It makes sense to start on all exchanges at the same time or at least not on a small exchange first, because what usually happens to tokens that are listed on small exchanges first and only and don't get on big exchanges quickly: They drop with low volume because of a lack of liquidity. You can imagine it this way: It's normal that at least some ICO-Investors sell (impatience etc.). If there is not enough attention and liquidity to catch that even a few guys selling can push the price down significantly.

And it's not just about liquidity, but also about the psychologics. A big exchange brings some attention, has a PR-effect, and that leads into something like a "feedback-system". Investors are more optimistic and more likely not to sell or at least not below ICO-price. Potential buyers are more likely to pay attention.

The most actual infos are not really infos, but interesting:

It's said on Telegram: Exchange listing after the AMA and the AMA will be this week. If asked for an exact date for the AMA the answer is:
"There is no exact date as of this moment. We will provide more information this week. Thank you for your patience."

There will also be their Barbecue on Wednesday in Frankfurt (ICO-participants are invited) which was announced right after they showed up again after their Fake-Exit-Scam.


The pressuring topics are:

1) Something went wrong with the token distribution. Some Investors obviously got significant more because of double-transactions (or even triple or whatever). For more infos they again point on the coming AMA and obviously it's a topic they would like to hide because they've burried that info on reddit while tried not to talk about it on platforms with more attention and activity.

2) It was said exchange listing would be end of April or early May. Obviously that didn't happen, for more infos... AMA


So, let's try it with some logical scenarios to think about what they eventually communicate without saying anything at all:


First: If they would plan to do the AMA today or tomorrow they would know that already and there wouldn't be any reason not to communicate it. Actually it would likely to be the opposite. Especially in the current heated up situation it would be smart to get all positive infos out as soon as possible, simply to cool down the mood and to avoid a shitshow during their real meeting on Wednesday/Barbecue. That they don't give an exact date for the AMA could mean: They don't know it yet themselves. That would be a bit odd, because an AMA is something that is 100% under their own control. So why not give an exact date already? Maybe: They are waiting for something that didn't happen yet. Could be that there are more uncertainties about the exchange situation or/and that they still didn't figure out a good way how to handle the false transactions or something else.

Again: It would be rational to come up with something positive before (and especially because of) the Barbecue.


What would be a nice twist: If they do the AMA during the Barbecue-meeting. Actually that would be a perfect scenario: A real meeting with Community-Members and a Live-Show on YouTube for those who can not attend personally for example. A team that would have good news would probably do something like that, also because it's safe to say that questions will come anyway. Maybe they think about such a possibility, but if - they're uncertain. Otherwise they would have announced it already. That's why I don't believe they'll do that.

Actually I believe that they are scared about the Barbecue and would like to call it off. They've announced that with some naivety before they knew how bad the feedback on their PR-Stunt would be and before they knew that they would do additional mistakes (erroneous SVD-transactions). And the exchange situation is also not solved yet. Probably they are concerned about the possibility that some who may show up there won't come with "party-mood" but more with a "let's roast Savedroid - Intention". That's why I'm surprised even more why they seem not to be able to come up with positive infos before.


Under the line it's not likely that the AMA will be today or tomorrow or Wednesday. My guess is: After the Barbecue - end of the week. If it should turn out to be that way it wouldn't be a good sign in my opinion, because again: It would be stupid to hold back good news if there are good news. My impression is more the opposite. They play on time because there are no good news.


At least the situation is not boring at all...

When exchange
Which exchange
When moon
When lambo ;-)


______________________

Edit: They've just announced that the AMA will be tomorrow:

https://twitter.com/savedroidAG/status/993424202458894337

Hi factoo3!

You know me because of my rants against Neucoin? ;-)

Regarding your questions: No, I don't believe that the inflation that starts with M3 will have much if any negative effect on the price, because 1) in comparison to many other projects the inflation rate is not that high. 2) M3 is a big step and progress in the Factom-history and a base for much more. 

I should say that I'm not so good informed anymore like I was in 2016 etc. because I didn't have that much time. But my view on Factom didn't change. I still see this project as one of the best thought out and most practicable use-cases in the whole space and I have trust in the team behind. Many are probably a bit disappointed because they hoped for higher price steps and bigger announcements (partnerships) and that is understandable. But my perspective on this is different because the comparison to other projects that have times of huge hypes can be very misleading. It needs a second look on the reasons why projects and their token price hyped. Usually that is not because of real usage and fundamental progress. It really is more about hype. People buy what they believe others will buy, so they care most about those projects that manage to get a lot of attention IN Crypto. Factom didn't even try to hype in Crypto. Ethereum as example: The number one usecase in 2017 was about ERC20-ICO's and a huge majority of those projects on Ethereum will probably fail. Ethereum itself has problems when it's about scalability - their number 2 Cryptokittie-Use-case made that even more obvious.

