Well, if the ICO is genuine
then everything they done will be genuine and legal
Else, the opposite
This is where Whitepaper is written, the money allocation will be written there (But of course you don't fully trust the whitepaper)
DYOR very carefully before you invest
Topic: is advertising for ICOs unethical? - page 3. (Read 13847 times)
Promotion for icos are just something else this time, because I think they are just using hunters to get what they want and will later pay shit money, some will even seized the money and will refuse to pay hunters. Tho I already know ico is a scam but since they havrle gotten what they why can them pay workers. Despite that they want to pay with there token, they are the owner, they will still be stingy to pay good cash.
Promoting ICOs is legal because there is no regulation yet about ICOs. Beside that, every ICOs have marketing budget and i think its normal because they want peoples know about the project they built. As long they pay bounty hunters, i think its good because give many people an opportunity to invest in the project
I've noticed many ICOs have to spend a lot of money on promotions and advertising.
For example, let's say an ICO raises 10 million dollars but has to spend 9 million on promotion.
Therefore, they only really raised 1 million for the project.
Isn't this unethical?
I think it is fine, as long as the project and their token (if they have any) should have a use case. Probably they are spending a lot on their investment to hook up more investors. But if they have no other plan but only to advertise, this is not the right thing to do. For example, let's say an ICO raises 10 million dollars but has to spend 9 million on promotion.
Therefore, they only really raised 1 million for the project.
Isn't this unethical?
Promotion for icos are just something else this time, because I think they are just using hunters to get what they want and will later pay shit money, some will even seized the money and will refuse to pay hunters. Tho I already know ico is a scam but since they havrle gotten what they why can them pay workers. Despite that they want to pay with there token, they are the owner, they will still be stingy to pay good cash.
No project will spend this much funds to promote their ICO. What most of them do is to spend little amount of bitcoin/ethereum plus their token as payment for anyone that will promote them. And also they use their tokens as full payment for promoters.
Where did you get these numbers? All ICOs have their own economic mapping and 99% of them fail...so.... it seems that they are using way too much money on advertisement exactly because they have nothing to show for and they need to get that 1 million to fly away for a no-extradition country...
Let's ask a more pertinent question: do we need ICO's?? Why are there projects that don't ask you for money in advance and still deliver?
Let's ask a more pertinent question: do we need ICO's?? Why are there projects that don't ask you for money in advance and still deliver?
If advertising, it requires reasonable funds and a good target. Of course there is no harm in advertising. If spending funds is only for advertising and minimal fundraising may not be ethical for the development of the project in the future. It's better to make a bounty program to promote a project. And if you really have to advertise in other places, there is also nothing wrong with the project market.
Advertising is very important. But of course you shouldn't forget about the real development of products and platforms. This can often be found in crypto projects. This is a very common mistake. 
If advertising, it requires reasonable funds and a good target. Of course there is no harm in advertising. If spending funds is only for advertising and minimal fundraising may not be ethical for the development of the project in the future. It's better to make a bounty program to promote a project. And if you really have to advertise in other places, there is also nothing wrong with the project market.
Crowdsales generally tend to allocate a much lower percentage of their overall budget to marketing and a significant amount of this is typically spent on creating and advertising the initial offering with not enough reserved for future uses like building brand awareness and increasing adoption so avoid investing in any projects that don't have a properly developed marketing strategy
Hello there, I think you have a grasp of what actually is the point of their marketing. If youre the CEO would you spend huge amount of promotions just to set youre project. They have budget for that and most stated their proposal but only fool will spend that much for an advertising. 9m$ is huge enough to develop a good project rather spend it on the platform for more development than petty advertising to gain investors eye. Anyway there is always a good advertising where you dont need to spend that much. Used bounty, with a strict on implementing promotions. Many hunters will join to it as long youve paid them later on. Cheaper and less hassle!
I strongly believe that there will not be a single project that can have this type of claim, it is absolutely not possible and unethical, I full understand that advertising can be quite very expensive, especially when you make use of some top media means like CNN, other media and news station, bill board’s advert and co.When it comes to cryptocurrency, we know that the only means of campaign is virtually through social media, which hunters are the ones doing majority of the advert, so when we see bounty hunters allocation, then we have seen the money allocated for promotion, wherein the highest allocated to hunters is 15%, so it will be a big lie for any project to make such claims.
I've noticed many ICOs have to spend a lot of money on promotions and advertising.
For example, let's say an ICO raises 10 million dollars but has to spend 9 million on promotion.
Therefore, they only really raised 1 million for the project.
Isn't this unethical?
If you're starting a company and looking for investors the traditional way via stock equity, you would never spend 9 million or even 5 million or even 2 million in order to raise 10 million from investors.
This begs the question, what ratio of promotion cost versus funds raised for ICOs is ethical?
And how do we know if an ICO is using an ethical ratio?
