Only selling 1 million tokens out of 22 million and the ICO price scheme is based on the assumption you will achieve a 100 million USD market capitalization within the first year???

Cryptoinsiders is mentally ill. When you repeatedly say or do the same thing over and over again expecting a different result, that is the definition of insanity. It is sad, really. Also, apparently he is so new to the cryptocurrency scene that he thinks the SEC is a legitimate threat to a foreign-based cryptocurrency entity... and he is dumb enough to think your average cryptocurrency investor in the US gives a damn what the SEC thinks. Why the hell do you think US investors moved to cryptocurrnecies in the first place? Hint: it is definitely not because of how regulated they are.

TaaS is a closed-end fund so it is not really the same as ICN etc.

I gotta say, equibit's ICO setup is even more frightening than Melonport's... Only selling 1 mil tokens out of 22 million and the price scheme is based on the assumption they will achieve a 100 million USD market capitalization within the first year... Both Melonport and Equibit look great from an end-user perspective but man do their initial distribution structures suck for ICO investors.

ICN had such a successful ICO in part because they didn't pull any of that bullshit, investors don't have to worry about constant inflation like they will with those projects.

Yeah and they haven't said what the PoS inflation rate is in either of the whitepapers or elsewhere (or at least I couldn't find any info) which is something I think should be known before investing.

When they say transfer to the community they mean sell to the community, right? If those tokens are needed to fund the coin-swap, development, research, etc then they are going to have to sell those shares to generate the funds they need to finance those things.

That's a good point I hadn't really considered. I often question the value in (and intentions of) devs traveling the world to go to conferences, but in this case since Iconomi is operating as both a potential investor and client/service provider to other projects and people in the cryptocurrency community there are obvious reasons for networking at such events.

Still I don't think it is too much to ask to know what the exact goals/objectives are for the conference, if this isn't already available somewhere, which I think is all psimoes was getting at.

Thanks!

There are tons of vultures on BCT, it has always been a cesspool (but I'm not so sure it's all that worse than with other financial instruments). Every good coin and even shitty ones are subjected to hype/fud cycles from groups looking to turn a quick profit at the expense of easily impressionable people. It's a super prevalent and simple form of market manipulation found all over this site and it sucks because it is often informed/connected assholes taking advantage of naive newcomers, which is bad for more than just the newcomers it also harms the cryptocurrency economy as a whole by centralizing wealth (to morally dubious individuals, nonetheless) and inhibiting adoption and utilization.

It also sucks how as a side effect it is near impossible to voice any reasonable criticism without instantly being considered one of the above and having all of your points simply dismissed on the grounds of trolling or FUDing and never receiving any sort of legitimate response or recognition.

Everything is so diametrically opposed here. Us-vs-them, you are either defending or you are attacking a coin, you are either a blind supporter or you are fudster troll. This is contributed to, additionally, by people who behave like the crypto space is zero-sum... As if because one supports a coin they have to oppose all those deemed "competition". Competition is very real, but there is room for many niche markets.

Interesting project with interesting team behind it. Whitepapers, website, and everything looks very professional. Keeping my eye on this one. I guess my only concern, like many others, is that only 51% of funds are sold to ICO investors and the rest is being kept by the team et al. 49% token share + all the money you are going to raise through the ICO seems ridiculous (and unprecedented).

And it appears the distribution numbers don't take into account inflation from PoS either? Or am I missing something? It says 51% will be distributed to community (through ICO), 20% team/angels, 20% business development, and 9% for research etc. But then there will also be coins produced through PoS that aren't included in this breakdown, right? So there will be more inflation/share dilution that an ICO investor needs to be aware of. What is the breakdown of the inflation due to PoS?

Also, as a potential investor I wish only BTC was being used to fund development and research instead of the using a share of the tokens. You plan to sell 29% shares of the token to generate funds over 3-4 years, which is going to drive the price down during that time. And when you say "Ultimately, 100% tokens will be allocated to the community so that Qtum can become a truly open source community." Isn't that just the same as saying you are also going to sell your 20% team/angel shares?

Awesome, thank you! I like how on top of things this team appears to be, let's hope it translates well for ICO investors.

10% of supply reserved for the team plus another 8% for future team members, expenses, and marketing seems like a lot considering you hope to raise up to 12,000 BTC...
What type of oversight/accountability will there be for the 18% of the supply in your control? Is there a time limit or a set of objectives that must be completed before that 18% can be sold on the markets?

Sorry if this is answered somewhere obvious already, I couldn't find it.

Any word on the bounty spreadsheet?

Another high profile competitor will be entering the DAPP scene soon. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1720632.0

I have serous doubts the ETF wI'll be approved at this time, sure hope it is though.

As long as the percent decrease in BTC:ICN is less than the percent increase in USD:BTC then USD:ICN increases despite the decrease in BTC:ICN. We already saw this when BTC rallied to 1000 and BTC:ICN stayed pretty much the same leading to an increase in fiat valuation of ICN.

And then some of us have actually been long time supporters of Lisk (all the way back to Crypti) and have become legitimately frustrated and concerned with how things are progressing. I still have my coins fyi, except for the fraction I converted to Ark.

Do you know how long we have been waiting now? Are you aware of Crypti, the predecessor of Lisk where Max et al had their first ICO and where the basis of the Lisk code originates? Two ICOs and, what, two-/+ years and we are still just supposed to wait patiently. Meanwhile, other projects are eating up Lisk's potential market space by actually releasing developments and coming through on their promises in a timely fashion while the Lisk team plans to "brainstorm" for the next 2 months.

I only very recently became critical of the Lisk team and that's because I've been exposed to other teams and seen how unproductive this one has been in conparison. It doesn't add up.

Traveled the world. You would think a team of people could do "brainstorming" while they attended conferences and stayed in fancy hotels, and instead of just twidling their thumbs while waiting for the legal processes to be worked out for the foundation.

Congrats to the chronobank team for a successfull ICO!

They just posted in the old thread how much they got from the 2nd distribution.