- Both are created by the parent company with a significant database of users.
- Both are planning to use this user database.
- Both have significant assets to support the development of their new products.
- Both are ambitious, far-sighted projects.
- Both are faced with the original ideology of Bitcoin due to concerns to be too centralized.
However, there are many differences between these two projects and their common strategies
- While both projects are long-term, Libra is trying to create a new variety of money, while Ton seeks to radically promote the entire stack of blockchas.
- Two projects demonstrated very different approaches in attempts to attract a wide audience of users.
The results of these divergent strategies are already visible, for example, in the corresponding repositories on GitHub.
According to the public data from GitHub, Libra 80 direct and more than 22,000 external participants, while Ton is presumably 15 participants and 8 well-known external participants.
The same trend is preserved when evaluating already developed third-party applications. It may also be due to the fact that the source code of Libra is well documented, while the Ton test network has practically no documentation.
Ton Telegram seeks to attract the attention of developers, the programming competition has recently been launched, with the prizes to the winner to $ 400,000. The winner must be at least one contract for several signatures, to propose improvements to FIFT compiler and find problems and fixes in Ton test network.
From the point of view of the expected dates of the start of work, these two projects also diverge. TON project should be launched until October 31, 2019. On the timing of the launch of the Libra network yet there are no accurate dates. According to some data, it is expected that the Libra network will be launched in 2020.
Economic Analysis of Libra and Gram (Open Telgram Open Network).
The initial price of GRAM sold in two rounds of private sales was recorded in US dollars. The average price of GRAM sold in the first round is set at 0.38 US dollars, and the price of the second round rose to 1.33 US dollars.
Current market price GRAM (T.E. The last price paid for the token) is set at 4 US dollars.
Since the GRAM initial emission is 5 billion units, the corresponding total market capitalization is established at $ 20 billion US dollars. Remuneration for the bid will lead to annual inflation in 2%, or 400 million. US dollars per year, according to the current assessment.
Unlike Libra, GRAM is not currency, but a service token. There is no reason to establish a fixed price of GRAM, because its secondary market value will fluctuate depending on the demand and suggestions. Ton Reserve can redeem GRAM to reduce the total current and, thus try to increase the price of tokens.
Since GRAM is a service token, it can also be used in several cases:
- Markup Requirements: GRAM is required to check blocks.
- Commissions for transactions: To send a transaction in Masterchain and Ton Workchain charged to GRAM. Instead, for other working chains, fees may be required for transactions expressed in their "native cryptoacive".
- Gas payments: similar to Ethereum, interaction with a smart contract requires payment of fees in GRAM for processing transactions.
- Putting payments: When storing something in a constant repository, the GRAM Commission is charged.
Since the cases of using GRAM and Ether are quite similar (especially in Ethereum 2.0), you can withdraw the probable GRAM legal classification. Taking the SEC position, Ether, most likely, will not be classified as Security "If the fundamental collection fails". It would make Ether crypto asset.
The collection of funds on the TON project was carried out by excluding SEC, and GRAM has options for use similar to Ether, so GRAM is likely to be classified as cryptoacive.
This classification can create short-term benefits for TON, since the relevant legislation is often missing or only created. Subsequently, there may be short-term possibilities for regulatory arbitration .
In addition, regulation is likely to ultimately be adapted to cryptoactives, which can potentially eliminate the fundamental gap between the existing regulations and properties of new assets.
On the other hand, Libra A much more limited use option: It should be used as a currency and seeks to remain stable for the price. It is assumed that this goal will be implemented by providing its collateral currencies, as well as short-term public debt securities and their accurate redundancy system.
Analysis of the number of users.
Due to the lack of official updated data, Binance Research had to make a reasonable assumption about the current user base. Using official data for March 2018 and Paul Durov's statements, you can estimate the current number of users. The corresponding indicator is considered as likely the upper border.
Table - Telegram User Evaluation Methodology
According to the methodology presented in the table, Telegram has about 500 million users. On the other hand, one Facebook has 2.4 billion users, which is about 5 times more than Telegram.