|
It seems as though people are referring to the soft cap and hard cap. Thats not what I'm talking. I'm talking about all steps before actually launching the tokensale and receiving funds for tokens. I'm referring to the process that leads up to the token sale; ie...white paper, landing page, token sale smart contract, bounties, marketing.
|
|
|
|
As far I understand, ICO's are fundraising for projects with a full proof plan, so you don't need funds before starting ICO as long as you can manage everything it takes to manage an ICO like web-design, team member, advisor, developers, marketing manager, other advertising costs and probably a lot more things to make the ICO successful. So, I guess it's quite tough to do it without funds.
Those are my exact thoughts. That is my plan. Are advisors really needed? A lot of advisors just want money to be listed on your website. |
|
|
|
If you launch an ICO without a budget 95% of your ICO will fail. Because marketing your ICO is really important. And for marketing to succeed, you need to spend some money on the company. And need to pay for the staff of your team
How was Digitex Futures able to be successful? It doesnt look like they spent much if anything at all on marketing |
|
|
|
It is rare for a project to survive without an ico
Because nobody wants to work for free
The teams
The moderators
The admins
The marketers
The whitepaper collator
The website designer
It all costs money
So all projects would eventually need an ico
The teams = hired after token sale funds are raisedThe moderators = bounties and receive payment in crypto upon a successful tokensaleThe admins = bounties and receive payment in crypto upon a successful tokensaleThe marketers = bountiesThe whitepaper collator = founder can createThe website designer = founder can createDo you think the above would work? |
|
|
|
I think yes we have many projects that collect minimum investitions in ico and become one of the leader in the market!But this happening with time only few times that projects with small capital become somthing big in crypto world,becose they cant get even soft cap,peoples is afraid to invest big money now,many scams,fraud ico coming out..
Wouldn't being transparent and the founders having to complete KYC ensure investors of frauds? In addition, the smart contract can be designed so as if the small cap isn't reached funds will be automatically refunded. |
|
|
|
|
When I say ICO I mean in preparation to actually doing the Token Sale.
|
|
|
|
Can I crypto company be successful with a min budget during the ICO? For example, can a startup not have funding and successful launch an ICO to include whitepaper, landing page, smart contract if they are knowledgeable? Or is a lot of $$$$$$$ required for everything. I for one thing that the idea and vision is what sells. Especially if the person is transaparent and people buy in the vision. I think word of mouth will travel and people will buy in.
Yes a stable budget is necessary and a main factor for the success of an ICO but it's not always like that. An ICO needs a budget first and foremost because it needs a reliable team, Who would work for an ICO project without a Budget? So it's really necessary. Also, Promotion and advertisements of ICO also requires a lot of money, which is also a main factor for a success of an ICO. So all in all It is really necesssar for an ICO to have a budget. So you're saying with marketing and promotion, that the business can't be organically grown?I see a lot of promoters who are willing to be bounties and a lot of listing sites that are free. |
|
|
|
funds are the main weapon of a project's success, unless you can invite many people to work for you free. promote the project that you will develop lol
I agree, but wouldnt it fair to conclude that one person can write whitepaper, create landing page, smart contract, and build a community; still having a successful ICO raising millions. Afterwards hire a team with the monies raised |
|
|
|
|
Why are crappy companies that are spending nothing to develop their ICO raising so much money? Most of these crappy companies are not being transparent.
|
|
|
|
|
Is it possible for one person to create whitepaper, landing page, smart contract, market, and still have a successful ICO? After the ICO, the person would hire a team with the funds raised to launch the platform successful. Everything will be transparent. In addition, are advisors really needed? A lot of advisors only want money just to be listed on an ICO.
|
|
|
|
|
How much would everyone say should be raised for the development of a crypto sports trading platform that is fully transparent. Individuals can trade shares of their favorite team with crypto and earn additional tokens when their team win and appreciate in value. This will be something completely new using block chain technology
|
|
|
|
|
When I say the ICO and funds I'm referring to the development of a landing page and the important thing before the ICO starts? In addition is organically growing the crowdbase possible?
|
|
|
|
|
Can I crypto company be successful with a min budget during the ICO? For example, can a startup not have funding and successful launch an ICO to include whitepaper, landing page, smart contract if they are knowledgeable? Or is a lot of $$$$$$$ required for everything. I for one thing that the idea and vision is what sells. Especially if the person is transaparent and people buy in the vision. I think word of mouth will travel and people will buy in.
|
|
|
|
Depends on the individual. But I do believed that majority of us doesn't want to share our private data right? So I think those people will likely won't join that bounty the minute KYC is being enforced. Again, you can't blame them though, because it was a last minute changes and no one is expecting it. I suggest you follow that bounty and see how it goes for the participants (willing to submit to KYC in order to get their tokens, or not take the risk of giving their passports.)
What sucks here the most are ICOs who don't disclose or mention anything about KYC during their pre-sale but after the TGE took place they will suddenly have a KYC requirement before they even send the tokens you have bought from them. I remembered in one of the Telegrams group of the ICO I participated in thousands of the members got shocked and furious at the same time that they are suddenly requiring KYCs out of nowhere and it took awhile for us to receive our tokens. They somehow hide the fact from people that KYC is an important step for you to receive the tokens you have bought from them during the token sale. This is probably why they hide the KYC requirement in the first place as it is highly unappealing to a lot of people. This is what somehow a strategy nowadays for those ICO which they do hide it out on earlier phase just to deceived investors that they aren't requiring any KYC and actually I had experienced the same thing too where Ive been too confident on investing because I know theres no such verification needed into its investors but in the end they do ask out for you to claim your tokens which is really shocking on investors side. You would really be put up on a situation which you wont really have any choice but to comply it since you already invested.If you do see that those tokens are really worth then you would comply it but if not then better leave it if you cant afford to give out your own informations. Check out Digitex's term and conditions https://digitexfutures.com/terms-and-conditions/ They decided not to implement KYC/AML, but rather mentioned that US residents shouldnt participate. Is this sufficient enough? Do you see any legal issues with that? You represent and warrant that you are not a resident or domiciliary of the United States of America or purchasing DGTX TOKENS from a location in the United States of America, nor are you an entity (including but not limited to any corporation or partnership) incorporated, established or registered in or under the laws of the United States of America, nor are you purchasing DGTX TOKENS on behalf of any such person or entity; |
|
|
|
Should I implement KYC/AML and do it myself or should I work with a trusted company to do so? I think that doing it myself will have a risk for the business in case of a hack, whereas using a company that has experience doing it is much secure.
