|
With all the hype building in crypto right now, this would be am excellent time to market skycoin. But only of it is at a stage of developement where marketing makes sense... no real point in marketing a completely unfinished product. Would be worthwhile to get on a high volume exchange though, then the coin would market itself.
|
|
|
|
He wants the devs to personally message him everyday to remind him not to be shaky anxiety riddled lil bitch 
I've just got email and access to iconomi.net dashboard and it looks great. Since I'm not a beta tester I can't do much there but a concept of buying and selling icnx and later other DDA looks promising and easy enough, I guess perfect for newbies like myself, lol. Yeah it's nice just to see the platform even if I can't buy icnx. I think this is why the price is rising (relative to btc), more and more people can now see what is in store. |
|
|
|
Someone posted this in slack. If DAMP was a car, it would be this car https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloodhound_SSCA prototype Eurojet EJ200 jet engine developed for the Eurofighter and bound for a museum, was donated to the project. This will take the car to 300 mph (480 km/h), after which a bespoke hybrid rocket designed by Nammo will boost the car up to 1,000 miles per hour (1,609 km/h). A third engine, a Jaguar supercharged V-8, will be used as an auxiliary power unit and to drive the oxidizer pump for the rocket. https://i.imgur.com/Zeztkfi.jpgA car that will never be available for public use?  I lol'd  |
|
|
|
I have 480 stakes for twitter campaign yesterday.Today I login to my excudo acc and I see thank my stakes is 11 now.How I need to understand it DEV???   480 stakes?? That seems like a lot considering a hero member gets only 2.5 stakes per week for sig campaign. |
|
|
|
Iconomi might come back it's just really hard to tell and the benefits that their first mover advantage gave them seem to be fewer and fewer as the days go on. It kinda sucks they originally collected $10,000,000 USD and the funds value has grown $50,000,000+ just based on the rise of crypto in general and we as holders don't really benefit at all from it. When on the other hand you have coins like Taas that have collected $8,000,000 and since the end of their ICO the value of their funding has grown 25% ($2,000,000) and they've already confirmed that profits generated from overall crypto growth count as profit (as it should) and will be paid back to investors as dividends, meaning the first dividend payments already going to be 50% of that $2,000,000 and it's only been 8 days since the end of the ICO. Meanwhile Iconomi won't provide the burn address or even tell it's investors how much they've invested in their latest ICO's until the end of the quarter, how does that make any sense and how is that transparent?
Personally I'd prefer not to distribute gains from ICO assets growth. By distributing you limit the investment capabilities. More money to invest = more profit for investors. BTW your numbers are skewed plus TaaS is building portfolio using 75% of ICO funds which leaves them with just $6M to invest if they distribute ICO funds value gains. Also ICONOMI has several revenue streams ICNX, ICNP, public DAA and yet unadvertised ICNL. In addition to that ICN is going to be a utility token as well. Do your math now  Actually 15% was used for operations and development not 25%. If you get 50% of profit, 25% goes back into the fund, and 25% goes to devs that's not a bad deal. It's been how many months so far and Iconomi still only has 250 beta users and they're aiming for a total of 6,000 before they deem the system usable? They can claim to have streams of income from X, Y, and Z but if you can't even verify they're burning the coins what value do their claims really have? Wouldn't it be a bit strange to use $ value of uninvested crypto as your baseline for profit calculations? Imagine you give me 1000 BTC for a crypto investment fund when BTC is worth $1000 I do nothing, and BTC goes to $2000 I refund you 250 BTC, keep 125 BTC to myself as fee, and 625 BTC remains in the fund. Are you sure that's how it works? Do you have a source? I do understand your point and that's a fair way of looking at it but this it's not going to be like Iconomi in the sense where they pretty much do nothing and then claim "oh look the values 500% since ICO" when that's really just they value of the underlying assets. Taas is going to be making various trades regularly and the BTC, ETH, etc. value will increase but yes the overall value of the fund is calculated in $. How is ICNP doing nothing when it has invested in 7(?) things, all of which that have been released have appreciated in value, and in the case of Golem some has been sold and profit has already been realized. It TaaS also developing an index fund and platform like ICNX and the DAMP that will also generate revenue? Or is that considered doing nothing as well. Hence why I said "pretty much doing nothing". You're right they have made some investments and some have paid off. I consider it nothing compared to the original idea, the idea I was sold on was this was supposed to be the "new economy", things were supposed to be transparent, we were going to be paid dividends from countless revenue streams, we had a timeline, and promises of bi-weekly AMA's; now all of that's out the window and what have we been left with? The promise that they're buying back ICN with no burn address provided and given their track record does it really make sense to trust them? A half-a**ed AMA months later where most of the questions weren't even answered. Maybe Taas is just one fund and I suppose that is just a subset of one of capabilities Iconomi was supposed to have but Taas is doing it right. Imagine trades being made and being posted to the blockchain in real time where you or anyone else can verify them, imagine dividends being paid on time quarterly and devs that care about the funds value, imagine constant communication and promises being kept. You don't get that with Iconomi. You don't get anything with either yet so let's hold off on the exaggerated claims. TaaS first payout is going to be from what investments and trades they've made exactly? Looks to me like it will be from them considering the appreciation of the ico funds as "profit", which allows them to take 25% for doing nothing but hold your money. If you had just held it your self you would get 100% of that appreciation. Actually Taas already provides communication and 4 of the members have already been apart of a previous fund that pays it's investors, so it's a little different then making an ICO and throwing in random keywords like Iconomi did and then scrambling and finding out you can't do this and that afterward. Taas is going to make money via 1. Long-term cyclical investment 2. Cross-exchange arbritrage 3. Algorthmic swing trading 4. Derivatives. The appreciation of the funds as all this happens is just the icing on the cake. So again TaaS itself hasnt done anything yet. Except they communicated, wow. Amazing. Did they provide quarterly reports, AMAs, blog posts, email updates? Or is that just the standard of communication required of iconomi but not anybody else? You do realize iconomi already has developed the platform beta, right? A platform which has potential to make TaaS completely obsolete. Or is that also "doing nothing" along with their succesful investments. Do you know what actually IS doing nothing? Simply holding onto ICO funds and claiming their passive appreciation is profit (thay TaaS can then siphon 25% off of for themselves). Go take your TaaS support to the TaaS thread where it belongs. It looks like it is desperately needed there. Actually they did provide monthly operational and trading reports on their previous project. But you're right all hail Iconomi!!!  "On their previous project". I could have sworn we were talking about TaaS? And yeah this is the Iconomi thread not the TaaS one what are you expecting coming here shilling TaaS and badmouthing Iconomi? |
|
|
|
Iconomi might come back it's just really hard to tell and the benefits that their first mover advantage gave them seem to be fewer and fewer as the days go on. It kinda sucks they originally collected $10,000,000 USD and the funds value has grown $50,000,000+ just based on the rise of crypto in general and we as holders don't really benefit at all from it. When on the other hand you have coins like Taas that have collected $8,000,000 and since the end of their ICO the value of their funding has grown 25% ($2,000,000) and they've already confirmed that profits generated from overall crypto growth count as profit (as it should) and will be paid back to investors as dividends, meaning the first dividend payments already going to be 50% of that $2,000,000 and it's only been 8 days since the end of the ICO. Meanwhile Iconomi won't provide the burn address or even tell it's investors how much they've invested in their latest ICO's until the end of the quarter, how does that make any sense and how is that transparent?