While there could be many arguments that could be made about why promoting a particular ico could be a bad idea, I think you are wrong in your points, most icos do not really spend money at all when it comes to their marketing, they make the promise to bounty hunters to pay them in tokens which have no value yet and in most cases this is only 1% of the total supply of those coins, so an ico gathering 10 millions is in fact only spending 100k in its promotion. For example, let's say an ICO raises 10 million dollars but has to spend 9 million on promotion.
Therefore, they only really raised 1 million for the project.
Isn't this unethical?
If you're starting a company and looking for investors the traditional way via stock equity, you would never spend 9 million or even 5 million or even 2 million in order to raise 10 million from investors.
This begs the question, what ratio of promotion cost versus funds raised for ICOs is ethical?
And how do we know if an ICO is using an ethical ratio?
I dont think they marketing budget until 90%. Mostly marketing budget not more than 10%. Mostly ICOs budget for development project and developers team. I think it still normal if the marketing budget not more than 10%.
That should be the first step in writing off a project that one is researching on for participation if they claim that they are spending such amount of money on campaign, and you are right about the fact that any project with success mindset would not even spend more than 10% of their capital, although majority of them are so used to padding the budget to make the project worth the amount they are requesting for.Most projects will focus more on spending money to develop and produce a quality product and if they have a quality product to showcase to the world, then they don’t need to spend so much more on campaign, since the product has a way of campaigning for itself through references if it is a good one.
We are not fully aware of the distribution of funds in the budgets of the ICO. But if we know that a project spends less on developing its product than on promoting it, then perhaps the team is not professional enough, does not work effectively, or hides its true intentions. Therefore, to participate in the project is not worth it.
It is a way, to make the ICO get public awareness, not unethical at all.
it depends on what kind of ico you are promoting . if you knew to your self that the ico that you promote is legit then there is no problem with that but if you are aware that an ico is scam or shady and you are still promoting it then that is wrong .
you will only helping the scammers to earn more income while they wont pay you at the end . you are also helping other incoscent people to got scammed . if its done in the forum , you are risking you account and reputation .
Actually it's not that much to advertising for ICO. You can just hire bounty managers and let them control the bounty and the advertising. I don't know beside the bounty, like google ads or social media ads, it will takes more cost. It's worth actually to advertise ICO for the ICO owner.
who definitely advertise by using services from bounty managers and bounty hunters, DEVs can pay them with tokens that they sell and can be paid after they get the money, it will be different from advertising on Google or others, they have to make more payments by using $ 
This has always been and always will be. Very little is spent on advertising and project promotion in relation to the funds raised.Just in addition to advertising, any project also has costs:legal,team salary,rental of premises,payment for utilities.please note that all these costs are borne by the project before the ICO.Generally guys 10% on advertising costs is normal.
It is a way, to make the ICO get public awareness, not unethical at all.
Because there are many scam ICO's in the past, some social medias ban ICO advertisement.
There are many ways to advertise ICO, but nowadays investors prefer to investing in IEO, advertised on the exchanges.
Because there are many scam ICO's in the past, some social medias ban ICO advertisement.
There are many ways to advertise ICO, but nowadays investors prefer to investing in IEO, advertised on the exchanges.
No need to regret advertising money. Especially if the advertising gives the project to earn much more money than was spent on it.
But if the advertisement did not bring any additional income, then it is bad and you need to punish those who made such mistakes.
It's not only about the money, you can make money if what you are advertising will succeed as most of the time they will pay. But if the advertisement did not bring any additional income, then it is bad and you need to punish those who made such mistakes.
However, you also to ensure that what you are advertising is legit and will help the crypto space grow, otherwise, it's not worth to enjoy the reward if the project will give bad reputation to the crypto market.
I've noticed many ICOs have to spend a lot of money on promotions and advertising.
For example, let's say an ICO raises 10 million dollars but has to spend 9 million on promotion.
Therefore, they only really raised 1 million for the project.
Isn't this unethical?
If you're starting a company and looking for investors the traditional way via stock equity, you would never spend 9 million or even 5 million or even 2 million in order to raise 10 million from investors.
This begs the question, what ratio of promotion cost versus funds raised for ICOs is ethical?
And how do we know if an ICO is using an ethical ratio?
For example, let's say an ICO raises 10 million dollars but has to spend 9 million on promotion.
Therefore, they only really raised 1 million for the project.
Isn't this unethical?
If you're starting a company and looking for investors the traditional way via stock equity, you would never spend 9 million or even 5 million or even 2 million in order to raise 10 million from investors.
This begs the question, what ratio of promotion cost versus funds raised for ICOs is ethical?
And how do we know if an ICO is using an ethical ratio?
I dont think they marketing budget until 90%. Mostly marketing budget not more than 10%. Mostly ICOs budget for development project and developers team. I think it still normal if the marketing budget not more than 10%.
No need to regret advertising money. Especially if the advertising gives the project to earn much more money than was spent on it.
But if the advertisement did not bring any additional income, then it is bad and you need to punish those who made such mistakes.
But if the advertisement did not bring any additional income, then it is bad and you need to punish those who made such mistakes.
Jump to: