Comments on New Currency Frontiers: OPEN CURRENCY NOW

A true currency circulates as it represents a “uni...

2011-02-13T16:41:13.799-08:00

A true currency circulates as it represents a “unit of account” that has an intrinsic stored value that is accepted in the marketplace. For example take a look at WIR Bank in Switzerland, an excellent example of a complementary currency.

Art, Touche! Michael also called me out on that ye...

2009-07-10T14:55:05.173-07:00

Art,
Touche! Michael also called me out on that yesterday, although for a slightly different reason. So, to clarify, there seem to be two issues around the word "fail."

1) What is counted as failure (or success)? On this front, Michael's point was that even if a monetary currency only enables three transactions, it might still be a success if those were transactions that wouldn't have happened otherwise. To me, this raises the question of how much economic activity is enabled vs. how much effort it took to launch the currency. Measuring from this perspective, even some of the more "successful" "complementary currencies" may not be worth the cost. Perhaps this is where "lowering the cost of failure" might actually increase the success rate, because if a currency was very easy to start, then even a few transactions might be worth the effort.

2) What is counted as a currency project? Of course, I advocate for expanding the definition of currency beyond money. So you are very right to call me out on this. The 85% was in reference to what are usually dubbed "complementary currencies." Of course, if you include all the currencies you mentioned, I am sure the number is much lower than 85%. Also, I am sure currencies in this more expanded space would measure their success or failure quite differently than "complementary currencies."

So yes, 85% is a BOGUS statistic. And yes, we should think carefully about what qualifies as a success or failure, no matter what type of currency we are creating.

Oh... but by the way... I like where you're go...

2009-07-10T09:26:36.043-07:00

Oh... but by the way... I like where you're going with this stuff. It is a new way of thinking we need to get more folks engaged in. :)

I don't think you can assert the broader defin...

2009-07-10T09:02:07.069-07:00

I don't think you can assert the broader definition of currencies and then cite a strange statistic saying that 85% of currencies fail.

First, there is no such statistic for the broader definition of currencies. We see successful currencies of that type all around us: bus passes, movie tickets, first place ribbons, trophies, awards, certifications, Olympic medals, college degrees/credits/grades, titles & honorifics, black/brown/green/yellow belts, etc.

Quite simply, the ones that fail are ones that have tried to compete in a highly monopolized space without demonstrating that they meet any needs much differently. Some have been poorly designed or poorly managed and most poorly funded. From any reasonable assessment of the situation, they SHOULD have failed.

Then you take some (bogus) statistic about those kinds of projects and apply it to currencies of all types? Hmmm...

I think that interpretation comes from being caught between worlds. Between the narrower monetary definition of currency and the broader space you've been finding yourself empowered by which also helps clearly illustrate why those projects have failed and were doomed to fail.