Lykke and Pillar Project coming out with a ICO is almost the same project. The guy making the Pillar Project work in Lykkes slack channel and wrote an article for them https://medium.com/@pullnews/the-story-of-the-lykke-coin-251b8179480c. Someone complained about someone copying the Lykke project and Tempus was trolling the guy acting very strange so I decided to start researching. I would think his reaction is wow i need to tell Richard about this. This is the pillar project https://us.pillarproject.io/. Also the story of the pillar project just like the lykke project... https://theascent.biz/the-story-of-the-pillar-project-bc7a653c8931. There is another one called the mother ship same idea and the road map is formatted just like the lykke roap map. Not sure now if Lykke is for real or just rolling out ICOs with the same idea. Pillar is not related to Lykke. There are also no relations between Lykke and Mothership. People are free to build teams and to present their whitepapers and goals to potential Investors who have to come to own conclusions and to make their choice if to invest in a project or not. And it’s always a good choice to dig deep to find out if something may have quality and a chance or not. I personally don’t know anything about mothership so far and if it could be seen as similar to Lykke or even a competitor. What I know about Pillar - I have zero concerns that it could turn out as competitor. About this: "Someone complained about someone copying the Lykke project and Tempus was trolling the guy acting very strange so I decided to start researching." I didn't defend Pillar in any way, but I disagreed with implications that David Siegel is a scammer or "stabbed Richard in the back". As far as I know: Nobody in Lykke is concerned about Pillar. The rest of the discussion on slack was pretty personal because I then was accused to work for Pillar or that I should leave Lykke to work for Pillar, being a scum and delusional and so on - so I just defended myself. Your fake news like cnn I watched you trolling the guy. You also stated David helps lykke and is part of the slack. And then he makes Pillar ico =). I sold all my lykke. Gl with the project to everyone invested. The user you are speaking about (and I'm sure that he also has a bitcointalk-account) called me delusional, idiot, scum, enemy, etc. while I just wanted to level that topic down. I'm not interested that the Lykke-Slack becomes an "Attention-on-Pillar-Slack" and that guy has tried a lot to give the impression as if Pillar would be of high importance for Lykke while attacking me, claiming I would or should work for Pillar and leave Lykke. And of course, I'm no one who simply accepts if somebody speaks that way with and about me. You are free to interpret that as trolling and of course you are also free to sell your LKK. Especially the latter is interesting, because it shows how personal this topic seems to be for you. But if you sell because you don't like me I can reassure you that I'm not that important. If you are scared that Pillar might be a competitor for Lykke: Same... I know nobody who believes that. |
|
|
|
I called it a good investment when you bought it at five cents. Why does that surprise you? Unlike you I don't have a wheelbarrow to push except transparency. If you cashed out now you'd have made 5 times your investment. Yes that's a good investment in my books. But no, I don't think it would be a good investment for latecomers who buy high from early investors and face much more downside risk.
Finally someone admits Richard owns most LKK, after all the stonewalling. You don't think that confirms my suggestion that Richard stands to make most of the profit, or that it is a make him richer scheme? Okayyyyy...
Anyway, short term Richard can totally manipulate LKK price to stop it going down, thanks to an in-house "algorithm" which I noticed last night favoured price going up: in other words, the larger the LKK sale the fewer USD per LKK you got, but the bigger the USD purchase of LKK the more LKK you got per USD. No price transparency at all, very heavily manipulated, and I can't see a US regulators having a bar of it. I also think as we get to the sharp end of Segwit 2x activation there's a limit to how much funny business with the "algorithm" determining the LKK price will be able to stop people running for the doors.
What surprises me, or actually I'm not really surprised, is the inconsistency of your argumentation. On one side you come up with hard accusations. You talk about Lykke as a "scheme", you claim the market would be manipulated, Richard Olsen himself would intervene on the market, and so on. At the same time you speak about Lykke as good investment. And sure, I get your point because that is the only one that is consistent: The price. And that is the constant message you spread on two threads here and several topics on reddit and THAT shows consistency. And one more time: I don't want to say that there shouldn't be different opinions about total value and price. It's the way you combine things and spread your message that is revealing. Another thing is: If one wants to attack a project, that is always possible, especially if done with theories like you come up with. - price goes down: that is about Lykke only underlined with the lie LKK would have went down before others did - price goes up: Richard Olsen manipulates the market Or supply and distribution: If founders and team-members wouldn't have so much skin in the game it would be easy to attack that, to come up with the claim they would only care about selling LKK to make money. If they hold a lot, and we are speaking about ownership here, you see a problem in that. So let's not forget your priority: Cheaper price because after all your accusations you still consider Lykke as good investment. That intention is the only consistent reflection in the way you communicate. |
|
|
|
I have repeatedly said it was a.good investment at 5 cents when u bought it as it was a cheap ico. Rich was still going to make most of the money but downside risk for investors was less. Ive been saying since it was around 40 cents i think it is overvalued and going down, at 26 cents now i think downside risk is high and it can fall further. We find out in a month i guess. I dont think i have to be totally one sided to pursue a legitimate line of reasoning, in answer to your question.
And who owns the two wallets with majority of total LKK supply?
Regarding the wallets: I already said in my last post that Lykke will publish a list of owners. Richard Olsen holds most of course, but it's also about team and board members. Regarding the price: It's not a problem if you point out your opinion about the price. But after all what you've said about Lykke being a scheme and your other concerns I'm really surprised that you still call it a good investment - that even more gives me the feeling that you simply want to talk the price down, especially because you put so much effort in it. I know that game and I reply. It's that simple. |
|
|
|
Lykke and Pillar Project coming out with a ICO is almost the same project. The guy making the Pillar Project work in Lykkes slack channel and wrote an article for them https://medium.com/@pullnews/the-story-of-the-lykke-coin-251b8179480c. Someone complained about someone copying the Lykke project and Tempus was trolling the guy acting very strange so I decided to start researching. I would think his reaction is wow i need to tell Richard about this. This is the pillar project https://us.pillarproject.io/. Also the story of the pillar project just like the lykke project... https://theascent.biz/the-story-of-the-pillar-project-bc7a653c8931. There is another one called the mother ship same idea and the road map is formatted just like the lykke roap map. Not sure now if Lykke is for real or just rolling out ICOs with the same idea. Pillar is not related to Lykke. There are also no relations between Lykke and Mothership. People are free to build teams and to present their whitepapers and goals to potential Investors who have to come to own conclusions and to make their choice if to invest in a project or not. And it’s always a good choice to dig deep to find out if something may have quality and a chance or not. I personally don’t know anything about mothership so far and if it could be seen as similar to Lykke or even a competitor. What I know about Pillar - I have zero concerns that it could turn out as competitor. About this: "Someone complained about someone copying the Lykke project and Tempus was trolling the guy acting very strange so I decided to start researching." I didn't defend Pillar in any way, but I disagreed with implications that David Siegel is a scammer or "stabbed Richard in the back". As far as I know: Nobody in Lykke is concerned about Pillar. The rest of the discussion on slack was pretty personal because I then was accused to work for Pillar or that I should leave Lykke to work for Pillar, being a scum and delusional and so on - so I just defended myself. |
|
|
|
Lykke and Pillar Project coming out with a ICO is almost the same project. The guy making the Pillar Project work in Lykkes slack channel and wrote an article for them https://medium.com/@pullnews/the-story-of-the-lykke-coin-251b8179480c. Someone complained about someone copying the Lykke project and Tempus was trolling the guy acting very strange so I decided to start researching. I would think his reaction is wow i need to tell Richard about this. This is the pillar project https://us.pillarproject.io/. Also the story of the pillar project just like the lykke project... https://theascent.biz/the-story-of-the-pillar-project-bc7a653c8931. There is another one called the mother ship same idea and the road map is formatted just like the lykke roap map. Not sure now if Lykke is for real or just rolling out ICOs with the same idea. Pillar is not related to Lykke. There are also no relations between Lykke and Mothership. People are free to build teams and to present their whitepapers and goals to potential Investors who have to come to own conclusions and to make their choice if to invest in a project or not. And it’s always a good choice to dig deep to find out if something may have quality and a chance or not. I personally don’t know anything about mothership so far and if it could be seen as similar to Lykke or even a competitor. What I know about Pillar - I have zero concerns that it could turn out as competitor. About this: "Someone complained about someone copying the Lykke project and Tempus was trolling the guy acting very strange so I decided to start researching." I didn't defend Pillar in any way, but I disagreed with implications that David Siegel is a scammer or "stabbed Richard in the back". As far as I know: Nobody in Lykke is concerned about Pillar. The rest of the discussion on slack was pretty personal because I then was accused to work for Pillar or that I should leave Lykke to work for Pillar, being a scum and delusional and so on - so I just defended myself. |
|
|
|
I come on Bitcointalk for a few of minutes and express a short view, then you quickly post paragraphs of what I think is sometimes fairly disingenuous responses - but my motive's the one to worry about? What's your motive? 1) You don't come just on Bitcointalk for a few minutes but you post in two threads and you post all over the Lykke-sub. And again: Nothing wrong with that and understandable that you would prefer to place your message without response, but it's pretty simple: If I have time, I reply. 2) My motives: I'm invested since September 16 and I also work for Lykke. mtnsaa also works for Lykke btw. We give infos, reply on questions, we are also free to point out our personal opinions, we chat with users and Investors, if needed we try to help if users need support etc. What you're a massive early investor looking for a price pump for the cash-out? I'm invested yes, but I wouldn't call it massive. And I don't trade much. I invest in projects I believe that have chances to turn out as pearls and then I usually hold and also take the rollercoaster.
