How much a territory can earn per month \ stacker news ~charts_and

pull down to refresh

524 sats \ 23 comments \ @Catcher 21h charts_and_numbers

If I'm looking at this graph right, then the total zaps per month are somewhere around 100-110k sats. At the same time, the monthly fee for territory is 50k sats.

So we have 20+ territories, all sharing the total income of 100k, while spending 50k per month each? Or what am I missing?

view all related items

83 sats \ 4 replies \ @ek 20h

If I'm looking at this graph right, then the total zaps per month are somewhere around 100-110k sats.

That's the graph for individual zaps. It counts how many times the zap button is pressed. The amount of sats zapped is in the spending graph:

So the amount zapped per month is actually between 2.5m and 4.5m sats.

So we have 20+ territories, all sharing the total income of 100k, while spending 50k per month each? Or what am I missing?

You're missing post fees as a source of revenue (1-2m sats per month).

But even with these corrected numbers your implied conclusion is still correct: most territories are not turning a profit.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @Taft 18h

most territories are not turning a profit.

That seems naive to ask: If they are not profitable, why keep them active?

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @030e0dca83 18h

Some artists came here not to get but give. At some point you'll comprehend stackerNews is about community not about sats

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Taft 17h

Is it? Maybe once upon a time, but now...

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Catcher OP 20h

Got it, thank you so much! Any plans on reducing the fee for territories?)

21 sats \ 1 reply \ @cyphercosmo 17h

I've noticed a few territories have increased their posting fees, many are ranging from 400 to 1000 sats per post now, which is expensive IMO.

Often I find myself choosing a territory that is aligned with my content but has cheaper fees, and if I can't find it I need to think if I really want to proceed with that post.

I think it would be a mistake to limit the fees as it might make sense for some territories, but when owners/renters set prices too high it discourages people from posting there and then they might post it in in the wrong place.

Do you think that's a problem? If so, shall we brainstorm ways to improve the situation?

89 sats \ 0 replies \ @frostdragon 17h

I've always had the ~FiresidePhilosophy fee at 400 because I've noticed that when someone puts some intentionality behind a thought-sharing post, it usually does pretty well on this site, getting around 1000ish zaps. So in a way, I'm discouraging posts that aren't like that in the hopes to facilitate thoughtful conversation. I want it to be a bit of a challenge.

But, it doesn't get a ton of posts at the moment. Going to try some things to up the engagement and make a longer term decision from there. In the meantime, I do have to consider it kind of a passion project like @grayruby said.

40 sats \ 5 replies \ @Cje95 20h

@grayruby can you shed any light on this?!

40 sats \ 4 replies \ @grayruby 19h

ek answered it above. Yes, territories can be profitable especially with the monthly fee lowered to 50k now but it takes time and you will never make a lot of sats from them so they should be a passion project more than a way to try to earn sats.

It took around 10 months for sports to get to break even and the best month we have had was over 100k sats in revenue but the territory fee was 100k sats at that time. I think we are on pace for around 80k sats this month so that will definitely be our most profitable month so far. But I am doing larger pick ‘ems for the playoffs so some of that profit will go back to the community in the form of bounty payouts.

40 sats \ 1 reply \ @Cje95 19h

That is super sweet that you are going to increase the pick'em playoffs to give back to the community!!!! Hopefully in the next few months I might be able to possibly launch a territory but we shall see if I have enough sats to support it without draining my sats away!

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @grayruby 17h

If you are going to launch a territory, I suggest you test it for a month or two before committing to it long term.

20 sats \ 1 reply \ @Catcher OP 19h

Oh, so it was 100k before? I thought 50k is way too much ;)

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @grayruby 19h

Yes 50k is a recent thing.

34 sats \ 1 reply \ @Shugard 20h

I have no understanding of territories. I was curious to create my own but since it's very complicated and non transparent I always think, I will lose a lot of money by trying.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Catcher OP 20h

Same idea, that's why I'm asking the question in the 1st place=)

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @profullstack 20h

last i checked it wasn't profitable to run a territory

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @frostdragon 20h

It doesn't look like this chart includes territory fees, and the territory owner makes 70% from that fee. Not that it comes close to paying for the monthly cost - if your fee is 100 sats, you'd need a little over 700 posts to make up for the cost.

BUT, there are roughly 100k sats in daily rewards as well, and I don't know how it fully works, but I believe the sats your territory makes get counted towards your rewards rank. @k00b might need to confirm that one.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @denlillaapan 20h

combination of

people paid up fully instead of monthly rent (charity/equity etc)
a bet on the SN growing and the future having larger total zaps
my territory is better than yours, so I'll attract more posts/comments/traffic/revenue

27 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 19h

My territories are better than yours, but that's largely thanks to you.

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @0xbitcoiner 20h

I think the 100k average isn't sats but the number of zaps, but I'm not sure.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @Catcher OP 20h

You think it's calculating total number of zaps per months? It's like 2 zaps per min 24/7?

44 sats \ 1 reply \ @0xbitcoiner 20h

I'm not sure but I think so. cc/ @ek

54 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek 20h

you are right