Bitcoin Forum

The ICO (Initial Coin Offerings) era has been past, many investor now not interest use these method, because most ICO turned into scam or failed.
after that, we have new method that called IEO (Initial Exchange Offering), The token sales administered by crypto exchange for helping startup that seeks to raise funds.
Now, DAOMAKER provide new method for token sales.

DYCO - Dynamic Coin Offering
"A DYCO offers its participants the ability to refund any token, no matter if they held them or sold them at a profit.
100% of the circulating supply is backed by USDC for the first 16 months after the Token Generation Event. The token supply remains static during this time. If the token value falls by more than 20% from the initial price, DYCO participants can generate risk free profits by buying tokens from the market and refunding them. Refunded tokens are automatically burned reducing the circulating supply by up to 100%."

Difference between DYCO, ICO, REFUNDABLE TOKEN SALE

https://i.ibb.co/TqnBq7m/dyco1.png (https://daomaker.com/dyco)

source: https://daomaker.com/dyco

is DYCO more effective than ICO or IEO? Is this method can give benefit for both the project and investor? and can this method reduce the scam project?

What do you think?

Obviously this system could be ideal for investors and promoters because it will give price guarantee and stability but at the same time i think it is too good to be true system and i do not see it being implemented anytime soon.

I am keeping my eye on this model and also Reversible ICO proposed by the creator of the ERC 20 token standard.

The other day I already heard about this model, but it is difficult to give any comments yet.But most likely this model will find its own investor as DAOMAKER chooses only the best projects.

It's too optimistic to say that DYCO that's more effective than ICO if we are going back again to the when some people have made the same thread like you that was showing the comparison between STO and ICO and those guys were saying the similar thing like you and then that doesn't make sense to make a conclusion before try to prove it.


it's better waiting for the result rather.  I didn't even believe if HYCO will be much more effective than ICO.

There is no way this would be sustainable, if the team has money to defend the process why are they looking for  other people's money.   This kind of model would surely be exploited, remember what happens to dai when  Ether price crashed some people lost money because market failed to follow the normal rule. I stand correct about this

This is a very good plan and I hope it will be sustainable. The fear of losing your money when the token dumps is enough to stop people from investing. This will bring in many investors and we will see many new projects

Honestly, this is my first time to encounter DYCO type of project.
And it seems that it will be the first for DAO maker to hold this kind.
So I am curious if they will be successful in implementing this new "standard".
We are already tired of ICOs and IEOs, which ended up the same.
Can DYCO regain the interest of investors?

"Teams must be transparent & successful, or else 100% of sold tokens are refunded & burned, thereby eliminating the project"
source: https://daomaker.com/dyco

Transparent and successful are subjective terms and open to human interpretation, this means you would still be at the mercy of human judgement and honesty. I would prefer a model where any refund mechanism is coded into the smart contract and lets the individual investor decide if the team has been transparent and successful. Release of funds for use by the team should be done in stages and subject to a voting mechanism based on number of tokens. Anyone who disagrees with the release should be able to refund their investment for 80% of the USDC held in their name by the smart contract.

I share your opinion if we have at least one crowdfunding doing this and become successful for investors and there are no profit loss for investors it will be embraced by both developers and investors, it is about protecting investors who losses a lot from ICO and IEO, so we'll see if any project can do this method.

DYCO would be a good way of gaining investors trust but there would be many problems for this type of ICO to happen.
The reason why project goes for ICO is to get funds to kickstart their project, If they had to held 80% of what they raise from investors as insurance, there would be left just 20% of funds to work with. Which would undermine the importance of the fund raising.

As Daomaker featured it, that's mean DYCO can be the next sale model in the crypto industry. Though I love the IEO model but it seems top exchanges are trying to dominate the whole crypto market, so we need a different but working sale model! Honestly, the idea is damn good, can't wait to see it live!

This method will be preferred by investors but not for developers, not many projects will use this method. Most fundraising projects want their funds to be received immediately.

Developers can take a chance since they cannot launch their platform effectively if they cannot generate funding and support from investors,  this industry without the help of investors cannot sustain itself so they are the one that should be a supporter and any model of crowdfunding that will help protect investors should be implemented.

Just want to update, here is the first project that implemented with DYCO (dynamic coin offering).
Orion protocol https://www.orionprotocol.io/
https://twitter.com/TheDaoMaker/status/1264917996289642502

Heard this fundraising model before 2018 I guess, seen one project implemented I wonder why not much more follows. Well if this model is feasible, this should be standard of crowdfunding. Good for the ecosystem and could also boost trust to both parties.

Hopefully this type of fundraising will be successful and help investors avoid scam projects in this market. For the time being I remain loyal to IEO and will follow this new format in the future

It is recommended and acceptable. investors are guarantee to request their token whenever they feel they are no longer interested in the project. the first stage of the project shows a deflationary/static price stage which means that price will decrease or be stable as the project progress. this is the reverse aspect of burning token which leads to inflation of the token price. A new project is already on the horizon for DYCO. ORION Project will use this pattern to raise funds.

This is exactly what the token sales area needs in this very volatile and uncertain industry. The IEO model came and failed because it followed in the direction of ICO. There was simply nothing innovative about it and thus, it failed. With DYCO, there is a lot to be happy about. Most of investors funds are backed and secured by USDC meaning real value and guarantee. If a project fails over a period of time, investors have an opportunity to easily call back their tokens and this in turn will help out with confidence in the system. I strongly believe it will be successful if projects key into it.

I love DAOMAKER and all their social mining stuff. And this DYCO sales also not bad idea. But Many project were running their own buyback systems in past. For example Algorand. Yep it's great idea to secure investors money and I am fully support such things. But this is not like something totally new on the market.

This will be very useful and trustworthy for investors and also for bounty hunters as any project failed in IEO, ICO maximum project disappeared and did not return the investment to investors and the hunters has also lost their precious time which they spent for promoting of the project.

That needs more evidence to profit the reliability of the DYCO. I remember when so many people said STO will replace ICO but it's death without even a single project that successfully to raised the money from the market.

I thought that it's too early to say like that.