Topic: [ANN] NeuCoin - Easy to use, free to try, focused on micropayments - Official - page 13. (Read 196236 times)

I understand the idea behind in general. The problem I see, and that's also the reason why I don't think that Neucoin is legit, is this:

They've started with a total supply of 3 billion and they've sold 100 Mio to the public. That's just 3.3% of the total supply. They've made 4,012 BTC with that 100 Mio which means: 0.00004 per Neucoin which was about 0.018 Dollar at that time (end of April).

That means, that they somehow believed, the total supply would be worth more than 50 Mio Dollar while just the three foundations were sitting on 2.4 billion = 43 Mio Dollar in Neucoin!

The thing about this is: There are just to possibilities.

1. They really believed in the ICO-price which would mean that they believed, Neucoin would be worth more than 50 Mio Dollar
2. They did not believe that Neucoin is worth so much, but maybe "one day in the future"... which would mean, that everybody who bought into the ICO bought to a future price, while it was very unlikely that this future would ever come.


To be more precise: If they really believed Neucoin would be worth 50 Mio and the three foundations should be worth > 40 Mio, that's a totally hubris. And if they did not believe that, it's kind of fraud to sell at those prices. It doesn't make any other sense.

Plus: It never was just about the distribution of those Coins they hold. They also stake, and they stake that much each and every day that it's totally impossible to distribute it. I mean, since it went live the market had an inflation of more than just 100%! In not even 6 months! What the hell did they believe how it would be possible to get that much new money into the market just to hold the ICO-price? It's simply impossible. The staking of just 1 day would crash the market to nearly 0 Dollar per Neucoin. That's the reality and that was the reality for every day since launch.

The whole concept is stupid, or it's fraud. I believe the truth is somewhere in the middle. A mix of greed and a totally lack of knowledge and hubris and ignorance of simplest economic laws.

And if you think back to April, if you think about it that way, you would stay away from buying into the ICO. You would be totally sure that the price is way too high. And you would ask yourself if it's just naive to sell at those prices or if it's fraud. And I've said that months before the ICO. It was predictable.

And that's the next problem: Those who thought about it did not buy! Only those who were unexperienced, who did not know enough about Crypto, who believed in the hype and promises around, bought into the ICO. And if a project needs the stupidity of the public to get traction... it's not worth a single satoshi.

And I don't mean that disrespectful to those who bought into it. I've made some bad decisions in Crypto as well. In 2014 I bought into two stupid Scams and lost some money. I see that as education-money... you lose but you learn. And what I've learned is to focus on the facts, on how the team acts, how they communicate, if they are able to reply on tough questions in all aspects and so on. The Neucoin-Team never showed qualities besides some talent to blind some people.

And what I still believe is: Everybody regrets this, also the team. I believe that nobody really made money with this because I'm sure that the ICO was mostly self-buying (nearly all of the 100 Mio Coins were in the top 100 in the early days after launch and before they came up with the official explorer).



First: Of course, Jango can be part of an economy. For it's own it's not an economy. And the problem is: Think about what would happen if the Neucoins on Jango would leave it to Bittrex. With other words: The supply on Jango shouldn't leave Jango because otherwise it would hurt the price. If I would be a musician there and let's say everybody loves me and all the 200,000 "Users" send me some Neucoins I would crash the market. And I don't say that Jango is a bad idea. It's the same problem I've mention again and again: The supply doesn't fit in any way to reality. The price reflects that and it's still too high.

Second: It's right not to expect that everything will be accomplished at once. But then again: Why start with a supply that would be worth over 50 Mio Dollar and monster-inflation and just 3.3% on the market while 97% sitting in the back, staking, and buying a project that is totally overvalued for years. It's as if you would give them a loan. You say: "Okay, I know it's not worth that much now but maybe in 2 or 3 years, so I hope you will deliver. Please take my money and make decisions I would agree with!". In fact that's what every Investor said who bought into the ICO. And if you take a look on the process since the ICO: Did they deliver? What I see is that they don't even really communicate! They don't do just the basic-work. They took the money and the biggest decisions they've made is to switch to full PoS (who is staking?) and to cut the total supply to increase the value (who wants to sell billions of Coins?).


And if we think about the future: The problem stays the same. Everybody who thinks about buying this but not impulsive but doing some research and analysis will still see a monster-premine and a monster-inflation. He doesn't see much communication, more arrogance and ignorance. It's very likely that if the price should go up 30% they will sell into it, so it hasn't much chance to rise. It's also very likely that they will run out of money (maybe they are already out of money) so the risk is very high that they will abandon the project. And I believe: It's already abandoned. Not totally, but if I ask myself if there is a team constantly working on this every day... nope. I don't believe that.

"performers can buy more plays on jango with those coins".  You mean "payola". Jango's entire business plan is Payola.  An illegal practice.  

"Payola, in the music industry, is the illegal practice of payment or other inducement by record companies for the broadcast of recordings on commercial radio in which the song is presented as being part of the normal day's broadcast. Under U.S. law, 47 U.S.C. § 317, a radio station can play a specific song in exchange for money, but this must be disclosed on the air as being sponsored airtime, and that play of the song should not be counted as a "regular airplay"."

Not suprising.  Jango is Dan Kauffman.  Neucoin, Dan Kauffman.  All the money in the Seychells went to Dan Kauffman's pocket.  Guys like you who defend criminal scum like Dan Kauffman deserve to lose the money you have and will continue to by being involved in this silly fraud.

You keep talking about Neucoin.  The joke is that Dan stole the 4000 BTC, and plebs are still talking about Neucoin as if it were something worthy of serious thought or consideration.  Neucoin aspires to do NOTHING that Dogecoin didn't accomplish two years ago--without a scammy offshore pre-mine pre-sale.

The stolen BTC is the scam.  The Neucoin is nothing more than the shiny thing Dan used to distract brainsurgeons like James while picking his pockets clean.

There were no fancy name investors.  There was just a big shaggy dog story, and an anonymous bitcoin address in the Seychelles.  A jingoistic marketing push and the only press coverage was bought and paid for because there is no innovation to write about.  Dogecoin did it all first, and is still doing it viably.

Jango is Dan.  Neucoin is Dan.  Anyone that gives Dan money for payola or shiny worthless internet trinkets that lose value at 100% per year deserves their loses.  Dan controls everything.  Nobody outside of the Daniverse is interested in Neucoin when there are perfectly suited alternatives like Dogecoin, cheaper, more widely and fairly distributed with liquid trading markets to be had at a tenth of the already depressed, yet artificially supported price of Neucoin.

Dan stole the Seychelles money, dummies.  Neucoin was the diversion.

I think to have coins to distribute to the new-to-crypto people.  Yes, that means very high inflation.  It is one way of getting participation from that group.  Hopefully, for those of us holding neucoins, there will be more deals in the future.  I don't look at what exists now as all there will every be.

Jango in essence is a complete economy.  neu gives users coins.  users can tip performers if they like their music.  performers can buy more plays on jango with those coins.  users and performers can get coins out of jango to invest/stake or trade on bittrex for btc.  I don't think what you say is invalid, but I don't expect them to accomplish everything at once.

Very solid post all around.  You make some great points.

The question is how you define "user". Let's say I buy some Neu and make an account on Jango and I tip some others there. Do I make them to "users"? I wouldn't agree with that. They just have an account with some Neucoins and most likely the majority won't care about it. And even if it's widely used on Jango... what would that mean? It's like a thump-up-button but without any real usecase that would give real value. If just 5 persons would try to collect as many coins on jango like they could and dump it on Bittrex the price would be at 1 sat. The only reason why that doesn't happen is because it has no value.

And what we don't see is that hundreds of new users, or at least 10 of those claimed 8000 new users per day make an account on the official forum or tweet how great Neucoin is. What does that mean? 8000 new users every day but nobody cares? And why should they? You could tip every account on Jango and it wouldn't change anything.

And the comparison with Poloniex is because that are real users! Just a little bit more than 100k but that's an economy. Jango is no economy and if the Coins on Jango would flow to Bittrex the price would crash even more.



Not sure if I understand what you mean with "The innovation is exactly the stuff you don't like, which means you overlook it as innovation.". Maybe you want to say that there is innovation but I don't recognize it as innovation? If yes, the question is where is the innovation? I mean, tipping and micro-transactions will definitely be a use case in crypto. But it won't be the way like Neucoin tries it. I believe it will be part of a project like Ethereum, maybe with a special Ethereum-micro-Coin but backed with the whole protocol. It needs an economy around it instead a monster-premine with a monster-inflation.

And no, my thoughts are not about altruism. And of course, it needs financial intentions or at least it would be naive to believe it would go without that. But if greed is the only real intention without any further philosophy it won't work. And what I try to say with that is already proven. The fact that they have to switch to full PoS (which has even a more intensive centralizing-effect on the eco-system) and to destroy half of the total supply is the admission that it wasn't well thought through. How is it possible that we here could easily predict what would happen and make calculations about it while the team behind planned it for more than a year with totally naive assumptions? I don't think they are stupid. I believe what I've said: Blinded by greed. Not thinking in scenarios to find the best way for the project, just believing in what they hope what would make them rich quick.

We don't need to talk about PoW or PoS. I'm not convinced about PoS-Systems and that's also a concern regarding ETH, because they want to switch to a PoS-model (but it's also different).

The real question is: Why this huge premine and why this high inflation rate? And they could destroy the whole premine but it wouldn't rescue Neucoin, just because of the high inflation. The market can't even handle the 200 Mio.


The problem in all eco-systems is that it all has a centralizing effect. But PoS even more/faster, while it has a lot more risks at the same time. I don't believe that any PoS-project will survive in longterm. Ethereum maybe, but it's a different design, not the usual PoS.



I see no reason to be optimistic that this project will survive the next 12 months. The reason is very simple: They've raised money in the ICO = 4,012 BTC. About 78 BTC are left.
https://blockchain.info/address/3MrNuksZ1VePU3dGiSQFiouWerJUJgDkfH

I don't know what they did with the money but it doesn't look as if they would spend it for the development. But if they have such a monthly burning rate, how will they move on? There are just two scenarios:

1. They've used it for Neucoin, which would mean that it's way too expensive and than they won't be able to pay the next months.
2. They've used it for different purposes - not the project. Than it's..... hmm....

And who makes good work for free? Will they pay the Developers with Neucoin? And they have dump it on the market because they need money to pay their bills?

In fact there is a third scenario:

3. They still have the money, just not on that address and they will be able to pay the next months. But: Where is the development? What are they doing? Sometimes I showed the github of Factom with their daily updates. They have to pay a big team of Devs, advertising, they have to travel and so on... I don't see anything like that in Neucoin.

So, under the line that's just one reason why I'm sure that this project has no chance. The other is the economical-design. And there are a lot of projects with really innovative approaches and Neucoin is like a dinosaur in comparison.

The problem stays the same. Cutting the total supply seems like a huge change, but in fact it's not really a change. The reason is very simple: The market can't handle the supply that is on the market right now, which is already > 100% more than 6 months ago. I've always said that it's about the inflation rate of the market and while they claim that it would be 100% inflation per year, which is ridiculous high, for the market the inflations is even higher! Ethereum, just for example, has 20% per year which is already high. Factom has zero inflation but "Coin-consumption" (Factoids are burned if they are used to record data into Factom) until the full protocol gets traction and than it will be 10% per year.

And the altcoin-market already gets more attention. The increase of volume is really noticeably, also on Bittrex. Volume last 24 hours: 2688 BTC. Some months ago there were a lot of days with not even 500 BTC. But that doesn't mean that all projects get more volume.

