Topic: [ANN][BCC] Bitconnect Coin - Decentralized Cryptocurrency - page 342. (Read 384600 times)

Exactly, but an escrow is also a warranty of trust, it can help to bring in more investors because of the escrow's fame, but in this case, Electroniccash can't understand is that BCC have aleready hitted the minimum, and they aleready have the reputation, just have a closer look, they tried to use Bittrex but apparently they failed because of Bittrex, and it is totaly understandable as bittrex charges a lot, like 10% plus 5BTC and more on, iti s not reliable. It is less money for the project, and it wouldn't be fair for the other investors, who haven't asked for an escrow. So the escrow is not mandatory, and some of them don't hesitate to pump from the company's ressources, i better like the BCC team to use the budget for Bittrex as a buy-back in case of a dump to secure the currency price.

Is this guy talking about every coin here or just acting a noob or a fortune teller,all his post are nonsense,he deviate from subjects to prove his point making it a general topic you should post it altcoin section for disscussion.

Escrow is not the issue if they have supported for a community for long time. The current issue is the bitcoin fund address, I also doubt 1400 btc raised is a bluff or hype, until OP shows the fund proof

they should have post it on the first page to make it legit. those devs can always deny everything. they may even deny they created this thread.   swear to god they can.

edward their signature campaign escrow doesn't have even have the light green trust. master p did it, so are those with green trust. their accounts doesn't matter to them, they can always buy another. so long as those accounts aren't connected to their real world account, they can still turn nuts still.

prove me wrong but if for instance they get this coin listed on exchange, they'd be gone FOREVER and bcc is all yours without a value.

 Wallet is existing,coins is existing,roadmap is existing,pools are existing investors get what they paid for immediately so why held an escrow,escrow are for those works that are not yet created .

You need an escrow if you will launch the wallet and the coins because nothing yet in existing..

You are locked in the escrow part, think about it.

You have a project, you got a community, you asked them to invest, they did it, and then you thought "Hey, why don't i do the same in bitcointalk ?". Now, thinking that most of  the people on your platform invested without an escrow you decide the do it again.
It is as easy as that, why should someone use an escrow when he aleready collected a lot of BTC without it ? it doesn't sounds logical to me.
Now, you can go to the signature section and check for edwardard's address, and try to follow them upward, you will find a lot of addresses with huge amounts of BTC, don't go too far away, because i suppose it is coin mixer then, or exchange because the sums are too high.

You shouldn't tell to people that they are ignorants, it is unfair, even if we don't share the same point of view, we are members of the signature campaign, we have to answer to questions and accusations of everyone here, because before participating to the campaign we check and verified the project ( i guess you did, as i did), so we must always answer in a pragmatic way. We are more in a "HelpDesk" like answer type, this is why we quote people's questions and try to answer as good as we can.
But, effectively, the identity is not that important, it is more about the project itself, its business plan, the roadmap, the reliability ... you are right Robelneo, any investment can be droped, crashes happens in stock markets even when you know everyone's identity (ftse, cac40, wallstreet ... ) with justified and approved actions, but, one should make the difference between a scam, and a project with breaches.
As a developer i saw that the platform is really functionnal and that a lot of work have been pulled there, so the developer team believes in the project, and they coded it well. while i believe there are two kinde of scams, the first one (1st degree) is the kinde of developer who uses templates without providing any work, who's only goal is to run with ICO funds. And the second (2nd degree), is where the dev imagine a project, an idea, they provide no business plan, they don't know how to realise the project, and they don't care about, they offer an approximative ICO, this project is at 99% sure to fail, as they will start investments straight after the ICO, even the roadmap is approximative, as they will need so much time to release the project that the coin will be completly dumped, at the end, they find them selves with a huge lack of funds, of developers, of everything, while the head is still believing in his project.
That's why everyone shall first read, understand, and assimilate a project ( as i did) before engagin, investing, participating. This is why i try to answer to everyone, using my knowledge.

Just think about it.

they were doing ICO so they know for sure they need the escrow for it. who in the right mind right now would do ICO without escrow. we all know these guys aren't newbies here in bitcointalk. they do have high rank account here, in fact they can give me a red trust for asking how this ICO come to realization without escrow but then of course they won't be doing it because they'd be busted.

I think you are putting words to the dev's mouth,you are not even an investors here or a member of their dashboard,that's make you an ignorant on Bitconnectcoin because all you are posting are generics,

Everything in this forum including Bitcoin are investment,there's no such thing as safe investment,stakes and shares sometimes falls,bitcoin sometimes drops ,it's about being confident in your investment and trusting what you see and analyze it according to your past experience ..

Only invest what you can afford to lose,it is taught by gurus and your mentor,even Bitconnectcoin is not  safe investment,let us see first how they deliver the goods,even Nakamoto did not reveal himself but he deliver the goods..

without that link going to the address with such amount of btc, its still a scam. BITCONNET COIN IS a SCAM
if this claims doesn't make these dev come here to respond to it, i guess they are now hiding and all you can do is hold your bcc on your own.

"keep it for life, its all yours" - that's your dev talking.

Your laziness is chocking me.
Read more before posting please, blockchain is live, project is prefunded, roadmap in the website, everything in OP post or both websites.

U are gullible to shits. Whats good in it? No chain, no funding, no roadmap, absolutely nothing to offer. U are a carpenter with low income, and I suspect that u was paid in advance for hyping and praising trashy dust.

That is nice project. a big amount of bitcoin was collected from ICO launching. I will buy some Bitconnect coins when it is available on the exchanges.
I hope this coin will have a good plans in the future.

So following all the accusations in the page i decided to do a small investigation on BCC.
I helped them to solve a small bug in a web page, after that, they offered a donation, so i followed the donation address back in blockchain.info, i went up to annother address with 300 BTC, i even confirmed that it is the same address who sends to the escrow, there are a lot of movements in the address, however, i had to fetch in order to find this address because it seems they are using coin mixers, as there are a lot of addresses to check before finding the 300 one.
But i really do believe they have the 1200 btc, the ico ends in 12 hours, so we will have more informations on it later today.
When they had the 1000 btc this thread was not active at all, there was only 4 pages of discussion, so i don't think that BCC was looking for bitcointalk's investors, they are just telling us what they are doing, the ICO was aleready running, and he runned for a long time, so they aleready have investors, internal investors, plus i don't think that Edwardar haven't checked if it is a scam or not, because he is playing his reputation here too as he is the campaign manager for signatures.
This thread's stars are Robelneo and Electroniccash, as they draw a lot of people to the discussion.
However i still believe it is not a scam, regarding all the addresses and amounts passing by, even if i don't have the proof that x or y address belongs to them. And i think that they aleready started to use the ico funds, and this is why the ico is internal. I can also tell you that the platform is worth around 100 BTC because it is as good as an exchange, so, mainly, bitcointalk is just a marketing way for them.
And i strongly believe that if people are complaining about this coin is due to bittrex, when they refused to hold the ICO (if i remember).
Again, Bittrex is not a trust granter, look at the flash ico, completly failed, but no one is accusing them of scam. Their ICO is still running while it was planned to be ended the 7th january 2017, you can still buy, so it looks they extended but no one announced it.
So please, let's whait and see what will happen next. Remember that most of the actual ICOs are failing (flash, icobid ...), except BCC, simply because they convinced their community to invest.

If 100 people invested here,100 new bitcoin address should be shown,because each user has their own unique address to deposit,but of course we can always ask for wallet account,but deposit and withdraw are ongoing,this could be the reason why dev cannot provide the funds on blockchain.

anyone trying to buy just seems like bullshit,

they use new account to asking people who sell it, am i wrong?

Correct, we need to focus on the project itself, not only the other things. If the BCC project is around here for more than 9 months. I think they should be OK. Let us see the result

Bitconnect must have seven lives to be able to raise over 1000BTC, but my concern is that there is no way to verify these funds on blockchain also the questions raised have not been attended to yet

Check the PM I wrote to you