Topic: Your opinions on IEOs (Read 1820 times)

Well, it can be said that IEO has become a real alternative to ICO. ICO created a fundraising boom in 2017 and 2018. However, a significant percentage of projects were scammers. So, all we need now is a trusted fundraising model for startups. And exactly IEOs provide an increased level of confidence in cryptocurrency projects, so I truly believe that IEOs can become the standard model for fundraising in the crypto space and, possibly, even create the next fundraising boom.

IEO is a much better fund raising means for projects cause it is been managed by the exchange. During the era of ICOs especially in 2018 so many projects couldn't raise enough fund for development or exchange listing. IEO is more secured and it gives the investors more confidence to invest.

Not every IEO is successful. In fact, Binance just announced earlier that they will be removing the BTT/USD trading pair due to lack of popularity.

https://www.publish0x.com/cryptobeach/bttbtc-being-removed-binance-xpxjpz

I didn't like IEOs too much because it gave far to much power to the exchange owners, the IDOs didn't work out so well because there was no manipulation involved but the IEOs were another story entirely, the owners of the exchange's were just changing the rules and gradually started weeding out the small man and ensuring that it's only whales that can participate in the IEO process, when the Hodling rules were introduced, it suddenly didn't seem so hot anymore when people were losing more by holding the exchange tokens than they were getting from successfully buying the IEO tokens and I think that's why it failed in the end.

I agree with you, if the IEO program can be decentralized maybe this will be more interesting, investors can find out the original statistics of a project that is doing IEO

IEO is good for token sales now because there has been a paradigm shift in interest of investors from ICOs towards IEOs. This was largely due to the frequently reported issues on fake and unsuccessful ICOs. However, IEOs tend to be successful on exchanges with large trading volume and liquidity like the tier exchanges (Binance, Kucoin, Coinbene etc)

Not every IEO is successful. In fact, Binance just announced earlier that they will be removing the BTT/USD trading pair due to lack of popularity.

https://www.publish0x.com/cryptobeach/bttbtc-being-removed-binance-xpxjpz

I think IEO is very good because it allows any crypto project to fundraise with directly through the cryptocurrency Exchange platform that many of its investors like Binance are already successfully running IEO and already many projects A successful one.

IEO is one of the new strategies for crowdfunding that are still not widely known for blockchain-based projects. If you want to join IEO choose a good project.

IEOs are better if held on those popular exchanges like binance, huobi, idax, okex, and kucoin because the coin will be marketed free by the exchange itself only.

IEO seems to be successful only in large, reputable and secure trading platforms with high liquidity. I see that Latoken launched ICOs on their platform long before the term IEO was born. However, they did not have great success, not getting money from investors. Successful IEO programs are mostly on large, cross-platform trading platforms. So I think IEO is only really good when it comes to large trading platforms.

Recently, I've seen a lot of positive press regarding IEOs. After all, Binance is already successfully running them, giving ICO projects a chance to shine and many other exchanges are following suit.
My personal opinion is that IEOs should be discouraged. Firstly, it gives more and more power to these centralised exchanges, who are able to charge higher, more ridiculous listing fees for coins as well as extremely large payments to hold IEOs. Their vested interests in this way mean they are less likely to care about vetting projects that may be untrustworthy, leading to even more irresponsible behaviour.

Exchanges are already making far too much from listing fees, so IEOs on top are completely unnecessary. While they are good promotion for coins, such practices cannot be good in the long-term.
Instead, the focus should be easy-to-use decentralised exchanges which don't require intrusive KYC/AML and are much less likely to be corrupt/ill-willed if some DAO-like structure is in place. While blockchain technology has made the storage of data much safer, what is the point if thousands of crypto exchanges hold endless amounts of data on the customers in the same way banks do? The only thing changing is who owns the data, so privacy has not improved. And as crypto adoption increases, so will regulation of exchanges.
We don't want to end up in a situation where to trade any meaningful amount of crypto you have to send your name, address, ID, and bank account details to some exchange which can do whatever it likes with your data.

Your thoughts?

It's not so safe as you said and most of the safest IEOs are running on the trusted exchange site only and as you can see that about so many bad IEOs even running on the various exchange site. You can't say if all of IEOs were safe but what you can say to tell other if IEO that runs on a big exchange site will give more guarantee than IEO that runs on a little exchange site.
But, analyzation is always needed to be caused by so many IEOs are not giving good result.

That will be the case for most IEOs why? Its because the whole process is centralized we cannot see the real score even the sales on the IEOs. Though they are saying that they completed some rounds but in reality who can confirm this? Only the exchangw but they cant show the transactions made during the sales or maybe there is no real transactions. Sound fishy but its true.