Topic: Bounty hunters killed ICO? (Read 7058 times)
I think know this is completely false, most times the tokens dumped on an exchange when bounty hunters rec I've their token even exceeds the amount of tokens allocated to the bounty campaign, sometimes the team members use the bounty hunters to disguise their dumping because it is always more convenient to blame bounty hunters who majority of them receive $10 or less for their services.
In my opinion not a bounty hunter who killed ico, but the developer of ico who killed ico itself, now are many fact is that ico is indeed a fraud that makes investors start to fear investing in ico, we can see before the rise of ico fraud in early 2018, many of the ico projects are developing quite rapidly even their tokens are rising high when their tokens are being listed in the market, and this certainly proves when the project developers were developing their projects correctly.
At the last past years ico is not good also based on their rules because of them they are also killed for their project if the reward is bitcoin or eth it is good but based on tokens they are giving is not good also.
From your question alone is wrong, and of course the reasons you give are also wrong. Your question is: Bounty hunters killed ICO?
What's the deal with the ICO dying with prize hunters? Of course ICOs die because ICO developers often commit fraud, they don't manage ICO properly, so investors are no longer interested in ICOs.
What's the deal with the ICO dying with prize hunters? Of course ICOs die because ICO developers often commit fraud, they don't manage ICO properly, so investors are no longer interested in ICOs.
True, you say the ICO died not because of the prize hunters, but the team that often carried off investors' funds was rife. 2018 many teams were unprofessional, even investors were willing to invest again in ICO, bounty hunters were also not the cause of falling prices because developers were not serious in handling projects.
Exactly, bounty hunters will not have any control on their funds raised by the company and their developments. The company itself allocates some percentages to the bounty hunters, which most of the bounty hunters will hold the coins because they believe the company, but at last, the company will scam the investors without any developments.
I don't think bounty hunters killed the ICO since they are the one also promoting the project and less reward thry are getting than the investors. And the only problem is when a bounty hunters created a lot of dummy account and that's the statt of a major dump if the prpject manager cannot control it.
But when an ico required KYC then that's the time only less people will join even the bounty hunters since they don't want to provide their informatiin and only stay anonymous.
But when an ico required KYC then that's the time only less people will join even the bounty hunters since they don't want to provide their informatiin and only stay anonymous.
Getting something without paying for it always allows you to sell with zero loss. The sooner you sell, the higher your profit, cause money today worth more than money tomorrow.It's just a point of view.
That may be true, but we must realize that the majority of token holders are teams and investors are not bounty hunters. Bounty Hunter only holds 1-2% of the total allocation. The amount will be divided equally among all participants according to the work done. So if the bounty hunter is used as the reason why ICO is dead, in my opinion it is the wrong thing. Selling quickly after distribution is a natural thing to get high prices, but there are still plenty of hired hunters who will hold token for a long time. 1) a project collected funds,
2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
4) Investors bought token on ICO see this crap and less people invest in ICOs.
True or False?
false!! Do you think a small amount of bounty will drive the price of a token to dropped? I dont think so, investors and the tokens of team should be the reason why a project dies. 2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
4) Investors bought token on ICO see this crap and less people invest in ICOs.
True or False?
The answer is false.
Bounty hunters reserve from the total supply is usually 2% to 5% which by value is just an integral part of the funds.
Ico reserves is usually 40% - 65% which is big enough to crash any business.
You can understand who killed ICO from the analysis above.
Exactly.Bounty hunters reserve from the total supply is usually 2% to 5% which by value is just an integral part of the funds.
Ico reserves is usually 40% - 65% which is big enough to crash any business.
You can understand who killed ICO from the analysis above.
Even those 2 - 3% of users won't dump all of their tokens at once. Team is responsible for all this. As they hold most of tokens in various names like marketing, project development, system reserve etc.
The problem is that they do not want to lose money from the raised fund because they are greedy and they want it all for them.
Getting something without paying for it always allows you to sell with zero loss. The sooner you sell, the higher your profit, cause money today worth more than money tomorrow.It's just a point of view.
You can't blame the bounty hunters. For the token to go down because of bounty hunters there will need to be multiple times more hunters tokens then investors tokens.
If they sell 100k tokens how many do you think hunters have? Even if they have 100k as well that is 50% loss and I guess you are talking about tokens that completely tank?
If they sell 100k tokens how many do you think hunters have? Even if they have 100k as well that is 50% loss and I guess you are talking about tokens that completely tank?
The answer is false.
Bounty hunters reserve from the total supply is usually 2% to 5% which by value is just an integral part of the funds.
Ico reserves is usually 40% - 65% which is big enough to crash any business.
You can understand who killed ICO from the analysis above.
Exactly.Bounty hunters reserve from the total supply is usually 2% to 5% which by value is just an integral part of the funds.
Ico reserves is usually 40% - 65% which is big enough to crash any business.
You can understand who killed ICO from the analysis above.
Even those 2 - 3% of users won't dump all of their tokens at once. Team is responsible for all this. As they hold most of tokens in various names like marketing, project development, system reserve etc.
owner of the ico is the main root of thier failures but investors and bounty hunters are the secondary reasons on why they fail more evenly .
i know good ico's on the past but no matter how good they are there are still times that their coin goes down . who do you think are responsible for that ?
price is based on demand and owners cant just manipulate thier own creation . they need investors and bounty hunters to drive demand but both can also drive the price sideways
I don't see how bounty hunters can be reason why project fail. Project do crowdfunding, they collect money and reach soft cap or hard cap and they have enough money to accomplish their goal. Bounty hunters can shake market at early days, later it depends on developers. If they succeed, token price will go up because there will be new investors, but if they fail no one can say bounty hunters are one of reasons. i know good ico's on the past but no matter how good they are there are still times that their coin goes down . who do you think are responsible for that ?
price is based on demand and owners cant just manipulate thier own creation . they need investors and bounty hunters to drive demand but both can also drive the price sideways
From your question alone is wrong, and of course the reasons you give are also wrong. Your question is: Bounty hunters killed ICO?
