Topic: ICONOMI - Live for today. Invest for tomorrow. - page 298. (Read 583526 times)

It is a fundamental change.  The whole sales pitch of Iconomi was "You bring the $$, our crypto expertise will do the rest!"  The project received an absolutely unprecedented amount of fiat funding during the ICO, indicating a large number of investors who are novices to the crypto world.  The idea of accumulating dividends in ETH is far different from having to periodically take profits by selling off small amounts of ICN.  Plus ETH is substantially more liquid (and reliable) an asset than ICN.

Second, it means no voting on major issues by ICN holders.  This is because if you were able to distribute voting rights (i.e. "ballots") to ICN holders, you could just as easily distribute dividends to them.

Third and relatedly, (and I have brought this up on Reddit several times and still nobody has explained otherwise), stocks in traditional markets that don't pay dividends have other characteristics that ICN does not have that provide actual rather than solely speculative value to shareholders.

Traditional stocks actually let you exercise voting rights.  ICN does not.

Traditional stocks are entitled to transparent accounting and information about how the company is being run.  ICN does not.

Quick list of broken promises, just off the top of my head:

• Team fund to be moved to segregated account in January
• Change in service operator (and subsequent refusal to even provide proof that it exists)
• Periodic "probably bi-weekly" AMAs on Reddit
• Quarterly expenditure reports showing amount and area of expenses (Iconomi has divested 2000BTC in just the last month.  Where the fuck is it going/has it gone?)

Add to these that we've got no idea on the terms of the Cofoundit spin-off.  Separation payments?  ICN retained? Intellectual property transferred?  You can tell me that ICN still represents an ownership share in Iconomi.  But when IP and employees start walking out the door to "spin-offs" and we have no clue what the terms were, that doesn't feel at all like ownership.

Traditional stocks can get paid out if a company is purchased or liquidated.  That can't happen with ICN.

ICN is opaque and powerless compared to traditional stocks.  It needs to provide dividends in ETH, which has real and established value.  It feels like the team is trying to ensure ICN liquidity (nice timing...) more than it's trying to return actual solid returns to its investors.

The buyback change is like abandoning gold-backed currency in a banana republic.

Note: Quoted portion has been rewritten while I was responding:


That could be true, but why do people always assume an ulterior motive? Are you trying to get your sell orders filled?  

Why must it be dismissed as "devil's advocate"? Because the team can do no wrong, and your perspective is already accepted as the correct one? ... You could just as easily conclude that their concerns are genuine, and have nothing to do with trying to manipulate the price. You already attempted to accuse me of the same, and I know you were wrong about me (because I am me), so why should I believe you are right about them?

As for the rest, I understand what you mean, and what you're trying to communicate with regards to dividends/buybacks. But using cold, hard math to compare the two isn't enough, especially in crypto, and especially when it's a sudden move from one method to the other, in a blog post that doesn't even acknowledge that the first option was ever promised.

We can put this to one side though, as some people obviously like the idea, and some don't, so we won't reach a consensus there.

Consider a couple of things though: In a traditional company, do you think investors would all be 100% happy if they were promised dividends, and then the model was suddenly changed? A key factor in both cases is that a lot of people like to hold, and not have to worry about going back to the market in order to realise any profit.

Would the ICO have been as successful if buybacks were in the original pitch?

Would the price be where it is now, if buybacks were the original method?

Would the price be where it is now if buybacks were announced 3 months ago? Or before the December 28th "delay"?

It's all speculation, of course, but it's good to look back and view the overall picture, rather than just take things as they come.

I'm not saying for certain one way or the other. But my personal opinion is that a buyback model would NOT have appealed to the same number of investors at that time, and the price would be much lower now, as buybacks would have been less appealing while waiting for the platform release etc.

You may think otherwise, but it's still worth thinking about things like that.

I recognise that anyone who bought into the ICO (and most people who bought after) are free to sell at a profit right now, if they aren't happy. And that's a good point to remember. But these guys are going to just keep flipping shit on you, if you keep letting them, and eventually it might be you who loses out, because too many people get sick of it and dump on your head.

The true believers will become the bagholders if it all goes wrong, and that's why you need to be more of a pain in the team's ass  

(lol @ the avatar)

This user is a known spammer and troll along with CryptoInsiders and WarrenBuffet. Do not take this account seriously.

Regarding the profit distribution methods of dividends vs buybacks, despite distributing the same amount of wealth mathematically, buybacks provide numerous advantages over the dividend model. Those advantages are:

Buybacks:
- Defer capital gain taxes until the asset is sold
- Add liquidity to ICN rather than to ETH
- Remove legal implications that dividends might cause
- Add buy walls to the order book providing price support
- Eliminate the possibility of sending ETH to lost/unused/exchange addresses

Dividends:
- ETH gas fees would be slightly cheaper than maker/taker fees on exchanges
- Dividends are a more commonly known model of profit distribution which would generate more hype from new traders
- The dividend model was promised early on to ICONOMI investors

??

Am I missing anything? Feel free to add.

There was a lot of confusion from people who incorrectly thought the repayment plan was a fundamental change to the business model or that ICN no longer represented a share of the profits from Iconomi platform.

My calculations are valuable in providing a clear example of how buyback & burn vs. dividends are two different methods of distributing the same amount of profit.

The primary difference between the two profit-sharing methods is a psychological/marketing one.  That and buyback & burn provides liquidity to the ICN orderbook instead of the ETH/BTC orderbook.  Buyback & burn may also provide an incentive for people to cheer for dumps in order to burn a larger amount of supply at a lower price.

snkns and yaksbeard bring up some valid points as they play devil's advocate.  One motive for a lot of people choosing to express their concerns so adamantly at this time could be to create uncertainty in an attempt to get buy orders filled before the flood of good news: product releases, marketing campaign, increased transparency.

I'm just catching up with your posts (and others) here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ICONOMI/comments/63cvyt/can_someone_prove_mathematically_that_buybacks/

... and I recommend this thread to others. Some very good points being made here, and in a couple of other threads.

And to Move_Crpyto, the calculations you keep repeating only represent a theoretical outcome that won't necessarily play out in reality. They are sound calculations within their own framework, but ultimately worthless as a comparison, or a model of prediction, because there's too many other factors to consider. Sorry, my friend. It would be nice if things were so simple, though.

Snkns, Yaksbeard, and others are doing an excellent job of explaining various problems they see and, in my opinion, these arguments have yet to be refuted properly. They're bringing a lot of sense into a space where people aren't thinking about things in enough depth. It's refreshing to see more valid criticism being posted. Keep it up!

The team is so shady lately, I have absolute faith that they will launch the platform, or some major news, between now and first vesting.  Pump will come this month.

The lack of communication is astounding.  Just a week of solid silence after a dishonest blog post.

I don't have 500k ICN to dump like that .
Maybe next stop is 30k

Yeah, right... is that your wall?

Not manipulation but just market direction once you go up once you go down.
I think that devs dumping can be reason since many of them joined 2nd project so
1st thing that they can do will be some dump.
Will see.

There goes 300K cheap ICN, all at once. A screenshot for the archives:

The lowest I've seen it at is 393, but it's moving about all over the place. It is so obviously manipulation, I can't believe the naivety of the people falling for it.

You are in luck. It is 379 now.

Yup, there's an over-extended 30k sell wall that is making the fools panic sell.

If/when it gets to 375, I'm buying the fucker.

Damn wtf was happen to ICN? Whale manipulaition?

ICN should stick to their ETH dividend plan

It's a bit of exaggerated fall... almost 30%? And who would sell if the bitcoin raising. What is the reason, unless you gain something out of it.

Iconomi posted the last update 4 days ago. And again 2 days before that:

https://medium.com/iconominet

https://www.ethnews.com/iconomi-spin-off-cofoundit-addresses-the-ico-vs-venture-capitalist-dilemma?platform=hootsuite

k shit, like this coin but yet again this thread turns to ass.

devs some clean updates pls?  i know it seems icn whale insiders don't post here but it could use some decent news for an uptick and eventually pump to new floor price.  it doesn't help btc is going up i guess...so have to wait for moonshot.  this coin is very undervalued like etc.