burning token - page 7. | Bitcointalksearch.org

Febo

legendary

Activity: 2730

Merit: 1288

Quote from: ginobitcoiner on February 04, 2019, 07:58:15 AM

I often read and heard about burning tokens that were not sold when the ICO project was finished, I also knew that by burning the rest of the token was a strategy so the price of the token didn't fall, but if the DEV and the team didn't burn it was a crime? is there a requirement that the remaining unsold tokens must be burned?

Usually that is stated before ICO happens. Rare will invest in a token with huge supply. It makes no sense. You will pay $1 for a token that will be worth 1 cent since there will be issued 100 times more tokens.

JohnyMnemonik

newbie

Activity: 18

Merit: 0

It is natural that they will be burned. Investors must be confident in their tokens and that they will not be cheaper. It gives them at least some hope.

Thanasis

hero member

Activity: 1820

Merit: 515

★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino

Quote from: ginobitcoiner on February 04, 2019, 07:58:15 AM

I often read and heard about burning tokens that were not sold when the ICO project was finished, I also knew that by burning the rest of the token was a strategy so the price of the token didn't fall, but if the DEV and the team didn't burn it was a crime? is there a requirement that the remaining unsold tokens must be burned?

Its their tokens so they can decide what they are going to do with the unsold tokens,burning it will be more benifitable for the investors but if the team is keeping themselves for future use the value of token will get less if the unsold token released into the market for purposes like bounty or airdrop.

Bttzed03

legendary

Activity: 2114

Merit: 1150

https://bitcoincleanup.com/

Quote from: ginobitcoiner on February 04, 2019, 07:58:15 AM

I often read and heard about burning tokens that were not sold when the ICO project was finished, I also knew that by burning the rest of the token was a strategy so the price of the token didn't fall, but if the DEV and the team didn't burn it was a crime? is there a requirement that the remaining unsold tokens must be burned?

Unless stated, It is not a requirement to burn unsold tokens but it helps boost investors confidence that the team will not dump those tokens on the market. There is also that belief that a lesser supply will help boost the price.

OluwaTosin10

jr. member

Activity: 546

Merit: 4

Token burn is good for any project
It secures investors mind that devs would not dump and run away
It also makes even the smallest investor think of a better price when they list on exchange

I think it is always stated in the Whitepaper what decision would be taken

dipeco

copper member

Activity: 210

Merit: 1

It is not a crime if nobody has announced a token burn. Some projects are distributing these tokens to the team members and are freezing them for 1-5 years. Another projects are burning tokens to increase the coin prices, but unfortunately it does not work.

pawanjain

hero member

Activity: 2702

Merit: 716

Nothing lasts forever

It actually depends on the team whether they want to burn the tokens after the sale or not. Most of the times the team decides to burn the unsold tokens.
By burning they often mean to sending it to an address whose private key they don't have. The team usually burns tokens so that the supply is not more than the demand.
This holds the price up in a way. This has become a usual practice now.

Debonaire217

sr. member

Activity: 644

Merit: 364

In Code We Trust

Quote from: ginobitcoiner on February 04, 2019, 07:58:15 AM

I often read and heard about burning tokens that were not sold when the ICO project was finished, I also knew that by burning the rest of the token was a strategy so the price of the token didn't fall, but if the DEV and the team didn't burn it was a crime? is there a requirement that the remaining unsold tokens must be burned?

In order to explicitly show that the team and the project is clean, they need to burn the token as favor for the investors who bought their tokens, its value is high and there should be a fixed volume and unallocated should be burned.

bartolo

hero member

Activity: 1176

Merit: 501

It depends on the project. Most ICOs burn unsold tokens once the ICO has finished, but there are ICO teams that choose to airdrop unsold tokens between investors or keep the tokens for themselves and lock them for some months or years. It's not mandatory to burn the unsold tokens but in any case they must state what they will do beforehand and in the case they keep the tokens they must explain why they make that decision and what they will do with those tokens.

