Bitcoin Forum

Buying the tokens on exchanges seems to be more safe than buying them on ICOs websites.
But there are still some problems:
1. Using IEOs instead of ICOs, we are adding a 3rd party than can control what we buy. This is in contradiction with the main purpose of cryotocurrencies which is centralization (edit: decentralization)
2. The big bonuses that big investors are still giving buying the tokens directly from the team and cause big price decrease
3. KYC that is still implementing. The only thing that has changed is that we are giving our documents to the exchange instead of the team ( In my opinion KYC should be completely eliminated or a new safe method which I have no idea about that should be implemented)
4. Exchanges might get money and do not pay attention to healthy of the project like what they do for listing the tokens

What do you guys think?
What should be done to have safer fundraising? Assume that you are making some rules. Just try to preserve the decentralization as much as possible.  

With a centralized system it means that the value of transparency is almost non-existent (unless the exchange wants to open transaction data for anyone or any wallet that bought during the IEO).

Sure, they (exchange) get some money from the project and most of them (in my opinion) they don't even doing some deep research about the project who will do the IEO in their exchange

I think you are right that there are still some challenges with IEOs but the major problem I see is with IEOs conducted on the small exchanges. Aside from the fact that they are not as reliable and reputable like the top exchanges, they can also hoard the tokens and pretend it sold out and then dump on the investors after listing.

I'm not sure if the problems you told are issues. But even if they're just your speculation, your thoughts about KYC should be eliminated is wrong in my point of view.
KYC prevent bots and anonymous person to be part of them. So KYC is a requirement that must be included.

Certainly, IEOs seems to be an improvement on ICO. Although it's not perfect but it has done alot of good with much more room for improvement. On the part of bonuses, only teams can fix this because they use the huge bonuses to woo investors who contribute money for seed funding and so on

I think it is not really different from ICOs. Both ICO and IEO basically have the same concept but for sure IEO has a better way. IEO provides a listing place at the early stage in fundraising. It makes investors won't be afraid about the listing plan. However, the developers and IEO teams can make an agreement about everything related to information on the token sale, even it is a manipulation of the data. So, it is also possible that the exchange as the third party shows a fake result on fundraising. In this case, we must be careful and selective to choose the exchange.

I assume there is no safer way. The best way is to analyze correctly all the parts of the projects. If you find out something strange or not make sense, then just avoid joining.

The first thing about safe or not an IEO will depend on what exchange is chosen. Regarding KYC itself, there are still many ICOs and IEOs that apply because they relate to several regulations from project developers and banks. Regarding centralization or decentralization, the IEO does not mean that it must be centralized and that it depends on the concept of the project itself. Regarding the prospect of exchange, it will depend on the agreement of the developers and also the exchange itself.

I don't think so. IEOs are new style of advertising and promoting a certain project. First of all, this does not guarantee that the project is legit. Also, your thread title is being opposed by your explanation (you are more of explaining IEO as an unsafe way than as a safe way).

IEO is the reason why I think there's only a few signature campaigns right now in the forum. Another thing, IEO is more of an UNSAFE way to join a crypto project. Buying tokens through exchanges during IEO stage will give an immediate impact to the price of the token, which is not good for small investors.

And yes, KYC is not a great thing on the part of investors. Honestly, KYC processes of these crypto projects are being done in the wrong way. As an investor, you should not disclose your personal info to people who you don't personally know. Once you give your personal info (especially your ID) to a certain project devs, the danger is already there. You should not give your trust to anyone considering that most crypto projects nowadays are exit scams. They might use your personal info for another BAD plans.

2. No need bonus, for what you get bonus went your asset got down from the ICO Price. For me bonus just wasting your asset, better IEO on reputable exchange top 1-5 without bonus but you got a good result.
3. KYC Its a normal think, if you disagree then avoid it.
4. Lol, If you talking about shit exchange then its true they only want a money from listed IEO. But if we are talking like Binance & Huobi, they always have their own due diligence to make sure shit project would come to them.

The third party creates more better awareness for projects that's why IEO sell off in seconds most times,people or investors trust exchanges more than buying through project websites

I can't deny IEO was really became a hope and advantage to most of the community of here in the forum. This is the feelings actually I have on it. Due to I found out that a project that under by IEO is much more higher chances for me to get profit compare to ICO, though I still believed in the ICO as long as I see it has something potential about their project. And I agreed that KYC must be eliminate completely for every campaign project.

It is true that IEO is a lot safer than ICO if the exchange platform is a reputable one. If not, then it is the same as an ordinary ICO.

Well, I therefore conclude that it always depend on the platform, the project and the team behind every project. We should always do our part on evaluating a certain project before we join.

All your points are good but investors prefer to do away with decentralization and KYC in exchange in making a profit on an exchange that will give them a safe environment to invest, ICO and IEO is not really decentralized but do we have a choice since this is the only way to become early investors for a project that we want to invest.

IEO has eased up many things for the investors. They can easily buy tokens with any coins they hold. They don't have to fill up KYC everytime and providing your KYC to a trusted exchange is better than providing to each ICO. Exchange supported projects are more successful than independent one, so there's nothing on exchange side to blame for.

If the project gets IEO at a leading exchange, it is definitely a good project and the development team of that project will be highly appreciated but most of these IEO projects are difficult to invest because every investor wants to join that IEO, so the competition rate will be very high. Now a lot of choices for everyone but it's best to just choose reputable exchanges like Bitmax, Gate, Bitfinex and Binance

Good points and there are still issues with IEO's such as it being difficult to access and there's always a risk there. I got to know some of the exchanges and they're only after big bucks from these projects and not after the progress or roadmap they have. An example is this new offering that offers you a 50% discounted price (https://medium.com/@StandardTokenizationProtocol/micro-token-offering-mto-3-d5a732475ffa?utm_source=lx) on hot coins that are already in exchanges if you win their lottery. It's great to see other companies always looking for ways to improve and make things better for the crypto community.

I think it is safe in a way that IEOs are less likely to run away from you. But still, there is a risk that you may not earn any profit at all. That is why I treat IEOs and ICOs the same way.

The same question I asked when I first heard of the Initial Exchange Offering. The only problem that solves is that it reduces the rate at which project get initiated without completion. It won't be able to prevent what may happen to be unsuspecting fraud as the exchanges may be carried away by their earnings from IEO projects to be listed on their platform.

The title is: IEOs are more safe. But there are still problems that must be solved.
I didn't meant IEOS are safe. You are right. In this topic, I have focused more on disadvantages. I just meant that IEOs are safer than ICOs but there are still many challenges with cryptocurrencies fundraising. In my opinion creating IEOs was a good progress when we compare them with ICOs.  Just this. There are many problem with them.

I don't think your opinion 1 is correct. The exchange' IEOs do not have smart contracts to check how much money has been transfered into it, all paramater are provide from exchange.
Regarding opinion 4, ít's true with almost projects so far, the exchange is just a listing and allows you trading, they have no right to interfere in the project.

That's true IEO is more safe and so far is very profitable. So far I don't have a problemin this new concept of fundraising.

I do not agree with the point 4.
For example if Binance manage IEO of some scam, then they will loose their reputation and loose more money than they get from listing such IEO.  ;)

I don't think you are controlled to what you able to buy, you can take it or leave it just like ICO, if talking about how the money gathered ICO also gathering your money in centralized way. The KYC is a must for the project or exchanges to survive, it is required by the government and if not you will be in huge problem since the main purpose is to prevent money laundering. Imagine an exchange oppose the idea of KYC they will be suspected for money laundering practice in an instant.

No matter what, I prefer IEOs to ICOs especially the fact that they limit the amount that each person can purchase, some exchanges even go as far as not ending the IEO when hardcap is reached, they just keep accepting investments until the time period expires, at the send of everything, investors might just get like5% of their order, further reducing the amount allocated to each person.

Exchanges has become a promising place for new projects and several popular exchanges have successfully launched their IEO platform. It means that investors are very comfortable with their investments in the IEO and the problems you say are not considered bad by some investors, because so far none of them have complained about them, of course this has always been a pros and cons.

There are still many fraudulent IEOs available in this market, but most of those projects appear only in small exchanges and very few investors participate. I think the selection of a good project IEO is a very difficult task because there are thousands of projects that want to be listed in Binance and the competition rate is very difficult, so scam is not possible in this exchange. Anyway, IEO has just appeared in the last 4 months and people still have a lot of opportunities to participate in good projects.

There is nothing safe about it.
I think people who have no idea why they are in this communnity have tolerance for principles that violate our ideals... If we understand what is being fed to us we would be more careful.
This whole thing shows how weak, gullible and easily deceived we humans can be when anyone (or anything) dangles few carrots in our faces.

Many of this IEO have proven to be unsuccessful. Aside being safe, which to me I don't believe it is totally safe because there are still some shit exchange platform that promote scam project and still offering IEO, the price of the token will still drop even if the token is $1000 each. This is because most project this day are not backup by demanding products and services. When there are no demand, how do you expect people to buy and when people are just selling without buying, definitely the token will be forever a dead token.

I totally agree with you and to add to your points i would say that IEOs are much better form of fund raising but at the same time i do not like the way some exchanges are offering IEOs, as in one of IEOs binance posted complicated lottery or draw type of system to participate in the ieo to which i do not agree as i think that the process shoupd be as simple as possible.

yes indeed due to the booming of the IEO this year the same problems are just keeping intact because it is turning to scam in the midway or even the IEO is finish just like ICO . This must be resolved or else it can product more problem within the crypto space

Yes, IEO is partially safe as far as fundraising is concerned. The safety of investors depends solely on the integrity of a particular exchange. For instance, an IEO on exchanges such as Binance, Kucoin and Bittrex is safe but IEO on unpopular exchanges are not that safe because investors are prone to risk of fund on the exchange. A lot of quack exchanges are now offering IEO so one should be very careful.

I think IEO are slightly secure than ICO. In another word, IEO is an advanced form of ICO. But IEO involves some problems too. As you said, there involves a risk like exchanges become too flexible to allow any project launching IEO compromising its rules.

Generally speaking, IEOs are safer than ICOs and it's true that there are some downsides with IEOs too. Investors nowadays prefer IEO mainly because they think the team must have been verified by the exchange and also because listing is sure. The downside is that investors do not bother doing due diligence on IEO projects relying entirely on the exchange, this is not proper. Talking about the KYC verification, in my own opinion, it's an advantage for IEOs since verification on an exchange entails you can participate successfully in all IEOs done on that exchange, which is better than multiple KYCs in the case of ICOs requesting KYC.

I still accept kyc, if it's for quality exchange. I also have no problem with the transparency of the funds obtained. and I'm also okay with bonuses.

but I pay more attention to the quality of the project. we cannot invest just because IEO is in a large market. must be verified from the exchange for every project that will do IEO, this is to prevent fraud.

but unfortunately almost all markets that provide IEO, rarely or even never do this. they only care about the money earned.

so if I could suggest the regulations. I want an institution or team that handles the problem to be verified and publish their findings to the community, before IEO starts. so potential investors can judge whether the project is feasible or not

Now a days I have seen that projects are organizing IEOs with very new exchanges on which most of the users dont have much confidence. Holding IEO on major exchanges off course costs more to projects but from investor's point of view I think this is most important.

I think there is a serious light which you have shined on a darkness we may not know about IEOs.. I was suspecting stuffs in this regards before, with a foreknowledge  that IEOS  sure have their shortcomings too!

Nevertheless,  IEOS still serve as the saving grace for crpto enthusiasts who loves investment in crypto projects

IEO regulations that implement a third party namely Exchange to manage token sales are also very precise, even though they are contrary to the decentralized cryptocurrency nature. with a third party that is sales exchange will be more efficient and easier to do. If you want to choose a good IEO, you can choose a third party or exchange that already has high credibility like Binance. For the KYC problem it has become mandatory, even though KYC ICO is required for several projects to find out the buyers of their coins.

I think the only problem here is exchange. maybe for a large exchange I'm not a problem, but what about a small exchange. this is what we should focus on.

it's useless to make any rules, if the exchange is doubtful. Examples such as coineal are indicative of scammers. I want that in the future there will only be a few exchanges that focus on running IEO. to make it easier to monitor.

Somehow I do not agree with the number 4 reason you stated. A good exchange will not just neglect the project it lists cos it has gained profit. That is why it is necessary always to participate in IEOs conducted by a reputable exchange and not just any random exchange.

Only Support those who's going to be offered inside a well known exchange so the risk is much lesser than trying to invest with those who are being sell to a not popular exchange who can easily runaway with your money, bigger and reputable exchange will scan those projects to make sure that the team behind are capable of paying the listing fee and have a good overview of the outcome from their projected road plans.

Nothing is much safer than having an escrow and giving the funds to the team thru each milestones achieved by the team. IEO is really not that safe the only who will profit here is the small exchanges that are pretty much doing these IEOs today because they know they are just small and messing all these up won't matter to them because they can actually mess these up.

The exchanges hosting these IEO's should equally take the interest of the investors serious and not being selfish about what they will gain alone.They should have regulations that will control the activities of these IEO projects to inspire confidence on the part of the investors too

Yes,I also think in ieo there are various things should change the first change should be kyc because we all know binance is leaking people personal information.Binance is the biggest exchange they leaking kyc information so what will small exchange do so I think kyc should change

Of course you are right, IEO is better and safer than ICO, and all the problems you listed are also present and interfere with normal operation. I can add on my own that, ideally, it would be if the money that the team collects on IEO were blocked by a smart contract and unlocked, only after all the conditions are met. In this case, no one would lose money even if they didn’t have good luck in collecting fees, investor funds would simply roll back to their owners.

1, Even dealing with the project team itself is already centralized so its just all the same.

2. Already a traditional,early investors would have big bonuses and the main ones who do dump price for profits nothing surprises here.

3. Get used to this system.We do hate it but we don't have any choice if we do like to invest.

4. Exchange are businesses,they would always matter on money making than thinking on investors safety.

How people are calling IEOs are safe? Give me one IEO who gives profit to the investors? But there are lots of IEO which has given profits to project team and exchanges.

The aspect that I am not so much comfortable with on these exchanges IEO is where they have to place that buy limit which is usually too high for any common man like to buy, how many projects I have to commit such big amount in before I know that I am investing.

Secondly, I believe they can all see now that it is not bounty hunters that are causing dump but the big bonuses that they have been giving.

This same big bonus is affecting the IEO to already as I heard that there is also dumping that is occurring in the IEO sector also  by these big bonuses, so my take is that they have to really cut it down, and for the KYC part, nothing you can do to ever get this KYC off these people’s mind. The only exchange that I still trust to get money and still do due diligence is Binance.

You have explained the issues very precisely i would like to add on the point of discount to large investors, whether it is an ico, ieo or sto the price of the tokens should be the same and their should be only one crowdsale not private sale, pre-sale and public sale, all these gimmicks by projects to attract big investors have resulted in an unstable and dumping market for the tokens of these projects because large scale investors keep selling at minimum profit the looser is the common or small investor who purchased from the public sale, so once we see one price for all in the crowdsale campaigns we will see stability in better performance by even newer tokens.

Only exchanges that care about their very own reputations will care about what project they are listing on their exchanges for IEO fund raising thats why its always good if every investors do their own research themselves and not relying on exchanges to the research for them

Investors will stop investing in IEOs if they arent making profits from them,you need to find good ICO analysis that can show you how profitable investing in IEO can be,many IEO from binance and gate.io are very profitable,do you invest in IEO like celer network? pls do your research very well,IEO is way profitable than you think

Using the third party will solve the existing problems caused by the teams. Actually, I believe in the proper exchange for sending my documents instead of teams. If there is a lock period for the pre-sale investors, the funds will not be used for dumping if there is a bonus stage on both ICO and IEO.

As it seems, nobody really cares about decentralisation, otherwise there would not be so much participants in IEOs. Everybody is screaming that privacy is important but what those people are caring about is only profit.