I understand there was scammers on Telegram, so they stopped communicating there. But look, even on Bitcointalk she's active when the team is trying to collect ICO money, and right when that was over they go radio silence.
It's just not a good look
I mentioned this a few posts ago, but if you want her to be active here, we've got to start asking real questions. If you go back through this thread, you'll find that it's mostly shitposting and complaining, so there's not much reason for her to participate. It seems that's why they are sticking to the public communication channels. If you've got a real question, she'll answer you if you reach out, but I wouldn't expect her to jump into the lion's den here for no reason. |
|
|
|
The inofficial real telegram group was so bad moderated, you didnt know, they are scamming you or just random people.
It was full of advertising, hijacked by others for their purposes. The other part of the problem was their new roadmap. It created alot of frustration, because they cutted half of your year profits, by delaying half a year. You cant invest, you cant get profit. So seriously you dont need a telegram group for that. Just come back in half a year ;-)
In crypto land its a dead project. Without the platform live, you have no product, nothing you can try out, cheer about or else.
Who have a platform connected to a real life use right now? What you are saying is that there are many dead projects in the top 100/200 market cap The roadmap showed a product for release in november, like beta release. Now we know, they are not even pre-alpha. I think a big part of the problem is that they didn't raise as much money as they expected. Their original time line was associated with an $8 million budget. When they were forced to cut back, it may have caused a delay in development. If that's the case, they had 3 choices: 1) keep the budget and time line as-is 2) cut the budget, causing a delay in development 3) return all investor funds because they didn't hit the soft cap I don't think #1 was really an option. Even if they stuck to the time line, they would have spent most of the capital they raised on development so there wouldn't be much left to actually invest in real estate. You could argue #3 would have been the best option, but that would have had to have been done immediately after the ICO. There's no easy answer, but I think #2 is better than #1. At least it preserves some value. |
|
|
|
I was confused a little when reading the description of the project. Did I correctly understand that Realisto will only work with real estate in Berlin, or won’t there be any geographical restrictions?
Remember that the are two components to the business model. First, the company will be doing direct real estate investing. Their expertise is in the Berlin market, so that's where they will be focused. The second part of the business model is to leverage the Realisto technology by allowing other investment managers to launch projects on the platform. These investments are managed by third parties, so they could be anywhere in the world depending on the expertise of the investment manager. As a REA token holder you won't automatically be invested in this real estate, but you WILL receive a percentage of the fees that investment managers pay to use the platform. |
|
|
|
FYI - Melissa just answered many of my questions privately, so they are still communicating even though the Telegram group is closed. Since it was a private conversation, I don't want to post it here publicly without permission. I still have concerns, but I at least wanted to mention that they are listening.
Can you ask her if you can share with us? Do you also asked her if we'll get updated weekly or every two weeks or once a month? I did not ask how often updates would be coming, but I'll find out if it's OK for me to post her comments. Melissa asked that I not copy/paste the conversation here because she's concerned it could lead to confusion, which would just feed the trolls. That said, she gave me permission to answer similar questions here if I know the answer. She seems very willing to communicate publicly in a constructive way. In my opinion, that requires that people put effort into asking good questions. If it's going to be more of the same trolling, it doesn't do anyone any good. Beyond that, I think she prefers to answer questions privately (that's my opinion, she didn't say this). She's very accessible if you are serious about asking questions. I know it's a tough situation, but if you want more public engagement, let's try to cut down on the trolling and start being constructive. I know this comment will get lost in all the noise, but we're at the forefront of a revolution. If we as early adopters want token investing to become more mainstream, we should do what we can to legitimize the industry. That means we have a duty to ask good questions and demand transparency in a respectful way. It also means we shouldn't be afraid to call people out when they fuck up (rather than allowing excuses and getting away with "just be patient" as a response), but it should be based on a rational argument. It's hard and it takes effort, but the experience should make you a better investor and earn you more money in the long run. /end rant/ |
|
|
|
I'm sorry to say, but I think the article is terrible. I've certainly been critical of REAL, but you're almost implying that they are a scam and that all ICOs without a working product should be avoided across the board. That's too simplistic of a conclusion when the reality is that investors just have to learn how to do better due diligence. |
|
|
|
FYI - Melissa just answered many of my questions privately, so they are still communicating even though the Telegram group is closed. Since it was a private conversation, I don't want to post it here publicly without permission. I still have concerns, but I at least wanted to mention that they are listening.
Can you ask her if you can share with us? Do you also asked her if we'll get updated weekly or every two weeks or once a month? I did not ask how often updates would be coming, but I'll find out if it's OK for me to post her comments. |
|
|
|
Did the company ever figure out how leverage would work? Would banks lend money against a property with decentralized management?
I didn't invest in the ICO, but am revisiting it now based on the token price. However, I'm still not convinced that decentralized management can really work.
Don't understand what you say but i trust you When they were looking to raise money during the ICO, I had asked if financing would be possible for properties with decentralized management. At the time, they didn't have an answer. If not, it poses a problem because investor returns would be lower (at the property level). That would theoretically make investing in assets on the Atlant platform less appealing than other comparable investment opportunities. |
|
|
|
|
Did the company ever figure out how leverage would work? Would banks lend money against a property with decentralized management?
I didn't invest in the ICO, but am revisiting it now based on the token price. However, I'm still not convinced that decentralized management can really work.
|
|
|
|
|
FYI - Melissa just answered many of my questions privately, so they are still communicating even though the Telegram group is closed. Since it was a private conversation, I don't want to post it here publicly without permission. I still have concerns, but I at least wanted to mention that they are listening.
|
|
|
|
Personally, i think Atlant should cancel the bounty distribution (redistribute that fund to actual investors).
Is this something that could even be done? This cannot be done because the reputation of the project is at stake here, if they will not gonna pay as they promise, believe me this project will fail. Marketing is very important in this kind of business and the bounty hunters did their job very well that's why the success was achieve, and now after everything has been done, you want to cancel the bounty, not a good idea IMO. I agree that it's not a good idea, but I was just asking if it was even possible. I don't think the smart contract would restrict this, but my guess is that they couldn't cut bounties even if they wanted to, or they'd be opening themselves up to a lawsuit. |
|
|
|
Personally, i think Atlant should cancel the bounty distribution (redistribute that fund to actual investors).
Is this something that could even be done? |
|
|
|
So new roadmap is out, what do you think? Let's be honest, I was expeting those dates, a company can't set up legal and liquidity things in just a couple of month. I can surely wait, better if they take time to make things right
True. Timing is normal. And let's not forget they initially had planned for 8 MM USD budget and they cut to 3MM USD to benefit the token holders with that extra USD 5 Million. I have not seen any other ICO company doing the same and I see some people here being unreasonable. LOL. They cut their budget because they were basically forced to. Aside from the pressure put on them to address the issue, if they didn't do anything, they would have had an $8 million budget and only $3 million to invest. That's obviously not good economics. Plus, they've either been unwilling or unable to show the breakdown behind the $3 million budget. They provided detail when it was $8 million, so not sure why it's not provided with the updated budget. To their credit, Melissa messaged me privately to ask what they could do to help show me they are a capable team and I outlined a couple of the specific issues I have. We've actually messaged about things like this before, so I know she's trying...I just don't know if the team behind her is good enough. Also, the Telegram group has started banning people who ask questions, including myself. I know I've been critical of the team, but I take pride in making sure everything I say is based on fact. It's not a good sign that they are banning people who ask questions. Well, you mention they were forced to cut their budget by USD 5 Million but imho, they were not, and they could just have followed what they said in their whitepaper... they just chose the best economics for us token holders, not for them. That just is a huge sign of good faith for me. Also, they did not ban anyone they just shut down the group as they explained and I am glad they did. Too much spam, phising and whining like it happened in the Slack groups. I didn't mean that they were literally forced. They could have technically left it as-is, but spending $8 million on a platform that has $3 million to invest would have been unreasonable. My point was that not hitting their soft cap "forced" them to do something. I give them credit for addressing the problem, but I think it's something most companies would have done as well. I'm fairly sure they wouldn't have cut their budget so significantly if they had raised what they expected. |
|
|
|
And let's not forget they initially had planned for 8 MM USD budget and they cut to 3MM USD to benefit the token holders with that extra USD 5 Million.
I have not seen any other ICO company doing the same and I see some people here being unreasonable. +1 Trikar, Can you post a link to the Telegram group for the people who were asking, since I know you're an admin? It would also be great if you could explain the rationale for banning myself and others from the group. Hi, there is an official channel with all the Real updates. Real published there the reasons of putting off the chat group. That reasons are: Spam Impersonating phishing attempts Real just close that channel for that reasons. You or others weren’t banned, the group no longer exists. I don’t know if you are in the updates group so just in case this is the link. https://t.me/realplatformMy apologies. I wasn't aware that the group was closed. |
|
|
|
And let's not forget they initially had planned for 8 MM USD budget and they cut to 3MM USD to benefit the token holders with that extra USD 5 Million.
I have not seen any other ICO company doing the same and I see some people here being unreasonable. +1 Trikar, Can you post a link to the Telegram group for the people who were asking, since I know you're an admin? It would also be great if you could explain the rationale for banning myself and others from the group. |
|
|
|
So new roadmap is out, what do you think? Let's be honest, I was expeting those dates, a company can't set up legal and liquidity things in just a couple of month. I can surely wait, better if they take time to make things right
True. Timing is normal. And let's not forget they initially had planned for 8 MM USD budget and they cut to 3MM USD to benefit the token holders with that extra USD 5 Million. I have not seen any other ICO company doing the same and I see some people here being unreasonable. LOL. They cut their budget because they were basically forced to. Aside from the pressure put on them to address the issue, if they didn't do anything, they would have had an $8 million budget and only $3 million to invest. That's obviously not good economics. Plus, they've either been unwilling or unable to show the breakdown behind the $3 million budget. They provided detail when it was $8 million, so not sure why it's not provided with the updated budget. To their credit, Melissa messaged me privately to ask what they could do to help show me they are a capable team and I outlined a couple of the specific issues I have. We've actually messaged about things like this before, so I know she's trying...I just don't know if the team behind her is good enough. Also, the Telegram group has started banning people who ask questions, including myself. I know I've been critical of the team, but I take pride in making sure everything I say is based on fact. It's not a good sign that they are banning people who ask questions. |
|
|
|
|
If the Core fund is expected to generate ETH dividends, but the Opportunistic investments will have capital appreciation (without dividends), what's the incentive for anyone to want to buy into the Opportunistic investments early on. Wouldn't people just keep their money in the Core fund and wait until an Opportunistic asset is closer to being sold off before they buy in?
I guess a related question is how will you be valuing the Opportunistic investments? At what point do they get written up above cost?
|
|
|
|
So new roadmap is out, what do you think? Let's be honest, I was expeting those dates, a company can't set up legal and liquidity things in just a couple of month. I can surely wait, better if they take time to make things right
I'm very surprised how calm investors are. Everytime I come here I read posts just like yours (let's give them time, it's complicated, they're working hard etc.). As far as I remember, in mid September they claimed to launch beta in November. Now it's almost December and they say thay will launch it in February. Actually I'm almost sure, that they first said October, and November was to witness their's first property aquisition. They claim they're behind the schedule because of not meeting their ICO goals, but I just cannot imagine how people are willing to believe these excuses. To create a web site which is not that complicated it should take no more than 300 hours of work. They almost don't update. They left bitcointalk as soon as they realized that some people here can actually think sober and ask difficult questions. They claim they have to establish a company in Singapur, whereas 2 months ago they claimed they are already established there. For past month instead of giving updates and working on the platform, they posted about their travels to Singapur and Australia to attend some summits that have nothing to do with real estate. How can you still say they're doing their job just fine? I agree 100%. That's how you know ICOs as a way to raise money is still in its infancy. There's no way sophisticated investors would be so complacent. I'm as shocked as you are that people aren't more demanding. It honestly baffles me. they are just throwing people instantly out of their community, if they are mentioning the delay or asking about development updates. it has been like that since the beginning. there is a reason why their coins are trading 75% off the price. its hard to say if this coin will recover. at the moment there is alot of selling pressure. i would not touch this. it seems they are hidding alot. Wow looks like I made the right decision not investing in the ico. Looked really good too and was thinking of jumping in. Current price looks tempting but too many issues. I stopped buying ico's around the time this came out because you can almost always get the coins cheaper after the hype dies down. Don't touch ico's anymore because they are mainly structured to make dev's and whales richer. Agreed. I passed on the ICO because it didn't seem worthwhile, but I took another look once the price dropped so much. The numbers make sense at this price, but the team is just so amateurish, it's still hard to justify. I'm still keeping an eye on it, but I don't think I'll ever be able to get comfortable with the team. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