Personally I'd prefer not to distribute gains from ICO assets growth. By distributing you limit the investment capabilities. More money to invest = more profit for investors. BTW your numbers are skewed plus TaaS is building portfolio using 75% of ICO funds which leaves them with just $6M to invest if they distribute ICO funds value gains. Also ICONOMI has several revenue streams ICNX, ICNP, public DAA and yet unadvertised ICNL. In addition to that ICN is going to be a utility token as well. Do your math now Actually 15% was used for operations and development not 25%. If you get 50% of profit, 25% goes back into the fund, and 25% goes to devs that's not a bad deal. It's been how many months so far and Iconomi still only has 250 beta users and they're aiming for a total of 6,000 before they deem the system usable? They can claim to have streams of income from X, Y, and Z but if you can't even verify they're burning the coins what value do their claims really have? Wouldn't it be a bit strange to use $ value of uninvested crypto as your baseline for profit calculations? Imagine you give me 1000 BTC for a crypto investment fund when BTC is worth $1000 I do nothing, and BTC goes to $2000 I refund you 250 BTC, keep 125 BTC to myself as fee, and 625 BTC remains in the fund. Are you sure that's how it works? Do you have a source? I do understand your point and that's a fair way of looking at it but this it's not going to be like Iconomi in the sense where they pretty much do nothing and then claim "oh look the values 500% since ICO" when that's really just they value of the underlying assets. Taas is going to be making various trades regularly and the BTC, ETH, etc. value will increase but yes the overall value of the fund is calculated in $. How is ICNP doing nothing when it has invested in 7(?) things, all of which that have been released have appreciated in value, and in the case of Golem some has been sold and profit has already been realized. It TaaS also developing an index fund and platform like ICNX and the DAMP that will also generate revenue? Or is that considered doing nothing as well. Hence why I said "pretty much doing nothing". You're right they have made some investments and some have paid off. I consider it nothing compared to the original idea, the idea I was sold on was this was supposed to be the "new economy", things were supposed to be transparent, we were going to be paid dividends from countless revenue streams, we had a timeline, and promises of bi-weekly AMA's; now all of that's out the window and what have we been left with? The promise that they're buying back ICN with no burn address provided and given their track record does it really make sense to trust them? A half-a**ed AMA months later where most of the questions weren't even answered. Maybe Taas is just one fund and I suppose that is just a subset of one of capabilities Iconomi was supposed to have but Taas is doing it right. Imagine trades being made and being posted to the blockchain in real time where you or anyone else can verify them, imagine dividends being paid on time quarterly and devs that care about the funds value, imagine constant communication and promises being kept. You don't get that with Iconomi. You don't get anything with either yet so let's hold off on the exaggerated claims. TaaS first payout is going to be from what investments and trades they've made exactly? Looks to me like it will be from them considering the appreciation of the ico funds as "profit", which allows them to take 25% for doing nothing but hold your money. If you had just held it your self you would get 100% of that appreciation. Actually Taas already provides communication and 4 of the members have already been apart of a previous fund that pays it's investors, so it's a little different then making an ICO and throwing in random keywords like Iconomi did and then scrambling and finding out you can't do this and that afterward. Taas is going to make money via 1. Long-term cyclical investment 2. Cross-exchange arbritrage 3. Algorthmic swing trading 4. Derivatives. The appreciation of the funds as all this happens is just the icing on the cake. So again TaaS itself hasnt done anything yet. Except they communicated, wow. Amazing. Did they provide quarterly reports, AMAs, blog posts, email updates? Or is that just the standard of communication required of iconomi but not anybody else? You do realize iconomi already has developed the platform beta, right? A platform which has potential to make TaaS completely obsolete. Or is that also "doing nothing" along with succesful ICNP investments. Do you know what actually IS doing nothing? Simply holding onto ICO funds and claiming their passive appreciation is profit (that TaaS can then siphon 25% off of for themselves, and distrbute % to token holders to make it look like it is a success when in fact nothing has been done yet). Go take your TaaS support to the TaaS thread where it belongs. It looks like it is desperately needed there. |
|
|
|
it's in the ICO details PAYOUT STRUCTURE
A smart contract lets token owners collect 50% of quarterly profits. Intuitively, it implies that investors with a larger share of tokens will collect a higher return. 25% of profits will be reinvested back into the fund, allowing the Net Asset Value (NAV) of a token to increase over time.
TaaS team has collected mainly Bitcoins and Ethereum the value of funds has surpassed $10M there are already profits for investors without moving a finger Lol the appreciation of the money you invested is being considered "profit". That way you can get "payouts" that make TaaS look successfull and the team can take 25% of those "profits" for themselves, when all they did was hold onto your money. If you had held onto that money yourself you would get 100% of the appreciation, now you only get a fraction and that is somehow a good thing? |
|
|
|
Iconomi might come back it's just really hard to tell and the benefits that their first mover advantage gave them seem to be fewer and fewer as the days go on. It kinda sucks they originally collected $10,000,000 USD and the funds value has grown $50,000,000+ just based on the rise of crypto in general and we as holders don't really benefit at all from it. When on the other hand you have coins like Taas that have collected $8,000,000 and since the end of their ICO the value of their funding has grown 25% ($2,000,000) and they've already confirmed that profits generated from overall crypto growth count as profit (as it should) and will be paid back to investors as dividends, meaning the first dividend payments already going to be 50% of that $2,000,000 and it's only been 8 days since the end of the ICO. Meanwhile Iconomi won't provide the burn address or even tell it's investors how much they've invested in their latest ICO's until the end of the quarter, how does that make any sense and how is that transparent?
Personally I'd prefer not to distribute gains from ICO assets growth. By distributing you limit the investment capabilities. More money to invest = more profit for investors. BTW your numbers are skewed plus TaaS is building portfolio using 75% of ICO funds which leaves them with just $6M to invest if they distribute ICO funds value gains. Also ICONOMI has several revenue streams ICNX, ICNP, public DAA and yet unadvertised ICNL. In addition to that ICN is going to be a utility token as well. Do your math now Actually 15% was used for operations and development not 25%. If you get 50% of profit, 25% goes back into the fund, and 25% goes to devs that's not a bad deal. It's been how many months so far and Iconomi still only has 250 beta users and they're aiming for a total of 6,000 before they deem the system usable? They can claim to have streams of income from X, Y, and Z but if you can't even verify they're burning the coins what value do their claims really have? Wouldn't it be a bit strange to use $ value of uninvested crypto as your baseline for profit calculations? Imagine you give me 1000 BTC for a crypto investment fund when BTC is worth $1000 I do nothing, and BTC goes to $2000 I refund you 250 BTC, keep 125 BTC to myself as fee, and 625 BTC remains in the fund. Are you sure that's how it works? Do you have a source? I do understand your point and that's a fair way of looking at it but this it's not going to be like Iconomi in the sense where they pretty much do nothing and then claim "oh look the values 500% since ICO" when that's really just they value of the underlying assets. Taas is going to be making various trades regularly and the BTC, ETH, etc. value will increase but yes the overall value of the fund is calculated in $. How is ICNP doing nothing when it has invested in 7(?) things, all of which that have been released have appreciated in value, and in the case of Golem some has been sold and profit has already been realized. It TaaS also developing an index fund and platform like ICNX and the DAMP that will also generate revenue? Or is that considered doing nothing as well. Hence why I said "pretty much doing nothing". You're right they have made some investments and some have paid off. I consider it nothing compared to the original idea, the idea I was sold on was this was supposed to be the "new economy", things were supposed to be transparent, we were going to be paid dividends from countless revenue streams, we had a timeline, and promises of bi-weekly AMA's; now all of that's out the window and what have we been left with? The promise that they're buying back ICN with no burn address provided and given their track record does it really make sense to trust them? A half-a**ed AMA months later where most of the questions weren't even answered. Maybe Taas is just one fund and I suppose that is just a subset of one of capabilities Iconomi was supposed to have but Taas is doing it right. Imagine trades being made and being posted to the blockchain in real time where you or anyone else can verify them, imagine dividends being paid on time quarterly and devs that care about the funds value, imagine constant communication and promises being kept. You don't get that with Iconomi. You don't get anything with either yet so let's hold off on the exaggerated claims. TaaS hasn't had time to keep or not keep promises so idk what you are taking about. You act like it is already a huge success and it hasn't even done anything yet. TaaS first payout is going to be from what investments and trades they've made exactly? Looks to me like it will be from them considering the appreciation of the ico funds as "profit", which allows them to take 25% for doing nothing but hold your money. If you had just held it your self you would get 100% of that appreciation. |
|
|
|
Iconomi might come back it's just really hard to tell and the benefits that their first mover advantage gave them seem to be fewer and fewer as the days go on. It kinda sucks they originally collected $10,000,000 USD and the funds value has grown $50,000,000+ just based on the rise of crypto in general and we as holders don't really benefit at all from it. When on the other hand you have coins like Taas that have collected $8,000,000 and since the end of their ICO the value of their funding has grown 25% ($2,000,000) and they've already confirmed that profits generated from overall crypto growth count as profit (as it should) and will be paid back to investors as dividends, meaning the first dividend payments already going to be 50% of that $2,000,000 and it's only been 8 days since the end of the ICO. Meanwhile Iconomi won't provide the burn address or even tell it's investors how much they've invested in their latest ICO's until the end of the quarter, how does that make any sense and how is that transparent?
Personally I'd prefer not to distribute gains from ICO assets growth. By distributing you limit the investment capabilities. More money to invest = more profit for investors. BTW your numbers are skewed plus TaaS is building portfolio using 75% of ICO funds which leaves them with just $6M to invest if they distribute ICO funds value gains. Also ICONOMI has several revenue streams ICNX, ICNP, public DAA and yet unadvertised ICNL. In addition to that ICN is going to be a utility token as well. Do your math now Actually 15% was used for operations and development not 25%. If you get 50% of profit, 25% goes back into the fund, and 25% goes to devs that's not a bad deal. It's been how many months so far and Iconomi still only has 250 beta users and they're aiming for a total of 6,000 before they deem the system usable? They can claim to have streams of income from X, Y, and Z but if you can't even verify they're burning the coins what value do their claims really have? Wouldn't it be a bit strange to use $ value of uninvested crypto as your baseline for profit calculations? Imagine you give me 1000 BTC for a crypto investment fund when BTC is worth $1000 I do nothing, and BTC goes to $2000 I refund you 250 BTC, keep 125 BTC to myself as fee, and 625 BTC remains in the fund. Are you sure that's how it works? Do you have a source? I do understand your point and that's a fair way of looking at it but this it's not going to be like Iconomi in the sense where they pretty much do nothing and then claim "oh look the values 500% since ICO" when that's really just they value of the underlying assets. Taas is going to be making various trades regularly and the BTC, ETH, etc. value will increase but yes the overall value of the fund is calculated in $. How is ICNP doing nothing when it has invested in 7(?) things, all of which that have been released have appreciated in value, and in the case of Golem some has been sold and profit has already been realized? Is TaaS also developing an index fund and platform like ICNX and the DAMP that will also generate revenue? Or is that considered doing nothing as well. TaaS is only doing a fraction of what Iconomi is doing, they aren't even comparable. One can compare TaaS to ICNP but ICNP is only part of Iconomi. |
|
|
|
I want to believe: Polo
probably not now. there had been a lot of tokens not listed still on polo which considerable enough. if polo had invested to wetrust, there can be a good chance. polo invested to some new tokens lately like GUP but didn't really add to their exchange. polo invested to matchpool?really? as a matter of fact yes. they do have a wallet to which contains more than 160k GUP. i'm not sure if they did with wetrust. they do have the money for sure and if I'm CEO of polo, i PROBABLY would invest to wetrust too. this is just me though. i couldn't think of something else to do but invest to legit tokens like this one if i have the means. An exchange investing in coins and deciding which coins to list and when based on their position in them is illegal as fuck. I hope polo gets rekt I'm tired of their insider trading and manipulation of coins. |
|
|
|
|
Also is it possible to password protect our wallets? I don't see the option.
|
|
|
|
Wow nice rebuttal, you really showed me there! When people resort to ad hominems it's a good sign they have no more substance to back them up.
or i just can't be bothered to waste time with a shill boy retard who has his head far up Jani's ass. Lol but you have time for these lame excues for posts. Willing to waste time on something comletely devoid of value and substance but not on something insightful and meaningful. You aren't fooling anybody. Keep it up you are only proving my point further and further. |
|
|
|
|
Wow nice rebuttal, you really showed me there! When people resort to ad hominems it's a good sign they have no more substance to back them up.
|
|
|
|
Reality is ICONOMI are just plain arrogant and rude.
They made millions off the back of our money and they can't even be arsed to communicate with their investors properly.
They also went back on the promise of paying ETH dividends.
Don't get me started with that buyback crap being the same thing.
Cause if the market had perceived it to be the same crap, ICN would have mooned by now but instead it's a dump fest.
ICONOMI shill boys need to shut up and start demanding more transparency from their masters.
Let's see... Q1 financial report, medium blog posts, email updates, they just did an AMA yesterday, and they are currently in Slack talking with us. You look like a fucking idiot who doesn't know what they are talking about. actually one of ICONOMI's biggest investors begs to differ. He's made it very clear that his concerns haven't been addressed. So, You are the one who's coming across as a massive shill idiot. Jan from cofound.it is in slack talking btw. So spare me your drivel you silly twat. Cofound.it doesn't exist yet, smartass. Yan is still working closely with iconomi. Maybe you should actually read what he is saying in slack? Mal didn't get his questions answered, sure that sucks. He got some of his questions answered. Many other questions were answered in the AMA. We got our Q1 report. We got an email update on icnp investments. But again name one project that does all of that and still gets bitched about nonstop. And again, if the price were high nobody would pretend to care about "communication". |
|
|
|
Reality is ICONOMI are just plain arrogant and rude.
They made millions off the back of our money and they can't even be arsed to communicate with their investors properly.
They also went back on the promise of paying ETH dividends.
Don't get me started with that buyback crap being the same thing.
Cause if the market had perceived it to be the same crap, ICN would have mooned by now but instead it's a dump fest.
ICONOMI shill boys need to shut up and start demanding more transparency from their masters.
Let's see... Q financial reports, medium blog posts, email updates, they just did an AMA yesterday, and they are currently in Slack talking with us. You look like a fucking idiot who doesn't know what they are talking about. What else do you want them to do? What other project does all of that and still receives this number of complaints about "communication". If the price was high and they were doing the same or even far less, nobody would complain. So let's not pretend we don't know what this is really about. |
|
|
|
|
If Iconomi is having issues with liquidity of certain components of the index, what if for now they released an ICN lite version that only contains the most liquid assets? And new assets could be added in as their liquidity increases or tolerance for low liquidity improves.
|
|
|
|
worst performer ICN
ICN is still above its ICO value... I get the frustration that it isn't worth much more by now but let's be real here. |
|
|
|
Let me guess, still no tx ids or addresses to prove ICO funds? Yall need to learn about the blockchain, it's this new tech that let's you do things like prove transactions/funds in a trustless manner. Pretty neat stuff. Check out bitcointalk.org it's a good place to introduce yourself to the concept.
I participated in their ICO. I don't have tx ids for BTC, but here's the Qtum ETH transaction page: https://etherscan.io/txs?a=0xa37f1c452e16188d59c8956b1b624b4ac8ccf3ab&p=140,001 ETH sent to address 0x556B5712C2a7CC5506fbfA785B52536fb8243765. I don't know who this belongs to or what to make of it. i think Qtum did not public any eth address. since all their eth from different exchanges. where you participate the ico? You're completely right. I participated via bizhongchou.com. I wonder if 0x556B5712C2a7CC5506fbfA785B52536fb8243765 is an address owned by Qtum... that's not a qtum address. The devs could clear this up for us in an instant but for some reason refuse to. sooner or later they will. just be patient. plus all these dramas, Qtum is still the first POS Smart contact platform and compatible with BIPs.... that's some real innovations. it's rare in crypto world. It's the first? I wasn't aware qtum was released and functional yet. |
|
|
|
Fuck distribution, moon regardless.
About that... Developement needs to occur first before we can moon. Also we need a high volume exchange. |
|
|
|
Arrrrrrghhhhh  . If I can't purchase ICNX soon I'm going to fucking explode. This is exactly how I feel, the price of ICNX keeps going up, but only for the few who are able to buy!!!! The waiting list is 6000, I invested enough to get a free Founders-Card, yet what will the ICNX price be about time I get on the platform?? As for others harping on about other exchanges, You are putting the cart before the horse, THE ICNX PLATFORM NEEDS TO BE UP AND RUNNING, BEFORE ANYTHING ELSE HAPPENS. So the only questions on this thread at the moment should be about the slow development of the platform, and to the ones who say this takes TIME, then the certain (Selected) few people should not be allowed to be able to make a profit with ICNX, while the rest of us are waiting for months, getting one answere to every three questions. If the Dev's needs to hire more Dev's, then get on with it!!!! Fuck you have enough money!!!! Still HODLING, but waiting for this platform while others make a profit from OUR investment is like having a wisdom tooth removed with a toothpick. I have many investments which I am willing to hodl for years, what pisses me off with this one is that even thou we all invested at the same time, some selected ones are allowed to get ahead start. Hey at least you aren't an American who won't be able to buy icnx anytime in the near future  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
