Topic: What to do with the Unsold Tokens? - page 3. (Read 1634 times)
usually, when the token is unsold, they will airdrop to investors or those tokens will be burn.
I think the first option is the most rational one, which is an unsold token will be burned because investors will not worry if there is a price destruction on the market if the unsold token is not burned, especially if the team keep the token, the team may sell most of the tokens on the market and it is terrible for traders and investors.
I agree more if the unsold tokens are burned, rather than airdrop, because if you use an airdrop it will make the price of the token cheaper, but there may be other purposes that we do not know that a company makes a drop from the token unsold, maybe they intend to promote harder through airdrop
Burning is the best option in my point of view. When you burn few tokens get into circulation, the demand is set at enticing prices, and then the coin gets value,that is what I know and many of the ico projects do this
Hi,
I've been reading about the strategy ICOs use for unsold tokens in case they do not reach their hard cap.
As far as I understand, there are a few options to be used for this scenario.
1) Unsold tokens are burned - the most common option used by ICOs. If tokens are burnt, token holders share will increase, therefore its price.
2) Unsold tokens are not burned - founders keep them. It's not a good option at the eyes of the token holders. It can be used as a personal interest.
3) Unsold tokens are airdropped - A few ICOs (eg. FundFantasy) used this strategy. As far as they see it, the token price will be decreased but will be readjusted because people will use it.
I'm not aware of any more alternatives to those three. What are your thoughts? Would you use option 1 or go for the other two options? Would you come up with another possibility?
Thank you very much.
Probably the best thing to do for an ico in case something like this happens is to have very clear policies from the very beginning about what they're going to do if not all the tokens are sold, because as we are seeing right now it is becoming more and more difficult for icos to reach their goals when it comes to funding, but if no policy was implemented from the very beginning about what to do with tokens that were not sold then the option number one seems to be the most fair and the one that is the easiest to perform, because airdropping tokens is very unfair to all of those that paid money for them and if the developers instead decide to keep the tokens then possible accusations that the project is a scam may arise. I've been reading about the strategy ICOs use for unsold tokens in case they do not reach their hard cap.
As far as I understand, there are a few options to be used for this scenario.
1) Unsold tokens are burned - the most common option used by ICOs. If tokens are burnt, token holders share will increase, therefore its price.
2) Unsold tokens are not burned - founders keep them. It's not a good option at the eyes of the token holders. It can be used as a personal interest.
3) Unsold tokens are airdropped - A few ICOs (eg. FundFantasy) used this strategy. As far as they see it, the token price will be decreased but will be readjusted because people will use it.
I'm not aware of any more alternatives to those three. What are your thoughts? Would you use option 1 or go for the other two options? Would you come up with another possibility?
Thank you very much.
Hi,
I've been reading about the strategy ICOs use for unsold tokens in case they do not reach their hard cap.
As far as I understand, there are a few options to be used for this scenario.
1) Unsold tokens are burned - the most common option used by ICOs. If tokens are burnt, token holders share will increase, therefore its price.
2) Unsold tokens are not burned - founders keep them. It's not a good option at the eyes of the token holders. It can be used as a personal interest.
3) Unsold tokens are airdropped - A few ICOs (eg. FundFantasy) used this strategy. As far as they see it, the token price will be decreased but will be readjusted because people will use it.
I'm not aware of any more alternatives to those three. What are your thoughts? Would you use option 1 or go for the other two options? Would you come up with another possibility?
Thank you very much.
Some ICOs burn coins that don't sell at their sales and some freeze for the next year. Every development has different thoughts, so it depends on the dev of the ICO. Their choice to make an ICO will be successful or not. I've been reading about the strategy ICOs use for unsold tokens in case they do not reach their hard cap.
As far as I understand, there are a few options to be used for this scenario.
1) Unsold tokens are burned - the most common option used by ICOs. If tokens are burnt, token holders share will increase, therefore its price.
2) Unsold tokens are not burned - founders keep them. It's not a good option at the eyes of the token holders. It can be used as a personal interest.
3) Unsold tokens are airdropped - A few ICOs (eg. FundFantasy) used this strategy. As far as they see it, the token price will be decreased but will be readjusted because people will use it.
I'm not aware of any more alternatives to those three. What are your thoughts? Would you use option 1 or go for the other two options? Would you come up with another possibility?
Thank you very much.
Most ICOs burn they unsold tokens because that is the only way to destroy it after ICO in other for them to be able to manage the project and to avoid pump and dump, that is why ICO teams that don't have proper management of the unsold coins tend to become pump and dump in the future.
I know that the unsold tokens will be burned, but not a few are not burned, they hold them on the DEV and some continue with ICO stage 2
Hi,
I've been reading about the strategy ICOs use for unsold tokens in case they do not reach their hard cap.
As far as I understand, there are a few options to be used for this scenario.
1) Unsold tokens are burned - the most common option used by ICOs. If tokens are burnt, token holders share will increase, therefore its price.
2) Unsold tokens are not burned - founders keep them. It's not a good option at the eyes of the token holders. It can be used as a personal interest.
3) Unsold tokens are airdropped - A few ICOs (eg. FundFantasy) used this strategy. As far as they see it, the token price will be decreased but will be readjusted because people will use it.
I'm not aware of any more alternatives to those three. What are your thoughts? Would you use option 1 or go for the other two options? Would you come up with another possibility?
Thank you very much.
I've been reading about the strategy ICOs use for unsold tokens in case they do not reach their hard cap.
As far as I understand, there are a few options to be used for this scenario.
1) Unsold tokens are burned - the most common option used by ICOs. If tokens are burnt, token holders share will increase, therefore its price.
2) Unsold tokens are not burned - founders keep them. It's not a good option at the eyes of the token holders. It can be used as a personal interest.
3) Unsold tokens are airdropped - A few ICOs (eg. FundFantasy) used this strategy. As far as they see it, the token price will be decreased but will be readjusted because people will use it.
I'm not aware of any more alternatives to those three. What are your thoughts? Would you use option 1 or go for the other two options? Would you come up with another possibility?
Thank you very much.
Mostly some ICO project developer,they burn the unsold token in order to have a great and marketable product especially when they reached the hard caps,and thats mostly the needs of some investor and participants of thats saying project,in order to protect the price value of the given token and would not turn someday into a shit coin,otherwise some ICO project developer they recycle some unsold token or they given it as a part of airdrop.
I think the best strategy is to burn unsold tokens. If the percentage of unsold token is too high, the number of token remaining in the team will be too high. This creates untrusted situation about price. BTW some Ico's can choose to distribute unsold tokens to whitelisted investors, which may be a good choice.
i am agree with you dude.if developers team holding too much unsold token investor should worry if someday it dumped by developers. 
If that unsold token are possible to be listed in an exchange that was better if not it will be hold forever without any value or it was already worthless. If you are bounty hunter you should be more picky or choosy which ico will be promoted or advertise to make your time more valueable or not be wasted.
Unsold tokens can only be HODL, etc. These tokens are listed to the exchange!
Only valuable tokens have the value of hodl, there are some ico scams, only tokens are issued, not on the exchange!
If you encounter these tokens, your luck is bad!
Only valuable tokens have the value of hodl, there are some ico scams, only tokens are issued, not on the exchange!
If you encounter these tokens, your luck is bad!
I think the best strategy is to burn unsold tokens. If the percentage of unsold token is too high, the number of token remaining in the team will be too high. This creates untrusted situation about price. BTW some Ico's can choose to distribute unsold tokens to whitelisted investors, which may be a good choice.
As far as I remember, the vast majority of ICOs are trying to burn their tokens in order to avoid a fall in the price of their coin!
^^ Really depends what occurs with the token worth. It is possible the tokens could be used towards raising the overall value of the project.
I agree with excess supply because that weakens the price but if token used were able to raise the demand for the project then the opposite is true
Its a question of the overall quality and efficiency of implementation for the project really
I agree with excess supply because that weakens the price but if token used were able to raise the demand for the project then the opposite is true
Its a question of the overall quality and efficiency of implementation for the project really
I think the best option is to burn the unsold tokens. That will increase the value of the sold altcoins and that will benefit the investors. That is my favorite choice because it always makes investors highly profitable. 
That mindset usually that the unsold tokens will not end up in the pocket of the owners and might make the idea of centralization of the token even come into play, burning it will always give some guarantee to investors as long as burning them also gives a chance of causing an increase in the price of the token quickly when there is an increase in demand. These days, there is always that notion that comes to investors when they realized the team does not have any plan to burn unsold tokens, and that can actually halt their plans to want to invest. So, burning is the best option for both parties like someone rightly said.To be fair of course to the investors and the developers the best option is to burn the unsold tokens
Burning unsold tokens leave the investors peaceful that at least the supply of the tokens is controlled and in the long run, the amount of tokens in circulation will obviously affect the price of the token in the long run, and as an investor, you sure want to be able to get rest assured that your investment will quickly pay off in the long run. These days a lot of investors are usually more interested in what happens to unsold tokens and that has made it a criterion in a way for the team to always consider burning them. 
unsold tokens must be burned to keep prices stable. if not burned most likely the price will go down when in the market.
I suddenly confused where is the unsold coins go.Well, I do not think they will burned it. I though it will vanish away or deleted in the internet. Or maybe the creator has another plan for it, because it is so hard to invent a coins and then after it did not sold they will throw it away somewhere. I could not think they will burned it because it is hard to developed a coins that can used to a transactions.
There is no point of keeping unsold tokens unless the company has plans of putting them in the market. Good ICO's burn them to make sure it won't find it's way into circulation.
as an investor point of view, i prefer them to burned.because if there are so many tokens remaining unsold after a crowdsale, those tokens can be used for manipulating the price in the future or price can be dumped easily with them.
Maybe the dev should burn the token so it will reduce the supply and they can hope that it will make the price can increase although not much. This is what I often see on the tokens or coins, but I don't know for sure. Maybe they will search another way to solve this problem because the unsold tokens mean they cannot sell the token in the right price.
Jump to: