There are already a ton of pools in the 201 forging delegates that share their earnings, so by voting for any of them you will be earning LWF which is similar as getting dividends  s this really a satisfactory reason of value to the project, no compensations to investors who set out from the initial stages to earn more benefits in the form of dividends.
|
|
|
|
That is a cool write up of much that has happened with Hive and I like that you guys will be going to so many conferences to build your brand and find more partners. The only thing that is still lacking is a top tier exchange like Binance... Add that and the platform launch this quarter and then this project will really take off. |
|
|
|
|
This is stated in the weekly update:
Airdopped OmiseGo tokens were sold for ETH, of which some will be added to Pinta and some will be used for buybacks. Details will be disclosed in the Q2 Financial Report.
Has anyone seen this in the Q2 report?
|
|
|
|
Nice, more then 570k burned tokens. I expected 500k+ so this is pretty good in my opinion. And I am also liking the fact that they are increasing their position in ICN, when it explodes there will be nice buyback profits from their ICN sales |
|
|
|
|
Enjin
Elixir
OmiseGo
Hive
Iconomi
All fundamentaly solid projects that will go boom with more development updates.
|
|
|
|
Why sneak around? Pay your taxes, be happy and be free... If you made millions get a tax advisor and make a plan to spend the least possible on taxes but pay them. Or move to a different country where there is less corruption or less taxes |
|
|
|
This is a great update, but I will be more excited once DHL confirms this partnership on their end. |
|
|
|
They would never use the full $70M. But this money could be invested and then 20% of the profits would be used for burning which could still be a lot of money. And honestly, I think that a solution will be found sooner or later. The Polkadot guys lost ALL of their ICO money and no way that will stand. One of the Polkadot guys is even an Ethereum cofounder so they will find a way, I am sure of it. Are you seriously suggesting that $75 million+ of funds supposed to be held indirectly by ICN holders doesn't matter to the price of ICN, and 'we' haven't lose anything? Irrespective of whether you think the hard fork is a good or bad idea, surely you can agree that ICN holders collectively lost something.
Edit: at the time of the incident the 600k ETH was worth something like 30 mil and now it's worth 70 mil (rough numbers)
that's 40 mil difference and if you extract 20% (performance fee) you would see that we would have seen 8 milion $ used for burning. Now it's that nothing? again not to mention future proffits
OK, you are right guys, we have lost potential profit on ICN. It is just hard for me to belive that even if Iconomi would get those funds back, the price of ICN would be higher. I don't understand the silence of the Iconomi team on this issue. You're talking about scores of millions of dollars here, not a trivial amount. For example, they could commit to using those funds to buyback and burn ICNs, which could actually make a difference this time given the large amount of money for the buyback and burn. I think they (together with Polkadot and Parity team) are still working on solution to get those funds back, even if the hard fork won't happen. It would be amazing to see $70M worth of buybacks, but it is half the current marketcap on ICN, so it's pretty much unreal. |
|
|
|
|
Joined the signature campaign. Looking forward to this project!
|
|
|
|
Agreed, that it became a pointless discussion. You keep on learning finance and I will keep on making money and we are both set. Good luck You don't seem to understand the very basics of finance, so seems pointless to try and educate you. Perhaps you should do some reading and get back if you want to have a civil discussion. It is clear that you're just looking for a pump for ICN with your comments on 100x the price, without any baseline or fair value considerations. At this stage, it is pointless to continue this discussion with you.
|
|
|
|
By comparing ICN to ETH you are comparing apples and oranges... ETH launched in 2015 and is far more down the roadmap line then ICN. Give ICN another year and then we can talk again. As for $0.01 being a win for you, that is your decision. I invest into projects with an at least x100 ROI expectation. I already gained that much on a few other projects and ICN will soon be among them. Do you think that ETH will do x100? I don't think so. But it seems that our investment styles differ by a lot so you do yours and I will do mine, but talking BS about how many promises they broken while breaking one is just BS. And if you are unhappy with ICN why not sell it and move to ETH? You will be better of there for sure So they just launched their first regulated fund with the second one close behind it. In the next 10 days they will announce the biggest burning of tokens in the history of ICN with the combined burned tokens amount probably exceeding 1% of the total supply. They are on the verge of accepting fiat payments and scaling things to the next level. They are implementing ICN fees for DAA creation in a month, ICN fees for DAA rebalancing (both of these fees meaning more burnt tokens in the future). And you would kill the company now when the work of the past year and a half is comming to fruition? If that isn't shortsighted then I don't know what is And I haven't even mentioned the huge unrealized profits from their ICO investments... Even in this crappy market when prices are down I would bet that the 20% of profits would result in $10M+ in profits for buybacks with that number growing heavily in the next bull run. So why would any reasonable investor cash out now and earn maybe another 50% profit when a few months from now you will probably have 500%+ profit? Is it possible? No idea, but I would vote against that because they are actually progressing nicely although at a slower pace that I had hoped for. As for the price being what it is, that is market determined. It will grow as they start marketing more heavily and give ICN more utility or if it stays low, they will just burn more ICN tokens which will ensure a bigger growth down the line. They haven't changed anything but dividends to buybacks.
The 24 month moratorium hasn't passed yet so there was no vote yet...
They stated in a previous AMA that ICN token holders would be entitled to the money from all the Iconomi owned assets if it would come to a stop.
EDIT: Am I unhappy with their speed of development and ICN utility? For sure, but I still think that they are building up the foundations to make ICN holders very rich in the future and I am willing to wait.
If this is true, I'd like to propose a token holder vote to dissolve the company, and return all the assets that the company holds to the ICN tokenholders, before the team goes about enriching themselves from the company coffers. Do you think this would be possible? There's a reason ICN is trading below the liquidation value of assets held by this company. Sure, the price is market determined, but it they are trading under book value, and the ICN holders own the company and its assets according to their fundraising documents, then it's an easy win for the ICN tokenholders. You're getting a dollar for 30 cents, why would you say no? If you think the team can deliver still, then they are free to do another ICO with modified terms, and perhaps keep their promises the next time to that set of investors. Maybe it is time for some elementary finance lessons. Can you find me one company in the S&P500 that trades below liquidation value? I'll wait. There's a reason why this doesn't happen. The future promise for returns means nothing. There are equivalent opportunities in any market. If you put in $1 and can get even $1.01 out immediately, that's a win because the opportunity cost of the $1 is the rest of the market. In this case, for example, ETH would be a natural alternative. Now tell me again how much ICN has historically outperformed ETH, and how it will continue to do so? In the end, my example to liquidate was hypothetical - obviously, there is no ICN voting mechanism. They just made a bunch of promises in the whitepaper to raise as much money as possible, and then never followed through on most promises. What makes you think the near future would be any different? If the company literally created a trust with all the ICO money and did absolutely nothing, you'd probably see the price of ICN to be 900% more than it is today. What does that tell you? |
|
|
|
So they just launched their first regulated fund with the second one close behind it. In the next 10 days they will announce the biggest burning of tokens in the history of ICN with the combined burned tokens amount probably exceeding 1% of the total supply. They are on the verge of accepting fiat payments and scaling things to the next level. They are implementing ICN fees for DAA creation in a month, ICN fees for DAA rebalancing (both of these fees meaning more burnt tokens in the future). And you would kill the company now when the work of the past year and a half is comming to fruition? If that isn't shortsighted then I don't know what is And I haven't even mentioned the huge unrealized profits from their ICO investments... Even in this crappy market when prices are down I would bet that the 20% of profits would result in $10M+ in profits for buybacks with that number growing heavily in the next bull run. So why would any reasonable investor cash out now and earn maybe another 50% profit when a few months from now you will probably have 500%+ profit? Is it possible? No idea, but I would vote against that because they are actually progressing nicely although at a slower pace that I had hoped for. As for the price being what it is, that is market determined. It will grow as they start marketing more heavily and give ICN more utility or if it stays low, they will just burn more ICN tokens which will ensure a bigger growth down the line. They haven't changed anything but dividends to buybacks.
The 24 month moratorium hasn't passed yet so there was no vote yet...
They stated in a previous AMA that ICN token holders would be entitled to the money from all the Iconomi owned assets if it would come to a stop.
EDIT: Am I unhappy with their speed of development and ICN utility? For sure, but I still think that they are building up the foundations to make ICN holders very rich in the future and I am willing to wait.
If this is true, I'd like to propose a token holder vote to dissolve the company, and return all the assets that the company holds to the ICN tokenholders, before the team goes about enriching themselves from the company coffers. Do you think this would be possible? There's a reason ICN is trading below the liquidation value of assets held by this company. Sure, the price is market determined, but it they are trading under book value, and the ICN holders own the company and its assets according to their fundraising documents, then it's an easy win for the ICN tokenholders. You're getting a dollar for 30 cents, why would you say no? If you think the team can deliver still, then they are free to do another ICO with modified terms, and perhaps keep their promises the next time to that set of investors. |
|
|
|
Is it possible? No idea, but I would vote against that because they are actually progressing nicely although at a slower pace that I had hoped for. As for the price being what it is, that is market determined. It will grow as they start marketing more heavily and give ICN more utility or if it stays low, they will just burn more ICN tokens which will ensure a bigger growth down the line. They haven't changed anything but dividends to buybacks.
The 24 month moratorium hasn't passed yet so there was no vote yet...
They stated in a previous AMA that ICN token holders would be entitled to the money from all the Iconomi owned assets if it would come to a stop.
EDIT: Am I unhappy with their speed of development and ICN utility? For sure, but I still think that they are building up the foundations to make ICN holders very rich in the future and I am willing to wait.
If this is true, I'd like to propose a token holder vote to dissolve the company, and return all the assets that the company holds to the ICN tokenholders, before the team goes about enriching themselves from the company coffers. Do you think this would be possible? There's a reason ICN is trading below the liquidation value of assets held by this company. |
|
|
|
They haven't changed anything but dividends to buybacks. The 24 month moratorium hasn't passed yet so there was no vote yet... They stated in a previous AMA that ICN token holders would be entitled to the money from all the Iconomi owned assets if it would come to a stop. EDIT: Am I unhappy with their speed of development and ICN utility? For sure, but I still think that they are building up the foundations to make ICN holders very rich in the future and I am willing to wait. @muleroaa @ruletheworld I wasn't in crypto in 2016 yet and didn't invest in Iconomi ICO, but when I first bought ICN tokens the dividends was still on the roadmap (early 2017). I've found this pdf dated July 2016, so I guess it is the original one made for crowdsale. They even ditched the token holders voting promise... https://coss.io/documents/white-papers/iconomi.pdfICN tokens represent ownership of the ICONOMI platform, allowing their holders to receive dividends and vote on ICONOMI related issues. On the positive side, the team delivered working product - fund management platform, and they are developing it pretty well. Not many blockchain projects did that. Thanks for the link. It does seem like the original Whitepaper. I remember reading it before the ICO, but never saved a copy. Good to have a local copy just in case. For reference on how much the team has gone back on their original promises, here's a quote. Note that dividends vs. buybacks is the least of people's concerns: 100 % of the ICONOMI tokens represent 100 % ownership of the ICONOMI platform, comprising of all assets and liabilities, as well as each and every right and obligation, including but not limited to intellectual property rights, branding and trademarks. ICN tokens represent ownership of the ICONOMI platform, allowing their holders to receive dividends and vote on ICONOMI related issues. ICN ownership entitles its possessor to participate in ICONOMI platform related voting. One of the most important voting issues will be the selection of service operators. ICN holders are free to vote on a service operator at any time after the ICONOMI platform has been launched, but not before a 24-month moratorium has passed. I don't see the above being true one bit. The biggest problem is, all these 'changes' were done AFTER the team raised millions of dollars from the ICO participants. This is material misrepresentation to investors. With respect to the actual product being developed, I am quite happy with that to be honest, and you're right that they seem better than most ICOs that never deliver anything. With that being said, all the value is going to the team instead of the ICN holders as they promised during the ICO. This is a problem. It is as if they took the money from one group, and built something to benefit another group, violating all the promises made to the first group during the process of raising money. That's what is concerning - not the product itself, but the use of the funds to benefit the investors who put the money to build the product in the first place. That's why everyone is so keen on the ICN utility, so that the ICO investors can see some of the benefits from the platform as well. The dividends aspect is just one of dozens of issues. |
|
|
|
Get some what? You mean invest into Nina? No idea, I know that I only buy ICN and not the DAAs so for me it doesn't matter if it gets listed either way as long there will be fees flowing from it for buybacks  @someonesomeone @Gutenhans
So do we have any conclusion about Nina being present on ICONOMI and available to buy for registered users? Would really like to know should I collect some funds to get some or just forget about it. Maybe next AMA we get straigth answer.
|
|
|
|
What announcement? Also, the team already stated multiple times that they are not interested in getting on other exchanges which is a total bummer and also what is killing this project... Now im starting to get hyped up more and more..
Todays announcement Youtube and Google campain xoming up!!
Next.. Bigger exchanges. Making it easier to buy would make it bigger.
|
|
|
|
Who said that professional investors will avoid Iconomi? I am a big supporter and ICN owner, not someone trying to FUD. But it is stated in the Columbus Capital blog post that only professional investors will be able to invest in Nina, simple fact... Why I don't think that the fund will be listed on the Iconomi platform? Because they will have to differentiate between professional investors and regular ones. Professional probably meaning acredited (in my opinion anyway). But now that I am thinking about it, they might just list it as a private DAA and only show it to investors that qualify for it and that would probably be the easiest way to hold the funds on the platform and directly collect fees. Yes, the fees will go towards buybacks, but I doubt that it will listed on the ICN platform because it is only for professional investors... I doubt it because they stated that only professional investors will be able to purchase these funds... So will Nina Columbus be available to buy on Iconomi platform just like regular funds? I've only glimpsed thru the medium article but haven't found this info, only about traditional stock exchange.
where have you seen this statement? To my knowledge they said they will pay fees to iconomi that means using the iconomi platform. check the last sentence in the post https://medium.com/@columbuscapital/2018-the-year-of-columbus-capital-q-a-2e53e01bfed9 Iconomi said the whole time they are a investing platform for everybody, professional investors included. At the moment actually they focus only on professional investors regarding marketing (see meet the managers events). Can't see a reason why some professional investor would say pass at iconomi platform. Actually i can find a few reasons someone that wants to invest in crypto BIG time can make himself a private/public DAA with the platform being super easy to use. They have top security. They are insured and use cold storage. This is what professional investors are searching for. Big four audit it's also in the roadmap and goal is to gain trust from big money. Fiat gateway it's also a tool for big players. And at first will be open only for big deposits. Almost everything they develop it's meant to bring big investors. got some questions why would you think professional investors would avoid Iconomi platform? what would they have as a alternative with decent fees and fort Knox security? why should columbus pay fees to iconomi if they don't host the funds? DAA's produce fees to iconomi when you let your money on the iconomi platform (managing fees) and when you sell from a daa fund from the platform (exit fees). they don't perceive fees from financial operations outside the platform and i did not hear any rumor about they planing to do so. Do you have info otherwise? i don't use rocketchat if what info you have is from there please share. |
|
|
|
|
Good catch! Looks like a certain scam for sure...
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