You picked a good investment early, no need to dupe latecomers. Interesting that you call it a good investment now. What did I miss? Didn't you say it's a "make Richard Olsen richer scheme"? Why is it a good investment now? Because the price goes back up? And I don't dupe latecomers. I give informations, I reply on questions, I also defend Lykke if somebody tries to spread misleading informations like you try that with your talking about a scheme, your focus on the price and saying LKK would have gone down before everything else and so on. And especially that point is really interesting if we look at one of your favorites: Zencash and when it was dumped and how hard (from about $19 to $4) and on your reactions on it. ;-)
It never rings true to me when everything someone says about something is positives with ne'er a single negative. I just replied on your posts. If you want to know if I'm 100% happy: No, I'm not. There have been several delays for example. Limit orders are not there yet or the web-based-terminal, Ethereum-implementation caused some trouble, support sometimes was overwhelmed etc. I've never said that Lykke is perfect. It will need a lot of improvements and that are no secrets. But is that in any way unusual in this space or software-development in general? I don't think so. I know a lot of good projects but not a single one without delays, setbacks, tech-problems, rolloercoaster on the market etc. You can't tell me who owns the 2 wallets - Lykke can't tell us who or why 2 wallets own most LKK, great transparency.
I've asked and they'll publish a list of holders, executive team and board members. No, I don't really consider a Vanuatu brokerage license "approval" for our purposes - it's a few steps ahead of "I got approval from my mum" but not that many. (No offence to Vanuatuans, my point is, what's Vanuatu got to a Swiss based crypto trading startup?).
The regulatory topic is not really what I'm very familiar about. Feel free to see that how you see it and not to invest and not to use Lykke. Still interested why you said "good investment" above.
I already stated my views about LKK risking big drops well before the price crash these two weeks. Who knows about price in cryptoland - it goes up, it goes down, up, down - personally I do think short-term Lykke is falling to 10-15 cents, with dips below that being buying opportunities. I'd certainly buy under 10 cents.
Yes, not new to me. You've spread that over and over again on Bitcointalk and reddit. - I will also buy Lykke - less than the 23 cents it is now - or cheap (less than 10 cents would be definitely cheap!)
- Me too, I definitely think 8 cents will be a buying opportunity.
- I see 10-15 cents a real possibility now, with drops below 10 cents being heavily bought.
- I'm expecting 10-15 cent LKK, with potential dips below being aggresively bought.
- LKK is going well below 20 cents, hold your horses to 10-15 cents
- I see 10-15 cent LKK short term.
- Now I'm predicting 10-15. There's way more downside to play out yet.
