Sorry Breakout but you are not going to have the wildly successful ICO you envisioned. In part because it was overoptimistic given the circumstances, in part because you havent listened: you need to show a WORKING interface of your games, not just composite pictures. You also need to explaing brrgstake much more clearly (and it has to be tradeable too), including those 6 million berstake that will be given out? And finally, since you expect BRO buyers to finance your whole operation INCLUDING time and resources already invested, you need to incentivize early investors much, much more. Otherwise you are going to find it very very difficult to break even the minimum for the project to go ahead.

There's still time. But not much...

Delisting next...

How is that (poker) a bad thing you ask? How about BECAUSE IT IS ILLEGAL IN THE US. Because crypto is about to be regulated in US and something illegal, like pokrr, could severely limit its chances to not be shut down. Is it clear enough for you now? Now how is it good for Pink? Ewow wow wow.

Jokers all around...

No need for your answer blunder from down under... or thereabouts...

First of all, just go back in full to the spirit of the coin in late May and, like then, it will have my full and undivided support. No if no buts. See how you are full of shit? That simple.

Second of all, you -the ones supporting the new path- have made of Pinkcoin a joke in crypto, an insignificant dide show quick on its wag to oblivion.

I doubt it is reversible. Especially after your devs' willful participation in the SEED debacle.

I doubt you would see reality until well after delisting.

Good luck, you are going to need iwhat was that about Ivey considering investing in Pink?

You are such jokers, really...

The "achievements" of this debacle are indeed record-setting.

Not the least of ehich would be MOST IRREPARABLE DAMAGE TO ANY COIN WHOSE DEV TEAM SUPPORTED THE DRBSCLE. In this case Pinkcoin which price has mirrored the debacle of SEED since inception.

You must be proud...

Still counting the "profits"?

The coin is dead. RIP.

I never fud. Just warned everyone all along.

You will never see it though, no matter how clear...

Hold away Maddie, hold away.

Its too long to wait... besides other circumstances.

The Ethereum investors are already lamenting having invested and a lot of yhem would want to take their money back already... imagina whats gonna happen in 3-4 months... here everyone and his aunt knows the chances of vrc going lower, maybe significantly, outstrip the possibilities of going ANY higher by 9 to 1 or more, in the next few months... All the money in crypto is going to BRO and other new interesting projects... simply there's no money left to buh vrc... even if there were a good reason to do it.

Bagholders, be ready to face MONTHS of (way) under 10k or be quite miserable.

Perhaps it should be much wiser to heed the word of someone posessing a character and psychology that would name himself such a sane handle as SpockSkywalker? Lololol.

Nutcases running amok...

The damage caused by supporting, sponsoring and promoting the SEED debacle by this dev team has had grave repercussions. They'll be graver now that they have made of the entire pink project a joke.

It will be the shortest lived shitcoin of them all. Way shorter than the memory of those who supported it... and sunk PINK along the way.

Raw lunacy...

The first wallet, Fayoling, own more than 25% of SEED.

The top 5 wallets own 60% of SEED.

RIP

Well Randy I have to say, in light of the latest examination and in contrast with the expectations that you guys have, that I believe you are setting yourselves up for a huge disappointment.

There are a couple of things that are not exactly reassuring on the technical side of things and that goes against your statement of the project as being "well thought of". That at this stage in the game you will change to plan B regarding the mining platform and that the bloating of the blockchain hasn't been thoroughly examined long, long before this time, is, like I said, the contrary to reassuring. And, consequently, makes one thing what other aspects have not been well thought of. The other technical thing that remains an enigma is, probably, even more important: So far we only have a few images, pretty conventional and quite unimpressive as to what the aspect of the platform will be. We don't know at all how that will work and, like I said, it isn't precisely impressive: If you go into any casino en Earth these days, you can see and play poker and other games on a platform much more impressive than that, with video, etc. This is like going to the times of Pac-Man, a decade behind. Not having a working beta that people can actually experience, is, in my view, and insuperable flaw in your ICO launching.

Now, the recent projections that I have read here are a set up for disappointment... to a certain extent. To begin with, Breakout Gamis has posted that the minimal ICO money required is 1,000 BTC, which at current price is 380,000 dollars. On the pother hand, he expects between 10 and 15 times that much... the later putting BRO's launch in the same league of Ethereum. I know it will be comparing apples to Oranges to a certain extent but only in relative terms. Number one, I believe that the Ethereum ICO as well as the constant ones coming into the market plus the "JL&&& ventures and assets including SuperNET have stretched the amount of BTC available in altcoin territory to the ;point that many worthwhile projects, some quite established, are already suffering greatly because of the scarcity of capital; number 2, realistically examined, BRO is just an idea, far from a reality -with less than 1,000 BTC in the ICO it won't even happen-. Admittedly a very good idea and well supported but with too many caveats, self made and circumstantially converging to take for granted a success at the level Breakout Gamins -and you- are predicting.