Regarding Scam or no Scam: I've never said that it was a Scam right from the beginning. I also wouldn't say it was started with good intentions. I believe that it was planned with a lot greed in mind but without any professionalism, no knowledge about economics etc. My personal question always was and still is: Who was the "mastermind" of it? Who was able to make such a plan and convince so many others that it would be a good plan while it was so obvious that it's naive? It doesn't really matter, but I really would like to know how that was possible and if nobody was there to say "are you out of your mind???".

And what I see as kind of scam is the attempt to get people into buying with all the hype-promises,

And another problem if we speak about the question if it's a scam or not: I can imagine that professionals who have to make a decision (add it to an exchange or not, add it to a platform or not - just for example) don't see it as legit. If I would be the CEO of an exchange or whatever I would ask myself: Why should I implement it? To make the team behind rich? I would see it as risk for my own credibility. And under the line that's also the problem when it comes to investing. There is no scenario that ppl buy it who really think about it because of multiple reasons.

Adapting from user acquisition speak, I'd consider them something closer to a "lead."  Whether neucoin ultimately "converts" them remains to be seen.  Maybe they are or maybe they aren't or maybe they will we don't know.  Every coin has a consumer education problem.  Neucoin will end up with a rather large freshman class.

Most companies use the same strategy when reporting numbers.  I've worked for several.  Even behemoths like Facebook and Twitter report a significant segment of "zombie" users as actual users.

Wow. I'm surprised to see these responses. Its seems this thread is more alive than I thought. It's also quite clear to me that there's a lot of disappointment and distrust with the way the project has been managed and with communication in particular. Another thing I'd like to mention is about their numbers of users. I don't believe the amount of user engagement entailed in Jango NeuCoin tipping or Solitaire playing is worthy of being counted as the creation of a new "user". It's more like 'liking' a song or simply 'playing' a game. It doesn't really mean the listener or the player cares about the NeuCoin token. Some of them might, but it's misleading to count all participants as "users".

Anyway, I still like their approach to introducing new people to the world of cryptocurrency and I'm happy to see this tread isn't dead. There's another forum too by the way. http://forum.neucoin.org/

The fundamentals of this pseudo-coin remain:
Lies, lies, lies, incompetence, single-server centralization, arrogance, disrespected deadlines, nonexistent distribution and nonexistent community.

And what I really despise the most: Daniel Kaufman the uber-scammer hiding behind sockpuppets instead of manning up.

This is a patchwork of wrong decisions at best, but more likely a purely greed-based failed scam.

Is this coin real? Is it on any exchanges??

I participated in a bunch of the surveys & never received any emails related to the neucoin I was supposed to receive

The innovation is exactly the stuff you don't like, which means you overlook it as innovation. Nothing wrong with that, its a personal choice. You have to realize you are being highly altruistic in your requirements. Again, nothing wrong with, that but it lacks a little bit of pragmatism. What you are asking is very unlikely to occur without some monetary motivation (aka greed)

Ultimately the "decentralization" concern comes down to the PoS vs PoW argument. NEU will be centralized for a time. Neucoin is decentralizing its currency by paying them out to consumers as rewards. It is going to take a while but in reality is not any more BS than an average PoW model. (eth has an amazing PoW model, but I digress) There is a hidden PoW model in the neucoin approach. Instead of buying an expensive graphics card or ASIC and burning electricity to solve arbitrary problems, people frequent websites or create content.  Its human-based PoW. They then have the option to grow their coins by staking or using a growth account that functions just like a common CD.

Which of the two approaches do you think is the most inclusive of average consumers?

They've taken steps to address some of the major concerns raised here.  Decentralization will be accelerated and the number of coins will be greatly reduced. This coin is so young. Will you not have a different opinion many years from now when the coins have been distributed and are no longer centralized? It may not start trading well until that point, but I'd rather be staking a few coins in the meantime.

You are applying "house rules" to a coin that isn't playing by them. I find this thread myopic.

120K registered users or unique users checking in per month? There is a big difference. Poloniex doesn't compare to something with volume like Jango.com. NEU growth is linked to Jango.com usage and growth.  Do you have access to comscore? Compare Jango and Poloniex. You don't get fully accurate numbers but it is good for comparing the size of two sites. (Jango.com gets 10-20x as many unique visitors without counting mobile apps.)

NeuCoin will most likely prosper to some extent if only due to the "raising tide" effect as the Altcoin market gets more and more attention. I don't necessarily agree with those who claim it was a scam from the beginning. I think it was started with good intentions by some team members and hidden agendas for others. Only time will tell who is right and who is wrong.

As a basic idea, I agree. If we, just as a theory, use a time-machine in the past and think about a project like Neucoin, it really could be interesting:

Easy to use for everybody, easy to "adopt", something like a "fun-way" to learn about and to get in touch with Crypto, micro-tipping, communication and education to involve unexperienced user, transparency, and so on.

It's nothing I would call very special or innovative but I wouldn't ever criticize a project with such a focus if it's done right. What would be needed for that? A stable base. The code and the economical-design must be stable, it needs a skilled and hardworking team and a lot of communication. And it would need decentralization! A project like that would only have the chance to reach real value as a community-project, with very low barriers to participate for everybody and also other Developers. It would not and should not be about greed, not all about the price. The price should reflect adoption, but shouldn't be the focus. It would be more an "education-fun-project". In fact there already is/was this kind of project: Doge. And just by the way: Neucoin wanted to repeat the success of Doge regarding adoption but with the intention to make big money out of it. The intention behind the squirrel is to establish a branding, something that is appealing in a simple way... it's the attempt to use simple advertising-mechanism. Nothing wrong with that, but if there is not more than some advertising-methods, there is still nothing.

And the problem is: Neucoin is bad for Crypto. Because for those who are really new to Crypto, Neucoin is a bad experience. Not just because of the money. It's simply not what they claimed it would be. It's not open and decentralized and fun and communication and education. It's a dictatorship, the team shows nothing but ignorance and arrogance and incompetence. And why? Because they acted out of greed! That was the focus since day one.

It's visible everywhere. Especially the economical-design is obvious. I mean, it's not just obvious, it's ridiculous. It is as if greed has lowered the IQ of those who are responsible for that. And it's a simple fact that greed makes people stupid. They develop stupid ideas blinded by greed. And some buy stupid projects blinded by stupid promises which are totally in contrast to the facts. It's not meant as critique to those who invested because some were just unexperienced but it's kind of stupid to feel married to a project that's not just totally flawed by design but also without any respect for those who gave there money.

And greed is also the reason for the lack of communication because it's too easy to reveal. It's easy to ask questions in a way that both, the answer or the silence, would be revealing. So they have to avoid communication and they have control communication. And both is obvious: They avoid communication in this thread because they can't control it. They control communication (and also avoid it) on their own forum. And isn't it paradox that they are not even able to make a better forum? I mean, a lot of little shitcoins have at least good communication-platforms. But they don't care about that because they don't like communication! It's kind of a psychological problem, because if I have something to hide I fear questions and if I fear questions I fear communications. That's why the communication is always "one-way". They say what they have to say but they don't discuss things. It's not that it would be too much work. They just can't do that because open discussions are a risk.

But, they are not even really aware about all those dynamics. They believed to be super-smart while they were blinded by greed.

That's the big red line and it's still visible. I mean, all the talking about Jango... Jango was only possible because of relationships. The same guy behind Neucoin is behind Jango. So what. It's just another advertising-attempt and not a sign of progress. And there is no natural way to grow because the design is totally flawed. Now they destroy coins which seems to make sense for the exchanges but a professional who thinks about adding Neucoin to his platform (if there would be anybody) will rethink that. The same with the switch to full PoS. It raises some questions but at the same time it also gives answers. It's all about the price and they still want to sell a product they make out of nothing because they hold nearly all of it, but without quality or a real philosophy behind.

