We are definitely at the right time, it's hard to know which projects will be the winners but it all starts to make sense slowly. I have no doubt in my mind blockchain tech is the future. Banks will sort of collapse not because of greed, but because money will be digital, and tech companies will have the upper hand. Right now a company like Apple or Google is in much better position to guard your money than a bank. A blockchain tech company would be 100 times more secure. The problem is that regulation gets in the way and makes progress very expensive. That's why I'm interested in this Swiss startups, it reminds me of silicon valley in a way. Yes, I see it very similar. But I believe that the economical system will collapse because of the inherent economical structure. It's a debt-system. It was said by many that Bitcoin would be some kind of pyramid scheme or snow-ball-system. But that's more true for the established financial system and I'm not an economical expert but I'm very sure that there is no solution - that escalation will be the base for change and "solution". Until we run into the next trouble. Humans are humans - I don't expect an upgrade soon. 
By the way, what do you think about Chronobank, it's related to this thread because I know Lykke will add the token once it's released.
Yes, Sergey said on telegram today that it will be on Lykke in early march. I'm not sure yet what I think about it. One reason is that I would have to look much deeper into it to really have an opinion. Until now I think that it's very interesting and I'm eager to see how it will develop, especially over time. But I'm also sceptical because it seems to be very experimental on all important fronts. Technically it's very connected to Ethereum. Economically there are some things I'm really unsure about (stable tokens) and socially it becomes really complex since it will be about a reputation systems etc. If we think about Blockchain and why it's so magical: One of the most important aspects is to get human weaknesses as much as possible out of the system. Factom is a continuation of that for example. But Chronobank can't do that and assumes a lot of rational behavior. They assume rational markets, otherwise their Tokens won't be stable or it will need a lot of money to ensure stability while the whole system could suffer if the value should go down. Maybe there is something I miss here - but right now I'm very skeptical about that point. Another one is the complexity of all the involved social aspects and the reputation-system. They somehow compare their concept with Uber. But that's just about "A guy drives me from A to B - I check if I'm still alive - yes, good work!" It's a whole different thing to evaluate the work of a designer for example. And reputation systems are usually very vulnerable, fraud attempts included. I'm very unsure how to handle such a complex system. If you take a look at page 16: https://chronobank.io/files/business_outline.pdfJust that is a challenge. Over time, if Chronobank should get traction, it may become less important because the more companies will use Chronobank the more stable the system should become. But they will need to be fast to get traction and that could turn out as a problem. They also need a lot of money because liquidity will be needed. If there should be unstable markets for their tokens and if they shouldn't have the liquidity to stabilize it, I'm not so sure how they should be able not to just go down because the whole system would lose credibility. I don't believe in rationality of economical systems and I don't believe in reputation-systems once it's about high meaning and complexity. That's why I'm very sceptical. But... it's also a little but too much guessing involved because I didn't look deep into it. Under the line I hope that it will work out because it's absolutely an interesting concept. |
|
|
|
tempus, can you confirm that these 50m coins are not new issues and are instead coming out of the company's own longstanding LKK holdings?
Yes! The company sells shares that already exist - the total supply doesn't increase. tempus, I know you are a reliable investor and user here since we used to exchange some messages about Factom for example. I bought some LKK at the previous ICO but sold right after when BTC rally started last year. Now, honestly from what I remember there would be like +1 billion coins, so that's 10 million "shares" right? Taking in account 100 coins represent 1 share. So I have a couple of questions here...keep in mind that would not be the absolute total supply, I've read somewhere they will create more shares like any other companies do when they expand. 1) Why the need for such complicated system, just make a simple pair, 1 coin, 1 share? Excuse me my ignorance if this relates to something in particular. 2) The value of 1 share for Lykke equals 5 dollars right now basically then (this didn't move much since the ICO), that would make the actual marketcap for Lykke around 50 millions dollars right now? It's a little overvalued in my opinion but not outrageous considering the potential it has, however that will put it in the top 10 crypto projects. Hi mtnsaa! Yes, the Bitcoin-rise pushed also LKK a little bit down in between. I even expected Bitcoin to rise but decided not to sell because it never feels safe with all the blocksize-drama-war and China etc. I also didn't sell FCT. But, to your questions: Total supply is 1,285,690,000 Lykke Coin = 12,856,900 LKK shares, so it's even a little bit more. Total value is about $63 million. Will ne Coins/Shares be issued in the future? Theoretically that is possible and back in September or October I've talked with Richard Olsen about that and he explained how it's usually done in companies. But some weeks ago (January) the same question was asked on Telegram and Sergey replied that there are no plans to issue new shares. Just found the comment on telegram. Quoting Sergey Ivliev: "there is no plans to increase number of shares of Lykke Corp, hence no "inflation" for Lykke coins"1) I'm not totally sure why they've chosen the "100 LKK = 1 share - design", but I believe it's to make it also useful as currency including the possibility for micro-transactions. Lykke won't be only about being a trading-platform but will also focus on payment etc. (Debit Card is also planned). And one can think of Lykke-Coins as a useful Crypto-Currency while being backed because it represents ownership. 2) Like said above, the value is even a little bit higher. And that's often somehow controversial and I thought a lot about it myself before I've decided to invest. It's also kind of subjective and about the own strategy, but my view on Lykke is that while they are not loud like some others when it's about marketing, they really push the project forward. And compared with some other projects and teams behind, I believe the value is fair, even more when it's about future potential. If Lykke should be successful, and right now I don't see reasons to believe it won't be, there is not really a limit how it can grow into multiple spaces. What is interesting, because you've also mentioned Factom: I believe to see some similarities but also very interesting differences. Similar is that both teams really focus on delivery. Both teams move step by step while avoiding "hype-on-promise". But in comparison to Factom, what always will be a "background-system" (but with high potential in my opinion) Lykke has much more potential to be attractive for potentially everybody and a lot of different use cases. I really believe that Lykke can go viral out of itself, maybe already in 2017. And if we compare Lykke and Ripple for example: XRP, as a currency, is valued at $232,637,449 right now. I've never understood that valuation because even if a decentralized system, the whole project is pretty much centralized. XRP is under the line just a system-currency and unlike to LKK it doesn't represent ownership of the Ripple-Company. Or if compared with some of the projects with similar goals, like Waves: $25 million marketcap right now. That's much cheaper of course, but Lykke is far ahead and especially the people behind are simply on another level. And if we compare it to Factom: It's a shame that Factom is not already valued much higher! ;-) But I expect it to fly in 2017. That's of course my personal view and no investment is ever totally safe or predictable. But in my opinion this is one of a very few pearls in the Blockchain/Crypto-Space while I'm very sure that about 99% will have no real chance. It needs so much expertise in a lot of different areas to get a project on a road to success - I think, that's underrated by a lot of teams and also a majority of Investors. Best regards, tempus Thank you very much for such detailed explanation, well I invested in Iconomi ICO (and bought some more at 16k), luckily I took profit at the peak and sold all since I didn't considered it a long term investment, so I'm looking to actually commit to Lykke (I just had to sell during the ICO because BTC was about to blow, I was right!). Anyway, I agree with you, the 100=1 ratio must be because LKK will also act as some form of currency and maybe that will bring some kind of stability to it. You can see how projects with more than 1 billion coins are much more stable (Ripple, Sia, Digibyte, Doge, lol). I mentioned Iconomi because I'm afraid regulation will crush it and Lykke seems to have a very clear roadplan in the future and are based in Switzerland which is crypto paradise. I'm also looking for dividends pay tokens as you mentioned for long term too and while I can see a bright future in Ethereum, many of the current tokens are to underdeveloped right now and seem like a long shot and years away (Augur, Iconomi, First Blood, Maker Dao, upcoming MelonPort and Gnosis). Lykke is already working and the app is beautiful indeed. The idea is also brilliant and will actually use btc blockchain for settlement which is to me one of the most important use cases (not being a currency or "storage of wealth" nonsense). Yes, I absolutely agree. And speaking of similarities between Factom and Lykke I forgot to mention the point you speak about. Both use the Bitcoin-Blockchain as a base. Both are in a way complementary to Bitcoin that they can even be seen as helpful for some of Bitcoins problems. Scaling of course but also transaction-speed for example. And even more important: Both stay independent at the same time, can and will utilize also other Blockchains. And it's kind of a fun fact that there are some Bitcoin-Maximalists out there who believe Bitcoin should be the only Blockchain and BTC the only currency and all projects with an own token should just die. They don't get, that exactly this design is a continuation of Bitcoin itself. I believe that there will be "many" Blockchains and Cryptocurrencies in future that are connected, some will be more adopted and accepted than others, but the whole system together will be unbeatable. And a project like Lykke, without own Blockchain but utilizing all Blockchains that are relevant, will act like a revolving door in Crypto and beyond and into multiple economical use cases and spaces. Others will do that as well of course and it will also be about competition. But this whole space is so young and there nearly endless room to grow, that it's a safe bet that quality will push through. Btw, because in the end it's about the question if a project is a good investment or not: My own investment-strategy is also about the context, about the established system and what I believe is likely to happen (banking and currency crises "everywhere", especially in the EU). I focus on those projects I believe to be able to connect and grow into established use cases but also benefit of a possible downfall. And that's also best seen in Factom and Lykke, since both projects have a changing effect on the established system and both are likely to benefit from crises (others as well of course). But if we think especially about a currency crisis (Banks in the Eurozone and Euro itself could break) - what will people try and do? It will be about getting rid of the Fiat-currency, as fast as possible, and into something that is seen as safe haven. And Lykke offers exactly that. It is and gives choice. Long story short: Projects like Lykke and Factom (and some others) just have to move on. Richard Olsen often says "go with the flow" and I believe that is really key. There is a dynamic for such projects. When we will look back in some years it' very likely in my opinion that we will say: "Timing couldn't have been better!". ;-) |
|
|
|
tempus, can you confirm that these 50m coins are not new issues and are instead coming out of the company's own longstanding LKK holdings?
Yes! The company sells shares that already exist - the total supply doesn't increase. tempus, I know you are a reliable investor and user here since we used to exchange some messages about Factom for example. I bought some LKK at the previous ICO but sold right after when BTC rally started last year. Now, honestly from what I remember there would be like +1 billion coins, so that's 10 million "shares" right? Taking in account 100 coins represent 1 share. So I have a couple of questions here...keep in mind that would not be the absolute total supply, I've read somewhere they will create more shares like any other companies do when they expand. 1) Why the need for such complicated system, just make a simple pair, 1 coin, 1 share? Excuse me my ignorance if this relates to something in particular. 2) The value of 1 share for Lykke equals 5 dollars right now basically then (this didn't move much since the ICO), that would make the actual marketcap for Lykke around 50 millions dollars right now? It's a little overvalued in my opinion but not outrageous considering the potential it has, however that will put it in the top 10 crypto projects. Hi mtnsaa! Yes, the Bitcoin-rise pushed also LKK a little bit down in between. I even expected Bitcoin to rise but decided not to sell because it never feels safe with all the blocksize-drama-war and China etc. I also didn't sell FCT. But, to your questions: Total supply is 1,285,690,000 Lykke Coin = 12,856,900 LKK shares, so it's even a little bit more. Total value is about $63 million. Will ne Coins/Shares be issued in the future? Theoretically that is possible and back in September or October I've talked with Richard Olsen about that and he explained how it's usually done in companies. But some weeks ago (January) the same question was asked on Telegram and Sergey replied that there are no plans to issue new shares. Just found the comment on telegram. Quoting Sergey Ivliev: "there is no plans to increase number of shares of Lykke Corp, hence no "inflation" for Lykke coins"1) I'm not totally sure why they've chosen the "100 LKK = 1 share - design", but I believe it's to make it also useful as currency including the possibility for micro-transactions. Lykke won't be only about being a trading-platform but will also focus on payment etc. (Debit Card is also planned). And one can think of Lykke-Coins as a useful Crypto-Currency while being backed because it represents ownership. 2) Like said above, the value is even a little bit higher. And that's often somehow controversial and I thought a lot about it myself before I've decided to invest. It's also kind of subjective and about the own strategy, but my view on Lykke is that while they are not loud like some others when it's about marketing, they really push the project forward. And compared with some other projects and teams behind, I believe the value is fair, even more when it's about future potential. If Lykke should be successful, and right now I don't see reasons to believe it won't be, there is not really a limit how it can grow into multiple spaces. What is interesting, because you've also mentioned Factom: I believe to see some similarities but also very interesting differences. Similar is that both teams really focus on delivery. Both teams move step by step while avoiding "hype-on-promise". But in comparison to Factom, what always will be a "background-system" (but with high potential in my opinion) Lykke has much more potential to be attractive for potentially everybody and a lot of different use cases. I really believe that Lykke can go viral out of itself, maybe already in 2017. And if we compare Lykke and Ripple for example: XRP, as a currency, is valued at $232,637,449 right now. I've never understood that valuation because even if a decentralized system, the whole project is pretty much centralized. XRP is under the line just a system-currency and unlike to LKK it doesn't represent ownership of the Ripple-Company. Or if compared with some of the projects with similar goals, like Waves: $25 million marketcap right now. That's much cheaper of course, but Lykke is far ahead and especially the people behind are simply on another level. And if we compare it to Factom: It's a shame that Factom is not already valued much higher! ;-) But I expect it to fly in 2017. That's of course my personal view and no investment is ever totally safe or predictable. But in my opinion this is one of a very few pearls in the Blockchain/Crypto-Space while I'm very sure that about 99% will have no real chance. It needs so much expertise in a lot of different areas to get a project on a road to success - I think, that's underrated by a lot of teams and also a majority of Investors. Best regards, tempus |
|
|
|
ich habe mir mal die antwort auf meine frage durchgelesen. das liest sich ja super. werde wohl 50% (von dem was ich investieren will) für die vorfinanzierung stecken und dann die anderen 50% wenn es online geht.
ich find solche projekte wie lykke (oder auch stratis) am besten. die machen weniger theater mit werbung und leute bequatschen und konzentrieren sich auf das projekt. umso mehr man rum tratscht, umso mehr heizt man die leute an und umso schneller wollen die es fertig haben.
so finde ich es schönsten. das prinzip klappt bei stratis auch sehr gut und die liefern auch so, wie es in ihrer roadmap angegeben ist.
Das stimmt schon. Wobei es bei Stratis dann ja schon etwas knapp wurde, da die sich auch ein Minimalziel für deren ICO gesteckt hatten. Aber das war sehr tief angesetzt, was ich persönlich nicht so schlecht finde, und wurde nur knapp nicht erreicht, die Devs haben das Projekt aber trotzdem fortgeführt - und das fand ich auch super. STRAT ist jedenfalls ein guten Beispiel dafür, dass man nicht zwingend Millionen einsammeln muß und trotzdem etwas daraus machen kann.Bleibt natürlich zu hoffen, dass die Leute auch am Ball bleiben und nicht irgendwann die Lust mangels Money verlieren  Denn einer der Stratis Leute, der den ganzen Thread gemanagt hatte, war schon bei FibreCoin dabei. Eigentlich ein schönes Projekt, aber warum auch immer nicht mehr weiterentwickelt. Kurz etwas zur Geld-Frage, denn da ist Lykke schon durchaus anders, aber auch begründet: Eine Voraussetzung für Lykkes Reichweite und Erfolg wird sein, möglichst überall reguliert zu sein, die nötigen Lizenzen zu haben. Und das ist erstaunlich teuer - übertrifft die Millionenmarke soweit ich weiß. Und natürlich gibt es dann auch einige Kosten weil Lykke sehr viele Mitarbeiter beschäftigt und das sind (zum Glück) keine Script-Kiddies oder ausschließlich Typen wie ich ;-) (meine Expertise ist leider tatsächlich nur meine Erfahrung im Crypto-Bereich), sondern sie haben für jeden Bereich echte Experten und Lykke geht schon jetzt weit über Crypto hinaus, auch wenn das noch nicht so deutlich ist. |
|
|
|
ich habe mir mal die antwort auf meine frage durchgelesen. das liest sich ja super. werde wohl 50% (von dem was ich investieren will) für die vorfinanzierung stecken und dann die anderen 50% wenn es online geht.
ich find solche projekte wie lykke (oder auch stratis) am besten. die machen weniger theater mit werbung und leute bequatschen und konzentrieren sich auf das projekt. umso mehr man rum tratscht, umso mehr heizt man die leute an und umso schneller wollen die es fertig haben.
so finde ich es schönsten. das prinzip klappt bei stratis auch sehr gut und die liefern auch so, wie es in ihrer roadmap angegeben ist.
Was ich ganz interessant fand als ich mir das Video der Zürich-Konferenz ansah: Richard Olsen erwähnt an einer Stelle sinngemäß, das er eigentlich so wenig wie möglich "reden" will sondern es ihm v.a. darum geht dass alles eben funktioniert. Er hat es mir gegenüber mal etwas anders gesagt: dass er erst liefern möchte. Und das war was mich sofort beeindruckt hat als ich auf Lykke aufmerksam wurde obwohl ich eigentlich kein Fan von Smartphone-App's bin: Das Ding hat verdammt viele Funktionen und da werden noch weit mehr hinzukommen, aber sie ist trotzdem sehr intuitiv zu bedienen. Und das ist etwas was ich immer sehr schätze - "useful design". Aber längerfristig wird Lykke vermutlich auch Marketing betreffend etwas höher drehen. Stratis werde ich mir mal genauer ansehen. Darüber weiß ich bisher fast nichts. |
|
|
|
Code will be uploaded at the end of ICO.
That high Market cap will no be existence if there are no users. It might take 10 years or more for those coins to be in circulation.
Coins in circulation will be from ICO and Rebates.
Again, We are working on escrow terms for unsold coins right now. We will not control unsold coins.
I will make a video next week, we have too much development and only a couple weeks left so time is short.
Unfortunately, we all think of only a cryptocurrency market cap.
It's clear that the market cap will mostly be determined on new users coming into crypto.
Please refer to the white paper as some questions were answered there.
Best regards,
Patriarch.
I agree with the market cap. Its only measured with coins in circulation and it makes sense that the part of the no users no coins so people will make the markert cap go up I've tried to explain you the difference between marketcap and total value some time ago. And they've measured the value of this central-bank-PoS-inflation-System at about $450 million. Now you have the choice to trust that they won't sell the 99.9% on the market. But why does it exist? To sell it once new users come in? And if that happens, how could this have any potential to rise in price if they begin to sell once there would be more demand - it already is at a ridiculous high price! And who would benefit in such a scenario? Investors or Patriarch? The price can't rise until this project would legitimately value at $450 million! That can't ever happen because of it's design! And it won't happen because I give you my word: There won't be real development. Maybe they'll release some kind of Code and an App they've copied out of other Githubs - but they have in no way the expertise to lead a project. Plus: Do you really believe that this has any chance to get on a legit exchange? And if that would happen (and it won't happen), do you really believe there will be enough stupid enough to buy into this? The question if this is a legit project or not is no secret to solve. The answer is obvious. But what I would really like to know is if you really believe in this as an Investor or if you are part of this. Because if you are really just a user who truly believes in this and gave his real money - you should open your eyes and start to think. |
|
|
|
Code will be uploaded at the end of ICO.
That high Market cap will no be existence if there are no users. It might take 10 years or more for those coins to be in circulation.
Coins in circulation will be from ICO and Rebates.
Again, We are working on escrow terms for unsold coins right now. We will not control unsold coins.
I will make a video next week, we have too much development and only a couple weeks left so time is short.
Unfortunately, we all think of only a cryptocurrency market cap.
It's clear that the market cap will mostly be determined on new users coming into crypto.
Please refer to the white paper as some questions were answered there.
Best regards,
Patriarch.
Interesting reply! You don't answer directly on my post, but indirectly - and you say: "Please refer to the white paper as some questions were answered there." You want a lot of money, but you don't want to answer directly or show with quotes out of the whitepaper where it answers some of my questions? You also say: "That high Market cap will no be existence if there are no users."The 15bn Coins will be in existence, right or worng? You measure the total value would at $450 million, right or wrong? If wrong - why such a high price? How could the price ever rise if there should be new users and you begin to distribute the 15bn plus PoS-Inflation? Where are the rules to make clear when and how you would begin to sell the 99.9% that you or the escrow will hold? Whoever will hold about 99.9% of the total supply after this ICO needs to be trusted that he won't stake it and that he will be able to keep them safe, right or wrong? You claim this is a cryptocurrency and that you would want to help the Crypto-Community - but this is a central-bank-design plus hyperinflation. What do you believe how this will help anybody else than yourself - first with the ICO-BTC and than with 99.9% of the total supply? This is also interesting: "I will make a video next week, we have too much development and only a couple weeks left so time is short."
You claim this would be an open source project but there is no code in the Github. You've said you would stream an Interview live, but it never happened. I really don't understand how it's possible that something like this even exists. It's not possible that this is legit and that's true for a lot of projects. But this is so low-level. I don't get it. But obviously it's possible that some unexperienced kids send you real money. |
|
|
|
Again, That is your opinion. We want to help the crypto community, not hurt it.
We all agree this community was founded on good principles and morals.
I do understand the need to stop SCAMS, I have been a victim of a scam project in Bitcointalk.
I know first hand the anger and disappointment of a SCAM project, but we are not that.
If you can't see our vision here, that's ok, we don't expect everybody to.
We are sincere with our goals. Time will tell the truth.
Best regards,
Patriarch.
I agree, it doesn't need the word Scam. It only needs some questions: 1. You offer 15 bn Coins in this ICO. The average price is $0.03. That means, you measure the total value of this project at: 15,000,000,000 x $0.03 = $450,000,000 ---> wtf? What makes you believe, the total value of this project should be that high and on #3 right behind Bitcoin and Ethereum? 2. After this ICO the team will hold about 99.9% of the total supply. The Algo is Proof of Stake. Why should anybody trust you guys that you don't stake the 99.9%? 3. You constantly claim: "We want to help the crypto community, not hurt it." That's cute! a) But why and how would a totally centralized "Currency" be helpful and how could it have any chance to become mainstream? b) And let's say the price would have any chance to rise, who would benefit most? The guys who have sent you money to get 0.01% in summary or you with your 99.9% of the total supply? c) And if the price has no chance to rise, and I can predict that exactly that is the case - why should anybody buy this? 4. Why should anybody trust you that you'll be able to keep your 99.9% of the total supply safe? It's not only a threat for the price. You know what is possible with a > 51%-supply in a PoS-System, right? 5. Your Whitepaper is full of buzzwords, but it doesn't say much about the tech. Not really interested in it, or why is that so? 6. Would it be possible to show a working product in a Video? Should be, since you already have a lot of Screenshots. 7. You've said one month ago : (...) Please see our website https://www.procommerce.io/i have an upcoming interview that will be streamed live. I will post that on here as well. Where can I find this interview? Would you show your face in a video plus your ID-Card to raise trust in you and your project? 8. Do you really believe that a total Premine-PoS-Project with 99.9% of the total supply in the hands of the team has any chance to get on a legit exchange? |
|
|
|
Thanks! I'll edit it into the Ann! |
|
|
|
Danke für die ausführliche Antwort. Werde mir auch noch ein paar Gedanken darüber machen.
Der Vergleich mit Synereo war eher in Bezug auf den Verkauf bei BF (~33000sat) und den niedrigeren Preisen auf den Börsen (~25000 sat - die Zahlen nehme ich gerade aus dem Gedächtnis und sind nur ungefähr).
Ja, ich kann mich erinnern das der Kurs auf der Börse eigentlich die gesamte Zeit über unterhalb des Crowdfunding-Preises lag. Interessant ist, das die trotzdem € 4,2 Millionen auf Bnktothefuture bekommen haben, und das mit nur 307 Backers ( https://bnktothefuture.com/pitches/synereo), was einem Durchschnitt von € 13,600 pro Backer entspricht. Ich meine mich zu erinnern, dass ich irgendeinen Grund feststellte warum ich der Ansicht war der Kurs könne nur fallen und das war vor dem "Greg-Meredith-Desaster" - das folgte erst danach (hatte zuerst gedacht es wäre nahezu gleichzeitig gewesen). Das der Kurs danach so abschmierte hat m.A.n. jedenfalls nicht mit dem Crowdfunding zu tun, sondern damit das Bitcoin loslegte und mit den internen Problemen: https://bit.news/eng/decentralized-social-network-synereo-going-crisis/ Und wie gesagt, das Lykke-Crowdfunding ist sowieso anders. Wobei ich immer mal darüber nachdenke, ob BnktotheFuture nicht eine ziemlich perfekte Plattform für Lykke wäre, v.a. wenn es um solche eher langfristig orientierten Sachen geht. |
|
|
|
I would also like to know where we should keep these.........i have 700 from the ico wherever those are...i dont even know how to get them back...and 2700 on an exchange.....where is the best place to put them if im holding till factom hits around 30? Does anyone else here think 30 is possible in a couple years?.........i really like this coin and dont hear much about it.....I have a similar $ amount of monero but if I was going to bet I would say factom hits 30 before monero hits 100..........have similar amount of game credits and that one feels like it may beat them all.....have similar amount of ripple and seems like that will be big but of all the coins i have that is the only one that has done absolutely nothing....can u imagine working there....going home to your wife for the last three years....every day she sais" hey i heard eth doubled today...what did XRP do? or Hey i heard monero went from $1 to $3 today...what did xrp do?.........i bet there have been some lost marriages there......also have a lot of dash but no idea if thats gonna keep going.......i think factom and game credits have the most upside.....but i bought 100 decred at a buck,,then heard charlie lee talking about it so i just bought more at 2.50 but raelly have no idea.......i am excited about SC....i have a lot of storj but then read about sc and they seem to say they can do it cheaper? To sum up I guess im saying, where should i put my factom coins....and what coin are you guys the most excited about from today on....factom? or something else
If you are invested for longterm you can just wait. Once M2 plus Factom-Wallet run stable you can use that to "unfreeze" the ICO-Factoids. I doubt that Exodus will implement that feature. But they'll make it (most likely) possible to import private keys. And yes, I believe $30 is possible. Not soon, but I would make a bet that we'll see it sometime in the next 24 months. |
|
|
|
Auf der Seite steht 20% discount. Aber welchen Preis legen Sie zugrunde, wenn es doch schon auf der Börse zu handeln gibt? Nicht das sowas wie bei Synereo passiert...
Der zugrunde liegende Preis ist 0.05 CHF. Das war der Preis des letzten ICO's und kurz vor diesem Crowdfunding lag er auf der Börse etwas darüber. Ich glaube nicht, dass Lykke ein Synereo-Szenario erleben wird, aus zwei Gründen: 1. Es gab bei Synereo meines Wissens ja Probleme im Team. Ich habe mir das nicht genauer angesehen, aber ein Hauptmitglied ist ausgeschieden und das lief nicht besonders harmonisch, hat den Kurs jedenfalls beeinflusst. 2. Wichtiger: Wie in meinem vorherigen Post beschrieben verkauft Lykke nicht direkt LKK, sondern eine Art "1-Jahres-Verträge" - LKK-Futures sozusagen.
Noch mal als "praktisches Szenario": Wenn Du Dich entscheiden würdest z.B. 10k "1YLKK" zu kaufen, würdest Du umgerechnet 400 CHF bezahlen und nach Ende des ICO's würden Dir diese Token gutgeschrieben. Dann hättest Du die Wahl zwischen zwei weiteren Szenarien: a) Du könntest diese Token auf der Börse handeln b) Du kannst den Vertrag sozusagen aktivieren und ab dem Tag an dem Du das tust, ist es als ob Du LKK für mindestens 365 Tage hältst, bzw. werden Dir, nach Ablauf der 365 Tage, die normalen LKK-Shares 1:1 gutgeschrieben. Sollte der LKK-Kurs also in einem Jahr 50% über dem heutigen Kurs stehen, wäre Dein Profit 50% plus Discount, also ca. 70%. Sollte der Kurs bis in einem Jahr auf 0.04 CHF fallen - wäre es ein Null-Summenspiel. Sollte der Kurs 50% fallen - wäre der Kursverlust "nur" ca. 30% etc. Es ist also vor allem für langfristig orientierte Investoren interessant.
Und ja, es gibt ein paar die LKK verkaufen um das Geld in die 1YForwards zu stecken, was man hier sehen kann (Dollar-Kurs):  Aber letztlich kann man davon ausgehen, dass es beiden Kursen helfen wird. Wirklich Sinn macht es dann in Kombination mit Margin-Trading, was schon sehr bald möglich sein wird.
Ich muss mich da ehrlich gesagt selbst noch etwas reindenken, weil ich mich bisher nie mit solchen Finanzinstrumenten befasst habe. Ich habe auch immer die Finger von Margin-Trading etc. gelassen. Aber es wird wirklich interessant werden wie sich der 1YForwardLKK-Kurs entwickeln wird und er wird natürlich auch sehr aufschlussreich darüber sein, wie Investoren Lykke langfristig einschätzen usw. Übrigens ist das derzeitige Crowdfunding auch als eine Art Testlauf gedacht und wurde daher auch vorher nicht langfristig angekündigt oder großartig Marketing dafür gemacht. Es geht zwar durchaus um Finanzierung aber eben auch darum herauszufinden wie potentielle Investoren darauf reagieren. |
|
|
|
Lykke geht in eine neue Finanzierungs-Runde die während der Lykke-Konferenz in Zürich angekündigt wurde. Ein Video davon gibts hier: Lykke Conference at the Labor Bar in Zurich Switzerland Lykke Conference at the Labor Bar in Zurich SwitzerlandDer Sound is etwas leise, eine bessere Version wird folgen. Wer Interesse am ICO hat, die nötigen Infos auf englisch sind diese: The Lykke Times | Special Edition: 1-year Lykke forward offering
Lykke Develops 1-year Forward Offering for Cryptocurrency Market
Fact Sheet
Investor Deck
ICO-Seite Kurz als Erklärung, denn dieses ICO ist ungewöhnlich: Dieser 1-year-LKK-forward-token entspricht einem handelbaren Vertrag. In der Praxis funktioniert das so: Angenommen jemand möchte grundlegend LKK-Shares kaufen, kann er das natürlich wie immer auf der Lykke-Plattform machen. 100 LKK entsprechen 1 Aktie. Es ist mit diesem neuen 1YLKK aber auch möglich preiswerter zu kaufen (0.04 CHF), während die Umwandlung in "echte LKK" erst in einem Jahr stattfindet. Aber: Dieser 1YLKK-token entspricht wie gesagt einem Vertrag, und sofort nach Ende des ICO's können diese 1YLKK ebenfalls als Verträge gehandelt werden, bis ein Investor sich dazu entscheidet den 365-Tage-Ablauf zu triggern, womit der Vertrag dann gültig wird und 365 Tage später erfolgt dann der Swap. Es handelt sich dabei also um LKK-Futures und es wird interessant sein inwiefern sie gehandelt werden, zu welchem Preis, und wie viele sich wann entscheiden den Trigger zu drücken und damit den 365-Tages-Ablauf zu starten. Wobei ich annehme das die meisten die ins ICO kaufen das ziemlich schnell machen werden, weil es eben v.a. für jene die langfristig orientiert sind eine gute Möglichkeit ist sich preiswerter einzukaufen. Wer Fragen hat - immer her damit. Ich habe selbst erst ne Weile gebraucht bis ich das Prinzip verstanden habe. ;-) |
|
|
|
OP said that 100 LYKKE is entitled to 1 share.
The question is: how can I benefits this 1 share?
They will distribute the dividends to shareholders, but this token is not very legal, because shares can't be existed in token/coin form. Therefore it is still in grey area, they can refuse to pay ua the dividends. It is legal and Lykke is also not the only company that gives out shares on the blockchain and makes it possible to exchange shares over the blockchain and you'll see that it will be common in future to do that. The ownership is more direct and faster as if you buy shares how it's still typical yet. Regarding dividends: Shareholders have voting rights. At the same time: The Lykke-team and the company has a majority of shares, so it would be theoretically possible to vote how they want it and it would be legal. But: It also wouldn't be smart to ignore the opinions of the community-shareholders. Lykke will pay dividends once the company is stable running and profitable and once it's not necessary to re-invest profits into Lykke itself. There is no conflict of interest between Lykke as a company and those who run it and the community-shareholders. What's best for Lykke is best for everybody. And those who run Lykke at the "top", the people who make the decision (like Richard Olsen and Sergey Ivliev but also others of course) how to build the platform, how to invest money etc., are very open for all kinds of feedback and they will always include public opinions, suggestions and critique in their decisions because they know it's the smartest way to bring Lykke to success. |
|
|
|
tempus, can you confirm that these 50m coins are not new issues and are instead coming out of the company's own longstanding LKK holdings?
Yes! The company sells shares that already exist - the total supply doesn't increase. |
|
|
|
Kind of funny is, that some are critical that the supply is not already more distributed and others are critical about it when there is more on the free market. ;-)
There's nothing funny about being diluted out of an investment. First of all: That are no new issued shares! They already exist. But please tell me what would be the best-case-scenario in your opinion. Why I ask is this: Lykke is a really huge project and a company which employs about 30 people (I'm not even sure about the exact number). And we are not talking about Script-Kiddies here or Crypto-Guys like me but about people with huge expertise in a lot of different areas (the tech, finance, risk management, etc.). Additionally: Lykke has costs because the goal is to get licenses everywhere and that's not cheap. That said: Out of your own perspective as a shareholder it would not only be paradox but under the line simply not rational, if you would want them to stop all that because no new shares should reach the market. But, my question was serious. I would like to know what you (or others) believe would be best. It should be considered that this is no "shitcoin" or "take-the-ICO-Money-and-run-Project" or one of those projects that would be good if they wouldn't be so damn unprofessional on the business side. |
|
|
|
Hello op!
I had already a lykke wallet. How to start here ? And what is the difference between bitcoin wallet address and colored bitcoin address?
If you want to buy into the ICO and you already have downloaded the Lykke-App you just need to go on this site: https://forward.lykke.com and to fill out the form. After that you'll receive a mail from Lykke. About the difference between Bitcoin and Colored Coins: We all know Bitcoin, right? Colored Coins are fractions of Bitcoin, run on the Bitcoin-Blockchain by the same principle, but they can represent other kinds of values. Lykke-Shares for example or other Crypto-tokens or even tokens that are pegged to Fiat, like "1-Dollar-colored-coin". If you want to know more about it, here are good explanations: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Colored_Coinshttp://coloredcoins.org/learn/# |
|
|
|
50,000,000 new coins on the market? Seriously?
I understand that it's not easy to understand. Important to read is this: https://forward.lykke.com/files/Fact_sheet_2017.pdfBut even if it's not about more LKK on the market now, it's of course selling LKK-shares as forwards. Kind of funny is, that some are critical that the supply is not already more distributed and others are critical about it when there is more on the free market. ;-) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