- since the altcoin crash I see LKK going to 10-15 centshttps://www.reddit.com/user/playingpoodles....only reddit-quotes about the price, not even all, and only about 24-48 hours. And what I find revealing is that you mix that up with your theories about Richard Olsen and Lykke to be a "scheme", claims the price would be backed by him, claims LKK would have gone down before the whole market went down, all your other concerns - but still: you want to buy and call it a "good investment". I think it's obvious that I also have a theory about you, right? Let's see if it will help to get it cheap. ;-) |
|
|
|
Yes I have gone and expressed my reasoned positions. I post because I am interested in this space and have concerns about Lykke including: (i) there is zero price transparency of LKK because it's not free floated, there's no limit orders (ii) it's unlicensed and has a tiny userbase (iv) most coins are beneficially owned by one man, the founder - two wallets contain over 50% of coins. If you want the wallet addresses ask me https://blockchainexplorer.lykke.com/asset/AXkedGbAH1XGDpAypVzA5eyjegX4FaCnvMMy basic point is that Lykke is a risky "make Richard Olsen richer" scheme. All the small crypto traders take all the risk providing funding, but Richard gets the lion's share of the coins and no risk - if the "dream" is realised Richard will be much richer, and all the crypto investors will be a bit richer. If it isn't, Richard loses nothing, but all the small crypto investors lose all their investment. That's the truth - you don't like me writing it, fine. "But you have special theories for Lykke? See, what I find interesting is that you put in some effort in your price talking about Lykke. 2 threads on Bitcointalk and also on reddit." Of course you are free to express everything what you think. But also of course: For me it's at least an info to think about intentions whenever I see somebody who posts on all places and several threads (I'm Ph03n1xII on reddit btw). If you believe it's needed to do that because you want to warn people - fine. But most of your talking was about the price and it's a usual game in Crypto that those who are not invested or not invested any more would like to get a cheaper price. "(i) there is zero price transparency of LKK because it's not free floated, there's no limit orders"Yes, limit orders are not possible yet but will come. Lykke is simply not a totally finished platform yet. At the same time Investors still make decisions to buy or sell at certain prices and that moves the LKK-market. That's the reason why the price increased over the last months and that is also the reason why the price recently went down - pretty much in line with the overall market. (ii) it's unlicensed and has a tiny userbaseLykke is not without any licenses: Lykke Exchange Granted Financial Brokerage License in Vanuatu
http://www.financemagnates.com/cryptocurrency/exchange/lykke-blockchain-exchange-granted-financial-license-in-vanuatu/...and there is progress on the regulatory front: • EU broker license. Our application for a Cyprus Investment Firms license for Lykke Cyprus Ltd. is on the fast track at CySEC, the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission. We recently received a letter from CySEC containing general questions about Lykke and requests for additional documents. The team is hard at work preparing our official response.
• EU EMI license. Our Electronic Money Institution application is ready to be submitted to the Central Bank of Cyprus, including the capital requirement of €350,000. Lykke EMI is engaged with various banks to support our payment processing strategy. New systems and controls are now in place, pending activation of electronic payments.
• UK MTF license. The Multilateral Trading Facility package is facing some new delays due to the updated FCA requirements for UK-based MTF. We are updating our IT Strategy document and the application package to match the new requirements of the FCA.https://www.lykke.com/city/blog/lykke_heat_from_the_global_street(the post gives more infos, also about Singapore and the USA) (iv) most coins are beneficially owned by one man, the founder - two wallets contain over 50% of coins. If you want the wallet addresses ask me https://blockchainexplorer.lykke.com/asset/AXkedGbAH1XGDpAypVzA5eyjegX4FaCnvMRight now I don't have the info about the first two wallets but about Richard Olsen: "Richard Olsen is the only significant shareholder with a holding in excess of 10 percent." https://www.lykke.com/Lykke_Corp_Placement_Memorandum.pdfEspecially this is really wrong: "My basic point is that Lykke is a risky "make Richard Olsen richer" scheme. All the small crypto traders take all the risk providing funding, but Richard gets the lion's share of the coins and no risk - if the "dream" is realised Richard will be much richer, and all the crypto investors will be a bit richer. If it isn't, Richard loses nothing, but all the small crypto investors lose all their investment.
That's the truth - you don't like me writing it, fine." Richard Olsen is Lykke's biggest Investor. Nobody would lose as much as he would and not only but also money. If you call your assumptions "truth" I'm not sure how you define that word. |
|
|
|
2 - Coinbase is ahead, which actually operates its business within the law unlike Lykke which provides unlicensed fiat transfers. Coinbase has approval in most US states, UK, most of EU. Plus it has 6-10 million users versus Lykke's less than 12,000 (you say 20K?).The whole point of my argument that Lykke is overvalued is comparing its value to Coinbase's. 1. Coinbase is a centralized exchange and around since 2012. 2. Lykke is a blockchain-project, a semi-decentralized exchange. Lykke just made it's first steps but at the same time has much higher ambitions. It doesn't make that much sense to compare both projects to come to the conclusion that Lykke is overvalued. LKK moves with the whole market at the moment. Of course you are free to point out your opinion about it's value but if you ignore the context or even say misleading things like "LKK started selling off earlier and faster than the altcoin market as a whole", what is clearly false, I'm not so sure that your analysis has much base. I mean, you just could take a look at one of your investments. When crashed Zencash again - before or after LKK went down? 12,000 users is there in black and white in the latest Lykke annual report - can you give us a link for your 20K?  Look, each person can do what he wants. Lykke has only stopped plunging because someone (Lykke's extremely wealthy owner perhaps?) has been pumping lots of liquidity into it. Highly risky, especially if that doesn't stem the price decline. Man, I don't get why it's necessary to spread such theories! Do you have any proof for that? Do you see that... - Bitcoin bounces - ETH bounces - FCT bounces - ZCash - pretty much everything seems to recover at least temporarily... But you have special theories for Lykke? See, what I find interesting is that you put in some effort in your price talking about Lykke. 2 threads on Bitcointalk and also on reddit.
I'll say it again, only place to be until Segwit 2x activates on 1 August and Bitcoin's future becomes clear in the fortnight after that is in USD or Bitcoin.
No problem if that is your choice. |
|
|
|
Not true, LKK started selling off earlier and faster than the altcoin market as a whole. Now, yes, the whole market has joined in the fun. I mean, there's probably other things more overvalued than Lykke, my point is Lykke is one of the obviously overvalued coins (based on present lack of any regulatory approval and tiny userbase less than 12000). 1) Maybe check the market again: - whole market peaked on June 20 while it already became shaky about 1 week before: http://coinmarketcap.com/charts/ - ETH peaked at June 12, Ripple on May 17, etc. LKK had it's peak on June 20 and started to fall later than most of the others. 2) To point on "lack of regulatory approval" is a bit funny if you think about the question which projects are ahead on that front? 3) Number of users doubled in June and is > 20k Personally, my sense is that the top echelons of Lykke (including Brother Number One, who is very rich and certainly can inject liquidity) of Lykke are intervening to try and hold LKK from crashing. You can see it in the high volume and sharp drop off, that has been temporarily leveled. Interesting theories... But Lykke went down like others did and is simply following the market as a whole. You don't see that pattern in Bitcoin and others? Bitcoin goes down below $2200 and is above $2300 now, others also seem to find at least a temporarily base but in Lykke it's an intervention from "Brother number one"? Believe me it's not going to work, there's more blood in store for LKK (and yes, like you say every other altcoin, everything except Bitcoin and USD). Of course it can go down more. It also could go way more down for Bitcoin, because actually there is the reason for the whole uncertainty. But it's also possible that Segwit will be activated soon, that there won't be a split, that new money will flow into the whole market and so on. The most important question is, whenever markets move hard and in whichever direction: Is it about the whole context or is it a certain reaction on a certain situation of a certain project. And the LKK price simply moves like it's usual these days in Crypto. |
|
|
|
we have some issues with creditvouchers, the deposit is no longer working. they may have changed something on their site.
The team is in contact with CV. I can't be totally sure right now but it seems as if the issue is on their side. Hopefully it's up again soon.
I've been warning people for two weeks LKK was overvalued and will correct down. Now it's down to 27 cents. Now given the altcoin sell off which I warned of has been faster and harder than I anticipated, I can see LKK shooting down below fair value, theoretically even below 10 cents, but certainly 10-15 range.
Thing is that everything is down. If you look here, it's deeply red: http://coinmarketcap.com (only 3 exceptions in the top 100). Kind of funny is that USDT is up above $1. That shows how much money flees into Fiat. My personal opinion is: After the hype of the last months in the whole market, that totally ignored the trouble Bitcoin is still in, this is an overreaction into the opposite direction. Unfortunately it's very rare that Crypto moves "normal" ;-) But whatever scenario will realize in Bitcoin, finally things move and there is potential again. Bitcoin is still the biggest "money-mover" that gets Fiat into the markets or pushes it out. Interesting article btw: Countdown to SegWit: These Are the Dates to Keep an Eye On
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/countdown-segwit-these-are-dates-keep-eye/ |
|
|
|
-this lykke wallet need to be serviced, I keep getting error messages on withdrawals to trading wallet-
drnash85, please write a mail to support@lykke.com |
|
|
|
Good points. I think we agree then that LKK is overbought and correcting down? Only question is how far? I wouldn't say I agree, because I personally always try to look at something out of different perspectives. There is the perspective on the status quo, what I said in my last two posts, and then yes: it's valued too high. But also important: I don't know of any blockchain-project that is not overvalued if only focused on the status quo. More realistic and also more rational in my opinion is to focus on the question of future-potential. And of course that is about the question if the concept of Lykke has potential as profitable usecase, and if the team has all what's needed to realize it. I believe yes, but of course we are not speaking about facts. Investing is about anticipating the future. If we focus on the market-situation right now: I don't think that it's possible to predict short-term moves and that is also very connected to the whole situation in this space, especially Bitcoin is likely to be a rollercoaster until the situation becomes more predictable again (in whatever way, split-scenario included) and of course that will/would have impact on all markets. It already has impact - high volatility and uncertainty on all markets that have some volume.
I'm not ill disposed to Lykke, I picked it up in that period when it was floating around issue price for a couple of months.
My issue is, not everything is necessarily up to the Lykke team. Whether and when US state regulators grant a license to a Swiss competitor to US incumbent Coinbase is very much up to those regulators, and I don't think Lykke help their chances when they skirt or flout lots of legal regulations like giving fiat money transfer to US and UK nationals without license approval. I am nervous at the push of Lykke to act like they're Coinbase already, everyone wants to act like Lykke's got regulatory authorisation, and Lykke sort of acts like it has, but really it hasn't.
Yes, absolutely right. Not everything is totally under control of the team and even if: Since everything is new, all teams have to learn a lot. But if a team is good, the unknowns are mainly about time-frames. I'm not that uncertain about the question if it will be possible to get the necessary licenses because that doesn't seem to be that much about conflicting interests in general. Countries want to regulate, even if there is no clear path yet. What is not the case is your impression that Lykke would act as if there already would be regulatory approval. US-citizen can't even download the App for example. Or Margin Trading: It's in demo-mode for most countries. Again the most interesting question is how to look at limitations like that. One could say: Lykke is still very limited. Technically it's far from being finished (no limit orders yet, no web-based-terminal etc.) and regarding the regulatory status it's the same. Especially users could say "Lykke is not that attractive until now if compared with other exchanges" and I'm sure that many see it that way. At the same time it's already pretty nice to buy Bitcoin or ETH for example. What would be a rational perspective of somebody who thinks about the question if LKK is a buy? My approach always was and still is not to overrate current limitations, but to find an answer on the question if I believe that current limitations will be overcome in future, because if yes: It's pure potential. That becomes obvious if we see it the other way around: If Lykke already would be fully developed, already would have all necessary licenses, but still only 20k users - something would be wrong then. And sure, the question about future potential is about anticipation. That is why I always focus on teams, on the question if the people behind have everything what's needed. In case of Lykke: - If Lykke gets all needed licenses, especially that is huge potential - If Lykke releases limit orders - it already will make the whole platform much more attractive. - If Lykke releases the web-based-terminal - same - If Lykke adds more wanted assets - same - If Lykke releases the debit card - same - If Lykke is able to connect into the existing financial system - same ...and so on. With other words: If somebody believes that the team is able to deliver, all current limitations can be seen as future potential. If somebody has too much doubts about that, he will decide not to invest, at least not now. |
|
|
|
Why compare it with Ripple, which seeks to be the go-to-point for interbank transfers with a distributed ledger, when Lykke seeks to be an exchange for digital assets with initial focus on small retail traders? It's an interesting comparison! If you compare: 1) Ripple and Lykke - of course Ripple is worth more, already very successful and indeed banks are obviously interested. 2) XRP and LKK - what exactly is the connection between Ripple and the currency? I know that for LKK: It represents ownership - 100% of the supply is 100% Lykke. But I have no idea why XRP should be at a billion-dollar valuation, I don't even know for what it's needed and the Ripple-team didn't care much about it. I also don't believe that Ripple as company is already worth $25 billions. And no, I also don't want to say that Lykke, the status quo, is already worth $425 millions. But if Lykke should become successful it could be 1) much more interesting and valuable than Ripple and 2) like already said: LKK is directly connected to the value of the company. Value of blockchain-projects in general: There is no project that is not overvalued if we focus on the status quo. There is no project that already could be seen as kind of established. At the same time it's also true that this space has huge potential in general. Why not compare it to Bitcoin that's worth over 40 billion, or ether's 25 billion? Why not compare it to Amazon with 300 billion or whatever it's worth? Because the only reason to do this is your reason and that is that you are an LKK holder and you want to instill irrational exuberance to make Lykke's price inflate beyond fair value. I know that's not a reply on my post, but it's an interesting point: Of course it's part of the game that those who are invested write more positive and those who are not more into the other direction. But the question about valuation and what is rational or not is not that easy to reply on. I'll give you my favorite example: Factom. In Factom it's possible to calculate what the price of 1 FCT should be, because whenever Entry Credits (necessary to use the system) are bought, Factoids are burned. Once Factom will be fully developed one could say: The price of 1 FCT should be at least at a level that not more Factoids are burned than new created over the protocol. The price is at $25 right now and that is totally overvalued if we focus on the status quo. It already was overvalued when it was $2.5. Was it irrational to buy it at $2.5? Obviously not. Is it irrational to buy it at $25? That question can't be answered because it will depend on the future and if I wouldn't be invested in Factom I would buy, because the possibility that Factom will be used for billions of entries per month or maybe even per day at some point is absolutely there. Same is true for pretty much all projects. If they should fail they are very overvalued. Those projects that will succeed are most likely not. And measured on the status quo - I know of no project that would not be overvalued. Sorry to tell you, that's already happened, which was my point. Could it rise on further irrational exuberance? Of course that's always possible. That's not happening now, LKK continues a slow decline. (It can't decline fast, because Lykke is its only market for itself and doesn't allow limit orders). Limit orders would mean that there are more orders on both sides, more buy-support included. To say that Lykke couldn't be dumped because users can't set limit orders yet is not correct. Of course the price could fall hard if a big Investor would sell 100% in one moment. Regarding price-decline: We have seen a hype over the last months that had impact on pretty much all projects. I've seen pumps of projects that are not even in development anymore, "walking deads". LKK moves a little bit slower, is not that "over-sensitive" like others, but of course: also LKK was bought up and corrects now. I believe one important aspect is the Bitcoin-situation that brings some uncertainty into the whole market - Bitcoin might have more up-potential if things go right but also the opposite if a bad-case-scenario should realize. And most of the newcomers, who came into this space because the ongoing hype attracted them, bought high. It's natural that they are highly uncertain now because 1) they bought high and 2) they can't overlook the situation.
My point is when an asset's price is grossly in excess of its proven value the downside risks magnify. An idea, a Vanuatu brokerage license, 11,442 users and a nice iPhone and Android app don't make something worth $460 million (last time I looked, LKK has probably gone down since then).
To imply that there would be something like a "proven value" anywhere in this space is not right. If I should be wrong, it should be possible to point on a blockchain-project and say "yes, that is already worth it's valuation". Regarding 11k users: That's the status of early june and has doubled since. The vanatu-license is only the beginning. In my opinion it's never about the status quo at all but about the question if the tendency is positive, basically about the questions: 1) what is planned for the project? 2) can those plans be seen as high potential? 3) do I believe the team behind is able to deliver? And everybody has to come to own conclusions, but in my opinion it's yes yes yes. If the team delivers and builds a platform how Lykke is meant to be in future, we are talking about a billion-dollar-company - all risks included of course, like in all projects. Nothing is safe and I'm still the opinion that there is nothing objective to find. |
|
|
|
The (two) number 1 things are regulatory approval and user base growth. Userbase growth I'd expect to continue its upward creep (though not fast enough). However regulatory approval, in particular in US states, isn't a quick or easy thing to achieve. I think there's a degree of realism in the market now that has replaced the early exuberance when it comes to Lykke. Lykke was a great buy at 6 cents. At 41 cents, it was substantially overvalued at some $600 million plus in marketcap. To give you perspective Coinbase was talking about raising a funding round that valued itself at $1 billion http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/02/bitcoin-start-up-coinbase-aims-for-1-billion-valuation.htmlCoinbase in conjunction with its exchange GDAX has regulatory approval all over the place, including UK, Canada, most of EU Europe, and most or all US states (probably most not all). It has insurance for both crypto, and for US folks FDIC insurance of USD deposits. Lykke on the other hand according to its annual report has "a Vanuatu brokerage license". https://www.lykke.com/Annual_Report_2016.pdf (see page 3 and from page 19) It is "applying" for lots of licenses, with keys being the US and UK. Applying for a license and having one is a very different thing. Lykke really has no licenses at this point, although they'll likely get some as time goes on, and anyway they appear to be allowing transactions without a license certainly with cryptocurrency, which they can probably get away with since everyone else is doing that. Not having any US license is a massive thing, and I'm not sure with a Swiss firm in competition with US incumbent Coinbase how enthusiastically and quickly US authorities will be in granting them licenses. Lykke's userbase according to its recently released annual report is 11,442 users as of 1 June 2017. https://www.lykke.com/Annual_Report_2016.pdf (Page 5). I couldn't get exact stats out there on Coinbase, but it seems like it's got anywhere from 6 to 10 million users. https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-user-base-surges-coinbase-adds-1-mln-users-in-1-monthhttp://www.newsbtc.com/2017/03/01/bitcoin-exchange-coinbase-surpasses-6-million-total-users/Lykke is sitting currently at just under $480 million in total market cap (that is marketcap including coins held by founders and not in free float, which is something like 80 to 90 per cent of them). My