My advice to those who invested in this is simple: Don't feel married to a project if the team behind doesn't show at least a little respect for your concerns. If I read in the official forum it's obvious for me that people have questions but also fear to ask those questions and to be critical. And it's understandable... they don't want to damage anything. But ask yourself if that atmosphere is in line with all the claims what Neucoin should stand for.

In fairness, I actually like their marketing strategy though. I'm a frequent Jango user (where I first heard about it, despite spending lots of time on crypto for the last few years) and just tried their Solitaire Racer Facebook game. It's things like that where the average person who knows nothing about crypto but has maybe heard of Bitcoin will start to connect the dots in their head and realize that Bitcoin might be useful for something.

They're making it extremely easy to use. "Do you like this song? Press this button to tip them with crypto." It doesn't get any simpler. "Do you like this game? Play more and earn this NeuCoin thingy" Suddenly people who had no interest in Bitcoin will see it as their way of cashing out their new found crypto token. As Bitcoin gains legitimacy it gets even easier to make the connection between loyalty token (NeuCoin) and real world goods and that's how value gets created.

The news of the huge coin burn brought me here but, for me, the biggest tell-tale sign of a crypto's health is the community in its forums and this coin seems pretty stagnant in that department. And seriously, nobody should believe their claims about their user numbers. All signs point to false.

Eth really a buzz eh

I thought that they would do that ("burning coins") but it won't help because it doesn't show anything else than desperation and under the line it's a nice admission that they were wrong while we here were right from the beginning.


There are some points that should be considered:

1.

If we calculate just what's on the market it's this:
212,956,147

Marketcap: about 880k Dollar

And that's still too much in my eyes for a project with that many flaws, without any transparency or just communication, and without any innovation. But the thing is: Even if they destroy 70% of their holdings there are still billions in the background and there is still a too high inflation-rate.


2.

They say: "Three months after launch of its first consumer apps, NeuCoin has reached over 275,000 users and is growing at over 8,000 users a day, on track to acquire 2 million users by year-end 2016."

And sorry, but I absolutely don't believe that this is more than a blatant lie.

Think about this: The Poloniex-Exchange has about 120,000 Users (they don't show it anymore but it was about 100k by end of the last year). And the Neucoin-Team wants everybody to believe they have 275,000 and that they grow with 8000 Users a day? That would be another 240,000 per month!  

Everybody who thinks about that must come to the conclusion that this is a ridiculous lie. Poloniex has a 60,000 BTC-volume today in 24 hours, with their 120k Users and multiple projects on the exchange, mainly it's about Ethereum. Neucoin usually has a volume of not more than 1 BTC per day (today it's more because of the announcement, but not sure how much is real and how much is fake).

Or the forum: Every day 8000 new User but it's all the Superman-guy who tries his best to get ppl excited. Or here in this thread... no new users who would like to know what this is about? I mean, there should be at least 100 users of 8000 everyday who make an account on Bittrex or the official forum or here to speak about it, if they are so excited about Neucoin, right?



So, what is this (still) about? It's greed like it always was. Just 78 BTC left: https://blockchain.info/address/3MrNuksZ1VePU3dGiSQFiouWerJUJgDkfH

All what they want is to give incentives for buy-support and they still give a shit about their investors. They focus on the "value" of their own supply.


And a big problem won't ever change: There is too much proof for a totally lack of professionalism and integrity and transparency and innovation. I mean, every professional who would think 5 minutes about implementing Neucoin wherever, won't see the "coin-destruction" as "wow, great decision!". It will be seen as what it is: An admission that this project was doomed since day one because of greed. And it still shows nothing else but greed what they do now. And nobody with some experience and an IQ above room-temperature will believe in their 8000-new-user-per-day-claim. Count those who are active in the forum... maybe ten. Buy-support on Bittrex: 6.7 BTC.

So, I would be carefully with buying because of their newest idea to destroy coins. ;-)

BS

(I see what your thinking but.. founders 200m neucoin was conditional on voting being implemented. Will voting still be implemented? )

I actually had to buy a few after this email hit me, maybe this coin is not a flash in the pan. 
 

NeuCoin to eliminate 50% of coin supply and
complete consumer distribution within three years

Three months after launch of its first consumer apps, NeuCoin has reached over 275,000 users and is growing at over 8,000 users a day, on track to acquire 2 million users by year-end 2016.

The NeuCoin foundations have determined that mass user adoption can be reached faster and with fewer tokens distributed than expected; therefore, to maximize NeuCoin’s value, the foundations’ holdings will be cut from 3.2B to 1B in the next several weeks by destroying 2.2B coins, decreasing the entire coin supply by 50%. A revised mining participation forecast puts expected total supply in 10 years at 10B rather than 100B as previously projected.

NeuCoin’s founding principle was distribution of the cryptocurrency to all participants in proportion to the value and utility they add. Over the past year, the NeuCoin foundations have distributed tokens in numerous ways:

Surveys, questionnaires, feedback programs and referral bonuses
 
Sale-restricted NeuCoins to the founding team, angel investors, service providers and strategic partners
 
A presale to the crypto-community in exchange for Bitcoin
 
Proof-of-stake and proof-of-work mining rewards
 
The GetNeuCoin tutorial-game and Growth Accounts at MyNeuCoin
 
The NeuCoin-integrated Facebook game Solitaire Racer
 
A tipping and user reward program with Jango, a free music site with 7M monthly users
This wide-ranging experience in distributing a cryptocurrency has taught NeuCoin valuable lessons:

Consumer fraud is a massive challenge! To combat fraud, user rewards must be small and even then require significant amounts of time to earn.

The clearest path to mass adoption is to partner with successful online services who would like to reward their users with NeuCoins for utilizing their service - like a loyalty point program. NeuCoin has implemented this type of program with Jango and is currently optimizing it in preparation for rolling it out with other large partners.

Important crypto ecosystem partners such as exchanges, payment processors, crypto-gambling services, etc. need to see a large NeuCoin user base, but don’t need to be given large NeuCoin bounties themselves.

In addition, over the past six months, members of the crypto community have raised two main critiques of NeuCoin’s design that the NeuCoin team and foundations consider valid:

Overall coin supply and future growth are too high 

Foundations own too much of the total coin supply for too long

Given all of the above, the NeuCoin foundations recently made several strategic decisions that are intended to increase the value of the cryptocurrency as well as accelerate its effective decentralization:

First and foremost, given the learnings that fewer coins need to be distributed per person to consumers, and that ecosystem partners do not require large rewards, the foundations will destroy 70% of their NeuCoin holdings over the next few weeks. This cuts the current total coin supply by roughly 50% to 2B and cuts the projected coin supply in 10 years to 10B (due to much lower projected proof-of-stake mining participation by consumers relative to the foundation’s 100% mining rate).

Second, user acquisition will be accelerated. Given the smaller number of foundation coins and the efficiency of NeuCoin’s simplified partner distribution program, the foundation will aim to distribute its holdings to consumers in 3 years rather than 10.

Third, given the sharpened focus on distributing foundation holdings almost entirely to consumers, the decision was made to merge the three NeuCoin foundations into one  - the NeuCoin Growth Foundation.

Lastly, in order to offset their increased percentage ownership of the total coin supply, the NeuCoin founders will forfeit the 200M NeuCoins they were to receive during the second and third year after launch, and all restricted coins held by NeuCoin founders, team, angel and seed investors will have their sales restrictions lengthened from 5 to 10 years.


 

"When the FUDing HARD QUESTIONS (fixed that for you) gets to the level it's at here you can't expect the coin devs to stick around." 
ya we see that with every scamcoin, happens everytime, everytime, they blame the community's questions and run lol