stepbruvv

What would happen if @X wanted to adopt Nano for payments? Why would they do so? How would they do it in practice? On the business side there are a few advantages to implementing Nano if you’re X. 1. Decreased payment processing cost. 2. Instantly settled payments. 3. Larger group that can pay X. 4. No reliance on outside parties. 5. Price appreciation of Nano holdings. Scenario 1: X implements Nano for paying for Premium. The simplest way to implement Nano would be to only offer it for paying for Premium. How much would X save in this scenario? We don’t have exact numbers, so we have to make some assumptions. Let’s say there are 1 million people paying $10 a month on average to X. X uses Stripe, which generally has a charge of ~$0.29 + 2.9%. For $10, that comes out to $0.58, or about 5.8% payment processing costs. There might be added optional costs for currency conversion. X likely has some deal in place decreasing these costs a bit, so an estimate of $580k a month might be the high estimate but is likely not off that much. This comes out to over $6 mln a year in just payment processing costs for Premium. Nano, as many know, is feeless. In the implementation that X is likely to prefer they would want to convert to USD, which can be done for ~0.5% fees, possibly a fair bit lower. That would be $50k a month or $600k a year, a saving of ~90% over the payment processing they currently have in place. It’s unclear how much it is worth to X to have access to the money instantly, rather than having to wait for credit card payments to settle, but it’s a nice bonus. So is the added bonus of people not being able to dispute the credit card payments. There are no figures on how often this happens but one might expect this to be a factor in the “verified bot accounts” which pop up and quickly disappear again. There is also potential revenue from implementing Nano in this scenario. A lot of people do not have access to credit cards but might still want to get Premium. This is currently not possible, which Nano would solve immediately. Expanding access like this means increasing potential revenue from Premium, making X less reliant on advertisers. There is an added beauty in using a decentralized digital currency like Nano in that it decreases reliance on outside parties. We’ve seen countless examples of how businesses can be pressured by credit card processors. @elonmusk and X are often controversial and have taken a clear stand in the freedom of speech debate, which can lead to (and has led to) political pressures. X can’t be shut off from Nano, and Nano can’t be shut down being a decentralized network. Finally, X might want to buy Nano before implementing it into X for payments. There are many reasons this would make sense: to test practical implementation, to test liquidity, because they anticipate a price increase in Nano, or because they plan to have a stack to instantly exchange into USD as payments come in. Implementing Nano into X would likely cause a big price increase for Nano, which X would profit from as a one-off gain, and would give X access to a non-debaseable form of money going into the future. Scenario 2: X implements Nano for paying for Premium and Creator payouts. Building on the previous example, X could enable Nano for Creator payouts and tipping. Creator payouts have minimums now and come with similar payment processing costs as paying for Premium does. Paying out in Nano means creators can get 100% of the payouts, attracting more content creators to Twitter and allowing for smaller content creators to start getting a share of earnings from Twitter. Decreasing these minimums to $1 might feel inconsequential, but there are a lot of creative minds in the world that would love to be able to earn even such small amounts. Scenario 3: X implements Nano for paying for Premium, Creator payouts and Tipping Payouts to content creators ties in to tipping. Back when we had the Nano TipBot on Twitter it was used a lot to tip what people saw as great content posted on Twitter. I had my fair share of tips sent to me, by people simply replying “@NanoTipBot 1” to send 1 Nano. If you can have a Nano balance on Twitter and there’s a button underneath posts to tip the creator people would be far more likely to do so. Alternatively it could even be used as an additional revenue source. There are posts that I like so much that I’d like to super-retweet it, but that’s not possible. If I could tip a few Nano to the post to get it spread more widely, even if all that money went to X, I would often gladly do so. It would allow to crowdsource advertising, to let people put their money where their mouth is. While these three scenarios are solely built on technology X already has in place or could easily implement in the near future, there are more ways this could be extremely beneficial in the future. If X expands to allow commerce to take place on or via X, what more attractive way to attract merchants than offering zero (or very low) payment fees, with a currency that anyone in the world can use and spend? What if you could send money to anyone in the world, anywhere, anytime, using just their X handle? Implementing Nano, coincidentally with currency symbol Ӿ, would allow all this. There is no other crypto, no other form of money in the world, that can offer zero fee, instantly settled payments using a payment network that can’t be stopped and can’t be censored.