Topic: is advertising for ICOs unethical? - page 5. (Read 13805 times)
I won't say it's unethical, sofar the team behind the project are ready to combat any issues that comes after as to the allocation of fund to the project. Every ICO projects has is ow project allocation and should be followed duly.
Although it's just an example, the numbers are a bit extreme. It's impractical to be spending 90% of funds for advertising. I've never seen an ICO spend that much so far. Maybe the more practical approach is allocating 10% to all forms of advertising.
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?
Impossible. No project owners would tend out to spend almost 90% of its accumulated amount on sale just on promotion/marketing allocationFor 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?
budget.Most of them will most likely use 2-3% on all total sales.By the way, where did you able to see this kind of allocation? Which project
you are pertaining to?
I don't see how ethics is being an issue over here. They raise 10 million and spend 9 million for promoting themselves. Well, this is totally up to them on how they are spending their budget on advertising. As long as they don't end up being a scam, then it is all okay to me. Now this would have been a different question if you asked whether it was unethical to advertise for an ICO that has a high chance of scamming.
Correct but while they planning for promotion and marketing they are allocating such fund but unfortunately most of the ICO did not reach the success on meeting the softcap as well. When look for hardcap reached ICO. Maximum 2 or 3 from 500 ICO projects nowadays.
Balance all the other ICO are not loyal one and they are here to scam us by looting the fund collected on ICO buddy.
Balance all the other ICO are not loyal one and they are here to scam us by looting the fund collected on ICO buddy.
Well some give so much for advertising and promotions but in the end they adjust the budget once their ICO raised a small amount only. Try may either deduct stakes allocations or they remove those who are not worth to receive bounty or rewards at all. Its important for a project to advertise their project because its the only way they could gather investors.
I don't know what kind of ICOs can spent 90% of funds for promotion. usually for promotion spend 10% or less of raised funds.
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?
In the recent days none of the projects were ready to spend money from their pockets to raise funds for their projects,all they were doing is just creating bounties and paying participants on their own tokens so this is unethical in my opinion. 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'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?
There are always ethical questions about any advertising, whether in crypto or in the wider world, around the point that it's just a hard sell of the product rather than a balanced view.
Regarding the % of budget spent on advertising, that should really be declared - so long as the company is open and honest about what they are spending on what, I don't think it's an issue.
I don't know what the rule says, but on a personal level I don't think it is, most of these ICO projects won't sell a good number of their tokens if not soft such promotions, so it becomes a necessity kind of to market these tokens to the right investors. That isn't in anyway suppose to be a crime.
I think what is ethical is for ICO or any new crypto projects to do whatever it takes to make that project a Success.
so if that involves spending a lot of money on advertisement, promotions, organising seminars and talk shows and going for events or other things in order to bring in investors into that project and make it known to more people in that niche then I believe it is not unethical.
What is unethical is making people invest in a project and not taking the required steps to make that project a success
I believe that there is no one in this forum that will say spending money on promotion is unethical, that is not the ball of contention here, we know that it cost a lot to run promotions to get people’s attention, but what becomes unethical is when the money spent promotion becomes far more than the project cost.so if that involves spending a lot of money on advertisement, promotions, organising seminars and talk shows and going for events or other things in order to bring in investors into that project and make it known to more people in that niche then I believe it is not unethical.
What is unethical is making people invest in a project and not taking the required steps to make that project a success
How is that ethical, if they spend money on promotion and they have created the awareness necessary and it is time for people to really come for the product, then they get stuck because they don’t have enough supply having spent what they would have used for production of advertising few ones that they have.
I think the 9 million for promotion alone is an exaggeration. Projects that pays in tokens don't even spend that much on promotion. Most usually state the percentage for promotions and they are normally less than 20%.
I ask you to notice another moment that companies pay tokens, as well as pay for work and advertising with their own tokens, which have no value. In fact, new projects have no product and there is no company as such, and therefore it is very difficult to talk about real value here.
I think the 9 million for promotion alone is an exaggeration. Projects that pays in tokens don't even spend that much on promotion. Most usually state the percentage for promotions and they are normally less than 20%.
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 have never found any project that spend $9M in promotion where they spend $10M from token sale. Do you have any proof in this regard?
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 have never found any project that spend $9M in promotion where they spend $10M from token sale. Do you have any proof in this regard?
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?
That is why some are just promising the bounty participants to give the payment but most failed to do so. Or another case is that they lessen the token allocated leaving the participants to retaliate and another story is bounty managers(most devs) run away with the money raised, in short a scam project.
I think what is ethical is for ICO or any new crypto projects to do whatever it takes to make that project a Success.
so if that involves spending a lot of money on advertisement, promotions, organising seminars and talk shows and going for events or other things in order to bring in investors into that project and make it known to more people in that niche then I believe it is not unethical.
What is unethical is making people invest in a project and not taking the required steps to make that project a success
so if that involves spending a lot of money on advertisement, promotions, organising seminars and talk shows and going for events or other things in order to bring in investors into that project and make it known to more people in that niche then I believe it is not unethical.
What is unethical is making people invest in a project and not taking the required steps to make that project a success
We allow ourselves advertise their project because we believe they are legit and have a potential to succeed.
However, there is a period only for advertising, in ICO, it's only in the crowdfunding stage but the crucial stage is after they collected the amount raise and how are they going to utilize it.
Very good question. I also do not know exactly why new projects spend so much money on advertisements. In cryprocurrency, advertisement is worth it? It there any set criteria that binds a project to collect only a certain amount of money? or one can collect as much as it can? But I think cryptocurrrency is such platform where advertisements rule and without advertisements, you can not get the attention of traders and investors. That is why I think it is a bit different from stock market. It is decentralized and it is for all people around the world.
That is because, they are thinking for a long term investment back from their project. The best way to do that is to strengthen their marketing, and even the profit is not really obtained on the ICO stage, once their project has been launched, there, the profit will going to be steady. They will need just to be successful in funding their project initially.
If you talk about project being launched, if they have spent virtually 90% of the fund on promotion, then what will they use to develop the project they want to launch, if there is any ICO doing this, then it is clear that they don’t have a product, and they are just trying to use the system as a money Ponzi scheme.
A genuine project will never waste money that much on promotion, yes to promote is quite expensive, but we are also in this industry together and we all know how things operate, so that ICO cannot just come here and give us a blatant lie.
I think what is ethical is for ICO or any new crypto projects to do whatever it takes to make that project a Success.
so if that involves spending a lot of money on advertisement, promotions, organising seminars and talk shows and going for events or other things in order to bring in investors into that project and make it known to more people in that niche then I believe it is not unethical.
What is unethical is making people invest in a project and not taking the required steps to make that project a success
so if that involves spending a lot of money on advertisement, promotions, organising seminars and talk shows and going for events or other things in order to bring in investors into that project and make it known to more people in that niche then I believe it is not unethical.
What is unethical is making people invest in a project and not taking the required steps to make that project a success
For bounties ICOs spend only 1-2 % of their total supply and for future marketing activities around 5-10%. Marketing activities has their limits and it would not be justifiable to spend 50 % of the funds for marketing.
That is more ideal proportion and not the one that is posted in OP which way too absurd. No team in their right mind would spend big budgets like 90 percent for marketing alone which is taken from ICO proceeds.
Jump to: