Regarding the recent DNM panic... As a vendor, is there any way to get your 0.5 bitcoin deposit BEFORE SIX MONTHS in case [EVO] goes down?

Hi, we're a vendor on Evo (been here for almost two months) and in case something happens and the website goes down we don't want to lose my 0.5 bitcoin deposit. We messaged them about this and they told me that they give it out in 6 months, but ironically it was right before the Operation Onymous hit...

So far, we have faith in evo, but just in case is there a way to guarantee I'll receive my deposit back?


Comments


[3 Points] CocaineNose:

<n/a>


[3 Points] Vendor_BBMC:

No.

I don't know any vendors who've ever got a deposit back from any marketplace.

I was on the original Silk Road for about 5 weeks before it got busted and I lost my 3.5 btc deposit.

Sheep marketplace robbed me.

I was eligible on SR2, but anyone who tried to get it back were hit by a software bug that messed up their ability to sell stuff


[1 Points] VodkaontheCrackRocks:

You could beg them till they give in. are you FE only?


[1 Points] eQ9YK66DcpT8JfS:

A model more appealing to vendors might be:

  1. Vendor buys in with X BTC.
  2. Vendor does not pay commissions to the market until their sum total is greater than some percentage of X.

e.g. assume DNM1 requires 1 BTC deposit and charges 5% comm on anything sold, with a 75% commision negation. A new vendor would provide 1 BTC, and then receive 100% of sales instead of 95% until net receipts reached 15 BTC (0.05 * 15 = 0.75), at which stage the market keeps the remaining 0.25 BTC and begins charging the vendor the standard 5%.

  1. Market wins (theoretically) since it's a buy-in with benefits rather than a deposit, which means that at least (100-X)% of the buy-in is immediately available for use.
  2. Established vendors from other markets with even a moderate throughput win since they reliably get more money back as opposed to losing it if the DNM is seized unexpectedly.
  3. New vendors are incentivized to provide the best service possible since they "earn" back their buy-in. Scammers who lose business are unable to get anything returned from the market since it's a buy-in, not a deposit.
  4. Both parties stand to lose less if the market is seized since there's no expectation of refund from the vendor. If anything, the vendor will feel more comfortable because there won't be any concerns as the one in the OP, and the market loses the necessesity to keep liquid assets on hand to pay out deposits should a large body of vendors decide to leave.

But now I'm just blathering on and on.. Was a fun idea to explore.