Topic: Bounty hunters killed ICO? - page 4. (Read 7058 times)
We are all entitled to our opinion as to the reason for the demise of ICO's. I personally believe that every group of individuals in the cryptocurrency space has a share in the blame and bounty hunters are the least to be considered.
somehow what you are saying is true but we can't deny the fact that bounty hunters really is a big help for any ico in able to achieve a certain selling cap. Hence it becomes a double edged sword because bounty hunters helps an ico to get many investors but bounty hunters also is the reason why the price of the token gets dumped.
Bounty hounters should not be said as an ico destroyer, because if the issue of price dump is a factor it should not be the main factor. because the rewards that the bounty hounters get are not comparable to investors. so the volume that affects the price of ico is not a bounty hunter.
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?
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?
Investors see only what that developers want to show them. After all, it is so convenient to blame the bounty hunters for the fall of the coin. And the reality can be much more prosaic - the team decided to make money)))
ICO depriving BOUNTY HUNTERS.
Some projects are scammed and not paying BH, if they get the success they suddenly change the budget.
If not changed, they will lock the tokens if not they will delay the payment.
Many cases like this happens with every new projects, most of the time they are holding and locking stakes they will do everything in their capabilities to keep the rewards on hold, bounty Hunters can affects literally if the projects is not that solid, if the developers is not aiming for more successful progress, it's not that much anyway if there's a proper plans after the bounty rewards got released. Some projects are scammed and not paying BH, if they get the success they suddenly change the budget.
If not changed, they will lock the tokens if not they will delay the payment.
In fact, the project teams made some problems and the bounty hunters just became the victims.
I don't know why some people just blame the bounty hunters for the deterioration of ICO reputation.
If it is about the dumping case, I think bounty hunters don't have the highest number of tokens. It is likely from the whales or the developers itself.
So, I disagree if they stated: "bounty hunters killed ICO".
I don't know why some people just blame the bounty hunters for the deterioration of ICO reputation.
If it is about the dumping case, I think bounty hunters don't have the highest number of tokens. It is likely from the whales or the developers itself.
So, I disagree if they stated: "bounty hunters killed ICO".
It's not true because bounty hunter just keep promoting a project bio but i know scam project killed ico now. Of the year two more the larger investor taking more scam project and loss their funds.
That's right, those scam projects killed the reputation of ICO and not bounty hunters. As we can see from the start, bounty hunters are just promoting the ICO without knowing if the project will succeed or not and they have nothing to do on how it will perform in the market. Then there's scam projects that ruined how people look on ICO that has been generalized as scam and this is the reason why investors sway away from investing in ICO which killed it
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??
It seems like you are contradicting yourself in your submission above by saying YES to the question post by the o.p. why the body of your submission say's NO to the question. Where exactly do you stand?
Back to the question, I don't believe the blame should be the bounty Hunters but the blame should be on the developers who are just out to dupe investment of there investment capital.
Will like reiterate that, hunters been paid.early does not.actually affect the ICO because mof these bounty campaigns will not pay huge portion of the tokens to hunters as we have seen in their token distributions. Most of the market got spoiled due to the fact that team usually dump in their tokens before hunters do.
ICO depriving BOUNTY HUNTERS.
Some projects are scammed and not paying BH, if they get the success they suddenly change the budget.
If not changed, they will lock the tokens if not they will delay the payment.
Some projects are scammed and not paying BH, if they get the success they suddenly change the budget.
If not changed, they will lock the tokens if not they will delay the payment.
They indeed have a big impact on the price after the listing, but only if the project fails to list on a mid to large sized exchange where the buy volume would quite easily eat up the bounty sellers. So the projects should be aware of this and its partially their fault if they are unable to provide larger volume exchanges after the listing.
Why do you think it's the bounty tokens that influence the price that much? Do you have any proof for that? I'd say it's most of the time early investors (private investors) who got huge bonuses that dump right after exchange listing.
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. Although Bounty hunters are increasing, bounty hunters do not deserve to be accused of being ICO killers. If you feel that the ICO was killed, there must be another reason and not because of BH. 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?
They indeed have a big impact on the price after the listing, but only if the project fails to list on a mid to large sized exchange where the buy volume would quite easily eat up the bounty sellers. So the projects should be aware of this and its partially their fault if they are unable to provide larger volume exchanges after the listing.
Bounty hunters are least involved in the current decline in ICO projects. The only thing bounty hunters are often accused of is lowering the price of new tokens when they appear on the exchange due to their massive sale. This charge is untrue for many reasons. Early investors have more chances and opportunities to collapse the price of new tokens, but for some reason they are not blamed for this.
A very large level of fraud among these projects, as well as the general condition of the cryptocurrency market, led to the current state of the ICO to a greater extent. In addition, I would not say that the ICO has died. Projects have become much smaller, but the quality, in my opinion, has become even better.
A very large level of fraud among these projects, as well as the general condition of the cryptocurrency market, led to the current state of the ICO to a greater extent. In addition, I would not say that the ICO has died. Projects have become much smaller, but the quality, in my opinion, has become even better.
It's not true because bounty hunter just keep promoting a project bio but i know scam project killed ico now. Of the year two more the larger investor taking more scam project and loss their funds.
If not true, why there's so big buthurt of bounty hunters? 
The whole problem of such a question is the lack of knowledge. Everyone is blaming bounty hunters because of their 0,05 percent of total tokens that dumped the price to -x10 from the token sale price. Wake up guys, the team is responsible and not bounty hunters.
-snip-
it can also be avoided when his team pays bitcoin, ETH, or coins that are popular with bounty hunters. however, the coins they hold are sometimes below 10%. Well, in this case, not all bounty hunter mistakes. I think when the team has a good strategy for avoiding dumps, the best way is to pay them another coin.Hopefully, for upcoming campaign many ICO use this method for the best solution with promotor/marketing and for themselves.
Jump to: