Some of your questions you find answered in this doc:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1RUZLxxoAfT3C5jIJ144DLYdztYe_sqrKqbTlZuD05-s/edit#gid=445871101

It shows User Statistics, and I was really surprised how much Factom is already used - and obviously increasing:




The reason for the latest price-bubble was just more attention because there was this info in one article:

"Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin’s fund Fenbushi was an early investor in Factom.“
http://www.financemagnates.com/cryptocurrency/interview/factom-ceo-blockchain-based-transparent-mortgages-can-restore-trust-in-markets/

That brought more attention from the ETH-community on Factom.

Web Login: https://login.lisk.io

The focus on use cases, users, business deals and entry credits is the best what they can do for their Investors. It wouldn't make sense to make marketing for Factom like we know it from Cryptocurrency-projects like Dash or other Coins. This is more a business-project which also means that there is a lot going on behind the curtain. If I should make a guess: > 70 % of what's going on regarding marketing, talking with companies, potential deals, we don't know because they can't talk about it. But the last months show: They are hard-working and they have results other projects would kill for. ;-)

Azure is not a business-deal, but it brings attention of Devs and potential use cases on a project - elevated potential in general. I believe it's justified that all projects that were added there had some increase in value after that.

There is no lack of marketing! I'll tell you my personal view: My only critique is the wallet because it doesn't work for me, but I have no doubt that there will be a better one in the future. Everything else I see as nearly perfect and I see Factom as better and with more potential than ETH. Or more precise: ETH seems unpredictable for me regarding real fundamentals while Factom seems rock-solid regarding it's future. In ETH it's at least for me never sure what is real quality and what's just hype - and there is a lot of Hype. I'm very carefully if I see a team to interested in the price and that's my impression in ETH. In Factom they do what they have to do. You can see that in the Github, but also regarding public relation they do a lot. Just a little overview about the last 2 weeks:


A Conversation with Factom CEO Peter Kirby and Ancun Zhengxin CTO HaiHua Shen [Audio + Transcription]
https://coinreport.net/conversation-factom-ceo-peter-kirby-ancun-zhengxin-cto-haihua-shen/

David Johnson at the Tatiana Show
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnRVFsyansc&feature=youtu.be&t=33m16s

Paul Snow Testifying before Congress
https://coinreport.net/conversation-factom-ceo-peter-kirby-ancun-zhengxin-cto-haihua-shen/

The revolution will be Factomized - San Francisco Bitcoin Meetup
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCH4VVxBYQg&feature=youtu.be

The Crypto Show with Peter Todd, Paul Snow and Jessica Solce
https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/the-crypto-show-with-peter-todd-paul-snow-and-jessica-solce

Latest Blogpost (from yesterday!): 500,000th Factom Entry + Latest News
https://www.factom.com/500000th-factom-entry-latest-news/


And that's not even everything. Because there were some other articles about Factom and that's just what we see. Just take a look here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/factom/
 

As you can see: They do a lot of marketing, but they won't do direct marketing for Factoids and it's price.

And regarding Milestone 2: It needs to be stable and if it should need more time everybody should be fine with that. I've followed a lot of teams and I can't remember that I saw a solid release without delay and I often saw complaining about delays because of a too optimistic team that gave a fix date.

In general should be considered, that they won't care about anything they recognize as "price-complaining". And you can ask yourself if you would speak of a lack of marketing if the last bubble wouldn't have been burst. The price needed to go down, because there was no real reason for the rise, just a lot of margin trading. And without real use of the system it's all just speculation. But if they are successful in doing what they do, this will be one of a very view projects with real use and really solid fundamentals and that will be visible in the price. And there are a lot of signs that Factom will have stable "real-world-use" before Ethereum.

Why limit it to Crypto-Exchanges? NASDAQ! Somebody already asked?

They don't wait every time. Ethereum launched on Polo if I remember it right. Factom definitely launched on Polo.

Best to start would be Poloniex, at least soon after launch. And I believe the chances are good. Lisk got some attention and the combination of the huge ICO and Azure should be enough to get listed on Polo soon.

Kein Problem. Bei den ganzen verschiedenen Kursen in Bitcoin plus Umrechnerei zum jeweiligen Dollar-Kurs... da verknotet sich das Hirn schon mal. ;-)

Und wo genau irre ich mich?

Über XEM weiß ich nichts, aber bei ETH stimmt das nicht. Das sieht nur auf dem Chart so aus weil der Einstiegspreis zuerst so hoch war. Wenn meine Notizen korrekt sind, war der ICO-Preis für ETH 0,0005 BTC. Und in die Nähe kam der Kurs meines Wissens nie wieder.


Edit: Hier ist es etwas präziser:

Ethereum crowdfunded its project a year ago, in June 2014, raising around $18 million worth in bitcoins by issuing a pre-sale of its ETH to early investors. The ICO price was 2000 ETH per BTC to a final rate of 1337 ETH per BTC. This rounds off to roughly 30 cents per ETH as per BTC prices at the time.
https://www.deepdotweb.com/2015/08/18/ether-price-plummets-what-happened/

Tiefststand nach dem es auf den Börsen war: Etwa 0.0019.

Tiefststand in Dollar, wenn man den Bitcoin-Preis berücksichtigt, dürfte ca. 100% plus zum ICO-Preis eigentlich nicht unterschritten haben.

(...)

Over the next few days, more information and details about the ICO will be announced. We will also release a checklist, so you can see if you are fully prepared for the launch. This effort will be combined with a guide on how to generate and validate your Lisk passphrase, and what to do if you lose it before we launch.

Our current plan is to launch Lisk on the 11th April, 2016. This is an estimate based on current workloads, so may change over the next 3 weeks. At launch we will provide a full client so you can directly access your LISK. At this moment it also looks like there will be several exchanges trading LISK immediately, or shortly after launch.

https://blog.lisk.io/the-lisk-ico-has-now-ended-with-a-total-of-14-009-btc-and-80-million-xcr-exchanged-93d6ce84d8fb#.4yeq1djt2

That might be the reason why he didn't use an official channel yet. The only question is if the info is legit or not. If yes, there will be an official announcement soon.  

Seems as if Dev already tweeted about it: https://twitter.com/FrankoCurrency/status/712626152611909633

But I would guess it needs an official announcement.

It's not very impressive if you change your points you are critical about. First you said "Java based?? lol ummmm ok.", after the info that it's Javascript you quickly speak about "shady...btc investment" etc.

The question is: What exactly is your point?

Frage wird sein ob er Widerstände durchbrechen kann oder kurz davor ist ne S-K-S zu bilden:
http://www.godmode-trader.de/know-how/1-9-5-schulter-kopf-schulter-formation-trendwendeformation,3733868

Ich bin nicht so sicher, ob es als Zeichen der Schwäche oder sogar als "red flag" gedeutet werden sollte, dass das Lisk-Team bei Crypti ausstieg, oder nicht vielleicht sogar umgekehrt. Manche sehen darin eine Art Perfidie, aber je nach Situation kann es auch durchaus als Zeichen von Konsequenz, Kompetenz und sogar Gradlinigkeit gewertet werden.

Letztlich wird es darauf ankommen ob sie fähig sind ihre Vision dieses Projekts zu verwirklichen. Wenn sie das sein sollten war der Cut mit Crypti konsequent und gradlinig und richtig. Falls sie das nicht sind, ist das noch nicht der Beweis des Gegenteils aber ganz sicher werden sie keine nächste Chance bekommen. Insofern ist die Sorge, sie könnten nächstes Jahr vielleicht Lisk aufgeben um etwas Neues zu starten ganz sicher nicht begründet. Lisk ist "do it or die", v.a. für das Team selbst. Und die extrem hohen ICO-Einnahmen sind nicht nur eine gute Finanzierung. Ich könnte mir vorstellen dass sie die Verantwortung durchaus fühlen. Um ICO-Projekte die nach 100 BTC ICO-Einnahmen irgendwann einfach hingeschmissen wurden hat sich niemand gekümmert. Aber gerade die Millionen die jetzt in Lisk geflossen sind bringen eine Ernsthaftigkeit mit sich die nicht viele Kompromisse zulassen wird.

Und mein persönlicher Eindruck von dem her was ich bisher über das Projekt weiß ist: Nach wie vor kann ich nicht wirklich bewerten inwiefern dieses Projekt objektiv große Chancen hat oder nicht weil mir dafür technische Kenntnisse fehlen (dasselbe Problem habe ich mit Ethereum und vielen anderen Projekten), aber ich bin 99% sicher, dass das Team es ernst meint. Worauf ich immer achte ist wie ein Team kommuniziert, weil ich glaube dass man daran viel mehr erkennen kann als viele vielleicht glauben - auf viele Bereiche bezogen. Und wenn ich ihre Kommunikation und ihr öffentliches Agieren mit anderen vergleiche ist das Lisk-Team eine 9.9 auf einer Skala von 1-10.

I agree. But the wallet-discussion really should be focused on this base-aspects: A safe way to store and transact Factoids and possible for the normal user. Some reactions of team-members are most likely out of the impression that criticism about the wallet is expressed with focus on marketing and price and some of the criticism is in fact expressed with that intention (clearly said). And they are right that the value of Factoids should be based on the value of the system for those who will use it and I also agree with them that it wouldn't be too smart to give dates for releases and rush things out.

My own criticism is based on the fact that there was not much reaction on those who expressed their problems with the wallet and my own experience that I'm not able to get the wallet running and without knowing what I'm doing wrong while I tried a lot without complaining about it - same with the papermill. I believe it's some kind of OS-conflict.

With other words: The discussion about the wallet should be focused on that aspect. If it seems as if it's about a nice design and price-hyping they don't care and they would be right with that. So I hope that they understand that it's at least for some not a price-question but a question of "how to store and transfer value in a safe way". At the moment it seems as if that's only possible with some luck regarding the own system or a question of technical skills. As a result some of us are in the paradox situation to believe in Factom's quality in longterm but with more trust in an exchange at least in short-term but since some months.

The recent discussion seems to be a little bit "heated up" and first I decided to say nothing but it could be that there are some misunderstandings and maybe I'm able to clarify some things, at least out of my personal view.

First let me say, I don't see much reason to complain about the direction the Factom-team is going. And I disagree with the way some express their criticism. It's not helpful and it's not even really rational to (try to) make time-pressure regarding the next release (Milestone 2). It will come and the most important is that it's stable. There is no doubt that the team is working hard and there is no reason to be impatient about that, even less reason to complain regarding the price.

But, regarding the wallet situation I understand the perspective of those who are critical, even if I'm not totally in line with the way it's sometimes expressed and the reason is very simple: It's not because I believe it would need a fancy wallet with whatever features to hype the price. But Factoids have value and Factoids are transferable, it's needed to store and to transact this value and it would be good to feel more certain with it.  

My own situation is: My Factoids are still on Poloniex because the wallet doesn't work for me and also the paperwallet doesn't work for me (Mac) It shows a lot of weird signs and all my efforts to solve the problem were unsuccessful. The reason might be that I'm not a tech guy, doing something wrong, but usually I'm able to do things like explained and I've tried it on different machines and I've tried all kinds of settings and different browsers to download and so on. And even if I would get my paperwallet-problems solved I wouldn't use it with larger amounts if I don't get the wallet-problems solved, because even if I really believe in Factoms quality (I'm in for longterm and not daytrading) I don't want to be in a situation that something happens without having a way back I feel certain with. Out of the perspective of coders those problems may seem trivial. Out of my perspective it's about the question how to handle that kind of risk. So I take the risk to have it on Poloniex (and some on Bittrex to diversify the risk) and I believe Polo is the best multi-coin exchange out there. If an exchange should get hacked or go down for whatever reason I won't say somebody else is responsible than me, but: I would lose a lot. Why? Because I believe in the potential of Factom. That's my risk as an Investor. But at the same time it's kind of frustrating because under the line I know that the Factom-team would be able to solve those problems and while I don't know if anybody else has the problem with the papermill I know that some others have problems with the wallet.

And again: In general I agree with the direction the team is going and that's the reason why I'm cautious, also because I'm not sure if I'm the problem, or my machines or the software. But I disagree with argumentations that Factoids are not intended as altcoin or that buying now is not investing in Factom or that speculation is not needed. It's all correct. But at the same time it's not totally right. It was started with an ICO and FCT's always had value and it's needed to store and transact this value. It was intended to be on exchanges and it was intended that people buy it. Maybe it's not needed any more and I agree that we shouldn't speak about the wallet as a factor to push the price. But under the line those argumentations could give the impression as if Factom now is only focused on the big goals and big deals while those who supported it since beginning are not needed any more. And kind of paradox: It's one of Factoms strengths that it's in fact correct. Factoids are out there and Factom's potential is not dependent on speculation, not even really on a wide distribution or the price and it doesn't make any difference if new people buy in or dump it. I see that as strengths and that are some of many reasons why Factom is a good investment. But it's also kind of paradox to see a project like Factom without any reasons to complain about, many reasons to be excited about, but to feel that uncertain at the same time and since some time.

Because that's a fact as well: For those who can't use the wallet, maybe because they are not skilled enough, maybe because the wallet is just not stable enough for their OS, the situation involves a lot of risks. If they send their FCT's to the paperwallet (if it works, and it doesn't work for me) it's a one-way-transaction if the wallet doesn't work stable. And to keep it on the exchange... we all know how that could end - MtGox, Vircurex, Mintpal, Cryptsy (...).

I personally say: I play in a high risk market with my money and with early software - high chances and high risks and my own responsibility. And I never complained about anything here and I understand the focus on priorities. But it also can be kind of frustrating to be patient and cautious, hoping for months that there may be updates to make the wallet more stable but the reactions seem as if it's not needed. I know that those reactions may be partially results out of the impression that some criticism may sound inappropriate and with focus on hype and bubbles. But at least for me it's a question of more certainty vs. uncertainty and in worst case about having a chance or losing a lot.

I'm in Factom since it hit Polo and I did much research about it. And Factom is absolutely my number 1 and the best project I currently know (in my eyes better than ETH), but what I also know is this: It did not get that much attention and their ICO wasn't a big success. That's the reason why the total supply is pretty low (the ICO was kind of a decision about the total supply), so it started with a low marketcap and stayed at a low marketcap until december. Than there were a lot of good news and it finally got the attention it deserves and would have deserved right from it's start.

What I want to say with that: The situation here is different. Lisk will start with way more of attention but also at a higher marketcap. Factom's price went down because of the low volume in the first two months and the team was never focused on the usual Investor but on deals. And, maybe the biggest difference: It seems hard to understand for a lot of people why Factom has so much potential. Lisk's business model is more an "eye-catcher", easier to understand on first sight.


And just by the way: In general it always seems as if the price would go down after an ICO but very often it's not really true because it always starts clearly above ICO-price on exchanges. If I remember it right, ETH never went below ICO-price while it seemed as if the price would go down after the launch.


What I expect is: The price could drop but the volume won't be too low and I believe that some who thought about buying into the ICO stepped back and bet on the chance to get it cheaper on the exchange/s. I'm in both positions. I bought some in the ICO but I'm ready to buy more if the price should go down and if I'm convinced to see longterm-potential. I'm new to this and wasn't aware about Crypti so I'm still in the "research-phase". ;-)