Bitcoin Forum

1) a project collected funds,
2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
4) Investors bought token on ICO see this crap and less people invest in ICOs.

True or False?

Yes, some ICOs made such mistake where they have distributed tokens to bounty hunters at a very early stage which eventually directed them to a massive failure. However, ICO owners learned from such mistakes pretty soon and adopted an approach to distribute at a later stage. So bounty hunters are not the sole reason for the failure of an ICO project.

Rather, the main reason of failure is the lack of business expertise. Majoriy of the successful ICO failed at sustaining their business because of the lack of expertise! It has no relation with bounty hunters.

If I ask you to give example of some ICOs with a very successful post-ICO business implementation, can you show me at least 5??

your argument is true, but bounty hunters didn't kill ICO.
let's see how much allocation for bounty, usually its not above 10% of total token issued, so this is not the problem.
driving price of coin is hard, sometimes investor dump their token after ICO at market price and make a coin price down. if only token from bounty hunters, pumping will be easy. thats my opinion

Most allocations for bounties are below 5%.
And the reason why many investors throw away their tokens is because they get a big bonus when buying (investing). This should be thought by the project, why investors often throw away.

And another thing that kills ICO is because many ICOs are scams. What makes investors no longer trust ICO, that's why
ICO dies slowly.

I don't think bounty hunters kill ICO, it's just that many projects are successful in sales but fail in development. Initially investors who want to get profits actually get losses.


The exact allocation for each project is different and the least is the allocation for the bounty.


For the price of the token down dramatically, certainly not the bounty hunter to blame. Because the allocation is small, how to reduce the price of the token.

or it could be the other way around. there is no law that says team can't trade their own coin. teams has all the right to sell their own tokens, no one can stop them from dumping their own holding which probably more than 10% of the total circulation. we all know how it could end up when all this takes place, all those who holds the token will panic and dumps.

That would be an absurd reasoning. The coins distributed to the bounty hunters would be equal or less than 5% of total tokens sold. Generally 1 or 2%. This too excludes the distributed coins for advisers and team members. This holding of 2.5 to 0.5% won't have any huge impact on the price or for a project to be a success or failure.

A story that doesn't say its true colour, any project can decide not to give bounty anything but nomproject has dome so and the team has a very optimistic power to select the percentage for the hunters which I see as just 1-2% of the token and you telling me that killed project or what ?

Get your findings well before you make a post , well I can se you are newbie and may not know much on how things runs on an new project.

Does ICO really is dead? I don't think so, this IEO is just for hype and still they have the same goal to begin with, to collect funds. Though IEO is much safer as some thoughts there are still that unsuccessful to it.

You cannot simply blame bounty hunterd for dumping, i do agree it is a factor but there are other factors also like loss of interest or faith from investors, slow or weak market situation, cheap tokens sold during private or presale, such investors can sell below ico price but still make huge profit similarly low volume exchange and low liquidity is also a factor for price crash.

ICO killed the greed of its developers, as projects in 2017 did for everything, but in fact did not plan to implement them. But then they beautifully said that it was all because of the bounty hunters who helped promote the project by attracting new investors. Instead of continuing to develop projects, they declared themselves bankrupt and closed projects, not one investor received the money back.

Not at all. If you count that one 10% of the ICO's who failed because they distributed too many tokens to hunters , yes but the rest of them failed because investors are refusing nowadays to invest in any type of project. Also the management of the ICO's is so poor , I mean someone put their C.V. in ratings websites and they pick them without testing their knowledge for blockchain and cryptos...

You cannot blame bounty hunters for the failure of ICOs or a project because, they are not responsible for the bad market conditions and also the projects themselves give ridiculous bonuses at ICOs.

So are you saying that ICO failed because there were too many allocations for the bounty? but in my opinion no, it's because there are too many bonuses to investors so other investors don't want to invest, other than that their products that are too excessive can make ico fail

If bounty hunters usually get 5-10% out of whole token circulation, part of them decides to hold, then how can the rest manage to drop price? Specially when all of them dont sell their bounty tokens at the same time.

The answer is false. Let's do the calculations. How many tokens gets allocated to hunter? Is that enough to drop a project price? What killed ICOs is the bear market and investors realization of what a mistake ICOs were coupled with the scamming events faced by investors.

We all know math, but you all know that it is easier to drop the price (for token) rather than rise it. Even a small number of BH are able to drop the price, because look at the countries of origin - South Asia, Africa mostly. They considered these tokens as a top source of income. And so it was till the begining of 2018. But all that is just my IMHO.

The project that distributes the most bounty awards is 5%. If it was the Bounty Hunters who brought the end of the ICO with 5%, these men would shake the world.
My answer is false. Bounty price can not affect that much.

ICOs has a loooot of "free money", such as bounty guys. I would cautiously agree with the author. Probably with 65%  :)

Some bounty hunters are dumping the price and they have their reasons for doing that. Why not to do a buyback before a token is listed on any exchange. This decision would solve any problems and would avoid such a dump that happens every single time.

so why they created a some bounty, if they know it will be a thousands of people joining.
basically ico just like a print new money, and paying bounty hunter with dust at the beginning.
if ico fail the bounty hunters will not payed.
also bounty just take a small amount of allocation.
and also briliant investor can see it, if allcoation for bounty above 5% from total supply, i guest it just a bullshit.

Hunters can’t kill the project because of this, even if they dump their holdings. Some of the good coins right now started from ICO and yet they survived the dump level of the hunters because they have the good project. If the developer made a mistake and can’t handle their marketing well, then expect that to die as well. ICO is not dead yet, some good ICO are still running.

I don't think that's the main factor. now, if you think about how much is the allocation for the bounty hounter that causes the price to drop? the allocation for the bounty hounter is not very small when compared to the allocation of investors. maybe if the team wants to try to make price developments can increase. so this is not a bounty hounter error but rather the development of a team that is not serious about working on a project and causing an ico scam

But what would you do, if you knew all other bounty hunters would start selling their tokens straight after listing and it would influence dramatic decrease? As practice show, -x5 at least.

Bounty hunters do not kill, because bounty hunters only receive a small amount of the total tokens that will be launched on the market. it is precisely investors who can kill ico, or most token holders and after launching into the market exchange, they sell all token.

don't blame the bounty hunter,
see, it's a risk if the price really drops drastically,
but the team should also anticipate this, such as making a buyback, or giving dividends if they hold the coins,
this is very simple actually if the project is indeed serious and already has a product.

For me it depends. Many ICO project were not killed just because of bounty hunters such as pundix. Pundix had a huge marketcap and bounty hunters can't dump it. We all know that the bounty hunters will also help to the project to success so that the bounty hunters are deserve to get rewards.  

that's true and OP must know if some times there was an ico which will try to distribute the token a year after it gets listed at exchange site. The problem is too many discounts that already offered by the developer when the developer can't provide a good exchange site to get big liquidity.
So many times bounty hunters are getting the dust and their token not worth even a dollar.

I can say what already written by OP is false statements. 

False! Although it might be contributory, it plays a very little role. You know what really killed the ICO market? It is the ICOs themselves. The ICO market used to be thriving, with a lot of investors passionately supporting crypto projects. What happened?

1. Because there were huge successes made in the market, it became a sweet target of scammers and haphazard and mediocre projects which are solely made to take a share with the pie and exit afterwards.

2. Many of the successful ICOs proved to be a crap after millions worth of investment was raised, coming out with poor to no products or partnerships at all.

3. The huge bonuses and discounts offered to attract ICO investors backfired. The investors have turned from real supporters of projects into plain profit-seekers. Just like some bounty hunters, they would dump their coins as soon as they are admitted to the exchanges.

In no way are bounty hunters responsible for the drop in ICO activities in the crypto space. The drop in ICO activities is as a result of the launch of a more convenient way of performing token sales which is IEO. Now, the attention is shifted more to IEOs.

What do you mean bounty hunters killed ico? I don't think bounty hunter can do that. It is probably your assumption only, because if your statement is true for sure there will be no more ICO now that arise so far. But why still ico exist now? it is because, you are definitely wrong with that kind of assessment. Without bounty hunters none of the potential altcoins that existed here for a years will not be exist.

free money? are you sure?
bounty hunters get rewards based on the support they have provided for a project. So it's not completely free because they do "work" according to the rules that have been made.
Many projects are also successful with tokens that match expectations of paying hounters fairly. So, it is not entirely to blame that bounty hunters cause chaos, many other factors.
If a project has a good strategy, I think this can be avoided.

The projects management killed the ICOs as they don't provide enough visibility about the project and investors are afraid that they will not recover their investment.

With the new concept IEO, investors know from the beginning on which exchange the project will be listed,  which is great.

You're not right. Bounty hunters are not ICO killers. You can see, the total allocation for bounty is only 2-3% of the total supply. Can it reduce prices in exchange? Be a smart person. Do not want to be blamed.

yes that's right, only fundraising is done by development not advisors. so when there are members of the development team who are not honest they often carry away project funds that have been collected to be used in the project development process. and mostly because that is the reason for investors to leave the ICO program and switch to IEO.

You are wrong to have said that. In the first place, without bounty hunters, I doubt if a project can be seen or known. Hence, by so doing, they get paid. Every bounty hunter is also an investor!. A project that must stand will stand!

I totally disagree with the topic, bounty hunters didn't kill ICO. The major issue for most ICO projects was the issue of scam. Many ICOs were outright scam hence you don't expect such to progress since investors became very skeptical. Also lack of strategy contributed to the fall of ICOs, some team members after token sale will be chasing free listing without using funds raised to list on a decent exchange. Most likely when they list on exchanges with low daily volume, the price of the coin is bound to drop drastically since there will be few buy orders.

False. Bounty hunters cannot influence prices. They do not have such a volume of coins to manipulate the market. When you hear accusations against bounty hunters of a collapse in prices - this is a lie.

I did not count, but I think so far 99% is False :)

Nice avatar :)

Even if we have millions of bounty hunters its not an accuse that project token drop in price because  bounty hunters dump token,thats why we have many bounties using fixed allocation instead of stake allocation and using fixed allocation the bounty participants will be limited

I don't think bounty hunters have had a lot of impact on some projects.
Many projects are dead because they do not have true investors. They didn't convince those investors to hold or that it didn't have the potential to live on.
bounty hunters are even paid very little and don't affect the price of tokens much.

I do not think bounty hunters are main responsible for dumping price of coins. They get a small amount of bounty allocation. Moreover, not all bounty hunters are in hurry to sell off their bounty tokens. I think other factors like selling coins at a discount of over 70 percent during ICO are more responsible.

I could say that you got the wrong perception when you think that bounty hunters kill ICO. Bounty allocations is so small that even when dump on the exchange it won't matter. The real reason why token's price dropped is the investors who bought millions of tokens from ICO which were cheap plus a big discounts. They are the ones that can afford to dump.

Bounty hunter is a part of supporting the development of projects in the field of promotion to increase fundraising when ICO, bounty allocation is determined by the team and controlled so it does not go down dramatically, many of the best ICOs have passed the bounty hunter distribution without the constraints of dramatic price reduction

A lot of people like to blame bounty hunters which is not good enough
Presale investors buy at a massive bonus of over 30%

Where as over 5,000 bounty hunters share just 5% of all total supply.

Ico are killed by project devs themselves and their investors.
Any lack of developments on the token leads to investors with so many bonuses to dump and move on while still in profit

I think that the biggest dumpers are teams of ICOs. They raise money from token sale, but that is not enough, they want to sell their tokens (30-50% from all existing tokens). WHile bounty hunters have only 2-3% from the total supply. So how can they cause a dump?

Yes, you are right. The main reason for the price drop is from their team. They even extend the time token sales with a bonus of 50%. I wonder. Why are they so enthusiastic to sell out their tokens at such a big discount. In fact, after that, they can not be listed on big exchanges.

Fair enoght. Team's working almost 24/7 and when ICO is over everyone (or not) wants to split his/her part. Bad or good, but we can understand them. However they usually take BTC and fiat but hold tokens. At least as far as I'm aware. They lock the tokens.

Scammers killed ICO.
How many ICO's don't paid nothing for bounty ?

we cannot say that all ICOs failed, many ICO projects were successful, and bounty hunters were also involved, ico's failure was not by bounty hunters, the failure of an ICO was caused by a management team that was unable to see opportunities and problems in ico, like they don't predict when it's time to register on the exchange, usually the bounty project is late for listing, they wait for stability so they lose the opportunity to fight to increase prices, and they don't dare to spend the budget to be listed in exchange which is really good.

By the way, unless you do marketmaking, token will go definetely down.

It's a bit dubious remark mate. I also thought that bountyhunters could really make a difference by dumping.
But a lot of projects have a pool of %1-2 shares of advertisers and not all of them are dumping so that's a drop in the ocean.
If the project is solid this is a good way to increase a deposit.

FALSE.

We all know that hunters can and impact token price but this is true only in low liquidity markets.
And liquidity comes form secondary investors and traders.
I see that ICOs where like a wheel, those investors who got huge ROIs from the first bubble ICOs continued to invest because it was too easy in the first time, they reinvested till they made a decision to stop losing money. The made money was lost and investors lost, new investors are very hard to come by.

With the allocation of only 5% to 15% for bounty hunters, I dont think, selling all that will collapse ICO price. There are other factors for example private investors who got the tokens/coins with huge discount, which actually affects the price. So its not bounty hunters who killed ICO.
Also the fun raising technology has changed and every project is now running IEO and still with involvement of bounty hunters.

I don't agree with this if you are asking or suggesting bounty hunters killed ICO. My question is this, why will a project embark on a bounty campaign when there's no resources or funds to pay the hunters that worked? It's also their time and efforts invested in that project. There's no blaming hunters cos they only received payment for their labour.

You don't have to blame bounty hunters for the failure of some crypto projects. If a project is good and prospective and there are evidences to prove its quality such as good price, a real working project and a sound team, trust me even bounty hunters will want to hodl.

Please note that many projects allocate about 40% of tokens for sale, but the rest goes to the team, advisers, fund, which they use at their discretion. In this case, 60% of the tokens that are received free of charge remain, so if you sell them at a price lower than the ICO price, you can make the dump very deep. Bounty hunters will not greatly affect the project if it is really valuable, interesting and the team allocates part of the raised funds during the ICO to maintain the price of the coin on the exchange.

Absolutely false, I think you have to correct it.
My opinion:
- A large bonus is the main factor a token price dropped
- Project does not run according to the roadmap and does not develop

During this time BPUNTY HUNTER helped ICO to grow by spreading about the projects they participated in.  if the ICO fails because the bounty hunter factor is also not entirely, because the allocation of tokens provided to the bounty is only a few percent.  what really matters is the number of investors and the development of the projects and their benefits.  If the bounty hunter is indicated to affect market prices, then the bounty hunter token can be distributed after the investors' tokens are distributed and sold in the market.

This is unfair, to judge bounty participants as ICO "killers". Almost all bounty participants only get 0.03% of the total token. of course there are those who sell the tokens directly. however there are still many bounty participants who support the project so hold tokens are the principle.

Those are false statements OP.
1. Majority of ICOs have already offered more than 50% discount that totally doesn't make sense
2. Team owned the majority of the funds and the team doesn't even wanna spend it for the big exchange site
3. Liquidity problem

Bounty participants always get the distribution delay and it can be considered as the reason if all of the things that you have mentioned seem not true.

yeah we can said that is true but not all like that.
the best solution of ICO is paid bounty hunter with BTC, ETH or other lsted coin.
so they will never get a problem for their token.
that is so simple.

It is not true that bounty hunters kill ICO. Developers and teams kill ICO because most of them plan to run with investors money and some dump the coin once it gets listed in an exchange. Most hunters do not even get the opportunity to sell their rewards before the developers dump them, make their money and run away.

I dont understand why everyone seem to blame hunters for anything negative.. The truth is ICO projects killed themselves, you don't scam many and expect many on board when new projects pop up. Hunters just support project and hype interesting ones.

 Absolutely agree with you. Many times I observed such a situation when the price of the token fell many times before the distribution for the bounty participants was made.

   It`s false from one more reason, bounties are usually 5% of total coin cap. It`s crazy to think that 5% can hurt the market. They can disturb it, that`s fine,
but to drop price to zero that can do just some big early investor, who had opportunity to buy for very low initial price, with some good bonus, and the team behind
with access to huge amounts.
   

Ye, man, the same. I think for ICO seed and closed rounds are deadly with the giant discount. This is dangerous when the huge count of tokens from whales and funds goes on the market by x0.1-x0.5 from ICO price. This crushes price more than poor bountyhunters

False, hunters don't kill Ico, is very glaring for all to see, bounty allocations is always 10% of the total supply, some not upto 10%, when there are investors owning 15, 10% of the total supply aswell. If investors holding 15% decided to sell at once at dip probably because losing interest in the project, the price will crash beyond expectations. Is not possible for hunters with just 10% allocations to crash market price.

Insightful argument, but bounty hunters didn't kill ico rather teams, most project teams dump a huge amount of token when distributing to bounty hunters and in turn accuse bounty hunters of dumping the token price. I know of a project that dumped 10 million token the same day distribution to bounty hunters took place. I think team should be blamed and not bounty hunters.

i dont think bouty hunter can killed the ico, i'm sure and the developer are calculating about allocation for bounty and tokensale, they are calculated before running campaign and pay hunter, but the mistakes of developer they pay hunter early or distributing token between hunter and investor at the same time and make price down after listed on exchange.

Very wrong assumptions, Why are most project dumps always attributed to bounty hunters forgetting that the developers and private investors who got these tokens cheap equally hold the larger part of the distribution

The effect of bounty hunters can be felt on the price of a token after ICO, but there are some exceptional projects that never experienced such negative effect. However, ICO investors, advisors, team and many others who share from the tokens also have their effect, most especially negative impact on the tokens. So bounty hunters alone should not be blamed.

yeah, i forgot about big bonus while joining early token sale.
this is a big problem in mid 2018 where many ICO launch and planned to be exit scam.


yep, since bounty hunter only got few of tons, but investor and advisor may threw their token in early listing.

That might be the reason why some of the bounties I joined like in 2018 is still on the stage where they are still trying to sell their tokens and they mentioned that the release of the token to exchanges will happen as soon as they have achived the amount they need in their ICO. Anyway I would keep their token and continue to wait for them to announce more on their plans for the future.

I don't think bounty hunters kill ICO just because they dump the price? what about investors that gives so much bonus like 30% - 50%, I think maybe that's the reason why the price is dumping, but I believe if their project is unique and has potential then we do not need to worry it will increase the price for sure.

Yes, even i don't know why most of the companies will blame the bounties if they don't want to run the bounty campaign better manage yourself and convince the investors to collect the money. Out of huge supply, companies will allocate only 2% to bounty hunters, what about the Team %, Investors %, Advisor % etc.

I think the bounty hunter does not kill the ICO. And that opinion will surely make a lot of bounty hunters who think that the wrong opinion. As the bounty hunters, they get only a fraction of the allocated funds are given. Every ICO should have a good developer and a large community. So the project can continue to evolve and if there is a dump of course not blame the bounty hunter.

Bounty hunters are always want to get paid because of their hardwork but i don't believe that they should be the one to be blame if the price of that certain coin will drop after the unlock because I have observed for many times that even the bounty token was not release yet but the price is already falling down of up to 80% therefore i believe that the investors are the one who do the early dumping as they receive a huge bonuses during ICO sales.

Most of the blames are in the bounty hunters because when the distribution is finish for the bounties and the project is listed on the exchane bounty dumpers are soaring surely but its the project fault not us. If they want to make the project stay successful they need to locked the tokens in couple of month just to make sure that the price is still stable when the dumpers came up

Bounty hunters are not responsible  for the death of any ICO or IEO,the blame is all on Developers and project teams,they need bounty hunters to create more awareness for their projects so they must have consider the cost too,with the whole max supply bounty hunters are only been shared 2% to 4% of the token max supply and if dump happens it shouldnt affect the value of the remaining 98 or 96 %

It is just that simpler. investors blame the bounty hunters and the team also begins to blame the bounty hunters to relieve themselves. no one likes to admit their mistakes

bounty hunters have a very small share of tokens from projects and they do not affect the price of tokens very much. ICO is killed by the creators of the projects themselves, who raise funds but the project does not implement and most often disappear with the money.

False.And let me tell you why.

While some ICOs might be affected by Bounty Hunters dumping their tokens, number is so little that is insignificant really.First of all, not all bounty hunters dump their tokens, some are even hodlers, but also, bounty pool is rarely big enough to make such a huge impact on the price.

On the other hand, what really killed ICOs is the fact that 99% of all ICOs were bad projects with sole purpose of  raising millions of dollars while giving huge bonuses in private sales, and then those private investors who got 200%-300% bonuses ( and the team itself) dumping tokens while small investors becoming bag holders, and loosing money.And now enough of those small investors lost enough amount of money to kill ICO market.

But yeah, it is easier to blame Bounty Hunters instead greedy teams and private investors that actually caused dumping in the first place.

Regardless of what is written in the white paper about the allocation of tokens, bounty hunters still should not be blame.
As long as the team is transparent, investors are already expected that they have read everything including bounty allocation before they invested their hard earned money, and when the price dump, they should accept that and just don't think it's the end of the project or it will not recover anymore.

Bounty hunters are also smart, they understand the market situation and though they have the minds of an investor but they don't usually look for long term investment, so if they get something that would satisfy their hard work, they'll dump, there's nothing we can do about it.

what you say is true but I don't think the prize hunter is blamed for the death of the ICO token price, now if we think who holds the most tokens ??

It's not true that bounty hunters killed ICO. There are other things that cause ICO to be abandoned. Bounty hunters are only workers who expect rewads when the project is successful.

Agree, the ICO's death does not involve bounty hunters because they are just people who want to receive money from others then work, their contributions and influences only help the project spread, even increase the chance for ICO to complete, they do not harm ICO when it is not in their favor. The one who killed the ICO is probably the developers, the scammers, and a bit related to investors, they contributed largely to the failures, pushing the project to the dead zone, too many scams, garbage and no investors, ICO died like that

99% from all respondents here are bounty guys (according to signatures)  ;D ;D ;D

I'm not in agreement with the idea that bounty hunters killed ICO. I think the group that should be mentioned for causing more havoc are the scammers and extortioners. Bounty hunters are only contributing to the well being of projects and don't participate in her downfall.

I myself am a member of the bounty and I can say that I personally saw how early investors and funds dumped the price of tokens. You ask how I found out? Everything is very simple. Tokens of the bounty participants were specially blocked, and distributed to early investors and funds, as a result, the price went down sharply. If you remove this fact and look at the number of tokens that is allocated to the bounty, then this is a very small part, which can in no way affect the price. Therefore, all the accusations against the participants of the bounty are not substantive and are created just to hide the fact of the drain of tokens by early investors and funds.

ICO project before distributing tokens to bounty hunters and airdroppers, they should make sure that there is enough liquidity for the token to prevent it from dumping so early.

I will start by asking how many percentage of the token is allocated to bounty hunters, some as low as 2%, I think maximum I have seen is 5%. Now tell me how that will affect a project. Most at times even before the tokens are distributed to hunters, the price already dipped. So I don't believe that hunters killed ICO

This has become the fall back lies that most project dev tell their investors now. It is laughable that same project dev allocate the same amount to bounty campaign. Are they telling us they don't know what they are doing. From experience, many project that do not have existing products or services that propels demand for the token before being listed on exchange will result in price dump because nobody will buy token that do not have use.

False, because prize hunters never kill ico, because hunters also want a good ico when they join the ico project, and the ico allocation for prize hunters is also very small, so they don't kill ico.

most of it is true but remember that not everything is like that, after all you can't say that bounty hunters are the main cause of project failure or token prices, because if the problem is due to the excessive amount of bounties then this problem should be easily resolved by how to limit the number of participants then if the problem is because many tokens have been provided for bounty hunters, then this problem is also easy to overcome, namely by providing an appropriate allocation, not excessive or too little

Well yea bounty hunters can bring to a fall in price of any project token.  This happens if the project didn't do their home work well to know how hunters behave if tokens are distributed all at once.

It's funny how people tend to blame bounty hunters for everything when a token price drops, even in the instances where bounty hunters has not yet received the tokens for the work they did, they are still blamed for the dump in price anyways.
Bounty hunters has nothing to do with price dump in my opinion because most projects allocate less than 1% of the total tokens to bounty campaigns.

I hate when team blame hunters for their token dumps. The money they give to hunters is part of their marketing budget and if they don't want to use hunters, they should advertise on google ads and coinmarket cap. Although BM must do their due diligence to guard against bounty cheaters.  

please don't always blame us, we bounty hunters only accept a very small number of tokens, even the distribution of tokens for bounty hunters is often deducted from the promised allocations, then some distribution projects are carried out in several phases, and some of them are locked on our wallet.
then? what should we continue to blame?

I completely agree, 2-5% can not affect the value of the token in any way, I think that the question is not in the project itself, rather in its value

we are always blamed for dumping. but if you think about the rations for the bounty hunters only a little. if we can blame it, of course they hold most of the funds and resilience should not be affected by the sale of rewards by bounty hunters

The bounty hunters are not the responsible for killing of any ICOs because they are only few fraction of the share of the whole project. What ever the funds for the project allocation from it's only 1% or less is allocated for the bounties. So, how they are the responsible for the project.

In my opinion its not true. We can not blame only bounty hunters for ICOs failures because bounty distribution to the bounty hunters in most of the projects are just 2-5% only and I believe only 5% token holder can not drop the token price even I believe early investor are also sold their coins early because they bought the coins with huge bonuses as well.

I totally disagree that bounty hunters kill ICO projects, funds allocated for bounty hunters are very small,and such fingers shouldn't be pointed at hunters, also teams should consider the exchanges they list,  and also how to sustain their market.

And on average, bounty hunters are paid about two percent of the total number of issued tokens. Therefore, in the fall in the price of new tokens on the exchange, the role and fault in this bounty hunter is very small. The collapse of the price of new tokens is primarily by investors who buy tokens at the initial stage of the ICO with very large price discounts. If the ICO project is mediocre, investors immediately sell tokens, earning up to 200 percent profit in a short time.
ICO teams need to come up with a system of passive income from the received tokens, so that their holders make sense to keep them and see real profit. Now, basically, the price of new tokens immediately after entering the exchange drops, and it falls by dozens, and sometimes hundreds of times.
As for the activities of the ICO in general, this activity is still quite alive, but it requires reasonable regulation and further development.

bounty hunter totally support ICO projects.if they called as killer in any ICO this is not fully true.price depend on market mechanism and if developers team could deliver good products, investors prefer to hold their asset although price dumped by hunter that get it freely.

It seems very wrong to blame prize hunters for causing the reduction in token prices after being listed on the market, we know that the ICO project allocates  funds to bounty hunters just a fraction of the percentage of their funds, so, it is unlikely that tokens obtained by bounty participants can affect the decline in the price of the token that is there is  in the market.

I remember how in 2017, many were happy that BH sold their tokens at a low price and bought them, today there is no demand for tokens at all, therefore we observe a price dump even from the sale of a very small number of tokens. Most likely this is not the fault of the bounty hunters, but that the scheme with the value of tokens does not work at all today.

Sentiments aside, developers killed ICO, of there are thousands of ICO, does developers not out limit on each of them? And what exactly is even the allocation of bounty hunters that it would make the price of ICO always drop when they want to withdraw what they are entitled to. Common, anytime I hear this talk, it hangers me, how do you get someone to work for you and you expect them not to get paid immediately?

Is this how the normal industries works in real life, that same project, if they were to have a physical presence, would they tell their workers not to withdraw their salaries because they don’t want their share capital to drop? Bull shit, you better talk to those you need to talk too which are the developers, they are the ones not pushing their project and also getting it attractive to the public.

This possibly can't be true, it's true most hunters sell off but the quantity allocated for bounty is very minute, that can't affect the price of the token, have you considered private investors who get lots of token for little amount? Bounty hunters shouldn't be blame

Not really. Bounty allocation are usually very little when compared to what is offered to investors. Infact I believe investors have more reason to sell once ico project gets listed because they spent money and expect returns compared to bounty hunters who may decide to hold for higher profits

Very good answer.Somehow all decided that all the troubles to blame the participants of the bounty.But in fact, not a competent distribution of funds and the lack of desire to develop the project actually lead to its collapse.So it is safe to say that in most cases the team that conducted the ICO is to blame.

Am not really surprised to see this Post, everything about the failure of a project is all attributed to Bounty hunters. Like seriously what's the % that is been allocated to bounty even when token is locked for months and price still dumps, hunters are the reason for it. Hunters are not the reason for the failure of ICO but rather lack of business focus

Agree with your point of view. Bounty hunter also responsible for this but not fully. Just some projects did that mistake, not every project did.

Their business strategy was also not good that time and the market also keep falling down after 2017. Then investor didn't want to lose their money which they already had

IEOs killed ICOs and bounty hunters. IEOs do not need bounty hunters because the main marketing is done by the exchange.
Aren´t you afraid that we are loosing a well paid job?

I think scam icos actually did. Who is not unaware of projects that just collected unsuspecting investors dollars without any thought on how much contribution they wanna make to develop and advance the crypto-currencies ecosystem

A big false! Do you know on how many percent does a project allocate for Bounties? Its just 1%-2% on the entire supply.How things thing can be considered as a main reason for such dump in price? Why would project owners wouldn't blame their investors itself.  :D

ICO itself has spoiled its reputation. A huge number of fraudulent projects, an incompetent team that does nothing to improve their project. All this was the reason that investors ' confidence in the ICO was gone. Bounty hunter have to this only the slightest relationship.

I do not like seeing when bounty hunters are accused of any ICO project or any project doing badly. I have noticed some tactics some team and developers of projects in bounty use to dump their own tokens and coins and them blame it on the bounty hunters.

Till today, many projects are still calling for the services and supports of bounty hunters. Had it been they are not doing the right thing, then a lot of them would have called it quit with bounty hunters.
I still believe that bounty hunters are very useful and their presence is highly needed to keep a project alive.

It's quite funny how several people tend to level accusations on bounty hunters without sound reasoning. Bounty hunters are only concerned with the promotion of projects and that hasn't stopped even with the newly popularised IEO which became popular after the demise of ICO.

Yes. thanks to the participation of prize hunters, project will have success. if we look at what percentage is obtained by the prize hunters, only a small portion of the total funds allocated, which is around 1-3%. and most of the failure of ICO is the lack of management and expertise of the team they have. and not from prize hunters, I suppose.

If I say I just learned what is crypto and bounty, would you call me looser?  ;D
Still better late than never. If I bet a good project with bounty, Im gonna hold it and not gonna kill my project  :D

Like you were wrong, Bounty Hunter didn't kill ico. The allocation for bounty hunters is on average 2%-3% or it will not be more than 5%. In my opinion the price dropped dramatically because investors sell tokens at low prices hoping to buy more and after that prices go up. Or the ico gives too many bonuses for investors

This is all a myth. Which bad projects are told to investors. That hunters are ruining the price. The hunters are to blame for the lack of stability in the project. And investors, as naive fools, take this for the truth. It is all about community interest in the project. How to look at interest? Yes, look at the site traffic statistics for one project 100,000 a month and another ate 3,000 visitors gaining. That is the whole problem.

I don't think so bounty hunters killed ICOs the majority of ICOs are doing scams that was the biggest reason why many people are not trusting ICOs.

This is not true !! Hunters don't make as many tokens as you think.

In fact, hunters only account for 2-5% of tokens of the project. This number is too small to kill an ICO.
The nature of the ICOs died of so many fraudulent projects and not strictly controlled. Most projects do not have too many highlights that make investors feel excited. Those are the reasons ICO died, cannot blame hunters

I have had yahoo62278 saying in one telegram page that he has proofs that many projects that launch bounty campaign get their token dumped and literally it means most hunters dump their token but also from experience, even when hunters tokens are locked, token still get dumped. XCT token is a primary example of this. My conclusion is that there are many factors that responsible to token getting dumped but dev team are the major contributor to the dump in price because they are the one that supposes to protect everyone including token dump. Some project even offers up to 90% bonus for purchasing a token.

Your point is right but not fully because a project success because of there team not by other.If bounty Hunter destroyed the ico then bounty would been finished by right now.

This is also right most people do not trust Ico’s because of failed to meet the requirements of their project and mostly scams Ico. Bounty hunters not the only one who should blame why Ico’s failed they have only amount of token who received during Ico.

I disagree with this, many Devs became greedy and each time they get tired of their project and plan on exiting scam, they set up a bounty and dump during distribution of rewards, that way they can pin down the blame on Hunters

Lies. Hunter's don't kill projects, most times these Hunters receive their reward after the Devs must have dumped the loving light out of it. So no, I don't agree that Hunter's are responsible for the death of shitty ICOs of nowadays

I think not bounty hunter kill ico project.but nothing investor to believe for invest buy their ico project on presale.if they can make believe some investor to succeafull their project with good marketing program.i think ico will be succes and many investor join there

Bounty hunters have helped the ICO to more easily get investors. Bounty hunters work hard to promote the ICO and of course, they also expect Token payouts. Bounty hunters sometimes also become investors so I guess they don't kill the ICO.

I think its true the initial price of the token falling down but Bounty hunters always promotes a project and help to raise the funds .So it could be better to come out with a good plan to restrict the hunter to sell the initially .Hopefully it will helps to success the project.

A lot of scam/dead projects killed ICO, not bounty

no, i don't agree with you,,
because the fact an ICO project need bounty hunters to spread the word about the project itself my friend
and not all bounty hunters will dump their rewards after the project listed on exchange mate  ;)

In the current situation, there is a sluggishness in almost all new projects that run ICO, because most of them run only with the aim of profit for a short time to develop the project. what is certain is that many investors are now watching and are not in a hurry to put their capital in a new ICO, so the influence is quite large.

I respectfully disagree, the percentage allocated to bounty campaigns most times is not enough to influence the price of a project, in fact, i think ico or project owners are hiding behind the excuse of bounty to dump their own price, who are this private investors? have you seen the outrageous bonus given to private investors, they could afford to sell for less without feeling it, they are the real ico killers not hunters.

To clear out your heading,I just want to tell something. First of all, bounty hunters actually do marketing for the project which can help to get more participants as investor for fund raising. There has almost low percentage to pay them if there has not limited or heavy participants. Actually it happened several times which I have seen in my bounty life.

However,some time bounty hunter got a huge amount of token and they normally not hold and then the price drop because they sell at low price. But I think it is not the only reason to kill ICO system

Bounty hunters do everything to support and PR the project and its tokens. ICOs were killed by a lot of scammers. I can say that the committed suicide, although did not want to do it. Finally, fraudsters are always opened. It happened with dishonest ICOs. Unfortunately, they made everything to ruin very good and honest projects, and they succeed in it.

Your points are really valid, but it is not just the bounty hunters to blame. Lack of business tactics and strategies displayed from the ICO is the main reason in the downfall of an ICO. They don’t know how to handle the coin in the market and eventually end up distributing the coin at a very early stage, causing the investors to dump the coin.

distributing coins without locking periode will make it easy to dumped holders in market.unexperienced team will do this to make their investors happy, but its dillema when it listed to market.moreover if bounty hunter directly sell their reward, price will drop alot and influenced to investors psychology.

bounty hunters actually help projects to spreaded to new investors in market.if any word bounty hunter killed ico its totally wrong in my opinion.they totally help projects in crowdfunding that used to developt their projects.so could deliver good products.

You right but you must also know bounty hunter not ICO killer. True fact is when those ICO project have strong team and great plan even hunter have so many token in their hand it will not dumper their price dramatically. As i know even price going down because hunter selling their token if their project good enough price will going up by natural demand.

Not all like that. You know sometimes we find project with so many bounty hunter who's joined until the end but they just spread the word with low quality. In that case quality is number 1. Good quality and quantity will the best. A week ago im joined bounty and Dev team said they not really impressed with our works. That way im mentioned about quality and quantity.

Bounty hunters are not responsible for the death of any ICO projects,the reason why bounty hunters are needed is to create awareness for ICO projects and without awareness the ICO project might perform worse and it might be hard to reach their softcap target and if bounty hunters decide to sell their share of token from promoting ICO projects it really shouldnt affect the project if the ICO project is good enough.

Didn't I explain above that why bounty hunters are always blamed if dumping occurs.
"bounty hunters only accept a very small number of tokens, even the distribution of tokens for bounty hunters is often deducted from the promised allocations, then some distribution projects are carried out in several phases, and some of them are locked on our wallets"
then what do you quote from the statement that I made before??

actually I find that ICOs desperately need bounty hunters because they help promote those ICOs as well as attract more investors. So the bounty hunters didn't kill ICOs, but the ICOs killed themselves. Especially those who create ICOs to scam that makes people lose confidence in ICOs and investors don't want to lose their money when investing in scam ICOs

completely agree with you. bounty hunters for ICO is like air for people. bounty hunters advertise projects around the world. rather than individual regions or countries as TV or newspapers do

Bounty Hunters are part of contributing factor to the downfall of ICO but not the main reason behind the downfall. Yes most Bounty Hunters because they are rewarded fast go to dump the token affecting the price crash but we should also remember that some Bounty Hunters are investors too. Some ICO's will never make it to the exchange thereby ripping the investors their money and even wasting Hunters strength and time because nothing is free. Let's not put the whole blame on Bounty Hunters for ICO downfalls

You are right. If the development team has a good strategy and plan, they can certainly anticipate a price reduction. Not just blaming bounty hunters. In addition, many ICO projects are scams that reduce investor confidence in ICOs. That is why IEO tends to be more popular because the existing tokens or coins are ready on the market.

I don't see any reason either why bounty hunters will be the one who killed an ICO if the project team involving are up to the task and well experienced but if we still have a situation where some people still believe the bounty hunters are the causes then I will advice project owners to pay their bounty participants in ETH rather than paying them in their token to avoid future misconception.

ETH reward bounty campaigns don't last long, the token paying bounties usually like to delay the bounty distribution. Allocation of the tokens is manipulated by the bounty manager, only few of them are managing the bounty campaigns as a loyal manager. Teams check the bounty portfolios in order to find the correct person for managing their marketing plans with the bounty campaigns.

FALSE!!!

-for a project to be successful they need to collect funds.
We are talking about bounty hunters, but still the percentage of budget for bounty is very small!

Even there are millions of BH in the project, the number of tokens still has fix allocation.

Most investors dont want to join any ICO now as there were so many scam before,.

Yes, bear market contributed to why ICO is very down now, but what also led to bear market, is it not the establishment of bad ICO which hunters promoted? The lack of strength to push project discouraged investors from putting money in ICO but rather pull out of ICO.

If we say bear market, how come we still have some of those altcoins ranked as top in coin market still doing fine, while most of those other ones promoted by hunters are the ones not rising at all, so they still contributed, but the good news is that something can still be done, if only we can just focus on promoting very quality project because we have investors that are always ready to invest, they are just scared of scam projects, but I believe if we can get a quality and verified projects, they will be willing to join us.

yes, it is very short, and not with the allocation of many bounty campaigns with ETH rewards. most of what I have seen they pay with bitcoin and very limited number of participants. if the ICO project could choose a manager campaign like that, surely no ICO would be difficult to develop. or who feel disadvantaged by bounty hunters who make their tokens dump.

Yes it's kinda true. I saw many successful icos that had promising coins in the past but they don't survive long because they distributed the coins to the bounty hunters early. Many bounty hunters don't intend to hold the coin or make use of it. But they just care of receiving it and selling it immediately to get money. That made the price crash and this then make many people lost interest in investing. And also there were so many scams that made people lost trust too, and bitcoin price dropped also became one of the reason. Now i can hardly find any bounty and ico again. Unless how it is in the past.

How can 3-5% of coins collapse the project? This is normally the amount of coins distributed among bounty hunters. Very often, the price of a coin falls long before the coins get bounty hunters. Well, that's their income. They see a drop and want to sell their coins so as not to lose even more.

pre-sales bonuses more than 50% - is killer of the projects...and get investors rekt...

Bounty hunters dont KILL ICO, they support and advertise it.
When it comes to token payment, then why the team just pay in ETHEREUM or BTC?
If it is about the dumping of tokens, lemme remind you that BH only have small amount of allocation compare to investors.

Perhaps it makes sense for ICO teams to think about passive income to their token holders. Then there will be material motivation to keep received new tokens. Now, not only bounty hunters, but investors are just looking to sell them more profitably. It is necessary to switch to the payment of dividends, this will resemble the stock market, however, this will change the entire cryptocurrency market. Including, the problem of the high volatility of the cryptocurrency should also be solved.

Yes, but that’s not all, you need to remember that some projects conduct gigantic token swap with other ICO projects, and then announces successfully received "investments", modestly silent about the fact that this was a token swap. And an ordinary investor sees that the project has already collected a decent amount and invests. Then our project, which received such an “investment,” begins to be traded on the exchange, and another project, the “investor”, which has tokens in its hands for a large amount, starts selling them, bringing down the price. This was a common practice with not-so-popular ICOs in 2018.

Once I used to get bounty tokens, I sold them straight a way. Asap. And only few times I had a reason to regret. Usually they dropped, otherwise ICOs would collect as much as two years ago

What do you mean by "reserved"?   ???


This is one of the reasons why they blame bounty hunters. Can you imagine if all bounty hunters do the same way as you did?
The token/coin price should be dropped significantly when you all sell all your bounty tokens immediately.

Can i ask you which is the project that has been doing such a model? It's too rarely for me to find an ICO that was doing swap with another ICO project. Majority of the dump driven by the pre sale investors and it's true.
I tell you when there was someone who has already participated in pre-sale which was putting 10 cents as the pre-sale price and then when it goes to the exchange site and then the price hits more than 20 cents and as an investor in the pre-sale price and can he dump it instantly? the answer is he can.

It is professional desease for bounty hunters  ;D
Regarding the topic, I usually sell bounty tokens as soon as possible unless I feel there can be higher profit. There are lots of hints.

I've seen "reserved" as a second message in thread in 100% of cases. I was always wondering, do thread creator buy this place?

I don't think so. I do not understand why people would prefer to invest when the ICO is running and not when they are registered in the country, even though it is very high risk if the ICO is not successful and not registered in the future. I am a prize hunter as well as an investor, but I don't recommend investing in an ongoing ICO.

Bounty hunters are not the cause of the down patronizing of ICO. IEOs offered unique advantages which has now won the interests of investors due to the smooth transactions made on the exchange platforms during the token sales. Also, the coins undergoing IEO have the opportunity to get listed on the exchange after the IEO period.

Reading from the comments about this topic, in the end of the day it's a mistake by the ICO devs in doing business. Because the bounty hunters does not have any control on what should be the next moves to be done in the project.

Bounty hunters is almost free advertising for the project. If they sell their tokens, then accusing them of falling the price of the token is ridiculous.

blaming bounty hunters cause they sell their token is not true. in fact, price down after hitting exchange is no longer as far as i know if devs really working on their project.
look back to 2017 and early Q1 2018, there was a btc bullrun, every ICO make a grear return in short and mid term.
how much token allocation for bounty? it's not above 10% of total supply.

It hase been discussed here many times, bounty participants can´t cause a huge dump when they own together only 1-2% of all existing tokens.

Pay attention to the bounty campaigns of various projects. They pay bounty hunters an average of 1-2% in tokens of the investments they have collected during the ICO. If the project collects one million dollars, then the bounty hunters will receive a total amount of 10-20 thousand dollars for all. Do you really think that such a small amount can have such a serious impact on the price of a good and popular token? I think that it can’t.
If projects are afraid of dumps from bounty hunters, then why not pay for their work in ETH?

This is one of the reasons why they blame bounty hunters. Can you imagine if all bounty hunters do the same way as you did?
The token/coin price should be dropped significantly when you all sell all your bounty tokens immediately.
[/quote]

That's what I'm trying to say to all here. And imho they really do it.
P.S. not blaming anyone

First of all, you have to keep in mind that bounty pool is only 1-2% from total supply. Now answer, how 1-2% of liquids can dump the price?

Thus is what I have been wondering about because that percentage will not lead to dumping of the tokens or coins, I onces told my friends that, haven such percentage like the one above can't perform the job of dumping. I think the project team actually have some secret they are operating with, which can be trance to the dumping. Possibly most of these projects operate underground in respect to how tokens are been dump.

Of the cases that I know of are projects that conducted their ICOs in 2018 using the ICOBOX platform - for example, AgentMiles, LaneAxis and Terawatt.

The 1-2% of all total supply coin or token is not enough to cause the dump in the price of a project but I don't think the project team have some sort of secret they operate which trance the dump in price because some project owners actually believed in the project concept and skills which are not enough to make a project survive in the crypto market. What I mean is that they also need some advice and direction from a crypto enthusiast which understand perfectly what the crypto sphere want and how to target the audience.

hahaha....i think you should do your maths and research well. Bounty hunters were thousands yeah, but they had something small which couldn't even "move" a healthy market.
Moreover, many projects that died never paid hunters, delayed payments, reduced payments, locked up payments, etc etc and yet still they died.
We were in a bubble and it busted...don't blame bounty hunters hehee

How can ICO kill bounty hunters who receive only 1% at the best 2% of the total bullet. How can 2% affect the price of a good project that has good volumes on the exchange?
ICO killed the scam and not the bounty hunters.

This analysis is not completely true..Sometimes the absence of proper development plan cause this dump in price..Some of this developers are clueless, distribute their coins at the worse possible time and facilitate the dump as an escuse to dump their own bags om investors..Bounty distribition should be systematic and done when the token has masskve liquidity...Not before.

Maybe the projects from 2017 should have used their funds wisely and actually develop something for the shitload of money they received. Most of the projects from the ICO-hype didn't deliver what they promised, a lot even ran out of funds or are now facing liquidity issues in this bear market. It's no wonder people don't wanna waste their money on false promises anymore. You can't blame bounty hunters for that.

In my opinion it will not be a loss because if we look at this time it is precisely the ico that is advantageous for the promotion of their projects in order to reach the cryptocurrency community and also information faster than using advertisements that are not necessarily successful in being able to get investors,on the other hand the participants also benefit from this work in the form of rewards.

To be honest, bounty hunters do play a big role in the death of ICOs.

However, that was mainly because the project owners do not pay hunters in bitcoin or ethereum. They pay in the projects native tokens which make hunters dump them in order to get their payments for services rendered. Also, payment of bounty hunters is done poorly sometimes. They pay hunters before project listing and so hunters dump price. Investors see this and avoid ICO

Bounty hunters got no chill. They sell their tokens at ridiculous price just because they want to get paid for their efforts on the project. Investors then realize their losses and so avoid anything ico from then on

ICO projects did mistakes with hunters. They should have arranged payments at several months after listing on exchange at installments. But investors will still end up dumping the price anyway.

Look at Coti for example. Listed a couple of months ago. Hunters won't be paid till December 2019 or January 2020 yet investors have dumped the token price badly. Hunters will be left with peanuts at the end of the day

You did mention bounty hunters in your title, so therefore they responded.

If you name your topic " Greedy teams and private investors killed ICO market" i am sure different kind of people would respond.And that would actually be the truth, THEY over saturated and consequently killed the ICO market with their crap projects.

yes, the scammer is the one to blame, not the bounty hunter, or even the DEV who dumps tokens that are not sold and they don't burn.
it is they who actually killed ICO.

I don't think bounty hunters are the main reason that ICOS are not being used by people as a form of investment right now, there are lots of fake and scam ICOS which people worldwide already know so they already lose trust with ICO and now participating on IEOS.

Exactly it's the DEVS who should be blamed here, it's their business so they should manage it properly for them to succeed.
Bounty hunters are just workers who are paid a fix small amount from the money they raise and it will only cause a dump if they are stupid enough to allow it, I mean they can't stop the bounty hunters from selling but they should at least build some volume to avoid dump, a buy back for example but actually that is not necessary if they will make an effort to get the project listed in big exchange.

I choose false. Bounty hunters always hold a fraction of the majority of coins that we see on the market. They have a little influence on the price of a token. Considering what you said, what if there are a 100,000 bounty hunters each with 200 tokens of a coin with a circulation supply of over 1 billion, do you expect these bounty hunter to cause a drop in the price compared to pre-sale and early birds participants who who as high as 200% bonus?
If a coin drops in price, I think it isn't from bounty hunters and if they may be part, their impact isn't as huge as other factors that aren't usually mentioned.

This is a nonsense thread why did you accusing Bounty hunters that killed the ICO were is the sense and logical evidences to support your accusation, Its a false accusation you know why!
1. ICO still existing at these moment.
2. Most of the time bounty allocation was just base on the sold tokens! and not just what you portrayed like its a super big allocation!
3. Earned bounty tokens are payments from the promotion of the ICO so whats your point while you are using "Free tokens"
4. I'm also participated in some ICO's and Ive been scammed 4 times already, and because of that after the ICO and the token was listed im quickly sell my token in ICO price im not bothering the price anymore because i have earned bonuses during the early part of the ICO you know why because i know how the market works these is not 2016-2017 already the crypto-space has change a lot.

The real causes why the most ICO's was not that succesfull comparing before thats because of the scams and other fraudulent acts and Bounty hunters has nothing to do with this!

I agree with you, there are many bounty hunters who have enough money to participate in ICO and become Investors, the developers need a lot of time to keep prices stable from the products they have and I see a lot of scams like big pumps when tokens are registered on the exchange then the developers don't run the Road Map that we expect.

Many ICOs have almost the same ideas, then investors will sell their tokens if the product of a new project running ICO does not have a good future because there is no update on the information of the project they are building.

There is no way that bounty hunters can kill ICO, because many ICO projects allocate very small funds to bounty hunters, and it is also impossible to blame investors for this, because investors are financier in a project, but in this case at least the team requires the right steps so that their tokens do not die when they are released on the market and in my opinion, it is better to supply fewer tokens and give fewer bonuses so that the price of tokens on the market will be more stable.

False.
I think you are overestimating the influence bounty hunters have.
First off, take a look at the percentage allocated to bounty hunters.
In a typical ICO, it is only like 1% to 2% of the coins available.
Some ICOs will go as high as 5%, but that is still a tiny fraction of the overall supply.
It just isn't enough to totally crash a project even if every bounty hunter completely dumps their coin.
(and not all bounty hunters do).

The biggest factor in an ICO getting killed is one that people seem to overlook:
It was a crappy business to begin with.
People like to blame bounty hunters, market situations, scammy practices when really, the business had no hope to begin with because it was just a bad startup.

In the event that they need to make the project remain fruitful they have to secured the tokens couple of month just to ensure that the price is as yet stable when the dumpers came up.
The greater part of the faults should not lie with the bounty hunters since when the circulation is complete the hunters only have a small portion of the total allocation of tokens.
Projects need to adopt better marketing and strategical means to keep the projects afloat

This is completely false. Even without bounty hunters and bounties, projects have gone on to fail woefully. A poorly developed or marketed project will fail and there is nothing anyone can do about it. Most projects have in the past employed several strategies against bounty hunters such as locking their rewards or tokens, yet they have mostly gone to fail exponentially with several dwindling prices and value in the open market. Bounty hunters aren't responsible but the projects developers surely have the blame.

But that's because of hunters selling their coins instantly when it releases on the market. That's why makes the prices instantly dump. They don't care about the price actually and will sell whenever it's already released on exchange. This is a typical bounty hunter that we see, they always say "when distri sir? when exchange?" Like they don't care about the project anymore.

They are not true believers of the project which they promote. The true vision is required for holding a long time and not to sell on the market. The bounty rewards are dumped by the bounty hunters after the news of getting listed on the exchange. That questions are showing the fact which they join the bounty campaign for getting quick and easy cash.
The bounty rewards can be the 6% of the total coin circulation but not all bounty hunters dump the distributed tokens. Teams don't like to see the real problems caused by their ineffective management, that's why we see such coincidence.

EARLY INVESTOR who killed ICO, not Bounty Hunter

I have observed various ICOs and when they held a listing on one of the exchanges, the level of ICO coin selling was very large and even exceeded the allocation given to Bounty Hunter, just imagine how much EARLY INVESTOR can get because they get a huge purchase bonus from the initial sale of ICO

so stop blaming BOUNTY HUNTER

Bounty hunters exchange their time for coins, while investors exchange their money, which means they certainly don’t want to sell a coin even at the purchase price, but what stops this bounty hunter from doing so? Nothing. So there is a price dump, which can lead to unpleasant consequences if the coin capitalization is not high.

Who would still develop interest in investing in ICOs when they continually turn scammers. Token sales become successful, yet, some even fail to get listed or they would even list on some bad exchanges with either low trading volumes or high withdrawal charges. The team are killing their own projects not hunters... Sometimes people think hunters are just some low life individuals who can survive on just some few dollars so they are willing to sell their tokens at any price, but that is not true

The hunters are to blame for the fact that the price of the token fell upon entering the market - this is a ridiculous statement. The project management is to blame. They knew how the bounty works and should have foreseen everything. Pay ETH hunters for that matter, and the token will not fall.

PM is to blame for not marketmaking in short term and developing project in long run. But why everyone consider a new post ICO token as something valuable? BTC price does not drop to 100$ because people consider it a value. After another ICO finishes tokensale, who cares about it much? Bounth guys sell their tokens. Then everything depend on PM.

It's quite unfortunate that bounty hunters are continually been accused of what they know nothing about. The project made the decision to distribute tokens and the holders have the right to do what pleases him with the tokens. If the team were interested in reducing the number of tokens sold, they could have offered another token for a swap. I know several projects that chose to give out more valuable tokens for swapping their ICO tokens and that has lifted the burden from the hunters.

only qualified projects that have money that able to pay bounty hunter using ethereum or bitcoin.usually they care about their token price so pay bounty hunter using main cryptocurrency.protecting their investors be main purpose of this.we know our profession as bounty hunter often blamed by investors when price dumped , and i think its not fair to us.

How can you think of such, does the little token been given to bounty hunters okay for them, talk more of affecting ICO's. You got it all wrong cos bounty hunters are been payed poorly

No, bounty hunters did not kill the ICO. Bounty hunters provide a valuable service to new projects. If anything hurts a new project it could be airdrops. Many people game airdrops and then dump them on the market.
Speaking of bounty, if you want to earn a bounty for testing a wifi sharing app (Aloha WiFi) join the Telegram community at- https://t.me/oppopenwifi and fill out the Beta tester form in the pinned message.

Exactly, bounty hunters barely earn up to 5% of the tokens in circulation, in most cases the developers don't pay bounty hunters their due and include more rigid conditions after the bounty campaign has been completed to reduce the number of tokens to be distributed.

Bounty hunters didn't kill ICOs. Amounts always allocated to hunters are minute when compared to tokens sold on exchanges. Also some projects lock hunters allocation for a long period of time price dump wasn't the fault of hunters but some projects lacked marketing strategies for their projects.

No, bounty hunters did not kill the ICO. it'e depands on project progress and working product.

little agree, but for the problem of hunter is not always caused by them, many projects that distribute tokens to hunters in a matter of months and before that applies tokens must be listed in market first and before the tokens are shared there are several tokens that have dumped due to certain things for example hacks, project scams, etc. at this time the BH allocation can also be said to have been a little compared to the past few years, so it's not always the fault of the hunter

You are right, but I as a bounty do not feel that bounty hunters kill ICO, try to do the calculation of the allocation they spend on bounty hunters compared to investors, only a few percent, far compared to the number of sales they made at the time of the ICO, should if they are serious about the project, they can do buybacks.

The drop in the price of new tokens is now happening for many reasons. First of all, this is the poor state of the altcoin market. This year they almost did not grow in price, despite a good, almost four-fold price increase in bitcoin from the beginning of April to the end of June this year. Now, only a few new tokens show growth when they appear on the exchange, and even then inexhaustibly. Basically, they immediately fall in price. Bounty hunters play an insignificant role in this, since they own only a few percent of the total number of issued tokens, and even then, as a rule, they are received in their wallets when the token has already collapsed in the price of the exchange. The early investors themselves significantly affect the price of the token, who try to consolidate their profits by selling tokens at the ICO price. Here you need to generally change the approach to cryptocurrency and provide for the presence of passive income in it. Toda will be interested in holding cryptocurrency, rather than selling it.

Paying bounty hunters with ETH in order to preserve the tokens is a good strategy yet the project management will not adopt it because the team wants to grow the community support for the tokens. Bounty hunters are not responsible for dumping because some hunters are also investors. Again, the allocation for bounty programs are sometimes way too small to bring the fall of the entire supply of a certain token.

At some points, I think yes they have contributed with this problem but it is not the main problem why some ICO are becoming scam or should I said "killed".

One reason are the investors. A huge percentage of the total token supply is for the token sale. If the project will become successfully sold all of their tokens, then the chances of the price of token to plummet will increase. The developers too are the reason sometimes. They sold their token immediately after they are getting listed on an exchange and some of them are simply abandoning the coin as it gets listed.

only unresponbility developers team that will sold their token after getting in exchanges.they have to locked their token reserved for several years, to give certainity that price will not dumped by them.but in fact some developers team be main reason why price crashing, but unfortunately bounty hunter blamed in this case.

Your words are correct. Most bounty hunters get paid much later.Not only who will be responsible for them. There are many investor scammers who buy many bonuses and destroy the market with little profit. So it's not just Hunter's fraud. Many scammers are involved. 10% of the total supply coins are spent on Hunter's.

as a bounty hunter I object to the opinion that bounty hunters kill ICO, the allocation given to bounty hunters is very small compared to the number of tokens in circulation, if ICO fails and the price of the token decreases then it is not entirely the fault of bounty hunters but it is also because the project has no strategy and good marketing planning

I agree with what you say here.
Most projects do not have a strategy/planning going forward after the seller is finished.
Therefore also most projects do not last long, after that one by one will die.
And one more thing, they don't have new innovations to be able to compete with previous projects.

Bounty hunters barely had a thing to do with the dealth of icos. The ico market died down as a result of most project having nothing to show off for what they raised funds for coupled with the fact that developers grows more greedy dumping tokens after listing on exchanges.

Bounty hunters are paid just few percent of the token pool, mostly only 1% of the token pool. Whereas early investors and whale that do buy during discounted sales do receive lots of bonuses worth almost x2 of their purchases, selling all their holdings cheaply on exchange because the huge bonuses will always give them a win. They have nothing to lose.

Bounty hunter is always the reason for the failure of a project because it has decreased prices, even though the allocation for bounty hunter is very little and of course it has been calculated so that it can overcome the price reduction by bounty hunter. Several projects have failed even though they have distributed allocations to the latest bounty hunters or on a regular basis.

Personally, my opinion is that it wasn't the bounty hunters who killed ICO, but a lot of crooks in these ICO projects.

No, it is surely the investors and speculators who killed ICO. Because they immediately sell their coins if they have a little profits or if they are afraid that the token lose more value against bitcoin or usdt. That's why all alcoins are falling. It is not just a problem of ICO.
And sometimes maybe because the ICO team sold a big part of their tokens for usdt or bitcoin. Bounty hunters have very little power to make an ICO fail.

Sometimes it works like that, that's true, but not always. If the team promotes their project in a right way, bounty hunters and advisors might not want to sell their tokens fast.

I want to ask if ico really died because of the hunters of gifts, I don't think so with a hadia hunter who wants to promote an ico,then ico will quickly be infected only there are some ico that stop in the middle of the road it is not the hunter's fault, but from the manager and his own team that is not solidarity

The team dumping tokens is more like it. Bounty hunters are blamed time and again for price dumps when we're all aware that most projects allocate only a small fraction of their token supply to promotional campaigns which in most cases are not enough to affect prices to the extent to which bounty hunters are blamed for. A good example of such a project would be Sparkster. No one can say bounty hunters dumped the price, investors wouldn't sell at a loss, so who dumped it?

Hmm, even though the topic is old but this thread is right for giving opinion.

For this point, almost all projects that I have participated in, the bounty allocation is only around 1% -7% of the total supply of tokens (Values above 5% are very rarely found), So I don't think it should have much effect on the cycle right?

Returning to point 2, the allocation to the bounty barely touches the value of 10%. But I agree a little, Indeed, distributing all tokens at the same time will affect the price of the token when the token listed first day the exchange, but it does not last long (usually only about 1-2 weeks after entering the exchange or distribution)

Logically the circulation of tokens for bounties is very small right (Point 2)? So this cannot be entirely blamed on bounty hunters but project development & marketing also matters (Market factors also affect). The point is in my opinion, the Bounty hunter does affect when tokens are distributed and the tokens will list on an exchange or vice versa, but after that it depends on the project team whether they can do recovery and also development & marketing that can attract various people into their projects. So i think both of them need each other, the Project gets an active token circulation & volume and also a promotion as well as bounty hunters who get paid. That is my opinion and ask me everyone has a different opinion, Cheers!  ;D

Lol, ICO died because they did not have to live. Think why they are needed? So that someone just collects money? How many worthy projects do you see today?

I spoke privately with the CEO of one project, the cost of which tokens fell several dozen times on the first day of trading on the exchange. Tokens to the bounty participants at that time were not distributed, and the bounty hunters could not influence this in any way. So this CEO hinted to me that this was done to pick up tokens from the 'weak hands' of some investors.

False. Not even an inch. People really think bounty hunters didn't work for thier tokens or begged because most of these funds are not escrowed of payments in btc or stable coin rather than the project native coin. Bounty hunters are like marketers and every provision should be adequately made by the platform to see that they are handsomely paid and not vilified for dumps. Large scale project dumps should rather be traced to the huge bonuses that the private and presale investors get from the project as well

Strong projects are able to survive on the market even when hunters dump their tokens. Some of them claim they ve had a successful token sale and has made enough funds, yet their claim their projects are dying because of few dumps from bounty hunters. Those projects are simply not serious

I agree with you, why is the bounty hunter always a suspect for falling ICO prices. Bounty Hunter helps promote tokens and they are not the cause of death of ICO.
this is wrong and not objective assessment.

I have seen strong arguments which pointed towards the bounty hunters in this kind of discussions. The bounty rewards are dumped by the bounty hunters after the getting listed on any exchange. There is nothing wrong to sell the tokens that received to your wallet by airdrop or the bounty campaign. The cause of the down price is usually linked to the dumped tokens by the bounty hunters. They usually only care to get their BTC with dumping as fast as possible on the first available market orders.

This is one of the biggest misconceptions against bounty hunters in the cryptocurrency world.
Projects and investors are always quick to blame bounty hunters but i don't accept that bounty hunters ought to be the one to be fault.

The project team also takes part of the blame, because the cost of that specific coin will drop after the open since I have watched for commonly that even the bounty token was not discharge yet.

This is often because of the excess bonus giving out during the token sale

Do you really think that bounty hunters can do that? Well, maybe if the team will give a lot but you know it is only a small amount of percentage is allocated to bounty hunters so it will only be a matter of days or even hours if it will cause dump. Do not blame promoters and you know what. I am a bounty hunter and mostly, I will invest to it as well depending on the project. So if I invested time and money so why should I dump it? Make sense?

I agree with the OP. Too many bounty hunters wanna fake their followers, then they get money and disapear. They did nothing useful, just cheaters.

So, what's the viewpoint here?? Please make your profile good responce by followers. We are all selling something, guys. So, at least have the real community for the ICO's owner. Don't let they give money for nothing.

I do not agree if Bounty Hunter is said to be the cause because only about 2% of the total tokens are part of the bounty hunter and not all sell their tokens directly when the market is available.
Many cases have occurred after the ICO prices dropped even though the tokens for bounty hunters have not been distributed.
There is also the case of an advisor directly selling all of his tokens when the market is available so prices are destroyed, so the solution is the key token for advisors and teams for 3 years.
There is also a very large bonus that is distributed both during pre-ICO or at ICO, sometimes the bonus is up to 100% and it is very crazy, if you want to give a bonus it is quite a maximum of 20%.
So Bounty Hunter is only workers who give their time to want high wages for their work

This is absolutely false. Most ICOs don't even pay Bounty Hunters before their listing. They prefer to pay hunters months, even year after listing putting the investors into consideration. How then is it possible for BH to dump price.

Bounty hunters are not ICO killers. Bounty hunters are often killed by ICO. I disagree with you about this.
Bounty hunters play an important role in the success of ICO projects, so it is very unlikely that ICOs will be killed by bounty hunters. Thanks.

It is foolish to blame bounty hunters for ICO team failures. Most likely, these ICO teams slowly and gradually beat off any desire to participate in ICO bounty campaigns as bounty hunters. In fact, we are engaged in advertising the ICO project and for our work we get their tokens, which are even very difficult to call money, because they often do not get that way.

Recently, however, so many additional responsibilities have been imposed on us that it is time to enroll bounty hunters on the team. In addition, recently in some telegrams it has been expressly stated that they deliberately change the conditions for payment of earned tokens and if someone does not follow their correspondence for several weeks and does not fulfill the new conditions, then he will lose the right to earn tokens.

 In conditions when the payment is delayed for many months, we are forced to participate in other projects and the overt intention of ICO teams to deceive us creates additional conflict situations that do not benefit this type of activity.

I believe the core mandate of every bounty program is to promote a particular project and attract investors into it. How can these same people be enemies of the project. Most bounty hunters are also investors so if your project or tokens are worth holding, no hunter will dump them. They should focus on their project development and stop blaming hunters

Right, because what we often see is that the hunters are always victims of the ICO, one of which is when the ICO project does not pay the hunters, if this happens, then the hunters are automatically harmed, and in this case those killed are the ico hunter.

not all bounty hunters throw away their tokens when the market opens. sometimes they also wait for the right price to sell, they read the roadmap and wait for good announcements from the project community.
I'm saying a small part of them.

I never see any way that bounty hunters used to kill ico or any new project that is coming up , as regard the allocation to bounty hunters which many thought is the reason for the dump in price but to me , it is a capital no , as many project are after money and go to a very high risk by giving out bonus to private investor with like 500% gain and you expect such people not to dump it even if its 100% gain why bounty only get 1-3% ,will that affect the price?.

This is mostly not true. It is true that if the bounty allocation too high, it can damage the price of the token later.
But usually the bounty allocation nowadays is very small if you compare with bounties in the past.
The dev who own the token or private investors without lock period could contribute the dump.

The allocation of tokens from each bounty is different and if the price of the token goes down it will not affect the new ico project, because I have joined and bought altcoin at ICO but project developers sometimes do not carry out their plans due to market situation and some negative information on crypto that makes prices other tokens and altcoin down

campaign prizes have always had a small percentage of earned token sales. if it's because of the bounty hunter, the team should be able to anticipate it, because there were many ICO projects in the past, so there is a lot of experience that can be used as a lesson. I think if the bounty hunter kills ICO, it means that the strength is very big of the bounty hunter on a project

Bounty hunters are not to blame when it comes to the down trend of ICOs. ICO killed itself because of its loose structures and methods of executing its sales. Due to the loose structures in ICOs, scam projects could easily penetrate because there were no checks on teams and projects. IEO took over because it restructured the method of token sales by hosting them on exchange platform. With the top exchanges, before an IEO is hosted, checks are made on the project to ascertain its authenticity.

On the off chance that bounty hunters typically get 1%out of entire token course, some portion of them chooses to hold, at that point by what means can the rest figure out how to drop cost? Extraordinarily when every one of them dont sell their bounty tokens simultaneously.

Team behind the project is to blame, that`s for sure. Bounty hunters get just small part of the tokens, they can affect the ICO, but in so small scale. Team that has the most of the tokens, private sales they organize with huge bonuses for big early investor, it`s normal to believe that they are behind everything.
Bad structure, bad plan and realization leads to death of ICO, and any other startup. IEO is taking over cause exchanges are vouching for startups, but I don`t believe in their words, I like to check project by myself before I make any move.

Bounty hunters get only 2-5% of the total token allocation. And not all of them instantly sell all their bounty as soon as they get token but contrarily some of them hold the coin longer than the usual investor. As a normal investor invest money they have a limit which they can't afford to lose but some bounty hunters can afford to hold it for longer. So it's a complete false alligation.  

Exactly, no need to talk about the stories of the past, right now, we can clearly see that the dead ICO is not due to bounty hunters, the death comes from investors and developers who are only planning to make money quickly, not building products. Projects are born every day but have little value and improvement compared to old projects, bounty hunters also do not have to receive rewards immediately, most projects right now have very late distribution of rewards, projects are listed until dump, bounty hunters are irrelevant when the reward needs a few more months to go into the wallet

Yeah, that's true fact about the ICO that have lot of bounty hunter to promote it. They just think about their token must be sent into their wallet without give impact for selling. Spreading fud and give negative comments in telegram global group to make the ICO will be trash for investor.
I think this problem can be solve if the team distribute token for bounty hunter payment each month to decrease chance to get dump by hunter.

False, I think. If you compare the Bounty Budget allocation to the ICO's total hardcap or softcap or percentage of raised fund, it's actually a small budget, usually less than 2%. And the project can be distribute follow a vetting schedule or paid all of that, but if they have money, the purchase of the entire bounty tokens which will not affect the token price. Those projects failed, they failed at the beginning, rather than having to wait until BH dump their tokens.

it can also be avoided when his team pays bitcoin, ETH, or coins that are popular with bounty hunters. however, the coins they hold are sometimes below 10%. Well, in this case, not all bounty hunter mistakes. I think when the team has a good strategy for avoiding dumps, the best way is to pay them another coin.

And the team must also be ready to have funds if they want to launch a bounty to promote it, if the payment is to use the same token, it makes the tokens cheap because the hunters now get tokens from the results directly sold.

I would not say that bounty hunters are always to blame for the price drop of any token, of course, sometimes bounty hunters kill the price and after that the price either stays in the same place forever or then starts to rise after some time, but I also constantly saw and I constantly see how investors who buy tokens for incredible bonuses kill the price of the token they bought, so do not forget that the creators of any project also constantly sell their tokens at an early stage due to various reasons.

It's the marketing failure, investors will stay longer if they have clear vision of success from a platform, Coins can be alive if it's really active and developing new projects to attract more people. Bounty hunters only got a small percentage from a project budget, they join to earn a reasonable value of the token, they won't sell in cheaper.

No, I don't think bounty hunters killed ICO. In my opinion, the biggest reason for the almost disappearance of ICOs is that their investors do not trust ICOs. Especially in the last two years, too many ICOs have turn into to scam or have been canceled. In this case, the reliability of the ICOs was significantly reduced. Another reason is that many ICOs are no longer profitable. As a result, many investors are joining the ICOs to make high profits. However, due to the current market situation, ICO tokens generally are not rise significantly in the short term. In this case, investors can not make high profits.

it's not entirely the fault of the prize hunter, because the person who holds the token is not just the prize hunter but there are still other token holders including the project team. so I don't blame prize hunters if the price of tokens when listing on the market goes down quite sharply and not all prize hunters kill ico.

I don't agree, because some projects have decreased even when the bounty hunter allocation has not been shared.
it's just an excuse because they don't have demand in the market, so the project itself is making rekt itself because it doesn't attract investors or traders.

The above pointed points are facts that can not be denied. The honest truth is that, the bounty hunters are stil under the project team no matter the number of people that exists wihtin the bounty hunting community. The Bounty Hunters plays by the laid down rules of the team. It is the team that should therefore put in place, measure that will curtail the excessess that will arise from the bounty hunters and not to blame them for the wrecking of ICOs.

There was a project that issued two tokens. A normal one and Bonus token. All the bonuses including bounties were given in that token. Also the team distinguished bonus for buying more tokens and bounties. That was smart move imho.

1. In essence, the PROJECT NEED a bounty campaign. It is precisely because there is a demand for bounty hunters that they exist. So it’s important not to forget this moment.
2. No one ever forces and cannot force a project to conduct a bounty campaign.
3. Thousands of BH in most cases have only 1-2% of tokens from the entire pool. So, even if all BH simultaneously sell their tokens, this will not be able to greatly affect the price of a valuable token.
These are all fables invented for you. The price of a token at the beginning of trading often falls so sharply due to the fact that tokens are sold by Pre-ICO participants who bought tokens at a very low price. As a result, when the token enters the exchange, they have the opportunity to sell them at the prices at which the ICO was conducted, while making profit from the difference in value.
4. Investors, if they see that some crap is happening with the project,  generally don't invest money in it. And holding a bounty campaign is not crap.

Now that you have the answers and counterarguments, I hope you get the answer to your question.

Don't be a victim of such fables, always think for yourself.

If we mean the same project starting on E letter, guess who's advised them that.  ;)
Cheers

I think ICO problems are their type of providence. In general, this is an old topic. Now IEO and hunters can not reduce the price if the project was on a good exchange. I think that hunters just do their job so that the world knows more about projects.

1) If there was no audit, no one knows how many funds project collected.
2) How bounty hunters killed ICO because of funds allocation?
3) Bounty hunters can make price drop on short run, in the long run, their dump shouldn't have impact on token's price.
4) Investors lost money because they invested in projects which disappeared, fail to develop or poorly operated by not experienced team and they stop investing.

ICO is done by the team, not bounty hunters. Various bounty campaigns are also planned projects. Advertising the project is just a job for bounty hunters and they should at least earn something. I wouldn't blame them.

It is necessary to take into account the fact that the total pool on the company's Bounty very rarely exceeded 2 or 3% and therefore these volumes of coins were not very important when pricing in the cryptocurrency market.  You should take into account the fact that most investors invested their money in new projects with a 50 percent discount just to make money on sales after listing.  No one was completely worried about the projects.  In addition, today the participants of the Bounty companies receive a dozen or hundreds of times less reward than stipulated by the terms of many Bounty companies, and many generally block the reward for hunters, But nevertheless, coin prices are still falling and the Hunters cannot be blamed for the fall  prices.  If the team was not able to realize the full potential of the project, then you need to consider the team with the highest measure of lack of professionalism, and not look for the perpetrators in the other direction.

I really hate this kind of question  :(

Most of you already said that bounty allocation is 1 or maybe the biggest one is 5 percent from the total token. Yes, the bounty allocation does not affect the price.

Have you check the team reserve? is it locked and transparently viewable on the blockchain? 

Have you checked the total fund collected? is it really 100 Mio collected or just words.

If you aren't able to check those then you invest in the wrong company.

We do need to watch those old standards that had been gone lately.

And that is not hunters faults. Hunters are also an investor.

I don't think so because the total amount of tokens that bounty hunters get is only a small part of the project. Because of that, it does not cause ICOs to die, but they only exchange errors for bounty hunters. Just because of the poor projects with inexperienced team, the scammers that make ICOs die from the end of 2018.

Of course, paying all bounty hunter with popular altcoin make it stable after listed on exchange, and bounty hunter can calculate their estimate earning without complain why it so cheap, so far from the ICO price, etc.
Hopefully, for upcoming campaign many ICO use this method for the best solution with promotor/marketing and for themselves.

The whole problem of such a question is the lack of knowledge. Everyone is blaming bounty hunters because of their 0,05 percent of total tokens that dumped the price to -x10 from the token sale price. Wake up guys, the team is responsible and not bounty hunters.

If not true, why there's so big buthurt of bounty hunters?  :D

It's not true because bounty hunter just keep promoting a project bio but i know scam project killed ico now. Of the year two more the larger investor taking more scam project and loss their funds.

Bounty hunters are least involved in the current decline in ICO projects. The only thing bounty hunters are often accused of is lowering the price of new tokens when they appear on the exchange due to their massive sale. This charge is untrue for many reasons. Early investors have more chances and opportunities to collapse the price of new tokens, but for some reason they are not blamed for this.
A very large level of fraud among these projects, as well as the general condition of the cryptocurrency market, led to the current state of the ICO to a greater extent. In addition, I would not say that the ICO has died. Projects have become much smaller, but the quality, in my opinion, has become even better.

They indeed have a big impact on the price after the listing, but only if the project fails to list on a mid to large sized exchange where the buy volume would quite easily eat up the bounty sellers. So the projects should be aware of this and its partially their fault if they are unable to provide larger volume exchanges after the listing.

False. Although Bounty hunters are increasing, bounty hunters do not deserve to be accused of being ICO killers. If you feel that the ICO was killed, there must be another reason and not because of BH.

Why do you think it's the bounty tokens that influence the price that much? Do you have any proof for that? I'd say it's most of the time early investors (private investors) who got huge bonuses that dump right after exchange listing.

ICO depriving BOUNTY HUNTERS.

Some projects are scammed and not paying BH, if they get the success they suddenly change the budget.
If not changed, they will lock the tokens if not they will delay the payment.

Will like reiterate that, hunters been paid.early does not.actually affect the ICO because mof these bounty campaigns will not pay huge portion of the tokens to hunters as we have seen in their token distributions. Most of the market got spoiled due to the fact that team usually dump in their tokens before hunters do.

It seems like you are contradicting yourself in your submission above by saying YES to the question post by the o.p. why the body of your submission say's NO to the question. Where exactly do you stand?

Back to the question, I don't believe the blame should be the bounty Hunters but the blame should be on the developers who are just out to dupe investment of there investment capital.

That's right, those scam projects killed the reputation of ICO and not bounty hunters. As we can see from the start, bounty hunters are just promoting the ICO without knowing if the project will succeed or not and they have nothing to do on how it will perform in the market. Then there's scam projects that ruined how people look on ICO that has been generalized as scam and this is the reason why investors sway away from investing in ICO which killed it

In fact, the project teams made some problems and the bounty hunters just became the victims.
I don't know why some people just blame the bounty hunters for the deterioration of ICO reputation.
If it is about the dumping case, I think bounty hunters don't have the highest number of tokens. It is likely from the whales or the developers itself.
So, I disagree if they stated: "bounty hunters killed ICO".

Many cases like this happens with every new projects, most of the time they are holding and locking stakes they will do everything in their capabilities to keep the rewards on hold, bounty Hunters can affects literally if the projects is not that solid, if the developers is not aiming for more successful progress, it's not that much anyway if there's a proper plans after the bounty rewards got released.

Investors see only what that developers want to show them. After all, it is so convenient to blame the bounty hunters for the fall of the coin. And the reality can be much more prosaic - the team decided to make money)))

I think not. If you compare bounty allocation with total raised fund, It cannot affect token prices. Team and private investors are the ones who hold the most tokens, and they are the cause of the dump. So stop blame hunters for that.

if we talk about psychology that effected while bounty  hunter dumped token its very big.although bount total has less portion if we compared with total supply.but if developers team could work hardly and keep update about their projects developtment, in my opinion bounty dumping will not effected to market price.

Bounty hounters should not be said as an ico destroyer, because if the issue of price dump is a factor it should not be the main factor. because the rewards that the bounty hounters get are not comparable to investors. so the volume that affects the price of ico is not a bounty hunter.

somehow what you are saying is true but we can't deny the fact that bounty hunters really is a big help for any ico in able to achieve a certain selling cap. Hence it becomes a double edged sword because bounty hunters helps an ico to get many investors but bounty hunters also is the reason why the price of the token gets dumped.

We are all entitled to our opinion as to the reason for the demise of ICO's. I personally believe that every group of individuals in the cryptocurrency space has a share in the blame and bounty hunters are the least to be considered.

But what about the fact that the ico market of the company almost brought ethereum into a painful state?  After all, it is because of the garbage that the Ethereum blockchain is full.  The problem with ico companies is not that Bounty Hunters sell their coins immediately after listing, but that these products do not have real prospects because of a poor plan of action and its implementation, but first of all, the team is not so professional as to do everything  so that their project develops fully and without problems.

I should say it's a false because the percentage rewards distributed to the bounty hunters are very small most likely two percent is the maximum rate for all the total for bounty participants. Weak hands, fear, and impatient are the cause of failure, some contributor want to become rich in a single night.

Basically dumping the project developers themselves. Fees are often fictitious and tokens are in the hands of the team, and after listing merge traders.

I know of some coins, like Zeew for instance, never distributed bounty tokens but its on the verge of dying and almost dead. Good projects can never be affected on the market by small bounty allocations

I think it is because the ICO gives investors a bonus when they first invest and latter the investors dump the coin, and this ends up in dropping of ICO. Also, another reason for dumping is because many ICOs are intended to be scams and therefore, people lose their trust and stop investing, and this leads to their downfall.

Bounty participants of the company have very little influence on the price of the token after the ICO. Not only that, they very rarely receive more than 1% of all tokens, but also very often they can delay the distribution of awards for six months. So I don't think the hunters had much of an impact on that.

This notion for me is misconception which many believe. Recently,  i carried out a survey on some recent projects while their prices dipped right from start,  i was able to discover that the dip happened even before bounty hunters are rewarded! What do we say to this?

The idea or concept behind most of them were not adding any value to the ecosystem, most of them were useless or just copy/paste of other already successful crypto and that's why most of ICOs failed. Also some of them failed only because they were being promoted by the scammers.

i agree with you. everyone blames the bounty hunter, but i think that's very impossible because if we look at the allocation for bounty hunters it doesn't support killing ICO. but i think we should stop blaming each other.

developers should work harder and make more interesting offers or ideas so investors are interested in buying ICO tokens.

If they care to their project and want to protect its price from dumpers, they can rebuy the bounty tokens. It will satisfy both the hunter as well as protect their own project. If not, their token will worth zero in a blink of an eye.

I don’t think that this is so, in my opinion this is some kind of stupid question, how could they destroy ICO, on the contrary, they were engaged in its promotion, and they received a very small share of the total issue of tissues.

How about we considering the fraction of tokens given to the bounty hunters, 0.5% to 1% of total tokens or sales
This bounty hunters in turn as claim sells of thir tokens, why wont the projects buy back?

Projects dying off is mostly cause by lack of project development strategies and certan lies from most developers about amounts raised during ICO sales and i think that was one of the reasons for the erection of IEO Yet tjis purposes are also defeated

Bounty hunters didn't kill ICO., this is the saddest thing for the bounty hunters, they are always every time the market price is getting down even they have no reasonable basis for it. Though I cannot deny most of the bounty participants now are after IEO program, only few of the ico now are good that can be consider.

No they are the people would take the least blame for it.When bounty unlock, also advisor and team tokens are unlock too. A bounty hunter has approx 20$ worth of coin, an advisor has 200k $. Which would kill the market?  The bounty hunter make the market sustain for the project and they are the backbone for the project and they are the investors also.

Bounty hunters are not killers of ICO rather they are building blocks of an ICO. Bounty hunters sometimes promote the project even when ICO has ended just to appreciate price. As may people here have mentioned that funds allocated to bounty hunters is 5% or 10% or its nearby figure and many of bounty hunters hold their tokens for a long time so its basically not bounty hunters who are responsible for price dump of any token. I think its market manipulation by some big giants who buy tokens at lower price and sell it at small margin. Once price starts falling they keep on buying and selling tokens with a small profit.

I strongly disagree with what was said by @OP
Because what kills ICO is not BH, it is caused by investors (if they get a big bonus when investing) or also the Project that discards their tokens or even fraudulent projects that do ICO. that is what causes ICO to collapse and make people no longer believe. things like this don't need to blame each other anymore. Because there are no benefits that get when we blame each other.

Bounty hunters has nothing to do with decline of ICOs startups, The main reason why there are no more people interested in investing on ICOs is due to the rampant scam most projects are turning out to be.

Bounty hunters are helping ICOs, IEOs and STOs to get enough attention to the upcoming tokensale. Thanks to bounty participants they have good stat on social media sites and they have alive community.  ;)

If bounty hunters are the cause of this business failure, I think it's wrong. This means the solution of a project so that it can succeed they do not hold a Bounty campaign. I suppose this makes no sense with the gift of this campaign is a way to promote a project. While no bounty hunters do not guarantee that the project can succeed, many projects have failed.

I think the project is very weak and not serious about developing the project, this is what causes the project to fail.

Same happens with airdrops,  too, bot only with bounty programs. But in the end it's all about people's work that needs to be paid. They wanna do Airdrop, they let people complete their airdrop bounty (join Telegram, instagram, add email , etc.), save their wallet and send tokens only when they get on the stock exchange. They are afraid of tokens being exchanged on decentralised exchanges like EtherDelta.

I think, Airdrop tokens should be send immediately after you complete airdrop bounty. Otherwise it makes no sense to me.

Bounty hunters are often blamed for dumping prices of coins. But this is not entirely true. In fact, token allocation is split among many others, team members, advisers, bounty hunters and others. Furthermore, a large chunk of bonus are given to investors during the ICO or IEO, which helps fall price of  coins dramatically.

One problem is that nobody wants use these platforms which are developed and ICO projects will eventually die. Average user is already finished discovering new things and is happy with big companies services. Internet is already divided and conquered.

THE Project is most projects ususally lacks continuity ! THey can’t simply rely on the Ico funds to keep sustaining the token price ! Investors will take profits, hunters also ! At everytime there is need for new flow of funds into the project as investing or else , the price will dip because holders will want to sell !

There is a good intention but cannot say that the people who promote the project also bring success to the project

I disagree,paying for bounty with a currency whose value is very volatile due to its newness and other market factors is a grave mistake.
Gitcoin and Bounty Network reward bounty activities in either ETH or DAI,this are pretty stable,bounty hunters are less likely to dump them.
When one receives $X in bounty rewards today,such may be valued at $0.1X in two months from now.

Prize hunters don't kill ico, but scamers who kill ico because they abuse the project as a crypto scheme to get rich. they need to remember that without the prize hunters, the project will not be known by the project investors, but instead they instead consider that the prize hunters are causing ico's reputation to be destroyed.

Thanks. That is more reason most of them have become craps. The foresight may be there at the beginning, but after such mistake might have occurred, they become lost, not knowing what to do to correct it.
ICOs, IEOs or whatever form or name the fundraising project is called, it ought to be handled by expertise which is one of the major factors that should be considered.

This happens only with those projects that have a small capitalization from the very start. Investors, first of all, began to invest less in ICO due to the huge amount of scam.

No, the price of the token is tied solely to its usefulness and market relevance. Many successful projects have had bounty and airdrops campaigns.

In a way, I will say it is totally false because bounty hunters do not have many tokens compared to private investors who hold plenty coins bought at a very cheap price. Most bounty hunters are serious holders because they read the  project and put their trust in it.
And even considering the rate that each hunters holds and when you think deeply, they do not sell on the same day so the dumping effect is caused by those who hold many coins not the peanuts that bounty hunters hold.

That is very wrong and I do not agree with you ... the bounty hunter never be able to kill ICO, because the allocation of coins given to the bounty campaign is only 1-3% of the 100% of coins launched..It makes no sense if only 1-3% can kill altcoin prices in various markets ... so don't blame the bounty hunters who have made Altcoin price dumps on the market ... because of the thousands of bounty campaign participants they only hold 1 -3% of the altcoin and the rest is held by investors, advisors and teams with a percentage of 97-99% altcoin launched to various markets. so think wisely so that it doesn't make many bounty hunters feel offended

The provisions are not the hunters who damage the price on the exchange, but the team itself can not overcome it, maybe the price is damaged in the market because when the sale does not run out and the rest of the team can sell in the market, except for the burnt tokens that are not sold.

the most important thing here is the allocation given to the bounty hunter is the decision of the development team. so, they need to do calculations regarding this. if they feel that it can kill their project, they should have given a small allocation from the start. In this case, Bounty Hunter is not entirely wrong, because they also do what they need to do to help the project.

when the ICO is finished, that's when the team's strategy needs to be done either to develop the products they make or try to maintain prices. whether a project dies or not is not determined by the bounty hunter, but what determines it is the team of the project.

not all prize hunters kill ICO, the question is the initial investor who receives the token first. Prize hunters receive tokens at the end of the project and not all prize hunters will sell tokens that they have received at the end of the campaign, some of them prefer to save them.

I fully agree with you, I believe that with a properly planned and conducted bounty the project will only benefit. However, with the wrong approach, negative effects can also occur

There are two cases and having different consequences .

1. If Bounty got hijacked by few people (Now a days we a marketing consultancy firm observed that most of bounties hijacked by Vietnamese, Philippines multi account holders)  than definitely amount of tokens they will earn will be dumped in future.

2. Bounties are for all around world people except some countries where it is illegal, Marketing campaign run for creating awareness all around the world except two three countries. If people from different part of world join bounty than it will really be good for project and it will worth it.

Bounty hunters are not responsible and shouldn't be blamed for what happened to ICOs most ICOs failed to keep their ICO promises especially that of exchange listing. All this made investors angry and they sold because most projects pay bounty hunters months after they're listed some have a lockup of months as well

No, personally, I don’t think so! What does bounty hunters have to do with it? These people help the project to develop and attract attention to their project, their remuneration for the work done rarely exceed 5% of the total number of coins, and how can you kill a project by selling only 5% ??

How can bounty hunters kill the ICO's can anybody explain because company raising money and they need to develop the product? Companies will allocate a very low percentage to the bounty people and it will not damage the entire project and people are spreading negative about the bounty hunters.

don't blame the bounty hunter who killed the ICO ... because investors can also do it to make the coin price go down in the market ... many bountie hunters receive coins after a few months the coins have been listed on the market ... so don't blame the bountie hunters ... because the bounty hunters has made a lot of time just to promote altcoin which is ultimately worthless in the market after investors make the price drop dramatically ..

The answer is false.
Bounty hunters reserve from the total supply is usually 2% to 5% which by value is just an integral part of the funds.
Ico reserves is usually 40% - 65% which is big enough to crash any business.
You can understand who killed ICO from the analysis above.

You mean it's investor fault? AFAIK all of investors only can invest max around 1 btc during ICO. Its mean each of investor only get small portion of Total supply of that token once it entered market. Do you think most of investor dump their token at same time asap it entered market? There is always a chance like that

The ICO collects funds so that they can carry out their great goals that you can often read on the whitepaper or Road map. But the opposite is true when the project is completed, which is sad. So many lost investors, the losers are still listed on the exchange, but it is not bounty hunters who destroy icons but scammers who use the ico to victimize and raise funds for investors.

From your question alone is wrong, and of course the reasons you give are also wrong. Your question is: Bounty hunters killed ICO?
What's the deal with the ICO dying with prize hunters? Of course ICOs die because ICO developers often commit fraud, they don't manage ICO properly, so investors are no longer interested in ICOs.

True, you say the ICO died not because of the prize hunters, but the team that often carried off investors' funds was rife. 2018 many teams were unprofessional, even investors were willing to invest again in ICO, bounty hunters were also not the cause of falling prices because developers were not serious in handling projects.

Yes it's true buddy, ico died not because a bounty hunter or investor, but a deceptive developer, which damaged the reputation of ico who really wanted to develop his project well.  So Ico is good to be affected. So it's normal that ico project died because developer is cheats and doesn't run the project properly

owner of the ico is the main root of thier failures but investors and bounty hunters are the secondary reasons on why they fail more evenly .

i know good ico's on the past but no matter how good they are there are still times that their coin goes down . who do you think are responsible for that ?  

price is based on demand and owners cant just manipulate thier own creation . they need investors and bounty hunters to drive demand but both can also drive the price sideways

I don't see how bounty hunters can be reason why project fail. Project do crowdfunding, they collect money and reach soft cap or hard cap and they have enough money to accomplish their goal. Bounty hunters can shake market at early days, later it depends on developers. If they succeed, token price will go up because there will be new investors, but if they fail no one can say bounty hunters are one of reasons.

Exactly.
Even those 2 - 3% of users won't dump all of their tokens at once. Team is responsible for all this. As they hold most of tokens in various names like marketing, project development, system reserve etc.

You can't blame the bounty hunters. For the token to go down because of bounty hunters there will need to be multiple times more hunters tokens then investors tokens.
If they sell 100k tokens how many do you think hunters have? Even if they have 100k as well that is 50% loss and I guess you are talking about tokens that completely tank?

Getting something without paying for it always allows you to sell with zero loss. The sooner you sell, the higher your profit, cause money today worth more than money tomorrow.It's just a point of view.

If they do thier job the dump will not gonna happen why not set a buy support after listed it in exhange then use some of the money raised for marketing.

The problem is that they do not want to lose money from the raised fund because they are greedy and they want it all for them.

false!! Do you think a small amount of bounty will drive the price of a token to dropped? I dont think so, investors and the tokens of team should be the reason why a project dies.

That may be true, but we must realize that the majority of token holders are teams and investors are not bounty hunters. Bounty Hunter only holds 1-2% of the total allocation. The amount will be divided equally among all participants according to the work done. So if the bounty hunter is used as the reason why ICO is dead, in my opinion it is the wrong thing. Selling quickly after distribution is a natural thing to get high prices, but there are still plenty of hired hunters who will hold token for a long time.

I don't think bounty hunters killed the ICO since they are the one also promoting the project and less reward thry are getting than the investors. And the only problem is when a bounty hunters created a lot of dummy account and that's the statt of a major dump if the prpject manager cannot control it.

But when an ico required KYC then that's the time only less people will join even the bounty hunters since they don't want to provide their informatiin and only stay anonymous.

Exactly, bounty hunters will not have any control on their funds raised by the company and their developments. The company itself allocates some percentages to the bounty hunters, which most of the bounty hunters will hold the coins because they believe the company, but at last, the company will scam the investors without any developments.

At the last past years ico is not good also based on their rules because of them they are also killed for their project if the reward is bitcoin or eth it is good but based on tokens they are giving is not good also.

In my opinion not a bounty hunter who killed ico, but the developer of ico who killed ico itself, now  are many fact is that ico is indeed a fraud that makes investors start to fear investing in ico, we can see before the rise of ico fraud in early 2018, many of the ico projects are developing quite rapidly even their tokens are rising high when their tokens are being listed in the market, and this certainly proves when the project developers were developing their projects correctly.

I think know this is completely false, most times the tokens dumped on an exchange when bounty hunters rec I've their token even exceeds the amount of tokens allocated to the bounty campaign, sometimes the team members use the bounty hunters to disguise their dumping because it is always more convenient to blame bounty hunters who majority of them receive $10 or less for their services.