What I mean by that: The Factom-guys didn't deliver any fancy stuff and they didn't do any marketing but they've worked on scalability and decentralization and also security is very strong - all of the most important aspects of Blockchain-Development and I have no doubt, that will have impact and will bring real usage. The price will react on partnerships and exchange listings etc. and M3 is the base for that. Even better exchange listings could come in combination with real usage, because exchanges could use Factom to make the own service more trustworthy.

What I find fascinating are all the paradoxes. A lot of what usual Crypto-Guys recognize as weaknesses are strengths in my opinion. The usecase for example. It's kind of simple, doesn't get that much attention like "smart contracts" or "ICO-platform" or whatever. But: It makes everything possible. Everything can be built on Factom and because of their economical model with two tokens, while the "entry-token" is no Cryptocurrency and prices can be fix and calculable, the barriers to use it are much lower compared to other projects.


What I believe is the number 1 question when we focus on the price of the token: Partnerships. It seems that they have several candidates but that is all under NDA. That there wasn't an announcement yet is not a negative sign in my opinion because until now it's only rational to consider all of that as tests. But I would be very surprised if there wouldn't be some big announcements in the coming months.

Mir scheint das sie zumindest nicht zum Team gehören und daher keine konkreten Informationen haben. Es wirkt, als ob sie ne Art Liste der meist gestellten Fragen plus "Antworten" haben (in Anführungsstrichen weil es nicht wirklich informative Antworten sind). Was ich am interessantesten finde: Da sind welche bei die weder englisch noch deutsch gut zu beherrschen scheinen.

Savedroid hat nicht verstanden wie bedeutend gute Kommunikation ist, was das für einen Unterschied machen könnte. Alleine die Formulierungen sind schon ziemlich unklug und die Roboter-Art wie die Antworten gepostet werden macht viele eher noch ärgerlicher.

NEO continues decentralization process: 'Received many interested parties'

In the process of the decentralization of the NEO blockchain, Fenbushi Capital prepared their consensus node in April and is now up and running on the TestNet, according to the latest NEO Global Development Monthly Report just published.

(...)

https://www.chepicap.com/en/news/82/neo-continues-decentralization-process-received-many-interested-parties-.html

Factom launches Milestone 3: Fully Autonomous Protocol

By Courtney Roberts – Digital Communications Manager

Austin, TX (May 3, 2018) - Factom has been on a four year journey. A journey of discovery, challenges and monumental innovation. These years of work have culminated into the third and final milestone of the Factom Protocol, a fully distributed and autonomous blockchain protocol without any central control. 

This is the third and final milestone for the Factom Blockchain Protocol as outlined in the white paper. Using a distributed consensus model that combines elements of proof of stake, proof of usage and additional anchoring to provide proof of work. The Factom network is able to balance power within the system, disallowing people to gain 51% of power to then control the network. Factom began with the idea that unchangeable data and audit trails are the foundation for supporting the enterprise markets in the use of Blockchain technology.

The "Federated" version of the Factom network (previously known as "M2") was the second major version of the Factom open source software. The first version Factom "Genesis" has been live over 2 years since September 1, 2015. The Genesis version bootstrapped the Factom network with 1 Federated Server providing the anchors into Bitcoin, and anyone could run a node.

“I really need sleep,” said Paul Snow, CEO and Chief Architect of Factom. “Our team of developers have been working around the clock to make M3 happen and we’re thrilled M3 is finally a reality.”

M3 includes several protocol changes and a networking change. The full Factom Governance document can be found here.

About Factom, Inc.

Factom, Inc. is an Austin-based blockchain technology company that is on a mission to provide blockchain data provenance for complex industries. Factom specializes in building scalable blockchain technology to handle complex enterprise data and volume. With clients such as the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Factom is the recognized leader in providing blockchain solutions in order to preserve, ensure and validate digital assets. For information, please visit factom.com.

https://www.factom.com/blog/factom-launches-milestone-3-fully-autonomous-protocol

It always was not only a shitcoin but a scam. And I'm cautious with such a word but in this case the whole setup is a fraud. 99.9% premine, big promises and hype... It's really a shame that people bought into this, even if not that many.

No. The question was asked on Reddit and even Paul Snow doesn't understand it. He said:

Poloniex has disabled FCT, and put up that notice. There is no known issue on the protocol side that is blocking them.
https://www.reddit.com/r/factom/comments/8fsvpd/whats_up_with_poloniex_on_frequent_maintenance/


Would be good if many open a support ticket. Actually I'm surprised that it's not more of a topic. I personally don't use Polo anymore because I don't trust them anymore.

Ja, das sehe ich genauso. Deine Zahlen werden zwar nicht total korrekt sein, was ich keineswegs kritisch meine weil das ja kaum möglich ist, aber Aufklärung zu leisten wäre ja eh deren Job. Der Punkt für mich ist: Ich sehe so oder so wenig Gründe denen irgendetwas zu glauben. Damit will ich nicht sagen das sie offensiv bei allem lügen. Aber sie verhalten sich eben auch nicht wirklich aufrichtig. Überall scheint es kleine oder auch größere Haken zu geben.

Wie Du selbst sagst:


Die Art wie sie kommunizieren ist ja extrem unklug. Im Grunde ist es nur eine Reaktion um sagen zu können das sie es nicht total verschweigen. Das ginge eh nicht weil die Katze ja aus dem Sack ist. Die Art wie sie kommunizieren ist hingegen sehr durchschaubar. Wenn man mögliche Alternativen durchdenkt und das mit deren "Ansatz" vergleicht wird klar was ich meine, v.a. wenn man den letzten Post nimmt:

Jemand fragt "So minting has been stopped?"

Savedroid-Account: "No it's still ongoing, this is just a public information about the rumours in the community"

Gerüchte in der Community. Wo findet man diese "Gerüchte"? Vor allem in diesem Thread. Wo wird darauf geantwortet? Da wo Savedroid am wenigsten Aufmerksamkeit bekommt, wo es kaum Aktivität gibt: Reddit. Wie wird darauf geantwortet? Eigentlich gar nicht.

Insofern ist das ne Alibi-Aktion, das Gegenteil von Transparenz. Im Grunde ist es wirklich lächerlich was die abziehen. Es scheint das die nicht eine Person haben die weiß wie man Dinge kommuniziert.

There is an unbelievable high number of projects who aim to deliver exactly that. The biggest task is to find a good solution between easy-to-use and high-security. It's the latter that concerns me when it's about Savedroid (actually it doesn't concern me personally because I won't use it). Thing is: The business-model of Savedroid was to help people putting money aside. In the Fiat-world it doesn't matter so much if you have money on this or that bank-account. But translated into Crypto there are several differences and difficulties:

1) Experienced Crypto-Users wouldn't ever store Crypto-Assets as savings in an online environment. That would be similar to having it on an exchange-account

2) It's the other way around: Crypto-Assets "should" be stored in a cold fashion what means: Not just should never ever anybody else have control over the own private keys but in best case (most secure) those PK's shouldn't touch an online device until the user wants to transact

3) If I get it right: Savedroid will have control over the private keys and of course it's not a cold-storage-service

4) The Savedroid-Guys are not experienced in Crypto themselves

5) Under the line: Users will have to pay fees to put money aside (doesn't make that much sense) and to give away control about it. Very true is this saying in Crypto: Who has control over the private keys owns the money.

6) Competitors are better and there are many.


Under the line there is not much incentive to use Savedroid at all, and even if: It's unlikely that they'll be superior to projects who basically do the same, but without all the fancy stuff (unnecessary transactions whenever trump tweets etc.) and focused on what matters: Security and easy to use. Actually I don't even get how Savedroid was able to market themselves as "we want to simplify" because that is not what they do. Their own token is not necessary but adds complexity. All the "AI-transactions" (if....happens...transact...amount x to..) add complexity and are not necessary. Question really is what is left?


And what already is obvious, even if we don't think about their silly PR-Stunt anymore. They are not ready for Crypto yet, overwhelmed by the tech and communication, don't know how to build and treat their own community etc. Just one example: This is on reddit today:

Currently investigating a minting issue, relevant for <1% of all tokens. Will announce details and solution in the next AMA before trading start.
https://www.reddit.com/r/savedroid_ico/comments/8goxr6/currently_investigating_a_minting_issue_relevant/

That seems to be all what they are saying about that subject and it's a weird choice to put that on reddit which is a desert for the project - near to zero activity, while not saying it anywhere else I would know of. But they used a megaphone to demand the whole space to be more transparent and that it would need higher ICO-Standards etc. I don't see any sign that they meet any of that themselves.

Die Transaktions-Probleme betreffend fangen sie an zumindest ein klitzekleines bisschen zu kommunizieren:
https://www.reddit.com/r/savedroid_ico/comments/8goxr6/currently_investigating_a_minting_issue_relevant/

Ja, weil ich glücklicherweise nicht investiert bin.

Okay, der war böse... aber zumindest aufrichtig ;-)

Falls die Zahl der Wahrheit nahe kommt oder sogar zu niedrig angesetzt sein sollte ginge es dann aber um mehr als 1%.

Total Supply: 10,000,000,000 SVD --> 100 %

Fehl-Transaktionen: 128,000,000 SVD --> 1,28%

Das ICO hat für 6 Millionen SVD bzw. 60% des Total meines Wissens nach etwa 40 Millionen EUR eingebracht. Total Supply/100% = 66 Millionen EUR

1,28% wären dann ca. 850.000 EUR. Wenn es noch mehr wäre, wäre dann bald die Millionen-Market geknackt. In Dollar gerechnet wäre das schon der Fall.

Sie sollten auf jeden Fall transparent sein, was die Zahlen selbst betrifft und wie sie vorhaben damit umzugehen.

Interessant, falls die grundlegenden Rückschlüsse korrekt sind. Erstens wäre damit die "Lösung-durch-Inflationierung" vom Tisch, da nicht alle Adressen den gleichen Faktor haben. Man kann schlecht alles mit z.B. 3 multiplizieren wenn einige nur 2 mal mehr, wieder andere sogar 5 mal mehr haben.

Und, da sie offenbar weiter auszahlen, scheint eine elegantere Lösung insgesamt vom Tisch zu sein. Sieht aus als ob sie es einfach so hinnehmen, möglicherweise weil das am wenigsten Aufmerksamkeit erzeugt. Würden sie den gesamten Token neu auflegen wäre das natürlich ne größere Meldung. Vielleicht sind sie mit jenen in Kontakt die mehr bekommen haben und versuchen den Schaden zu begrenzen. Ist aber zu bezweifeln das sie alles zurückbekommen.

Problem wäre so oder so: Inflationierung für den Markt. Was ich damit meine ist: Man kann natürlich sagen das es um relativ wenig Supply geht, tendenziell wohl weniger als 1%. Aber auch 0.5% wären immer noch ca. $250.000 und dieses "mehr" würde wohl zum großen Teil an Tag 1 auf den Börsen verkauft. Unter normalen Umständen wäre das sicherlich zu verkraften, aber im Kontext der Gesamtsituation und der aufgeheizten Stimmung weil bisher eigentlich gar nichts gut läuft...

Unabhängig vom momentanen Thema: Sie machen die Kommunikation betreffend echt krasse Fehler, u.a. auch sehr aufschlussreiche Fehler. Wenn man sich ihren Blog anschaut - https://medium.com/@ico_8796

Auffällig sind mehrere Dinge:

- Während des ICO's waren sie extrem aktiv und haben genau mit dem ICO aufgehört. Der letzte Artikel ist vom 9. März, vorher teilweise mehrere Artikel pro Tag.

- Unabhängig vom PR-Stunt wäre der Blog das simpelste Mittel um mit der Kommunikation in Kontakt zu bleiben. Videos werden vollkommen überschätzt, v.a. überlange AMA's. Außerdem können geschriebene Artikel besser auf den Punkt gebracht werden und dann zitiert und spezielle Aussagen von Community-Mitgliedern weiterverbreitet werden

- Am auffälligsten finde ich: Sie haben mit ihrem Fake-Exit-Scam so einen Wirbel verursacht und sind dann als vermeintliche Streiter für höhere Standards (inklusive mehr Transparenz) wieder aufgetaucht. Das Ding ging nach hinten los und noch immer werden Artikel verbreitet die Savedroid unter Scam laufen haben.
Und das Verrückte hier ist: Sie haben nicht mal nen offizielles Statement herausgegeben. Nur das Video. Anders gesagt: Der Blog sagt entweder und je nach Informations-Stand "jep, die sind offenbar echt abgehauen", oder "aha, die haben ihr ICO gehyped und danach kam im Grunde nix mehr - außer unnötiger Mist", oder mindestens "die haben null Kommunikations-Strategie".

Die hätten alle Kommunikations-Arten und Kanäle nutzen müssen und das logischerweise fortlaufend, auch um positive News zu erzeugen. Und sie könnten auf alle drängenden und sich wiederholenden Fragen mit nem Artikel reagieren.

Und ich glaube, dass das nicht nur verfehlte Kommunikation ist. Auf mich wirkt das alles wie Überforderung.

Right, plus: Zero regulatory barriers because no client needs to touch Crypto at all.

Bei 35k Investoren:

0,1% = 35 Personen
0,5% = 175 Personen

Insofern... das kann man dann wohl kaum persönlich regeln. Wüsste gerne wie das passiert ist, wenn es wirklich passiert ist.

Ja, das könnte wirklich nach hinten losgehen. Auch der zweistellige Satoshi-Bereich ist zu extrem m.A.n.. Worst case wäre: Zuerst fallender Preis, dann steigender BTC, dazu noch tendenziell fehlende Liquidität (falls keine größere Börse). Dann hat man schnell Preisschwankungen von 30% pro Tag.

Okay, dann ist die Frage wie gravierend Fehler sind. Falls es sich z.B. nur um drei Personen handelt die mehr bekommen haben ist das vielleicht persönlich regelbar. Falls deutlich mehr, wäre es schwierig.