point is, how could Lykke possibly be worth half of Coinbase, that has 6 to 10 million users, worldwide regulatory approval, including the key US market through approval in US states when Lykke has less than 12,000 users and no real regulatory approval? (I'm not suggesting Vanuatu is not a "real" jurisdiction, I'm saying it's not an important one for the purposes of cryptocurrency markets). My conclusion is it can't. That's why the price is off over 10% at 36.5 cents, but I think the price correction has only just begun. Segwit 2x will activate, and, when it does, Bitcoin will go up like crazy. No one will want to miss out on the action, they'll dump lots of things to free up liquidity to ride the "Bitcoin has finally scaled" wave up, they'll dump Ether, and they will certainly dump Lykke - especially early investors who are already sitting on lovely, acceptable 7x profits. I easily see a correction down to 25 to 30 cents in the next couple of months, which is probably closer to fair value anyway. The big upside risks are (1) US regulatory approval and (2) substantial userbase growth. The big downside risks are (1) rejection or delay of US regulatory approval (2) Bitcoin scales and everyone dumps everything including Lykke to buy it. Good analysis! I especially agree with your last conclusions about potentials and risks, because a lot will be about regulations. At the same time: Lykke is pretty much ahead when it's about that topic and may have some advantage over competing projects with similar goals. In general, value and how people evaluate "something" (not only Investments) is one of the most interesting topics in my opinion - and what I believe: There is nothing objective to find. Out of individual perspective it's very personal, in last consequence it's about personal and subjective interpretations of informations that have a context nobody is able to fully overlook, plus the context of an individual situation. It's about beliefs. In short: Nobody is able to have all informations and nobody is able to interpret any information he has other than subjective. Individual decisions are significantly based on 1) personal beliefs and 2) the absence of informations. And then there is the sum of individual views and decisions, the collective, the market(s). And that is a feedback-system: Individuals react on collective expressions (buying, selling, communicating) but the collective (part of) also reacts on individual decisions (whenever a "whale" shows his financial power the rumors start, and whenever a "VIP" communicates own opinions it has influence). In the end it's very much about time. Moments form facts, everything else is subjective. That leads into the paradox that it would be possible to say that a price at a certain point in time is objective, because it is a fact. It's also possible to say that there is absolutely nothing objective because what has lead to it, in time, are 100% individual and subjective decisions while no participant is able to see the full picture. But many, maybe even a majority, tend to objectify collective agreements, especially if the time-frame is long enough. When it's about Lykke and Blockchain-projects: Of course one can analyze a project, also compare it with others and it's possible to find facts about the status quo. Those facts are basically the results of the decisions of those who build a project. In my opinion, when it's about value and potential, it's very much about the teams behind. The same idea wouldn't be worth $10 if I would start it with some friends. But if the team behind Lykke should be able to develop the platform how it is meant to be, and of course that will always be an ongoing process, it might become a multi-billion-dollar project. And nobody has ever bought anything else than future potential. Btw, the question about Bitcoin and 1) what the result of the current controversy might be in time and 2) how it will effect other markets, is also very interesting and very complex. I consider 1 as nearly totally unclear. I only believe that there will be a lot of volatility because I don't believe that there will be something like a safe status quo anytime soon. But if something like a best-case-scenario should realize, new and more potential for the whole ecosystem and the price goes up etc.: Sure, it's possible that many would sell other Crypto-assets for Bitcoin. But what also should be taken into consideration: More people would be attracted and more money would flow into the whole ecosystem. A strong Bitcoin and a rising price of Bitcoin would be helpful for Lykke, also because even if Lykke is far from being fully developed, there is one fact: It's already pretty good to buy Bitcoin. Best article I know, about the Bitcoin-situation is this: Countdown to SegWit: These Are the Dates to Keep an Eye On
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/countdown-segwit-these-are-dates-keep-eye/ |
|
|
|
I think the #1 thing is limit orders, but I believe that requires some extra regulatory steps for approval?
Also on the roadmap it was just updated that web trading is now "near term" - hopefully soon.
They plan to publish a blogpost about limit orders, because there also have been some questions about it on Slack since it's Nr. 1 on the "wish-list". |
|
|
|
Hi,
Has anyone sent FCT from Poloniex to Kraken or Bittrex?
Thanks
Yes twice. One took 5 days, and the other took 15 minutes, good luck. Kind of concerning that it's actually reasonable to wish good luck before making a transaction from or to Polo ;-) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