Crypto platform is not very safe and even if you used a company which is so called secure, there's a possibility that they could crack it as well. Just look at how many exchanges are very hack, any project should not do a KYC/AML all they have to do is implement restrictions, they can even banned IP for restricted countries if they doesn't want to have a legal issues later and scrutiny from regulatory bodies. IMHO. So you're suggesting not doing KYC/AML and just banning IPs of certain countries? What are the pros and cons of doing such a thing? |
|
|
|
|
Should I implement KYC/AML and do it myself or should I work with a trusted company to do so? I think that doing it myself will have a risk for the business in case of a hack, whereas using a company that has experience doing it is much secure.
|
|
|
|
In addition to what others have said, usually they have legal experts who they seek advise. So at the beginning there are ICO which doesn't require any KYC's but when the tokens are about to distributed, other's suddenly asking for KYC's just to make sure that they are following all regulations and they need to adapt, otherwise if might have a big implications later. Its just sad though that it was not intimated at the very beginning so that investors or bounty hunters not comfortable sharing their personal data will not invest or join that ICO project.
ARe you saying that most ICOs dont start with KYC and AML; they do it later? Look at this, TV-TWO Signature Campaign: ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2884232.0). No KYC was mentioned when they started their campaign. And then their token bounty campaign can be found here; ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2617590.0) Bounty has successfully ended. Thank you everyone for your support!Dear Bounty Hunters, We have received an updated opinion from our legal council that urges TV-TWO to perform KYC on all individuals and companies that receive our tokens. While this is nothing new concerning our investors, it does come as a surprise to us that this also covers any entity that participated in marketing and bounty activities. The change comes in light of new regulation that qualifies transferring tokens to sanctioned parties as aiding and abetting in criminal activity.What does this mean? We need to ask any bounty hunter to complete the following KYC form on the TV-TWO website: https://tv-two.com/bounty.html.During the process, please enter the same Ethereum address that you have used in the bounty spreadsheets. Once your KYC is reviewed and approved, we will transfer the tokens that you have earned during the campaign to your wallet. Distribution starts on August 24. But at the last minute specially when bounty hunters are waiting for their payments, they posted that so many bounty hunters are confused and disappointed because we all know that most of us doesn't want to give sensitive information like our passport. I don't think thats a good luck for them to implement KYC after the fact. What are your thoughts? Would you have still been a bounty if you needed to perform KYC? |
|
|
|
The KYC or AML process is now standard practice for any legitimate ICO looking to raise funds. These processes not only benefit the project implementing them but also help to protect those with interests within the project.
Even though the crypto space is largely unregulated, it doesn’t mean that we can’t behave and conduct ourselves as any normally regulated sector. It’s all of our responsibility to ensure that we protect the ICO and crypto space as stakeholders. In order to do that, ICOs and projects need to implement a KYC or AML process.
I agree, but wouldnt you say there are added risk to collecting data of users. Lets say the data gets breached; what's next? Wouldn't the company implementing the KYC/AML be held liable. Also, instead of doing kYC/AML why not just restrict the companies that require them; primarily US and China. Yes, there's a big risk on investors or even bounty hunters if ever such hacks occurs: https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/83ybwn/shady_dadi_ico_server_got_hacked_huge_data_breach/https://thenextweb.com/hardfork/2018/02/07/sentinel-chain-ico-leak-passport/Of course the project or company should be held accountable because you put trust in them that they are going to secure your personal data. I guess ICO than are requiring KYC now are making it more riskier on our end. I think some ICO's are also doing some restrictions as well. You can't join if you are amongst the country they don't allowed. Can't the risk be mitigated by offloading the KYC to a company such as OST KYC? So far doing my research, if KYC/AML is provided, it looks like all countries can participate with the exception of China. Am I correct? |
|
|
|
What determines if an ICO requires KYC and AML?
It depends on the country that the ICO is operating from, and the citizens that it is offering its investment scheme to (that's why you see some ICOs banning certain country's citizens to participate). While I'm not sure what the exact procedures are, most legitimate ICOs nowadays in countries with more mature crypto ICO regulations will ask you for KYC docs such as your ID, as well as AML docs, perhaps fund sources. At the end of the day, the ICO itself is probably not even in that much control when it comes to the collection of the docs. The regulators in each country decides whether these investments are legal, what they are classified under, and what procedures are. Would you recommend using a site such as OST KYC for this? |
|
|
|
|
I'm looking for individuals to join my team and be a part of an exciting new project or become a partner. Individuals on the platform will be able to trade peer to peer what we like to call 'blocks' of their favorite sports teams in resemblance to what one would do with stock, an altcoin, or a platform-based coin. I'm starting a small community, and basically just me working on it right now (very early stage) but I am working out some partnerships at this time. I am looking for business partners that can bring all sorts of value to the startup. This can include but not be limited to: startup funding, blockchain/smart contract programming skill, attorneys/legal help (especially in corporate law and with securities), marketing/community cultivation, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
