I asked a similar question yesterday on NEM channel in telegram. Paul responded saying “Dynamic fees are impossible if you want to keep everything decoupled”.
To keep NEM decoupled means it is not interacting with third party resources like ethereum does. NEM specifically doesn’t do that to keep outside effects to minimum. I was thinking this was a current bug -not being able to peg to usd- but when you define it like that this is a feature of NEM. If you want to interact with outside world you can do that in your application, NEM will supply immutability and transactions as far as I can tell.
The price of microtransactions will always have to be updated but I guess if the price spikes occur this needs to be faster than today.
2 Likes
The irony of that though. If the price goes up this has to be manually updated and propagated from NIS to Clients; this is one of the most important variables that determines the cost($) of every transaction. I agree keeping outside influence is nice, but xem is already pegged to ($) in outside markets. If we all got XEM for nearly free, this wouldn’t be an issue but it is a practical issue because we have to buy xem to use it. So its a huge factor. I’m new and i hope i don’t come off too pushy, but this is going to be a blocker for a lot of people. Even though the XEM system has no knowledge of XEM?USD price. We all onboard using USD/XEM.
1 Like
An idea to help ease the concern over fees would be to have some type of fixed fee change system. For example:
If the price is $.25 USD to 1 XEM for 2-month average the fees are X
If the price is $.50 USD to 1 XEM for 2-month average the fees are X
If the price is $2 USD to 1 XEM for 2-month average the fees are X
This would give people/companies some ability to predict a change in the fee structure, additionally, you would reduce the requests for changes by people and reduce the number of times you would need to make the changes.
How will the blockchain (NEM platform) know about the price?!
How can this real price information be supplied to the blockchain?
I thinks he means adjustment via releases. He just wants a statement form the team that they are going to adjust fees to a fixed plan.
Great to hear that fees will be reduced!
A question regarding harvesting: Isn’t it strange if it is not possible to properly stake with an amount of 10000 XEM worth round about 20000 Euro? As super nodes are really expensive and require a lot fo XEM to operate, I guess there can not be thousands of. So wouldn’t this imply centralization and a reduced security of the network as a consequence?
Furthermore, it is quite a pitty to hear that, because the whitepaper presents an awesome technology, PoI, that incentivizes the less rich people to start staking for an increased network security and gives them an increased profit compared to richer users (in contrast to PoS). Additionally lots of efforts were measures were designed to design a great technology/network which adjusts itself by building trust relations among its users, clustering them, weighting them by ther activity (wher super nodes are probably not very active), etc…
I understand the importance of super nodes, but it seems unbalanced. And I wanted to be a useful part of NEM but now I read I’m useless… 
1 Like
10k xem is €2k, not €20k, but still a lot, i agree.
Well, there are ~450 active supernodes i think. That is a strong network and even if they are not controled by 450 users I guess it cannot be called centralized if 200 uncoordinated users control the network.
POI does give Accounts with a lower balance a relative higher importance but of course this has to be limited. Else all big balances would be split trying to gain control over the network.
Supernodes will remain to be the backbone of the network relying on the fact that if someone spends and locks up such an amount of money, he will not harm the network cause that would harm him as well.
Thank you for your quick answer 
I’m not trying to start a fight. Please understand my words as friendly feedback and consider I’m not an english native speaker 
Sorry, was a typo. 2.000 Euro is already a lot in my eyes
Hm, i do not see 450 nodes to be a lot in terms of security. Also, I believe there are many many many more users with 2.000 Euro than with 2 million Euro. Last but not least “uncoordinated” is good as it meas decentralization 
Everything okay with this. But also it was meant to motivate as many people as possible to do staking in order to create a strong network together (as I understood the whitepaper) . For example, there is no other good reason for incentivizing active users other than wanting them to help staking.
Unless the super node’s money is gone once it is unhonest, there is no risk for a super node operator trying to cheat the network, except maybe for not stying a super node for any loger.
To cut a long story short, the current network situation reads as it is not fitting to the awesomeness, design and all the great features and algorithms introduced with NEM. It seems basically back to PoS as in any other cryptocurrency, such as dash with its master nodes.
I don’t believe the NEM team has ever said that they won’t change the supernode requirements. It seems the team could and (may want to) adjust the requirements downward in order to increase the number of supernodes in the ecosystem to whatever number they feel is ideal.
Sure… just wanted to share my opinion and to get the most out of NEM with its very genious tech just as described in the whitepaper. (but still increasing super nodes is not the same as building a network of imporance and of active users, as described in the whitepaper)
450 nodes is a fairly sizeable footprint if the number of transactions is low. I can’t imagine a lot of transactions happening right now just because of the fees. Everything is currently overpriced. The nemtipbot is kinda impractical to use, because you’re sending 1 xem costs the same amount to send.
I like the concept of POI over the others. The high requirement is fine for now but as the network grows it has to lower. The question becomes how will people accumulate the XEM when it happens. I also like the idea of rewarding active users vs those that do nothing. It encourages people to use their XEM, the only problem is really replenishment and all the high cost fees everywhere, which eventually will be lowered. In the future I can see businesses or companies running their own supernode and also harvesting to try to recoupe some of the fee’s they are constantly paying like mining. If not, we would just have to keep paying and paying which would really suck and honestly probably wouldn’t be worth it. If the price spikes up 200-300%, we have to wait for the developers to release the new fee structure. The whole time companies and business have to pay 2-3x until devs find the time to update the fee, like what we’re seeing now. It’s definitely worrying that my account would be drained from fee’s while waiting for devs to release an update to fees. What we’ve already seen is a pretty wild swing in the prices and fee’s are still the same. We’re stuck.
I’m here because NEM looks very promising and it has a lot of the functions I’d like to use, but we’re basically paying for a “premium” gas vs regular. I’m keeping an eye on how fast the fee’s get turned around since I think its quite clear this is on many peoples minds especially new folks like myself. Once the fee structure is predictable, i think its better for the ecosystem.
1 Like
We are saying NEM doesn’t know about outside world but basically developers are updating it via code. So it learns about outside world via coding. Coding is expensive and requires effort and time. Can there be a mechanism to signal lowering of prices via supernodes? Say if 70% agrees it should be lowered 20% or increased 20%.
Maybe a voting mechanism similar to how we vote on projects can be implemented. Anyone knowledgeable can comment on this?
I have not yet voted on a project.
If NEM gets adopted a business cannot stop and wait for an application update to lower fees. Either he finds another solution or bears the costs. It is not feasible to expect any business to wait such long periods. If there is no change to this mechanism maybe there should be a way to update code every month/week to regulate the price.
1 Like
Multisignature transactions fees are a little to high too isn’t it? For sending 1000 or 10000 XEM i’m charge 7 XEM fee. So 10000 XEM is 1900$ with a fee of 1.33$, that’s almost 0.07% fee? I thought the standard was .05% fee
seriously tho, 0.05-0.07 who cares…
what happens when you want to buy something for $5 usd and pay 1xem fee thats around 6%, I think thats where we need to be looking at the fee issue…
Quote for the truth
Great, but when do you guess it be changed? One month, three month, six month, one year ?
Thanks
We will switch over to the new fee structure for testnet within the next few days. Once Nano Wallet and the iOS / Android smartphone Apps are thoroughly tested we can release the mainnet version. Once out it will have a ~3 week delay till the fee fork kicks in.
4 Likes
Fantastic, thanks for sharing
Is there still a fee revision at the test net?
testnet has new fee structure. Nano wallet with fee update will be out #soon.
2 Likes