If bounty hunters are the cause of this business failure, I think it's wrong. This means the solution of a project so that it can succeed they do not hold a Bounty campaign. I suppose this makes no sense with the gift of this campaign is a way to promote a project. While no bounty hunters do not guarantee that the project can succeed, many projects have failed.
I think the project is very weak and not serious about developing the project, this is what causes the project to fail.
Topic: Bounty hunters killed ICO? - page 3. (Read 7058 times)
Bounty hunters are helping ICOs, IEOs and STOs to get enough attention to the upcoming tokensale. Thanks to bounty participants they have good stat on social media sites and they have alive community. 
Bounty hunters has nothing to do with decline of ICOs startups, The main reason why there are no more people interested in investing on ICOs is due to the rampant scam most projects are turning out to be.
I strongly disagree with what was said by @OP
Because what kills ICO is not BH, it is caused by investors (if they get a big bonus when investing) or also the Project that discards their tokens or even fraudulent projects that do ICO. that is what causes ICO to collapse and make people no longer believe. things like this don't need to blame each other anymore. Because there are no benefits that get when we blame each other.
Because what kills ICO is not BH, it is caused by investors (if they get a big bonus when investing) or also the Project that discards their tokens or even fraudulent projects that do ICO. that is what causes ICO to collapse and make people no longer believe. things like this don't need to blame each other anymore. Because there are no benefits that get when we blame each other.
Bounty hunters are not killers of ICO rather they are building blocks of an ICO. Bounty hunters sometimes promote the project even when ICO has ended just to appreciate price. As may people here have mentioned that funds allocated to bounty hunters is 5% or 10% or its nearby figure and many of bounty hunters hold their tokens for a long time so its basically not bounty hunters who are responsible for price dump of any token. I think its market manipulation by some big giants who buy tokens at lower price and sell it at small margin. Once price starts falling they keep on buying and selling tokens with a small profit.
No they are the people would take the least blame for it.When bounty unlock, also advisor and team tokens are unlock too. A bounty hunter has approx 20$ worth of coin, an advisor has 200k $. Which would kill the market? The bounty hunter make the market sustain for the project and they are the backbone for the project and they are the investors also.
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?
Bounty hunters didn't kill ICO., this is the saddest thing for the bounty hunters, they are always every time the market price is getting down even they have no reasonable basis for it. Though I cannot deny most of the bounty participants now are after IEO program, only few of the ico now are good that can be consider.
Projects dying off is mostly cause by lack of project development strategies and certan lies from most developers about amounts raised during ICO sales and i think that was one of the reasons for the erection of IEO Yet tjis purposes are also defeated
How about we considering the fraction of tokens given to the bounty hunters, 0.5% to 1% of total tokens or sales
This bounty hunters in turn as claim sells of thir tokens, why wont the projects buy back?
This bounty hunters in turn as claim sells of thir tokens, why wont the projects buy back?
I don’t think that this is so, in my opinion this is some kind of stupid question, how could they destroy ICO, on the contrary, they were engaged in its promotion, and they received a very small share of the total issue of tissues.
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?
I think not. If you compare bounty allocation with total raised fund, It cannot affect token prices. Team and private investors are the ones who hold the most tokens, and they are the cause of the dump. So stop blame hunters for that.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?
This notion for me is misconception which many believe. Recently, i carried out a survey on some recent projects while their prices dipped right from start, i was able to discover that the dip happened even before bounty hunters are rewarded! What do we say to this?
i agree with you. everyone blames the bounty hunter, but i think that's very impossible because if we look at the allocation for bounty hunters it doesn't support killing ICO. but i think we should stop blaming each other.developers should work harder and make more interesting offers or ideas so investors are interested in buying ICO tokens.
The idea or concept behind most of them were not adding any value to the ecosystem, most of them were useless or just copy/paste of other already successful crypto and that's why most of ICOs failed. Also some of them failed only because they were being promoted by the scammers.
This notion for me is misconception which many believe. Recently, i carried out a survey on some recent projects while their prices dipped right from start, i was able to discover that the dip happened even before bounty hunters are rewarded! What do we say to this?
Bounty participants of the company have very little influence on the price of the token after the ICO. Not only that, they very rarely receive more than 1% of all tokens, but also very often they can delay the distribution of awards for six months. So I don't think the hunters had much of an impact on that.
I think it is because the ICO gives investors a bonus when they first invest and latter the investors dump the coin, and this ends up in dropping of ICO. Also, another reason for dumping is because many ICOs are intended to be scams and therefore, people lose their trust and stop investing, and this leads to their downfall.
I know of some coins, like Zeew for instance, never distributed bounty tokens but its on the verge of dying and almost dead. Good projects can never be affected on the market by small bounty allocations
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?
Basically dumping the project developers themselves. Fees are often fictitious and tokens are in the hands of the team, and after listing merge traders. 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?
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?
I should say it's a false because the percentage rewards distributed to the bounty hunters are very small most likely two percent is the maximum rate for all the total for bounty participants. Weak hands, fear, and impatient are the cause of failure, some contributor want to become rich in a single night. 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?
But what about the fact that the ico market of the company almost brought ethereum into a painful state? After all, it is because of the garbage that the Ethereum blockchain is full. The problem with ico companies is not that Bounty Hunters sell their coins immediately after listing, but that these products do not have real prospects because of a poor plan of action and its implementation, but first of all, the team is not so professional as to do everything so that their project develops fully and without problems.
Jump to: