Apostolis wrote:
Should we then put a rule that will disallow them to give profit to some which might be hamfull in the health of this network of companies in the future, when accepting to give some profit to them is also profitable for the consumers in the short term?
I have thought about this problem and imagined it might be ok to allow Venture Capitalists to invest, paying them some % of the Profit. The crucial point is that *some* % of the Profit be treated as Payer Investment, for otherwise those late users will never gain the co-ownership needed to crawl out of subjugation. You can read my attempt at explaining this here: http://ImputedProduction.BlogSpot.com/2011/09/burn-ring-funding-model.html I call it "Burn Ring" because the VC's ability to collect Profit from Payers will incrementally "burn-out" as those Payers gain ownership, and so will leave a wake of very high production that undercuts all Capitalist endeavors - since the co-owners who have sufficient ownership will be receiving Product at Cost, and so will never be tempted to buy from those who must sell at a Price above Cost. Profit will continue to flow to the VCs for as long as new Consumers are found who do not yet have sufficient ownership. I think this will be a very attractive investment because of the stability of the 'core' created by all the co-owners with sufficient ownership.