Sorry to say I am out and just sold the 900 tokens I had
. I made 10% on them atleast. I hope this succeeds for investors sake. I feel for the people who paid top dollar for it.
Personally I think that the competition might be too much from Tenx (PAY) already having a working card. Members in the U.S. are already receiving cards and they look very good.
Best of luck to those that remain. Its always sad to see an investment not perform. Doesnt mean it wont in the future. For me I just prefer to put my money elsewhere.
This is how I feel too.
MonaCo was one of my absolute favourite ICOs and I was very disappointed about how they treated the AC issue and tried to just shrug it off.
If not for that I would be doubling down right now, but given the situation I chose to exit as well in favour of projects like SONM.
We hear you and understand your emotion. In fact, the token value is strongly correlated to the number of users on Monaco platform. Every single holder of Monaco Platinum card needs to hold tokens and will also earn MCO through up to 2% cashback on all transactions. Utility of the token will increase over time - an example cited in the recent Q&A is discounts on fee when paying with MCO.
You apparently haven't heard me and there really is no emotion involved. It's simply an objective analysis of what has happened so far.
All of the above has much bigger impact that the Asset Contract. It's our view that the sell off on the day of Visa announcement was driven by technical trading, i.e. people waiting to sell on the day of the Visa announcement, rather than the news of Asset Contract removal. Having said that, we understand this is an important matter for the community and are looking into rolling out a replacement that will be fully compliant and not carry any legal risks that would potentially negatively impact token holders.
As you're apparently a community/PR type of manager, I doubt you're grasping the impact of the asset contract since even Kris himself claims this to be the case.
But it's patently false that the asset contract would have less of an impact for investors returns. And the fact that MonaCo
still claims that the asset contract, which was meant to directly share the potential
billions of annual revenue with investors makes this whole endeavour seem either extremely immature or outright dishonest.
Only someone who doesn't understand the value of the asset contract or someone who straight up benefits from the removal of it would taint it as impactless or even worthless as Kris put it.
I am actually shocked that MonaCo still hasn't rectified its stance on this matter and keeps going with the ridiculous "worthless" narrative.
I do agree that the dump was in part due to technical trading, and I don't see why MCO should care since the company will make more profits by removing the asset contract simply because MCO already has its ICO money and doesn't need to concern itself with the token price as long as people start using the cards.
And traders would trade anything regardless of fundamentals as long as it makes them money, they care about nothing else after all.
So sure, from MCO's perspective the asset contract is worthless, MCO will make more money without it since it won't have to share
any of its profits. But from any investor's perspective that actually knows what he's doing it's the last nail in the coffin.
Refer to my conservative calculations based on current card orders in a previous post for details. In the mid to long term the asset contract was
the value of the token.