I was refering to the dynamic case when I said that. When you take a house with a loan, you are the owner of the house. 2011/12/10 Patrick Anderson <[email protected]>
Apostolis wrote:
in both cases i presented, consumers have ownership of the company from the beginning till the end.
That is what I intend too, but only covers the 'static' case where the scale of production is exactly the amount needed to supply the consumer/owners with the Products they need.
Whenever there is Surplus, we will probably want to sell that extra Product to some consumers who do not yet have ownership. In that case, those latecomers will likely pay Price above Cost (Profit), and so we can use that overpayment as though they were investing - so that even those latecomers will gain co-ownership and cause them to move toward case #1 as well.
Treating Profit as Payer Investment will 'stablize' the growth of that entity - causing growth to approach zero as each Payer/Consumer becomes a co-owner, and thereby stops paying Profit.
Does that make sense?
This is very important for an accurate simulation.
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
-- Sincerely yours, Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis