Yes, the info graphic is coming very shortly. Thanks for your interest!

But seriously, I am curious about this IPO thing. I did a quick research and I came to conclusion that most people on bitcointalk believe that usually most IPO's fail to bring the investors any money. Someone mentioned that actually only few IPO's were price-wise succesful. I am trying to understand, why would I want to buy the coin in IPO if it will be cheaper when it hits exchange and it would be more beneficial to buy it then.

The real question is, why do we recommend index funds to so many people here, and then, why do we recommend Vanguard's in particular?
In order to have a good shot at a secure, reasonably well funded retirement, most of us will need to have some portfolio of stocks (and bonds, but let's just talk about stocks for now; the same arguments I'm going to present for stocks apply to bonds). So how do we get those stocks?
You could pick them. That's what people did back in the day and that's what some people do now. There are various stock picking theories, and I won't go into what they are. If you're into that, great; I'm not going to discourage you from doing what you believe is the best way to achieve your financial goals. And if you beat the market, even better. But very few people will do so, and those that do will spend a great deal of time doing it (as will many that don't).
If you aren't picking stocks, you still need to have some. It's just that your best bet at that point is some sort of mutual fund (or equivalent, like an ETF, which some people seem to view as a different investment entirely, when in reality it isn't significantly different from a mutual fund. In fact, at Vanguard, the ETFs are a share class of the mutual fund). You could try to pick mutual funds that are going to beat the market within your desired asset allocation -- but given how few repeatedly do so, we're back to the same problem as picking stocks in the first place. You could find a financial advisor who will do this for you, but that selection process has the same problem. To top it off, there's all sorts of fees that are certain to eat into your total return. The odds are against you if your goal is to pick a mutual fund that will beat an index fund in terms of the return that you see (and ultimately, that's the number that matters).
Which brings us to the idea that most people here aren't going to beat the market. For the vast majority of what I'll call casual investors - people who want to set their allocation, contribute methodically, and not think about it more than a few hours a year - index funds (and the asset allocation wrappers - life style and target date funds - that use them, too) really are the key.
And since there isn't much to index funds to compare across companies, costs become the key. (I'll point out here that if you want to do stock trading, Vanguard probably isn't the right brokerage for you, although they do have some actively managed mutual funds beyond allocation ones. And once you have over a half of a million dollars in assets there, you can make very discounted trades of stocks should you be so inclined - I think it drops to like $2/trade, and at $1 million in assets, you get some number of free stock trades per year too)
So, fees. Vanguard's fees are among the lowest in the business. None of their funds charge a sales load. The expense ratios for their lowest investment minimum share class - "investor" shares - are among the lowest in the industry. And when your investment in a given index fund gets to $10,000 - a pittance in the grand scheme of things - the expense ratio drops even further as you qualify for Admiral shares (which your investor shares will get promoted to when you hit this mark).
If you're looking to diversify the portion of your stock portfolio that you want to be in domestic (U.S. company) stock, you can hardly go wrong with a total U.S. market fund. And at Admiral class, the expense ratio is 0.05%. Compared to $6.95/trade at many brokerages, you'd need less than one trade per $13,900 invested to have the same costs -- good luck not having your costs drag on your "versus index" performance there.
Note that I said "among the lowest" - there are occasionally funds with a lower expense ratio for the same product that come along. I've yet to see one that didn't feel like a loss leader, certainly not at the five-figures (or more) invested mark. On top of this, those with lower expense ratios tend to be offered by for-profit brokerages, further giving me the "loss leader" feeling as these companies lose business to Vanguard. It's only a matter of time, I feel, before the expense ratios of these creep up, or the companies offering them make up for the loss in other ways. By contrast, Vanguard runs their funds at-cost, so I know that the expense ratios I'm paying are the cost of operating the fund and that any future cost savings will go to me: they don't have shareholders (other than those who are invested in Vanguard mutual funds) who might want to claim the difference as profit.
In summary: if you aren't going to stock pick, or pick someone to pick for you, or pick someone to pick someone to pick for you, you're a good candidate for Vanguard's index mutual funds. And that's a sizable fraction of people who come here looking for advice.

the most are hate this IPO format, just like ripple, dev control too much.

Are you part of the MaidSafe team? Looks very fishy to be asking for donations.

No scam. You are right about that it is not appropriate to accept donation while IPO is going!

I don't think he realizes if he tells blatant lies that are easily checked he loses credibility. It's a bit sad the way this threads ended up I feel stupid for watching it for so long.

"1. Release 0.1% of the coins per day and taper the release rate over time". That's total bullshit. Nobody gonna wait 1000 days to receive his few coins. I had enough of it with Reddcoin, although they're sending 1% of my coins every day.

Listen to people and delete your crappy plan. Ethereum guys also have crappy plan at first but after they listen what people think about it they decided that it just won't work and they're working on a new IPO plan for a couple of months now and still don't have it. It's not as easy as it might look like. If 95% people hate your IPO plan they'll hate your coin. I bet it's not what you're going for.

Yes. We are not doing inflation anymore. It is too much work.

We are hiring new developers after the IPO and will be selling coins to pay them. We wont sell off coins faster than the market can absorb and will decrease sell off rate if it affects the price negatively. Sell off rate will be variable.

We may be giving out coins as an incentive to roll out the wifi network, which requires a density of people who are in range of each other. We will put a map online where people can add locations they can setup equipment and will give out 200 Skycoin for confirmed mesh links. We will choose a few test cities and may distribute a few hundred thousand dollars in coins this way.

We have a lot of software to write, so we will be giving out bounties for projects that will drive adaption and will be hiring more developers.  We will also being doing more things after launch to engage the media and get favorable coverage in news outlets catering to groups that would benefit from adaption. We are hiring people to manage these media relationships and so it does not distract from development.

We are pursuing multiple strategies to ensure adaption.  We are looking at two years of work post launch to get to where we want to be.

Just the wallet project, getting support for multiple coins in the wallet, getting an exchange in the wallet, adding messaging and improving the user experience for purchases is going to take a full team a year of work. We are already starting on the third iteration of the wallet GUI, but will postpone major changes until after launch.

Stop supporting every piece of shit that comes out!!

Stop fucking mining every god damn coin. What the fuck is wrong with you people?
You people are ruining the altcoin market.
There is not enough money in the market for all these coins to rise in price. Every hash you put towards shit copycoins like this is a hash taken away from more deserving coins.

Lower hashrate = lower difficulty = lower price = lower adoption.

Fucking fuck, you people make me sick!

Yes, I'm fucking butthurt. Coins are down across the board because of this shit.
Just stop it.
If its got nothing new or innovative, say no.
If everyone stuck to a handful of deserving innovative coins, those coins would all rise in price and everyone would benefit.
Instead you guys spread us too thinly over everything.

If you mine a litecoin copy with no new features in 2014 you are a fucking tool.