No, I can't agree with you on the price of the ICO being the lowest. It could be, but far from a sure thing. The whole thing can so easily turn into a debacle that it is quite risky, actually, given the many possible variables, specially on the vital technical side of the coin platform and the gaming platform.

I don't do predictions with so many variables, but I can easily see people originally interested taking their time to see if the interest becomes BTC-vested interest and losing either on the long way of that month-long ICO. Remember that many people that were enthusiastic about Ethereum already are lamenting having "bitten" in view of the long -and not guaranteed- wait ahead. A high percentage of "enthusiastic investors" a month ago will be willing and very happy if they could take their money back right now. The same way, I can see a very big disappointment in your expectations. No, I will not see parity BRO-dollar. Not on the ICO and maybe never down the line. I would need to see many more realities, practical, working realities, to be more hopeful.

And maybe for some the stumbling point will be the "open" ICO. It is absurd for it doesn't change anything... except that this is crypto world and an ample majority of people with some BTC available are not very investment-savvy, on one side and rather "peculiar" on another. Meaning that they have convinced themselves than a closed ICO is "greedy" and you simply will not convince them otherwise no matter how absurd than concoction is in reality, so it will be also a (minimal) factor going against your very optimistic predictions.

Finally, if your more optimistic predictions were to happen, the whole thing looks disproportionate and absurd, starting with the immediate compensation of $ 3 million or more to the developers, some of which, logically, would immediately dump. And following with a "distribution" 2-year period, via promotions and such, that would put on your hands a budget several times above what Caesar's Palace spends in promotion --those 7 million coins could be worth in excess of 10 million dollars if your optimistic predictions come to happen... much more, in fact, if the operation is successful and, like you expect, it has repercussion in the price of the coin. The "distribution" model, in itself, is quite preposterous for you actually are asking people invested in the COIN to pay for the promotion of the CASINO, without obtaining any ownership in it and only the vague hope that supporting the casino expansion will somehow augment the value of the coin. A very tall order, from where I am standing.

Those 7 million coins should be part of the ICO, in my opinion, as it should be a working platform that compares advantageously with what other online casinos already have. And even on that case, it would still be quite risky to assume that the launching, bergstaking, etc, will work flawlessly -or acceptably- from the get go.

So yes, it is a great idea. Many points in its favor. But, like I posted before, a lot of caveats also.

I wouldn't worry about the top wallet(s). Fayoling has already said he will donate the bulk of it to bounties and such and I am sure the other top 5 will do likewise. Great things ahead... if you buy low enough.

As for the staking, I believe there are still a bunch of coins that will continue staking for quite a few more blocks. Maybe the top one will not stake more after this coming payout, if all the coins are in the same chunk; if they are not, some will continue staking. That muy understanding of the process, but needless ton say, I could be very wrong.

Like I said, it is totally irrelevant the final count of coins; what is relevant is the market cap that the market will assign to the coin, regardless how many units are out there.

Sorry but that is very juvenile perception. This is a BUSINESS. With investors behind it. A business that requires big money to be built. It doesn't matter one bit if the cap the price or not, nothing changes the outcome. This will get whatever amount of BTC it will and that will be the same whether it is capped or not. The price of the coin is irrelevant, the only measure that matters is the market cap assigned to the entire supply, not the price per coin of the 4.5 million on offer.

Jay, I know you are fully aware of the term "capitulation". You can provoke that daily or even more frequently if you want to. That's where the scoop comes. And you can also control the rebound. You can control it both ways and determine tops and bottoms.

As for the price being stable, I don't know if that's even desirable or attractive to cryptonites... where are they going to make money to justify their investment if the price remains stable?  

If any significant contribution would be ever made, all this embarrassment would have been worthwhile. Unfortunately I have no reasons to be optimistic at all.

Have a good day you too and, please, spare me the BS. Not too much to ask, I believe.

Not that it is any credit -you have made it into an embarrassment, actually- but I placed Pink Coin in THE WALL OF HONOR, only coin there so far. THEN quite deservedly. That was before anon. That was before poker. And that was when charity was a HUGE feature in this coin's plans and roadmap.

Now, this train wreck has not raised any charity funds in 6 weeks -and before that a minimal amount- and is looking ONLY as a gambling site and a window to advertise and sell software created for PINK by VOLUNTEERS. Oh, and of late, a promotion, supporting, escrowing and endorsing of the SEED debacle too.

The sad thing is that you are serious. The good thing is that no one else, fortunately, takes it seriously anywhere anymore.

Oh and, as a trader in modest amounts, I make -and lose- money all the time. In train wrecks like this as well as in many others, none of which I am grateful or ungrateful for since any gains or any losses are due to my decisions, not yours, peregrine as they might be.

Edit to add: And you are giving me quite undeserved credit, of course. Your deluded mind actually seriously believe that I have any influence whatsoever in the price of the coin, which only a very, seriously disturbed individual can possible even conceive.  Seriously.

Not that is of any relevance bu it could be quite significantly above that, like 50% above that? We'll see.