Callanta787

member

Activity: 546

Merit: 21

Burning unsold token is not a crime and its the devs call to decide but burning unsold tokens makes a lot of sense to me and it always help the price of any token

Msworld83

copper member

Activity: 448

Merit: 0

StableDex | Decentralized, Secure & Cost Effective

Well I think the burning of unsold token is over hype to make more value for the token , I see the project as a main focus to add value but burning thing has no much effect on price to me but many see it as a way to increase the price .

susila_bai

hero member

Activity: 1260

Merit: 524

When the project is launched they also split the token allocation and the allocated token for the ICO sale when not reached then they burn the remaining tokens which are not sold so that the distribution should be fair. But their are some projects which shows that they are burning the token, like purchasing the token from the profit and then burning it but actually they are selling their own shares and burn it so this way they take profit from the market and then manipulate it. So burning token is both fair and unfair.

marks1976

sr. member

Activity: 893

Merit: 250

Quote from: ginobitcoiner on February 04, 2019, 07:58:15 AM

I often read and heard about burning tokens that were not sold when the ICO project was finished, I also knew that by burning the rest of the token was a strategy so the price of the token didn't fall, but if the DEV and the team didn't burn it was a crime? is there a requirement that the remaining unsold tokens must be burned?

It's not as long as they are doing fair distribution that wil not deceived the investors. There was no any requirement for that and that's so simple just send the unsold token to the default address to burn it. that depends on the agreement between investors and dev.

Red-Apple

hero member

Activity: 1470

Merit: 655

it is not a crime because there is no laws in play in this market. we are in an unregulated and decentralized market that anybody can do whatever they want and unless users start enforcing rules, nobody else will. so if a developer decides not to burn anything and instead dump it on the users, there is nothing they can do about it.
you should try not to buy such shitcoins in first place.

herdiansyahdanang

sr. member

Activity: 588

Merit: 250

The unsold tokens do have to be burned, because if they can't, then this is manipulation for dumps at the exchange price, so the team has the right strategy like that.

andrejka

sr. member

Activity: 770

Merit: 251

MOBU - FUTURE OF SECURITY TOKENS

Quote from: ginobitcoiner on February 04, 2019, 07:58:15 AM

I often read and heard about burning tokens that were not sold when the ICO project was finished, I also knew that by burning the rest of the token was a strategy so the price of the token didn't fall, but if the DEV and the team didn't burn it was a crime? is there a requirement that the remaining unsold tokens must be burned?

It depends. But in many cases such intentions are written in the white paper or in the field of token economics. And yes, when unsold tokens are burnt the amount of them in circulation becomes smaller and this lead to the price stability or even growth in some cases if bounty hunters don't sell everything right after the exchange listing))

Reid

hero member

Activity: 3052

Merit: 651

Something like a wrong decision of making a large amount of tokens to begin with.

Also, the value increases once the number of tokens gets lower.
It is a good strategy. I dont know about the details though if they need to go thru some law just so they could do it.
I doubt they need it. It is their tokem and they will do what they want.

That is also one big difference between those ERC20 tokens than bitcoin. Who will burn bitcoins? Grin

raden1922

jr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 1

Colletrix-Bridging the Physical and Virtual Worlds

Regarding the requirements for burning tokens, it doesn't seem to exist. But burning of tokens, of course with the aim of reducing the amount of supply and making the price will be more valuable or survive so as not to drop dramatically like wasted tokens. In January I have read news about SCAVO Technologies tokens that burn from the supply of 100 million tokens to 20 million tokens.

herurist

sr. member

Activity: 1680

Merit: 259

Quote from: ginobitcoiner on February 04, 2019, 07:58:15 AM

I often read and heard about burning tokens that were not sold when the ICO project was finished, I also knew that by burning the rest of the token was a strategy so the price of the token didn't fall, but if the DEV and the team didn't burn it was a crime? is there a requirement that the remaining unsold tokens must be burned?

No burning token is not a crime but only one way they should take to keep the project alive. Not to scare you but most of us really like burning token because it will create trust and make price action go up, even not too high. Developer have do something and burn tokens is part of it, please think if developer keep stay with many tokens/ coins they should burn, price will fall even market in good condition.

Malamok101

full member

Activity: 868

Merit: 100

Proof-of-Stake Blockchain Network

It's a strategy of the project when it will be able to burned those tokens in exact dates that because people beliefs if they burned the unsold tokens the price of their token will have a potential to increase.

Topic: burning token - page 7. (Read 787 times)