Which comes first - the Chicken or the Egg? (Part 2)

Waiting for OutXchanges

So really, you can wait for your OutXchanges to happen FIRST, and then do what you would do anyway: InX to your IB to at least cover OA/DXD fees from there if not also buy Digots, or reduce CL, or set up for adsXposed, etc.

But it will cost you a lot more to wait to add funds. You could have been earning in the meantime by InXchanging now. You will get your OutXchanges later anyway, and at least your InX’d funds would have been earning in the meantime. If you just wait for OutXchanges FIRST, then you can have a long, long wait.

Because everyone is generally thinking what you are thinking.

That whole philosophy to how the system operates is FINALLY changing, by the way.

DXInOne is starting to ensure that everyone InX’s on a schedule if they wish to both gain AND to keep their gains as they go.

What does that do?

It sets up what has to happen anyway in order to get the system fluid again: ‘to control volatility at the OUTPUT end of the system, FIRST, volatility must be controlled at the INPUT end.’ That is, we can fix OutX delays by FIRST fixing InXchanging delays.

It cannot work the other way around. Enough has to be InX’d before OutX’s can fly through. Marketing cannot do that if the system is not already fluid enough to ‘sell’ to the public.

So: to answer the ‘which comes first issue’ … you cannot just choose to wait for your own OutXchanges to happen BEFORE you choose to InXchange, because what you are really doing is to say that you will not put in (up to all) of the money you get back UNTIL others ADD MONEY OF THEIR OWN TO THE SYSTEM.

And they will not really do that until…?

Until the system is already fluid.

That means ‘us.’ We are the ones who have to first control the fluidity before the system can become marketable. DXInOne just implemented standards to ensure this happens.

What does this mean?

The system WILL be made fluid again, BECAUSE we have to InXchange on a set schedule – on the clock – no matter what. Whether there is rain, sleet, hail, snow, tempests, earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, or outright shine:

We have to InXchange on a schedule. Monthly. That means that DXInOne can COUNT on a ‘monthly income’ in order to determine what can be processed, or accomplished each month.

There is not a system alive that can avoid volatility on an ongoing basis without having a consistent income.

DXInOne is finally ENSURING the income, and this finally ENSURES that OutXchanges get processed for all involved.

Those who don’t do their share to be part of the solution (InX’ing to IB to cover discounted OA/DXD fees) are also NO LONGER going to be part of the ‘imbalance’ problem (accruing DXG that they can list for OutXchanges for any size of money they have built up over the years).

That is: ONLY the active Members get to earn DXG into circulation. Therefore, ALL of the DXG created into circulation is proportionately backed by hard reserves. Therefore, the system will be fluid enough for marketing to be able to TOP OFF THE DIFFERENCE.

The next question on the agenda, therefore, is this:

“What is the purpose of cycling funds throughout the system?”

Which comes first - the Chicken or the Egg? (Part 1)

Which comes first?

by David Bennett, DXPowerTeam

The title of this entry: ‘which comes first…’ is really meant to mean this:

Does marketing precede system fluidity, or does system fluidity precede marketing?

We will address it in another form – something you often hear, read, or perhaps even feel yourself:

“I will think about adding more money when some of my OutXchanges are processed.”

As we learned in the last entry, this is an incorrect way of thinking through what is happening. We could rephrase the question to something more appropriate:

“When the reserves added by marketing’s efforts to bring more revenues becomes enough for at least one of my OutXchanges to be processed, then I will receive money. I might add more funds.”

The idea here is to realize that what is REALLY being said is along these lines:

“When others market, so new money (reserves) comes in, then as enough new reserves are added, my own OutXchanges will be processed in turn. I will then receive at least one OutXchange out of those fresh reserves. When I do receive that OutXchange (or more than one), then the reserves will be depleted until/unless I decide to add some more money to replace, in part or full, that amount of depleted reserves.”

If we view the statement in that way, then we see two issues emerge quickly.

The two main issues

a) If you are allowed to consider keeping out (or returning) reserves used to process your own OutXchanges, then others are allowed to consider this as well (and they will). This is fine, of course, but the system has to control some of that volatility. They need to do that by ensuring that OA/DXD fees are paid from IB at least most of the time, by absolutely everyone who is able to list OutXchanges. The system is not based on ‘cycling’ same funds, though that is possible whenever marketing is moving along well enough (there is far more e-currency/currency reserves than DXG available, system-wide).

b) More importantly, we are back to the ‘which comes first’ argument.

It is easy to imagine that marketing is moving along, drawing fresh subscribers to the system who are eager to get going and build up their holdings, etc. But CAN marketing do that well when the system is NOT already fluid…?

No; not really. Marketing is slowed to a crawl when the system is slow. Marketing finds it very, very hard to draw new subscribers during slow periods; perhaps only 5% of the usual number of new subscribers is reachable. At that rate, according to the 2005 standards, it would take about 20 months to accomplish what normally can be done within any single month during regular operational speeds.

So, when thinking about that… it means that you are waiting up to 20 months or so to be able to receive OutXchanges, before you decide to add fresh funds (and really, you are not considering adding fresh funds at all if your OutXchanges are being processed before you return some amount out of that total back into the system, such as only 50% or 25%, etc).

In that context, the issue is rather interesting.

Interesting Issue

It becomes more of a question along these lines:

If we assume that you are not ‘afraid’ of the system generally, because you know enough to realize what makes it slow and quicken, then you must realize that what you choose to InXchange and what you are waiting for to be OutXchanged are entirely unrelated.

All too often, folks feel that the money they receive from OutXchanges is actually some of their own money, BACK. It looks that way: if I had $1000 in E-Gold, and InX’d it, and then later received an OutXchange for $500, then I could well think absent-mindedly that I am staring at $500 of my OWN money, back in my E-Gold account.

And therefore, I am just waiting for the ‘other of my own $500 originally-transmitted dollars from E-Gold’ to be ‘returned’ back into my account.

… Remember: the money you receive from OutXchanges is probably NEVER, EVER the same exact dollars you yourself put into the system. This was generally never the case, and never will be.

So, what ARE the dollars you receive…?

Other peoples’ dollars, which they themselves added to the system.

That assumes that folks are adding money to the system.

And folks generally don’t add money to the system when the system is slow. And marketing basically cannot do anything about that, either.

We have enough DXInOne Marketers already, right? (Part 1)

Enough or Too Many?

by David Bennett, DXPowerTeam

In 2005, we saw marketers appear like popcorn. Everywhere you looked, someone had a product over DXInOne. Everyone seemed to suddenly know the system, and they are more than ready to explain it to you: for a price, or for free, through audio/video-based training, through Adobe documents, through support forums… You name it. Training everywhere.

Doesn’t make much sense

If there are so many training systems out there, then why aren’t enough reserves appearing to keep things smooth? Surely there should be a constant enough feed of fresh funds. There must be something else happening, right?

You are right. There is more to it than just the basic act of shepherding folks through the system. If it WAS that simple, then there wouldn’t be any problems with system volatility. Everything would be flowing along just fine.

All right. Sit back and mull that one over… and it shouldn’t take you long to peg on it:

Maybe it’s about just WHAT exactly the marketing sites are training over.

It’s what the marketing sites ARE training, on the whole. They are teaching their adherents, mainly, that this is a ‘cash production’ system. Namely, that everyone is supposed to be able to just add a few bucks, and forever make relatively consistent withdrawals.

They aren’t just saying ‘sometimes it works that way, (if) or (when) etc.’ And ‘sometimes it works another way, (if) or (when) etc.’

They are just plain telling you that you can add a few dollars and keep pulling out more and more as you go. At all times, mainly. No matter what is happening with system reserves.

Think of the biggest training systems during 2005, and think about what their training has been like. We dont mean their marketing pages – sure, everyone tends to market for best image. As far as that goes, marketing is marketing.

But marketing HAS TO BE counter-balanced by quality training. You have to be ready to be flexible in this system; to understand that the system is dynamic, and doesn’t just operate one way only.

In short, when is it possible to withdraw more than you put in? When the system is being marketed hard enough to drive more total e-currency/currency through the system than DXG in circulation. During THOSE times, we’re seeing ‘excess reserves’, which over 2005 were drained. Again, this issue existed also by the end of 2003, when we had to correct for that imbalance as well.

How it worked in 2005

During 2005, this is inevitably how it worked:

Many new members got in. And many older (senior) members already had cash in the system. Since everyone could buy digots using ‘old DXG’ directly to create ‘new DXG’, they surely did!

And what did they do with the cash they got from OutXchanges…?

You guessed it; they basically pocketed that cash.

They withdrew real money (reserves) consistently, while simultaneously creating more DXG by using their ‘old’ DXG.

In effect, many who had little funds to work with put funds through the system, and the system allowed those who were already vested to higher levels to extract that money.

I still remember Sharon Toberer excitedly talking about purchasing her husband a $10,000 electric car for his birthday, from DXG profits, because she thought ‘it was cute.’

Where do you think she got the $10,000 …? She had put some money (about $4000) in the system already. She was vested. When someone InXchanged $10,000 and it arrived in her account (this is just an example of the sort of usual thing that happened), she chose to cash that money out, and go on vacation, or make a purchase for the fun of it, or pay bills, etc. In this case, she bought an electric car (if I am remembering it correctly).

Is DXSynergy the next Google, EBay or PayPal?

Will DXSynergy rival these?

Ever wonder who the next Google, eBay or PayPal is going to be? Want to "get in on the ground floor" like the early employees of these companies who got cheap stock options and were able to cash them in later for big payoffs? This article will guide you toward just such an opportunity -- one that anyone can take advantage of with a modest investment of time and money.

Google. eBay. PayPal. These are currently the biggest names on the Internet (not counting MicroSoft). But rewind just 7-10 years back to the late 1990's. Who were the biggest names on the Internet then? Yahoo. AltaVista. Netscape. And America Online (AOL).

Do you see where I'm going with this?

Things change. Markets change. Original ideas rise to the fore, and better mousetraps do get invented every once in awhile. From time to time, an original idea will succeed in its original form until someone buys it up and runs it into the ground. Or, perhaps, a competitor copycats the idea and doesn't necessarily build it better, but rather has a better marketing department and/or more money behind them (Microsoft vs. Apple).

Sometimes, a startup (PayPal) will be wildly successful and then be bought out and be even more successful with the backing of the new buyer (eBay). And sometimes, competition ends up being healthy, with multiple vendors offering similar products and services. The main point is this: competitive forces are constantly driving and changing the marketplace.

One thing that Google, eBay and PayPal have all proven in recent years is that "better mousetraps" can benefit from meteoric rises to the top of the charts/markets/collective-consciousness. If you think about it, it really was not all that long ago that none of these companies even existed. But yet today, nearly every Internet user on this planet knows who these 3 companies are AND HOW TO GET TO THEIR WEBSITES - and that literally means BILLIONS of people.

So what does this have to do with DXSynergy?

Here's what I know: DXSynergy has been working for more than 5 years to create similar services to each of these three giants. I could also throw in names such as Travelocity, TimeShares.com, and CraigsList as "names" that correlate to service-lines that DXSynergy is working on and/or already has in place.

adsXposed is a lot like Google's AdSense and AdWords programs. With Google, publishers use AdSense to add advertising streams to their websites, while advertisers use AdWords to place the ads that run on that network and on Google's search network. In DXSynergy, there is also an added wrinkle which I will cover separately in it's own article -- an affiliate program that enables you to earn commissions on advertising purchases.

DXSynergy are busy behind the scenes!

DXSynergy is currently working on releasing DXSeeker, DXClassifieds, DXConcierge, DXTraveller and DXTravelAgent, just to name a few of their upcoming service lines.

DXFinder is a full-fledged search engine. Google rapidly rose to dominance by simply inventing a better search engine than anyone else had or has been able to come up with since. Will DXSeeker be a superior search engine to Google? Only time will tell, but they are serious about entering the market and it certainly should help amplify the inherent value and market- acceptance of adsXposed as well as all of the other DXServices.

DXAuctions is also forthcoming. This will compete directly with eBay. This would seem to be an even more daunting task than competing with Google, but wait: eBay has owned PayPal for several years now, and they have still yet to "get on the ball" and implement something that DXAuctions will have in place from Day One - actually it's already "in place" within the DXSystem and has been for several years -- built-in escrow payment capabilities. DXDirects will help eliminate a lot of the fraud that pervades so many innocent people's eBay shopping experiences.

DXSynergy is in a league of its own!

And as a "payment processor", DXSynergy is going to be playing in a league in which it has no peers. DXAccounts are so much more secure than PayPal accounts. PayPal transactions are subject to charge-backs and highly susceptible to fraud. DXSynergy requires users to provide extensive identification and place of residence/business documentation in order to earn a high rating and have access to all the features of the DXSystem. At PayPal, a fraudster can sign up for an account and within 5 minutes be using a stolen credit card to commit fraudulent transactions. That just does not and will not happen with DXSynergy because they have specifically taken the time to "get it right". They've been in development for 5+ years. These are not just some ideas that have been thrown against the wall to see what sticks. They have studied the competition and evolved their offerings into "better mousetraps".

by Kevin Fadden