I do not know what they want to achieve. Do Reggie needs to spell it out that 98 mio are not for sale. They could bought 28 mio more (if my memory serves me right) during ICO and it is their fault that they had not. And now crying and bitching here is just silly. I also blocked this user toknormal.

Indeed. And VERI, the "circulating supply" by the best accounts that can be gleaned from this thread is the 98 Million, not the 2 Million. Thanks for making my case for me

With the recent rise, I'm into this asset well into 5 figures now. I have no conflict of interest in making my case, in fact I'd be more conflicted by not making it. But I invested based on fundamentals, not some stock market 'trick' that came and infected the decentralised world of freely traded digital assets.

Here's the deal why the blockchain-supply is under-reported and why Veritasium's short term viability at least depends on it:

1. Traders make valuations based on marketcap, not coin-exchange rate

2. As such VERI's low marketcap looks extremely good value for new buyers because it's still below such benign offerings as Bytecoin etc al, even with the recent doubling of the last 24 hours

3. However, the small "reported supply" is not the real supply since new OTC trades are supplied from Reggie's 'wallet', not from the coinmarketcap.com reported quantity

4. If the full (blockchain issued) supply were to be correctly reported, what would happen ? You'd see a ranking like the one I posted earlier and an associated market correction since it would be unlikely to give a single token offering a higher valuation than the entire Ethereum blockchain coin supply

What Reggie is doing is making tactical use of marketcap reporting in order to price the non-ICO token supply based on the tiny ICO portion. It's not a bad strategy (and is working so far) but it should be transparent and not hidden behind some "we don't understand institutional markets" nonsense.

Just for clarification, an appropriate description of "circulating bs" would be something along the lines of:

 • exchange traded token supply counts towards advertised marketcap
 • OTC traded supply does not

That's what you appear to be promoting, not me.

Be advised that all of these digital assets are traded OTC for large amounts. That doesn't mean they get away with underreporting the blockchain-issued supply.

What's that got to do with anything ? All I'm saying is report the full marketcap according to convention in these markets or don't report it at all. Reggie can still do all the OTC selling he wants from his own wallet of 98 Million tokens.

This isn't an "institutional market". It's an unregulated, decentralised one.

As such it is 'policed' by holders, buyers, and anyone else with an interest in seeing open and free markets work efficiently. In an "institutionalised market" you might get away with the strategy of justifying a high unit price to the market based on low supply volume because you have a whole pile of regulations governing the release of that supply.

But in decentralised markets we only have marketcap to go by in doing comparative valuations. That's why it's important that all valuations are treated the same. Satoshi has 1 Million Bitcoin in a wallet that "are not circulating" and apparently are even less likely to than the 98 Million unreported VERI. They still get reported.

I said it before that the 2 mil circulating supply will be an issue and true enough every now and then it is brought up as an issue.
But someone pointed out to me that market cap is based on the circulating supply, thus Veritaseum's pricing is as valid as every other listed cryptos and tokens.

Selective timing... Someone bought a tiny amount at 1.0ETH. Price is now at .7ETH on Etherdelta, about $182.

I predict true sustained ethereum parity before the end of July.

Although I don't make any judgment over the ICO policy in general, ngin-x is at least correct in one principle.

These are not stocks - where some trusted entity "issues" the new stock. They are decentralised assets and the issuer is the blockchain. In that respect, Reggie Middleton is no different in status from any other wallet holder - he just happens to hold the largest wallet. Further, the conventional definition of "circulating supply" for decentralised assets is what the blockchain has issued, not what the largest holder manages to sell out of their particular wallet.

Even if we were to stretch the definition of "marketcap" just to suit this one asset and redefine "circulating supply" as that which is being made available to markets, the ~1.9 Million ICO tokens are probably less qualified than the 98 Million in RM's wallet since that's the part of the supply being actively marketed to OTC customers such as banks and sovereigns while the proportion of traded volume involving the minority reported supply is miniscule.

The correctly calculated marketcap for Veritasium is therefore currently as shown below:




based on...

Can someone explain how you rent Veri out without burning up the token? It's used as gas to access the system...but how is this possible without consuming the token all while the owners still retain possession?

I'm not protecting anyone? .. The information was posted here yesterday and in slack. I just didn't feel like dragging that whole drama again.   One video with him is posted https://youtu.be/07-cpHoCEIw  Jonny Blaze in comments section.  Edit .. I think the op must have cleaned up the comment section.

I do not understand what this coin is for. Web site looks like a blog with ugly template. Is this coin fundamentally strong and provide some useful service, why it grows so much? Or is it a speculative growth and it will drop to hell one day?

Bitter because you are late in this game. Feel sorry for you. And now am pressing Ignore button. Good luck in your bitterness.

Just a person on Youtube.. He hangs out on most Veritaseum  videos comments section. He got me thinking about my due diligence, so I researched his claims and decided to post what I came up with.  In case anyone ran across the same thing.
I also spoke with someone from the Ultra Coin days about his claims and he gave Reggie and Veritaseum his legit stamp of approval.

I've been dealing with a person who claims Veritaseum had no wallet or code since Ultra Coin ..Claims no product since 2014 and it's all a scam.  I present exhibit A, 2014 video of Ultra Coin client, and Developer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dV27kQnUKHc
2014 video of working code