Topic: Is ICO regulation good or bad? - page 31. (Read 31553 times)
regulation is definitely important, and definitely good. Just think of it this way: what is holding cryptocurrencies back are allegations such as "Fraud" "Crash" "Bubble" etc. If the government decides to regulate the cryptocurrency market/industry, it is indirectly validating the concept and "supports" the idea, to the extent that they decided to regulate it. The government "pays" attention therefore to that sector and that makes people more willing to trust it.
More and more countries are planning to regulate ICOs. China, Canada, Russia,... I think this in an development nobody can stop. Do you think it is good or bad that ICOs will be more regulated in the near future? What positive and negative influences will it probably have?
I think there will be more investors like professional managed funds or even retirement funds which will invest into ICOs. The prices for ICOs will then become even more expensive and make it more difficult to make profits for small investors.
I think there will be more investors like professional managed funds or even retirement funds which will invest into ICOs. The prices for ICOs will then become even more expensive and make it more difficult to make profits for small investors.
Banning ICOs i am against, however regulating ICOs i'm not that worried about. Anything in moderation is good, unregulated ICOs may result in shit projects popping up all the time that are trying to suck investors money away.
But banning it is a bit too extreme in my opinion.
But then, even if every single country does ban ICOs people will just find new ways to invest into cryptos.
More and more countries are planning to regulate ICOs. China, Canada, Russia,... I think this in an development nobody can stop. Do you think it is good or bad that ICOs will be more regulated in the near future? What positive and negative influences will it probably have?
I think there will be more investors like professional managed funds or even retirement funds which will invest into ICOs. The prices for ICOs will then become even more expensive and make it more difficult to make profits for small investors.
I think there will be more investors like professional managed funds or even retirement funds which will invest into ICOs. The prices for ICOs will then become even more expensive and make it more difficult to make profits for small investors.
Banning ICOs i am against, however regulating ICOs i'm not that worried about. Anything in moderation is good, unregulated ICOs may result in shit projects popping up all the time that are trying to suck investors money away.
But banning it is a bit too extreme in my opinion.
But then, even if every single country does ban ICOs people will just find new ways to invest into cryptos.
More and more countries are planning to regulate ICOs. China, Canada, Russia,... I think this in an development nobody can stop. Do you think it is good or bad that ICOs will be more regulated in the near future? What positive and negative influences will it probably have?
I think there will be more investors like professional managed funds or even retirement funds which will invest into ICOs. The prices for ICOs will then become even more expensive and make it more difficult to make profits for small investors.
I think there will be more investors like professional managed funds or even retirement funds which will invest into ICOs. The prices for ICOs will then become even more expensive and make it more difficult to make profits for small investors.
Banning ICOs i am against, however regulating ICOs i'm not that worried about. Anything in moderation is good, unregulated ICOs may result in shit projects popping up all the time that are trying to suck investors money away.
But banning it is a bit too extreme in my opinion.
But then, even if every single country does ban ICOs people will just find new ways to invest into cryptos.
I think there will be more huge investors which will invest into ICOs. In this case prices for ICOs will get even more expensive and make it difficult to make profits for small investors.
I think the market will find a way to let small investors back in even if that trend takes place, referring to microtransactions, crowdfunding, 'kickstarter'.Not just the market. Just because the SEC doesn't let small investors invest in many things that "sophisticated investors" can, doesn't mean that 1) other regulations don't either (many do) 2) that's how the regulation would work with ICOs.
There can be regulation and not change the important aspects of ICOs.
I think there will be more huge investors which will invest into ICOs. In this case prices for ICOs will get even more expensive and make it difficult to make profits for small investors.
I think the market will find a way to let small investors back in even if that trend takes place, referring to microtransactions, crowdfunding, 'kickstarter'. 
Majority of countries are planning to regulate ICOs. China, Russia, Canada are thinking abt it... Suppose that ICOs widespread nobody can stop. Do you believe that ICOs will be more regulated in the future? What prons and cons will it probably have?
I think there will be more huge investors which will invest into ICOs. In this case prices for ICOs will get even more expensive and make it difficult to make profits for small investors.
I think there will be more huge investors which will invest into ICOs. In this case prices for ICOs will get even more expensive and make it difficult to make profits for small investors.
The final goal of any regulation is protection. Ok, maybe in the perfect world. But anyway, I believe "ICO regulation" is not a single, pre-defined substance so that we could say whether it is good or not. One regulation might be good, another one might be bad. What seems to be more interesting to me is what a good regulation is or would be (along with what a bad one is as well).
Agreed. Do you have any ideas? This is a discussion I find immensely interesting.
Well, the one thing I can say right away is I believe that ban is not regulation. In fact.
Of course. A ban makes something illegal whereas regulation defines laws to be abided by.
I didn't know some people thought a ban was regulation.
The final goal of any regulation is protection. Ok, maybe in the perfect world. But anyway, I believe "ICO regulation" is not a single, pre-defined substance so that we could say whether it is good or not. One regulation might be good, another one might be bad. What seems to be more interesting to me is what a good regulation is or would be (along with what a bad one is as well).
Agreed. Do you have any ideas? This is a discussion I find immensely interesting.
Well, the one thing I can say right away is I believe that ban is not regulation. In fact.
The final goal of any regulation is protection. Ok, maybe in the perfect world. But anyway, I believe "ICO regulation" is not a single, pre-defined substance so that we could say whether it is good or not. One regulation might be good, another one might be bad. What seems to be more interesting to me is what a good regulation is or would be (along with what a bad one is as well).
Agreed. Do you have any ideas? This is a discussion I find immensely interesting.
The final goal of any regulation is protection. Ok, maybe in the perfect world. But anyway, I believe "ICO regulation" is not a single, pre-defined substance so that we could say whether it is good or not. One regulation might be good, another one might be bad. What seems to be more interesting to me is what a good regulation is or would be (along with what a bad one is as well).
It is good, but ban whole ICO like China is bad, they did silly regulations to ban all.
They're starting to backtrack on it. I believe they never intended the ban to be long term. They're too focused on the long term to make such a mistake.
It is good, but ban whole ICO like China is bad, they did silly regulations to ban all.
Regulations are always healthy for any thing otherwise anyone can do illegal activity, whather it's forex, cryptocurrency or any money market. IF market regulated, then no one do fraud with its investors as he knows that stringent action will be taken against him if he disown regulations and no one ignore rules and it makes market healthy and sustainable.
I half agree with you. Fraud will always happen since some firms just pay the fines and move on. I work in the industry and I guarantee you that the amount of fines some companies pay and just continue their business in the same way is astounding.
Having said that, I do believe regulation is a good thing (which is why I am working on it with our ICO) since it greatly lowers those possibilities.
Regulations are always healthy for any thing otherwise anyone can do illegal activity, whather it's forex, cryptocurrency or any money market. IF market regulated, then no one do fraud with its investors as he knows that stringent action will be taken against him if he disown regulations and no one ignore rules and it makes market healthy and sustainable.
I don't know if regulation would be the correct one, but should yes end up with so much ICO scam that is being released. This is all the fault of the ETH.
Regulation is very good, exactly because of all these scams that float around us. ETH may have enabled somehow scams but it not the one to blame. People made the scams not a coin. Those are to be blamed, because they are the ones giving this really free market a bad name. They are giving the excuse to bank propaganda that paints black crypto currency. They are the ones that drive away people from investing in real ICOs that actual need funding.
Every difficult thing connected with money should be regulated. But we need a special organization which regulates it without corruption and not for personal purposes.
This means that we should undergo of verifying of which ICO is good before investing. Aside from regulations there is need of whole surveillance of all ico's to filter which is good and bad. These is needed for all users, investors because these way can lessen those scam project.The problem isn't only scam projects. The problem is also criminal money being laundered via ICOs.
Every difficult thing connected with money should be regulated. But we need a special organization which regulates it without corruption and not for personal purposes.
This means that we should undergo of verifying of which ICO is good before investing. Aside from regulations there is need of whole surveillance of all ico's to filter which is good and bad. These is needed for all users, investors because these way can lessen those scam project. I agree with Hueristic, the answer is more due diligence, not more regulation. Don't expect the government to do your due diligence for you. I expect more professional firms and funds will emerge that offer this filtering service for investors, taking a small percentage for their troubles. Probably worth it to reduce risk and improve returns.
I have personal experience with regulation - I'm an advisor to a company that helps firms get regulated. I can tell you that some regulations are just simple rubber stamps that provide no real value to consumers/ investors; whereas some regulation procedures weed out the filth that an individual may not be able to weed out without investing a lot of money.
And please don't be offended but the idea that private firms have less bias/ interest than a government is very naive.
Such firms will exist anyway to weed out the good investments from the bad investments but that is unrelated to regulation.
I agree with Hueristic, the answer is more due diligence, not more regulation. Don't expect the government to do your due diligence for you. I expect more professional firms and funds will emerge that offer this filtering service for investors, taking a small percentage for their troubles. Probably worth it to reduce risk and improve returns.
Jump to: