Topic: What will ICO's do with those unsold tokens? - page 5. (Read 846 times)
The unsold tokens are either added back to the main pool for further development or better still they burn the unsold tokens. All these decisions would have to be made by the team based on the stipulated plans that they have made concerning their ICO but i prefer they burn to reduce the total supply hence increasing the value of their token from time to time.
Whatever is stated in the whitepaper and in the road map. If the whitepaper states that they will burn unsold token, then they should burn the tokens after ICO or they will lose credibility. If they say they will lock it for future use, then it will be locked or frozen. You should read the whitepaper of any ICO so you know what they intended to do with the tokens. It is due diligence.
Burning is the best what a project can do to keep investors happy and hope for good fortune.We have already seen thousands of projects failed and even to get listed.I too have a load of shit tokens and the projects had vanished.Moreover we see that times are changing slowly from ICO to IEO and the game is played little differently.Crowdsale was much more safe and good.
I dont think that most of the ICOs were selling the unsold tokens yet, but they are doing more opportunities by selling once more.
I have seen many ICO's selling tokens for cryptocurrencies. What will they do with those unsold tokens at the end of their ICO? Some say they will burn it so no one can use it. Are they burning it or is it really the good to burn those unsold tokens?
It's a good practice provided that they really burn it, it's good for long term profit, small supply means good profit for early holders of the coins, but we still have to look for the platform, I don't care if they burn it or resell it as long as they are dedicated to push their platform, it's all about the platform for me.
I have seen many ICO's selling tokens for cryptocurrencies. What will they do with those unsold tokens at the end of their ICO? Some say they will burn it so no one can use it. Are they burning it or is it really the good to burn those unsold tokens?
Burn it, to reserve the value of the tokens. Other way than burn may resulting the dump of the token price
because usually the amount of unsold tokens in most ICO nowadays is very massive.
IF the dev not burning the unsold tokens, im afraid the damage price of the token will become irreversible.
I think to burn tokens, this is the last choice for all ICOs if they have not found an accurate solution after making some of their efforts and most importantly they must continue to follow the first commitment as stated in the whitepaper by having the target in accordance with the negotiated start possible in doing additional distribution it is an obligation to distribute in other ways I think it will be very good after that if you don't find a good solution then they will burn it.
Depending on the writeup from the whitepaper, usually, ICO projects burn tokens that are unsold. This helps reduce the supply in circulation while also improving the potential value of the token price
You understand that when a project has many tokens after selling tokens, this significantly affects the price, that is, there will be a surplus of tokens on the market, and by burning tokens the price stabilizes and corresponds to the sale price or even higher.
I have seen many ICO's selling tokens for cryptocurrencies. What will they do with those unsold tokens at the end of their ICO? Some say they will burn it so no one can use it. Are they burning it or is it really the good to burn those unsold tokens?
If they are really to go by their policy, they are actually meant to burn these tokens to limit the number of supplies but I think some of these ICO, not all though don’t go by these, some of them use these remaining token to crash the price of their ICO by dumping so that the price of the ICO can crash and will limit the ability of the investor to dump the coin because after they dump these remaining token.It will make the price of the token go far below the ICO price, but I think it is better to do these and still be able to control it back after their project is fully established than for investors to dump the coin.
I have seen many ICO's selling tokens for cryptocurrencies. What will they do with those unsold tokens at the end of their ICO? Some say they will burn it so no one can use it. Are they burning it or is it really the good to burn those unsold tokens?
many projects prefer to burn it. but there are also those who choose to lock it for several years.but for me, the better are those who burn it. by burning unsold tokens making fewer token supplies, this provides a greater opportunity for future prices to rise. and maybe I'm not the only one who agrees with this, because people are more aware of projects that don't burn unsold tokens
Yes, almost all the projects are coins that are not sold and projects that are worried about the price of their coins, burn not sold coins.
Different projects with different ways of dealing with their unsold tokens. They can burn the tokens off, airdrop it to their community or reserve it for future purpose like emergencies, marketing, etc. Each of them have their effect on the tokens, the burned tokens will decrease the tokens total supply and therefore have a corresponding increase in the value of each token. While airdroping the tokens will increase the circulating supply which will give the tokens more liquidity but could also have a adverse effects on the tokens price.
I have seen many ICO's selling tokens for cryptocurrencies. What will they do with those unsold tokens at the end of their ICO? Some say they will burn it so no one can use it. Are they burning it or is it really the good to burn those unsold tokens?
Yes mostly projects burn the unsold tokens but thats not happen all the time. Its good if they burn the unsold tokens because it will decrease the total supply of the coin directly increasing in price. But some other projects choose not to burn those unsold tokens rather use it for developments and emergency purposes. 
if they burn their unsold coins it is a very right decision in order to maintain the quality of their coins. but I see not all projects do that. so we need proof of the project that really burned their unsold coins to make them more reliable.
Most of them are burning these tokens.
But also there is some greedier ones. They keep that tokens for themselves or looking for a second ico.
But also there is some greedier ones. They keep that tokens for themselves or looking for a second ico.
Much depends on what is written in the contract. If now we can see with you that people really took this operation into account in the smart contract, then of course we can say that it is generally normal and the tokens are really just burned.
I have seen almost ICOs burning unsold tokens. It's good to decrease total supply and to increase value of token. But some projects will use unsold tokens for marketing like running airdrop campaigns for holders.
As my experienced, there are only 2 ways what team do to unsold tokens. They will either burn it or just distribute it to all holders in a fair way so somehow all holders get some profit to it.
I have seen many ICO's selling tokens for cryptocurrencies. What will they do with those unsold tokens at the end of their ICO? Some say they will burn it so no one can use it. Are they burning it or is it really the good to burn those unsold tokens?
yes they usually burn it. I don't think that's good or not, but it must be because this can cause investors to be scared. many are predicted if the token is not burned, there will be a dump. To get rid of this thought, it is natural that tokens that are not sold must be burned. Jump to: