Written by David Bennett,
DXPowerTeam
Let's deal with the next mainstream question that appear quite often:
"We have been shown over and over again that cycling funds is to our best interest. All of the marketing we've seen has been about how to cycle funds."
This is a fair statement: even DXPowerTeam directly trained, during both 2004 and 2005, how to 'cycle' your funds for best results.
There are two questions
1) What benefit is there to cycling funds?
2) Why does everyone speak of cycling funds?
In short, the answers to each question parallel each other so much that we may as well treat the answers over this together, in context. We will put forth an explanation of the 'big picture of cycling funds' below, and answer both questions together.
Starting with the first question… what BENEFIT is there to the base cycling of funds:
In short, the answer is simple, but elusive generally.
The cycling of funds serves particular purposes in the system, TO A DEGREE. That goes to mean that each batch of funds should only be cycled enough to fulfill certain economic needs, BUT NOT MUCH MORE.
Here is what we mean
There is a purpose to InXchanging funds. DXMerchants are on the receiving end. They are able to do two things with the money they receive: they can process OutXchanges (meaning directly that new InX'd funds can be used to process 'old' OutXchanges).
Therefore, we see that money must make at least two moves: first, to a DXMerchant. Then, from a DXMerchant to an end-user: someone who has listed an OutXchange (or a combination of DXUsers who have listed OutXchanges, depending on the amount InXchanged and the OutXchange queue for that particular form of currency/e-currency).
So far, so good.
But as we know, when DXMerchants process OutXchanges, they are being paid for funds to be REMOVED from circulation, generally speaking. That is, the recipient of the monies used to process OutXchanges (the person whose OutX is being processed) is NOT required to bring that money back into the system. At least, not during 2005, but YES, during 2004.
Thinking further… DXMerchants also have to process ClaimXchanges, in order to be paid for RETURNING money to system reserves. That was a valuable step in maintaining system fluidity.
Also, fees have to be paid. So money would tend to be used at LEAST occasionally to cover fees. If you assume that more than fees were withdrawn for any month, then the fee money would effectively be from the OutXchanges, meaning 'cycling.'
Therefore, we are seeing some reasons for at least a FEW 'cycled' rounds per batch of money. There are different sections of the total system to be maintenanced; each section in turn, and so money WOULD tend to make at least a few round-trips.
What we did in 2004 and 2005
In 2004, DXUsers HAD to pay their OA/DXD fees from IB. If they did not, they could not continue to make their DXPortfolios earn more profits. In short, no one could pay standard OA fees. No matter what – everyone HAD to pay from IB. Or their DXPortfolios would not earn UNTIL the fees were paid from IB. Plain and simple.
In 2005, no one had to return any amount of money to their IB to pay for fees. They could pay their OA/DXD fees directly with DXG that they had earned earlier. Plain and simple… but 'bad' for the economy, UNLESS one thing was occurring:
The marketing department was drawing new funds without problems. IF the marketing department could continue to draw fresh e-currency/currency reserves, then OutXchanges could be processed with no issues, to that degree.
That affects speed and size of OutX's, of course. If marketing has trouble drawing large funds, then small OutX's are listed. If marketing has trouble drawing LOTS of new users with some funds each, then even small OutX's will take some time to process through.
Since marketing will have trouble drawing funds at all during slow periods, then any combination of 'size' and 'speed' for OutXchanges WILL be limited, until system fluidity is restored.
Quick note… DXInOne can wait almost FOREVER for system speeds to be restored. Do not be afraid that their 'reputation might be tarnished' or that 'they might close their business down if OutX's don't speed up.' You have to remember that DXInOne never guarantees OutX timing, and regardless of how the trainers over this system want it to work, DXInOne itself does not HAVE to make OutX's work at any certain speeds. Much of DXInOne will actually be based on the DXGPC, and other things. OutX's are NOT the main priority.
But OutXchanges WILL be made to work quickly starting now. We will get back to this at a later point, when we speak of the 'future prospects' of the system, and what to expect.
Getting back to the issue
DXIO is really not affected by whether the system is moving fast or slow at this time, or before. That is because DXIO is not required or even expected to operate at all until the DXServices are fully released; the system was not expected to be put into operation until then.
GDT bought out the previous owners of this system. It is basically understood that the system has had 3 sets of owners over time. When GDT took it over, there were numerous folks already active, though no one had any idea what to do with it – a 9-month slowdown was in progress. So, GDT assumed that no one would get it moving again until they finished their work; that is, finished the DXServices process. But Dave Bennett of DXPowerTeam discovered and drove this system back into operation, prematurely.
So we are working a system that is not expected to operate at all until later.
Ultimately, remember that we are not even supposed to be here, yet, but are here to PREPARE for WHEN the DXSystem is finalized for 'public release.'
OK… here is the issue that many have not thought about:
We have been cycling funds, SPECIFICALLY to build up values for WHEN the DXSystem is released, and not before. We have, however, had GREAT LUCK in keeping the system speed up for prolonged periods of time, in that we knew what was required to maintain liquidity – in 2004.
Whenever the system reserves were drained to some degree, we simply realized that we had to get more money into play, and did. Everyone knew this, and therefore were not bothered by slowdowns. Slowdowns just meant that funds (reserves) had been used up between fees and whatever folks took out and intended to keep, personally, as the system allowed this.
During 2005, the 'cycling game' taught, as with 2004, BUT it was taught by folks who were simply surprised to see that they could ADD money to the system, and continue to draw out more… again, and again, and again. They didn't much understand WHY or HOW it was happening (we had set the stage for them in 2004), but they understood that they could create money by training over this angle. Pure and simple. (Too simple, actually, as most of you are coming to understand better by now.)
So NOW, let's get exactly into the whole 'why cycle?' scenario.
A Simple Anology
If you took $100 and put it into the bank (DXAccount)… and then you jogged over to the ATM machine and withdrew it (listed OutX's that are processed), then you pay the [$2.00 fee for ATM funds withdrawn] (the OutX fee).
So, now you have 98 dollars left. If you jog back to your bank and put the money back into your account, and then jog back to the ATM machine and withdrew it again, then you would pay another 2 dollars (ATM withdrawal fee).
Now with your $96, you run back to the bank… etc.
See where this is going? Eventually, by cycling the same funds over and over, you would wind up giving ALL of your money to the bank. That leaves you with no money left; the bank would own your money at this point.
Would you have the audacity to point your finger at the bank, and call them a 'scam' because they now have all of your money…? Of course not!
Yet, that is precisely what DXUsers are doing with regards to DXIO, on the whole.
OK… with the bank scenario: you would never do that, correct? Of course not!
So why would you do it with DXIO…? Why would you cycle funds that DXIO has the right to receive via our InXchanges and/or ClaimXchanges over the course of time, to recover what is due to them?
The Answer
You are intentionally LEVERAGING your investment in the DXPortfolio. You are intentionally working rounds that WILL cause the base reserves to be absorbed in fees, but you do it so that you can raise your TDV, so that you can earn more money as you go, over time.
And what is the purpose of THAT…? To prepare for the main DXSystem releases. To be riding high with TDV reserves, and CAPABLE of earning quite a lot monthly, as marketing continues to do its job, and as the DXServices make more services available to allow those extra funds to be used for value-added services.
Right… everyone DID think that we would be further along by now. That is, we DID think that the DXServices would all be launched by now. We were early.
It turns out that we had created, inevitably, WAY too much DXG to make use of over time. Now, DXIO had to find a way to reduce much of the earned DXG backlog, so that OutXchanges can be returned to earlier processing standards.
OK… we have given you a lot to think about!
This DXInOne article along with others regarding DXInOne and ECurrency Exchange can be viewed at
Dynamic-Xchange.com
