I have invested in the ICO, but I am getting pretty worried. Someone told me this:
1. several issues besides the growing bubble around icos...
2. wings has engineered their "twitter presence" i.e., bought followers and rts.
3. the use of "donation" heavily...
4. the idea sucks in general.
5. the creators of the platform cannot be identified save for their social media marketer.
I countered them with Wings' rating on ICOrating website.
Do we have answers to this negative list to get the ICO moving?
1 - Wings was especially designed to bring back order, transparency and community control in the chaotic ecosystem of crypto crowdfunding, by focusing the community attention via forecast markets on quality projects high potential preposition and public teams.
2 - We offered bounty for joining our twitter, this is a standard method all companies (mainstream as well) are doing, promoting their social presence in exchange for various perks. The nouncy campaign has followed among these lines as well.
3 - Wings token campaign was specifically designed as a donation based one, In order to be the first legal and regulatory compliant (goo.gl/k8N654) crypto-crowdfunding platform. Ethereum actually established this pattern, and other recent projects have followed it as well.
4 - As you correctly mentioned, people are welcome to read the latest review by ICOrating, where we got one of the highest ratings -
http://icorating.com/project/12/WingsThat said we always welcome any
constructive critique, and in fact improving the product design following the feedback we are constantly receiving.
5 - We are very public, and had our team members traveling the world extensively during the last few months (USA, China, Swiss, UK, Russia, Argentina and more).
Here are some of our team recorded public presentations, meet-ups and interviews:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZQ2LV_pYBHctbyx5ScdASgThis guys is full of shit. If you don't see how much of a scam this whole campaign is, then you deserve to lose all your money. There are no legal and regulatory laws preventing any company from having legitimate investors. If they really are confident in their product, then they shouldn't have any issue with calling investors what they are (or are they too scared to have REAL obligations to deliver). Investors clearly understand the risks of investing, but calling them "donators" is just pretty much robbing you in broad daylight. Which company out there calls people "donators"?? You buy a stock of a company, you are an investor and shareholder flat out. When Facebook, Twitter and Google conducted their IPOs, did they ask for "donations".
This scheme brings into mind Synerio AMPs where Dor Konforty ran with the same "donation" scam and fucked over all his "donators" when they lost more than 70% of what they put in before they even got their coins. Guys, please wake up. You have a snake oil salesman who is pretty much selling you snake oil and not even hiding the fact that its snake oil. Do not "donate" to this fucker who will steal your money. These guys (and I believe many are ex crypti) are all part of the same developer cartels that copy, develop, pump and dump the coins that you won't hear about in a years time. Just look at what happened with Lisk, the DAO, and Synerio AMPs.
As a person who has been burnt before, I am strongly urging anyone who is reading this to not "donate" money to these thieves. The red flags are all there, "Donations", ex crypty folks, bribing people to post fake twitter posts to hype this product. This is a clear SCAM. A true company would not hide from calling people that fund it with their hard earned money investors and does not need to bribe people to create fake twitter hype. I cannot begin to emphasize how much this has SCAM written all over it.