Jump to content
Montoya

DENT wireless - a competing model for crossborder exchange?

Recommended Posts

So, I have been reading up on a few Alt-coins and one in particular sparked my interest: Dent wireless. Basically, without getting into the weeds, it allows for the sale and purchase of cellular data worldwide. Apparently they have also cut deals with some major telecoms. I have not used their app personally but some people online claim it works. 

That being said, the more I thought about it, the more I realized that the platform, if it ever gained steam, could be a potentially powerful pathway for small remittances, possibly better even than Ripple (at least in theory). The benefit of a crypto tied to a commodity (cell data) that so many people have, need, and use, is that the system has built in liquidity. Not only that, but it is distributed liquidity, which means no need for large scale market makers. Here is an example:

I live in Hong Kong and want to send money to my cousin in Manila. I can simply sell extra data from my phone in exchange for dent, or simply buy data at any bodega, upload it, and trade for Dent. I can then send the dent to my cousin instantly. He can then trade the dent for local data and in turn resell that, to a shop owner for example. 

While this scenario requires at least a number of people using the app in each country, the barriers to entry are extremely low, much lower than being a market-maker in XRP or BTC. I say this because any bodega or shop owner can act as a market maker if they can sell data. Because the app allows instant transfer, almost anyone in the country could act as a market maker if they wish to. 

I may be missing something in the details here so please feel free to weigh in. 

Edited by Montoya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Ripple CTO said, interoperability will put enormous pressure on specialty tokens. We'll see how long this token can be artificially tied to this commodity in an Interledger world. 

I think it's the other way round and XRP is a competitor as a value bridge for trading cell data :music:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, I have been reading up on a few Alt-coins and one in particular sparked my interest: Dent wireless. Basically, without getting into the weeds, it allows for the sale and purchase of cellular data worldwide. Apparently they have also cut deals with some major telecoms. I have not used their app personally but some people online claim it works. 
That being said, the more I thought about it, the more I realized that the platform, if it ever gained steam, could be a potentially powerful pathway for remittances, possibly better even than Ripple (at least in theory). The benefit of a crypto tied to a commodity (cell data) that so many people have, need, and use, is that the system has built in liquidity. Not only that, but it is distributed liquidity, which means no need for large scale market makers. Here is an example:
I live in Hong Kong and want to send money to my cousin in Manila. I can simply sell extra data from my phone in exchange for dent, or simply buy data at any bodega, upload it, and trade for Dent. I can then send the dent to my cousin instantly. He can then trade the dent for local data and in turn resell that, to a shop owner for example. 
While this scenario requires at least a number of people using the app in each country, the barriers to entry are extremely low, much lower than being a market-maker in XRP or BTC. I say this because any bodega or shop owner can act as a market maker if they can sell data. Because the app allows instant transfer, almost anyone in the country could act as a market maker if they wish to. 
I may be missing something in the details here so please feel free to weigh in. 

That will not be possible in all the countries, due a telco has not a banking license or money transfer license( some countries protected in advance with law enforcements to avoid the telcos take over the banking industry) as an example in Mexico

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That will not be possible in all the countries, due a telco has not a banking license or money transfer license( some countries protected in advance with law enforcements to avoid the telcos take over the banking industry) as an example in Mexico

Let me make it easy to understand - the airtime credit is not allowed to be used as medium of exchange for goods or other services ( different that airtime credits)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, FERforum said:


Let me make it easy to understand - the airtime credit is not allowed to be used as medium of exchange for goods or other services ( different that airtime credits)

Do you have any citation for this? 

If I have a bunch of these tokens, and I want to buy data for my phone,  I can do so. Is it not possible to then trade those minutes to another person who wants or needs data in exchange for a good or service?

Even if it is not allowed, how could such a process be stopped seeing as it would be completely person to person?

The fact that it can be so granular in its market making is what made it catch my imagination initially. Both ILP and Xrapid require large market makers to provide liquidity. Such an example as I mentioned above would have almost instant liquidity due to being tied to a commodity. The number of potential buyers for XRP or BTC or XLM is limited by those hoping to speculate in the asset. Meanwhile, a token backed by a good that almost everyone wants or needs could provide a potential pool of millions willing to provide liquidity, even if their purpose is not to provide liquidity but simply to buy airtime.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jcdenton said:

As Ripple CTO said, interoperability will put enormous pressure on specialty tokens. We'll see how long this token can be artificially tied to this commodity in an Interledger world. 

I think it's the other way round and XRP is a competitor as a value bridge for trading cell data :music:

There is no reason this would not work with ILP. But what would be the point? This, if used in the manner I suggested, would likely be more direct, person to person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FYI, this is just a thought experiment, I'm not here to pump any alt-coin or bash Ripple. I am long on Ripple, and I don't see the above happening. That being said, it is important to hash these things out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you have any citation for this? 
If I have a bunch of these tokens, and I want to buy data for my phone,  I can do so. Is it not possible to then trade those minutes to another person who wants or needs data in exchange for a good or service?
Even if it is not allowed, how could such a process be stopped seeing as it would be completely person to person?
The fact that it can be so granular in its market making is what made it catch my imagination initially. Both ILP and Xrapid require large market makers to provide liquidity. Such an example as I mentioned above would have almost instant liquidity due to being tied to a commodity. The number of potential buyers for XRP or BTC or XLM is limited by those hoping to speculate in the asset. Meanwhile, a token backed by a good that almost everyone wants or needs could provide a potential pool of millions willing to provide liquidity, even if their purpose is not to provide liquidity but simply to buy airtime.  

I mentioned in Mexico and could be others countries- I like the business model ( I tried like 3 yrs ago the same business idea) and I did my due diligence with the Mexican authorities and we find out I cant be done ( airtime tradable for other goods or services) I agree with you the Telcos are the one with the important client base - in Mexico it was to protect the financial industry from the telcos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Montoya said:

There is no reason this would not work with ILP. But what would be the point? 

The point is that ILP allows value to flow through the most useful assets 

8 hours ago, Montoya said:

This, if used in the manner I suggested, would likely be more direct, person to person.

It doesn't sound very direct. There are 1, 2, 3, 4 middlemen in this: 

14 hours ago, Montoya said:

simply buy data at any bodega, upload it, and trade for Dent. I can then send the dent to my cousin instantly. He can then trade the dent for local data and in turn resell that, to a shop owner for example. 

Importantly, note that the bodega guys are not acting as market makers for Dent in this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, jcdenton said:

The point is that ILP allows value to flow through the most useful assets 

It doesn't sound very direct. There are 1, 2, 3, 4 middlemen in this: 

Importantly, note that the bodega guys are not acting as market makers for Dent in this. 

wouldn't the most usefull asset be the one with most liquidity? And wouldn't the most liquidity be provided by the asset that has the most demand? Wouldn't an asset tied to a good that everyone wants or needs be highly in demand?

I don't see how the bodega owner is not a MM. They are buying data to resell at a markup, the same as a MM buys one currency to sell at a markup. They are simply making markets between data and dollars/yen/pesos. The only difference is that they are using a token as a stand-in for the data so they can facilitate international transfers of data (at least as I understand it). 

If it is regulatory concerns that would kill it, then that is another matter. But I see no issues with the points you raised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Montoya said:

wouldn't the most usefull asset be the one with most liquidity? And wouldn't the most liquidity be provided by the asset that has the most demand? Wouldn't an asset tied to a good that everyone wants or needs be highly in demand?

I mean that Interledger effectively cancels the ability to keep the asset tied to the good. 

32 minutes ago, Montoya said:

I don't see how the bodega owner is not a MM. They are buying data to resell at a markup, the same as a MM buys one currency to sell at a markup. They are simply making markets between data and dollars/yen/pesos. The only difference is that they are using a token as a stand-in for the data so they can facilitate international transfers of data (at least as I understand it)

"market makers for Dent" -- In your example, middlemen 1 and 4 are making markets for fiat/data and 2 and 3 (dent app users) are making data/dent. The assumption then is that this app liquidity will be so large that it dwarfs x-border payments and adopts them as a secondary use case. I'm saying that it's more likely to happen the other way round and the company will be forced to allow other currencies to take over or be taken out by a competitor that does. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...