What's the deal with the ICO dying with prize hunters? Of course ICOs die because ICO developers often commit fraud, they don't manage ICO properly, so investors are no longer interested in ICOs.
What's the deal with the ICO dying with prize hunters? Of course ICOs die because ICO developers often commit fraud, they don't manage ICO properly, so investors are no longer interested in ICOs.
True, you say the ICO died not because of the prize hunters, but the team that often carried off investors' funds was rife. 2018 many teams were unprofessional, even investors were willing to invest again in ICO, bounty hunters were also not the cause of falling prices because developers were not serious in handling projects.
owner of the ico is the main root of thier failures but investors and bounty hunters are the secondary reasons on why they fail more evenly .
i know good ico's on the past but no matter how good they are there are still times that their coin goes down . who do you think are responsible for that ?
price is based on demand and owners cant just manipulate thier own creation . they need investors and bounty hunters to drive demand but both can also drive the price sideways
From your question alone is wrong, and of course the reasons you give are also wrong. Your question is: Bounty hunters killed ICO?
What's the deal with the ICO dying with prize hunters? Of course ICOs die because ICO developers often commit fraud, they don't manage ICO properly, so investors are no longer interested in ICOs.
What's the deal with the ICO dying with prize hunters? Of course ICOs die because ICO developers often commit fraud, they don't manage ICO properly, so investors are no longer interested in ICOs.
True, you say the ICO died not because of the prize hunters, but the team that often carried off investors' funds was rife. 2018 many teams were unprofessional, even investors were willing to invest again in ICO, bounty hunters were also not the cause of falling prices because developers were not serious in handling projects.
1) a project collected funds,
2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
4) Investors bought token on ICO see this crap and less people invest in ICOs.
True or False?
From your question alone is wrong, and of course the reasons you give are also wrong. Your question is: Bounty hunters killed ICO?2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
4) Investors bought token on ICO see this crap and less people invest in ICOs.
True or False?
What's the deal with the ICO dying with prize hunters? Of course ICOs die because ICO developers often commit fraud, they don't manage ICO properly, so investors are no longer interested in ICOs.
True, you say the ICO died not because of the prize hunters, but the team that often carried off investors' funds was rife. 2018 many teams were unprofessional, even investors were willing to invest again in ICO, bounty hunters were also not the cause of falling prices because developers were not serious in handling projects.
1) a project collected funds,
2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
4) Investors bought token on ICO see this crap and less people invest in ICOs.
True or False?
From your question alone is wrong, and of course the reasons you give are also wrong. Your question is: Bounty hunters killed ICO?2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
4) Investors bought token on ICO see this crap and less people invest in ICOs.
True or False?
What's the deal with the ICO dying with prize hunters? Of course ICOs die because ICO developers often commit fraud, they don't manage ICO properly, so investors are no longer interested in ICOs.
1) a project collected funds,
2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
4) Investors bought token on ICO see this crap and less people invest in ICOs.
True or False?
2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
4) Investors bought token on ICO see this crap and less people invest in ICOs.
True or False?
The ICO collects funds so that they can carry out their great goals that you can often read on the whitepaper or Road map. But the opposite is true when the project is completed, which is sad. So many lost investors, the losers are still listed on the exchange, but it is not bounty hunters who destroy icons but scammers who use the ico to victimize and raise funds for investors.
The answer is false.
Bounty hunters reserve from the total supply is usually 2% to 5% which by value is just an integral part of the funds.
Ico reserves is usually 40% - 65% which is big enough to crash any business.
You can understand who killed ICO from the analysis above.
You mean it's investor fault? AFAIK all of investors only can invest max around 1 btc during ICO. Its mean each of investor only get small portion of Total supply of that token once it entered market. Do you think most of investor dump their token at same time asap it entered market? There is always a chance like that Bounty hunters reserve from the total supply is usually 2% to 5% which by value is just an integral part of the funds.
Ico reserves is usually 40% - 65% which is big enough to crash any business.
You can understand who killed ICO from the analysis above.
The answer is false.
Bounty hunters reserve from the total supply is usually 2% to 5% which by value is just an integral part of the funds.
Ico reserves is usually 40% - 65% which is big enough to crash any business.
You can understand who killed ICO from the analysis above.
Bounty hunters reserve from the total supply is usually 2% to 5% which by value is just an integral part of the funds.
Ico reserves is usually 40% - 65% which is big enough to crash any business.
You can understand who killed ICO from the analysis above.
1) a project collected funds,
2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
4) Investors bought token on ICO see this crap and less people invest in ICOs.
True or False?
2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
4) Investors bought token on ICO see this crap and less people invest in ICOs.
True or False?
don't blame the bounty hunter who killed the ICO ... because investors can also do it to make the coin price go down in the market ... many bountie hunters receive coins after a few months the coins have been listed on the market ... so don't blame the bountie hunters ... because the bounty hunters has made a lot of time just to promote altcoin which is ultimately worthless in the market after investors make the price drop dramatically ..
Jump to: