Not at all. If you count that one 10% of the ICO's who failed because they distributed too many tokens to hunters , yes but the rest of them failed because investors are refusing nowadays to invest in any type of project. Also the management of the ICO's is so poor , I mean someone put their C.V. in ratings websites and they pick them without testing their knowledge for blockchain and cryptos...
So are you saying that ICO failed because there were too many allocations for the bounty? but in my opinion no, it's because there are too many bonuses to investors so other investors don't want to invest, other than that their products that are too excessive can make ico fail 
Topic: Bounty hunters killed ICO? - page 18. (Read 7058 times)
You cannot blame bounty hunters for the failure of ICOs or a project because, they are not responsible for the bad market conditions and also the projects themselves give ridiculous bonuses at ICOs.
Not at all. If you count that one 10% of the ICO's who failed because they distributed too many tokens to hunters , yes but the rest of them failed because investors are refusing nowadays to invest in any type of project. Also the management of the ICO's is so poor , I mean someone put their C.V. in ratings websites and they pick them without testing their knowledge for blockchain and cryptos...
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?
ICO killed the greed of its developers, as projects in 2017 did for everything, but in fact did not plan to implement them. But then they beautifully said that it was all because of the bounty hunters who helped promote the project by attracting new investors. Instead of continuing to develop projects, they declared themselves bankrupt and closed projects, not one investor received the money back.
You cannot simply blame bounty hunterd for dumping, i do agree it is a factor but there are other factors also like loss of interest or faith from investors, slow or weak market situation, cheap tokens sold during private or presale, such investors can sell below ico price but still make huge profit similarly low volume exchange and low liquidity is also a factor for price crash.
Does ICO really is dead? I don't think so, this IEO is just for hype and still they have the same goal to begin with, to collect funds. Though IEO is much safer as some thoughts there are still that unsuccessful to it.
A story that doesn't say its true colour, any project can decide not to give bounty anything but nomproject has dome so and the team has a very optimistic power to select the percentage for the hunters which I see as just 1-2% of the token and you telling me that killed project or what ?
Get your findings well before you make a post , well I can se you are newbie and may not know much on how things runs on an new project.
Get your findings well before you make a post , well I can se you are newbie and may not know much on how things runs on an new project.
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?
That would be an absurd reasoning. The coins distributed to the bounty hunters would be equal or less than 5% of total tokens sold. Generally 1 or 2%. This too excludes the distributed coins for advisers and team members. This holding of 2.5 to 0.5% won't have any huge impact on the price or for a project to be a success or failure.
or it could be the other way around. there is no law that says team can't trade their own coin. teams has all the right to sell their own tokens, no one can stop them from dumping their own holding which probably more than 10% of the total circulation. we all know how it could end up when all this takes place, all those who holds the token will panic and dumps.
I don't think bounty hunters kill ICO, it's just that many projects are successful in sales but fail in development. Initially investors who want to get profits actually get losses.
The exact allocation for each project is different and the least is the allocation for the bounty.
For the price of the token down dramatically, certainly not the bounty hunter to blame. Because the allocation is small, how to reduce the price of the token.
2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
The exact allocation for each project is different and the least is the allocation for the bounty.
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
For the price of the token down dramatically, certainly not the bounty hunter to blame. Because the allocation is small, how to reduce the price of the token.
your argument is true, but bounty hunters didn't kill ICO.
let's see how much allocation for bounty, usually its not above 10% of total token issued, so this is not the problem.
driving price of coin is hard, sometimes investor dump their token after ICO at market price and make a coin price down. if only token from bounty hunters, pumping will be easy. thats my opinion
let's see how much allocation for bounty, usually its not above 10% of total token issued, so this is not the problem.
driving price of coin is hard, sometimes investor dump their token after ICO at market price and make a coin price down. if only token from bounty hunters, pumping will be easy. thats my opinion
Most allocations for bounties are below 5%.
And the reason why many investors throw away their tokens is because they get a big bonus when buying (investing). This should be thought by the project, why investors often throw away.
And another thing that kills ICO is because many ICOs are scams. What makes investors no longer trust ICO, that's why
ICO dies slowly.
your argument is true, but bounty hunters didn't kill ICO.
let's see how much allocation for bounty, usually its not above 10% of total token issued, so this is not the problem.
driving price of coin is hard, sometimes investor dump their token after ICO at market price and make a coin price down. if only token from bounty hunters, pumping will be easy. thats my opinion
let's see how much allocation for bounty, usually its not above 10% of total token issued, so this is not the problem.
driving price of coin is hard, sometimes investor dump their token after ICO at market price and make a coin price down. if only token from bounty hunters, pumping will be easy. thats my opinion
Yes, some ICOs made such mistake where they have distributed tokens to bounty hunters at a very early stage which eventually directed them to a massive failure. However, ICO owners learned from such mistakes pretty soon and adopted an approach to distribute at a later stage. So bounty hunters are not the sole reason for the failure of an ICO project.
Rather, the main reason of failure is the lack of business expertise. Majoriy of the successful ICO failed at sustaining their business because of the lack of expertise! It has no relation with bounty hunters.
If I ask you to give example of some ICOs with a very successful post-ICO business implementation, can you show me at least 5??
Rather, the main reason of failure is the lack of business expertise. Majoriy of the successful ICO failed at sustaining their business because of the lack of expertise! It has no relation with bounty hunters.
If I ask you to give example of some ICOs with a very successful post-ICO business implementation, can you show me at least 5??
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?
Jump to: