really believe in a strict relation between number of validators (more staked PRV) and the PRV price?
But there is an other aspect to take into account. For a node staked with 1750 PRV the ROI will decrease because the PRV price is increasing. So same reward for a higher USD amount staked.
The average reward will statistically decrease as validators increase, but it’s mitigated (or even reversed) by two factors:
More slots for validators to earn (look into releasing fixed validator slots). There are only so many open slots, and that will grow over time. As sharding increases, the number of available slots will increase to over 16,000.
More transactions to validate. As the Privacy network is used by more and more people, there will be more work for validators to do and therefore more opportunities to earn, as well as more fees paid.
The increase in validators is not meant to increase the demand for PRV and raise the price. That may happen, it may not. The point of increasing the number of validators is for greater security and stability in the network.
As for the decreased ROI due to staking 1750 PRV, that is somewhat of a misunderstanding. That 1750 PRV is always yours, even though it’s locked. If you bought 1750 PRV to stake today at $1.70, and in time PRV becomes $2.50, that’s better for you. Not only does the USD value of your PRV reward as a validator increase, but you can unstake and sell the 1750 PRV for positive (but definitive) ROI. If you don’t sell, your ROI hasn’t decreased because you’ve already staked, you don’t need to buy more at a higher price.
This is one of many reasons it’s better to get in early as a validator, because the cost of the 1750 PRV has consistently gone up over time. That said, this is all speculative, and we can’t predict the price of PRV, nor do we want to. It helps to disassociate the USD value, because that’s not really what Incognito and PRV are about.
The bottom line is, you stake but always retain ownership of 1750 PRV. You earn PRV rewards, the pool of which decreases by 9% each year. As transactions and slots for validators increase, you’ll earn those rewards more frequently, which means that even though the block reward pool shrinks and there’s more competition, you may actually be earning more consistently and more in fees.
Hope that helps!
Hi @aaron, thanks for your answer.
My heart inclines to both helping the network and make some ROI. Sure the more validators the better to help the security and stability of the network. But the ROI and its evolution also needs to be clear for the people who invests in the Incognito network by buying a pre staked node or create some vNode.
- More slots for validators to earn
Yes but. There will be 176 new slots which is less than the november’s validators increase only. Sharding increase, yes so it will only spread out the rewards. So you will earn more often but less. Am I right?
- More transactions to validate.
Yes but. The fees are so small that it is almost impossible to really consider those. It will need to increase the number of transactions by 10^7 at least
As for the decreased ROI due to staking 1750 PRV, that is somewhat of a misunderstanding. That 1750 PRV is always yours, even though it’s locked. If you bought 1750 PRV to stake today at $1.70, and in time PRV becomes $2.50, that’s better for you. Not only does the USD value of your PRV reward as a validator increase, but you can unstake and sell the 1750 PRV for positive (but definitive) ROI. If you don’t sell, your ROI hasn’t decreased because you’ve already staked, you don’t need to buy more at a higher price.
I don’t really agree here. Yes of course it is better if the price goes up. But it also mean the APY for your actual value in USD is decreasing.
If you have 1750PRV valued at 1750USD and you make 875PRV per year so 875USD.
If you have 1750PRV valued at 3500USD and you make 437,5PRV per year so still 875USD. It is good but you might change for an other project if the ROI is better. Because the return is now half of what is use to be if you consider the USD value of your assets.
But at the end you are right if the ROI is less the number of validator should balanced itself.
I am not trying to be annoying or anything. I am also promoting the network and a big supporter of Incognito as a whole.
Just realized I never responded to this, I apologize!
There will be far more than 176 new slots, as validators will need to fill all shards. As for spreading out rewards, I’m not sure what you mean. Block rewards decrease over time, which is one reason it’s good to be an early validator, and yet conversely, if the price of PRV goes up and it’s harder to buy 1750 PRV, the USD value of your earnings increases too. Which is another reason it’s better to get in early, with the opposite effect.
I don’t see where you’re getting the 437,5 PRV? The number of PRV you earn won’t be cut in half just because the price of PRV goes up.
