Topic: Should startup crypto projects use DYCO instead of IEO/ICO? (Read 183 times)
Yeah, if it was as good as you said, projects would flock to daomarker that you don't have to shill it at here. Thing look bright in the paper or promise but when carrying out, problem rise eventually.
Every new startup projects should stay away from ICO or new fundraising event, the only thing that works now is IEO fundraising, let's stick to that since it's still working perfectly, secondly new projects aren't that serious anymore, they only start as if they mean business but along the way they start relenting, this have chased away many investors
The problem is not ICO or IEO. The problem are the projects themselves. The way the crowdfunding is done is no big deal. That was just a way for interested investors to take part in the unfolding of the project and its product and possibly earn from it. The sad fact however is that almost all those projects did not move forward. Even those that earned millions in their ICO and IEO are not showing any product result.
That's just an opinion (https://daomaker.com/dyco?utm_source=lx) don't make it as a reference in the assessment, gather a few references as supporting literacy before you make a decision and a deep analysis of other references is needed.
I also hope people are wiser in reading and analyzing an opinion in the future so they are not wrong.
I also hope people are wiser in reading and analyzing an opinion in the future so they are not wrong.
It sounds good from your above post but I have no good knowledge on it. However, no project can be able to collect fund unless they have utility in real life. Back in the day, any project could raise fubd because most people used to take such ICO as passive income way but now it has changed. Anyway, the idea of DYCO sounds good.
I can not make sense out of the bold sentence in your post above' are you saying that no project will be able to collect any funds through ico/ieo unless they have utility in real life" lol! Am I hearing you correctly! All the thousands of project that have collected funds in the past and present and some are still collecting as we speak, how many have a utility in real life?
Is either I miss interpret that particular sentence or you clearly don't know what you are saying,
In the whole of crypto market, only a very handful of project have a real life usage rest of them are just base on speculations, and yet they all did ico/ieo at a point and collect money which majority of them fail to utilize properly.
The days of ICO are over since 2018. And the days of IEO are almost over. Because with a system, it is not possible to run away from investors money again and again. So every time something new comes along some people take the money of the investors. Which some days go well and they gain success. Because something new actually creates its hype and a huge amount of investors run towards it. And the results for investors are bad. So I don't want to be interested in anything like that anymore. There must be hidden risks here.
Buying crowdfunding tokens to refund when things go wrong is not a proper way to invest, what happens when every buyer sells back? project crashes ?
Ico has vanished into the thin air, while only the top guns in crypto exchange platform hodl successful ieos, but you think dyco is gona work ?
In a world, with very knowledgeable investors and eager to research newbies ?
Ico has vanished into the thin air, while only the top guns in crypto exchange platform hodl successful ieos, but you think dyco is gona work ?
In a world, with very knowledgeable investors and eager to research newbies ?
And for burning the tokens, they should be bought from the market and who would buy those coins? Would it be daomaker or the project itself. If the project have to instantly buy back their token after getting listed, they'd never get listed at all. ICO are done for raising the funds, if they won't be able to use that money, they won't issue an ICO. The gradual unfreezing of funds is a better idea.
I don't think there are any projects that buy their tokens back on the market because they don't guarantee that the tokens that have been burned will make prices rise, ICO can't be trusted anymore. Many of them already know that the ICO stage is always frozen by their own team because they know that big money it will not be used properly so there is often a scamer on the project.
ICO was the best fundraising strategy ever, huge funds came into crypto space in 2017 making many projects reach their hardcap target smoothly but things have changed alot since many investors are took advantage of, now IEO is what we have left, it works but not much successful like how ICO did in it's glorious days, I'm totally against new fundraising skill because it's harder to trust another when IEO did things better, the only thing missing is trusts, we should focus on restoring that lost 'trust'.
Once the token price falls by more than 20% from the initial price, there's this offering called Dynamic Coin Offering where participants can generate risk free profits by buying tokens from the market and be able to refund them. Those tokens that were refunded are automatically burned reducing the circulating supply by up to 100%.
Is this better than IEO and ICO itself being that people are entering crypto, risk free?
Interesting, it looks like they saw the weakness of ICO due to trust and confidence with the project. What worries me here is the ability of the project to sustained all those refunds that will be push through by the investors. This is a win win situation if you think about it. Comparing to IEO there is a chance that you can participate as I read even sold at the market is capable of selling on the team. But as I read the terms, this is something new that might work or not. But lets see, it says that there will be the first dyco around May so we can hear it sooner as we already on the middle of the month. Is this better than IEO and ICO itself being that people are entering crypto, risk free?
And for burning the tokens, they should be bought from the market and who would buy those coins? Would it be daomaker or the project itself. If the project have to instantly buy back their token after getting listed, they'd never get listed at all. ICO are done for raising the funds, if they won't be able to use that money, they won't issue an ICO. The gradual unfreezing of funds is a better idea.
Once the token price falls by more than 20% from the initial price, there's this offering called Dynamic Coin Offering where participants can generate risk free profits by buying tokens from the market and be able to refund them. Those tokens that were refunded are automatically burned reducing the circulating supply by up to 100%.
Is this better than IEO and ICO itself being that people are entering crypto, risk free?
Interesting, it looks like they saw the weakness of ICO due to trust and confidence with the project. What worries me here is the ability of the project to sustained all those refunds that will be push through by the investors. This is a win win situation if you think about it. Comparing to IEO there is a chance that you can participate as I read even sold at the market is capable of selling on the team. But as I read the terms, this is something new that might work or not. But lets see, it says that there will be the first dyco around May so we can hear it sooner as we already on the middle of the month. Is this better than IEO and ICO itself being that people are entering crypto, risk free?
In early 2018, token sales were said to become the future of crowdfunding. Now, 2 years later, token sale volumes are down by 99.7%.
The problem isn't token sales. The problem is the framework of ICOs. The framework is broken and always was.
It is 2020 and the ICO framework has remained static. Token sale are as backwards as ever. We decided this cannot go on.
Once the token price falls by more than 20% from the initial price, there's this offering called Dynamic Coin Offering where participants can generate risk free profits by buying tokens from the market and be able to refund them. Those tokens that were refunded are automatically burned reducing the circulating supply by up to 100%.
Is this better than IEO and ICO itself being that people are entering crypto, risk free?
Source - https://daomaker.com/dyco?utm_source=lx
Are you promoting Daomaker? Obviously this is a new form that is not really needed at the moment. IEO is still doing their job well, they have helped many new projects succeed and many investors have gained profits when investing in it. The problem isn't token sales. The problem is the framework of ICOs. The framework is broken and always was.
It is 2020 and the ICO framework has remained static. Token sale are as backwards as ever. We decided this cannot go on.
Once the token price falls by more than 20% from the initial price, there's this offering called Dynamic Coin Offering where participants can generate risk free profits by buying tokens from the market and be able to refund them. Those tokens that were refunded are automatically burned reducing the circulating supply by up to 100%.
Is this better than IEO and ICO itself being that people are entering crypto, risk free?
Source - https://daomaker.com/dyco?utm_source=lx
That's probably related to you or you have sort of connection from that project. As you have said they're already dropping and lucky are those that managed to survive in this catastrophy for ICOs.
It's impossible to go back to the days that ICOs are still relative and being liked by most. Another ICO that will go out today will mostly be thought of the same as the others that have existed.
It's impossible to go back to the days that ICOs are still relative and being liked by most. Another ICO that will go out today will mostly be thought of the same as the others that have existed.
IEO is still good, so I think there is no need for any new form of fundraising. If only serious exchanges select good projects, I believe that new projects will still be successful and profitable for investors.
I'm not interested in any new style of raising money for new projects, IEO is more than enough, data shows that ICO did better when it was still reigning in 2017 but scammers destroys every ICO respects left, but IEO still gets the job done, trying new ways of raising fund in 2020 will be a lot more risky than anything
DYCO is promising but only if it's a real project and not another scam getaways, people needs to be very careful this days, scammers will always find a new ways to lure investors and ruined them over, you've been warned, I think it's better to concentrate more on upcoming IEOs from top exchanges than looking for new type of ICO look alikes
In my opinion, IEO is enough. It has an intermediary exchange, the problem of investors is just to scrutinize that exchange and choose their own IEO to minimize risk. Anyway, DYCO's idea sounds good and if it's true, I believe many investors will pay attention to it.
Hm, this makes me remember IMO platform from 2019 that scammed millions of people, even my 200$ worth of IMO Token shrinks down to 29$ today, people do need a new fundraising system but that is a big weak point for many scammers, they will provide what we needed the most to take advantage of us, if DYCO is real it's only a matter of time
True 
IMO platform did scam many, even bounty rewards was locked for a year and price is already dumped, I don't have any reason to trust new fund raising ICO platform until they prove that they are different, I even trust ICO and IEO more than any, sorry
Hm, this makes me remember IMO platform from 2019 that scammed millions of people, even my 200$ worth of IMO Token shrinks down to 29$ today, people do need a new fundraising system but that is a big weak point for many scammers, they will provide what we needed the most to take advantage of us, if DYCO is real it's only a matter of time
DYCO looks interesting, I'm opened to newer ways to raise fund for new projects because IEO is just not enough, but new Fundraising strategies must first prove themselves and many investors will give a try, honestly we need something new
legendary
Activity: 2156
Merit: 2100
Marketing Campaign Manager |Telegram ID- @LT_Mouse
It sounds good from your above post but I have no good knowledge on it. However, no project can be able to collect fund unless they have utility in real life. Back in the day, any project could raise fubd because most people used to take such ICO as passive income way but now it has changed. Anyway, the idea of DYCO sounds good.
A shill advertisement of daomaker which itself is a stupid idea that's not going to work. I don't think any ICO would go with daomaker to have such an ICO which won't let them use the money they raise. Even if any ICO got hosted with daomaker, I bet it's surely a scam associated with the daomaker itself.
That's the problem here. Promoting a different approach of crowdsourcing but doing it in the wrong way. They should have at least created only one thread but seems I have been seeing not only one. So it looks like they are being desperate to promote this daomaker platform. I hope people are now smart in choosing a quality project.
A shill advertisement of daomaker which itself is a stupid idea that's not going to work. I don't think any ICO would go with daomaker to have such an ICO which won't let them use the money they raise. Even if any ICO got hosted with daomaker, I bet it's surely a scam associated with the daomaker itself.
In early 2018, token sales were said to become the future of crowdfunding. Now, 2 years later, token sale volumes are down by 99.7%.
The problem isn't token sales. The problem is the framework of ICOs. The framework is broken and always was.
It is 2020 and the ICO framework has remained static. Token sale are as backwards as ever. We decided this cannot go on.
Once the token price falls by more than 20% from the initial price, there's this offering called Dynamic Coin Offering where participants can generate risk free profits by buying tokens from the market and be able to refund them. Those tokens that were refunded are automatically burned reducing the circulating supply by up to 100%.
Is this better than IEO and ICO itself being that people are entering crypto, risk free?
Source - https://daomaker.com/dyco?utm_source=lx
The problem isn't token sales. The problem is the framework of ICOs. The framework is broken and always was.
It is 2020 and the ICO framework has remained static. Token sale are as backwards as ever. We decided this cannot go on.
Once the token price falls by more than 20% from the initial price, there's this offering called Dynamic Coin Offering where participants can generate risk free profits by buying tokens from the market and be able to refund them. Those tokens that were refunded are automatically burned reducing the circulating supply by up to 100%.
Is this better than IEO and ICO itself being that people are entering crypto, risk free?
Source - https://daomaker.com/dyco?utm_source=lx
Jump to: