BridgeCoin — Update I
TL;DR. Ecology:2 (2). Technology:2 (2). Decentralization:2 (2). Valuation:2(3). Rating:2/10 (2/10)
Six months have passed since the BD Ratings genesis review of BridgeCoin. Let's continue with updated ratings and also in hindsight explore if the initial weak rating was a good call.
2018-04-06: USD 1.57, Satoshis 23 114.
2018-10-01: USD 1.58, Satoshis 23 961.
Looking at the subreddit, it is still completely dead, with just a few threads started during the last months. All those threads have been about price movements and not fundamentals, so it is hard to report any new developments for BridgeCoin by only considering this source. The subreddit has a grand total of 119 subscribers. The BridgeCoin BCT thread is a bit more active. Looking at transaction statistics, it is evident that not a lot on-chain transactions are happening.
In April 2018, just after the initial review, an updated roadmap was produced by the BridgeCoin team. This laid out plan could be described as ambitious, with for example future exchange integration of Tether (USDT), Ethereum (with accompanying ERC20 tokens) and Cryptonote coins like Monero. Ethereum integration is at time of writing not yet completed. These ambitious plans can be analysed in contrast to the base functionality of the DEX - depositing, trading and withdrawing - which has resulted in some criticism in the official BCT thread. Multiple traders have had long delays when depositing and/or withdrawing funds, stating that this base functionality is more important to get working.
Reasons: Still extremely small community. Few on-chain transactions.
The complete chain halts seems to have stopped despite the lack of PoW miner subsidies. This is a positive development but certainly not enough to warrant any higher Technology rating since the whole blockchain is game theoretically broken anyway. As it stands now, most users are trusting that others mine on the chain for free. The BridgeCoin client development on GitHub is still inactive, so all focus is on CryptoBridge, the trading platform. This might be good for traders, but not for people who want to store wealth on the BridgeCoin blockchain. It is the latter and not the former that this ratings article is focusing on.
Reasons: No active blockchain development. Still broken incentives model.
BridgeCoin is still trying to expand an ecosystem on top of BitShares, instead of properly maintaining its own chain. As mentioned earlier, the mining rewards are long gone, and the minimal transaction fees creates an inherent weakness in the game theoretic aspects of the blockchain's continuous function. As the developer team does nothing to counter this growing dependency, what happens is that BCO holders are more and more in danger of having their wealth affected by what decisions are taken on the BitShares blockchain.
There is some talk about further decentralization in how the DEX will work in the future, but it all relates to the decentralized trading itself, and not the underlying blockchain.
Reasons: Still dependent on BitShares.
BridgeCoin has increased slightly in value relative to Bitcoin, despite few positive changes in fundamentals. In fact, with so low fundamentals, half a year of continuous Bitcoin development and establishment as the main value protocol of cryptocurrencies is casting an even longer shadow on the BridgeCoin blockchain that falls further behind. The latter has seen no code base improvements at all, except mainly for the CryptoBridge user interface and experience. This coin is not in any regard functioning as a decentralized store of value protocol.
Reasons: No core technical development.