 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2018-264Washington D.C., Nov. 16, 2018 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced settled charges against two companies that sold digital tokens in initial coin offerings (ICOs). These are the Commission’s first cases imposing civil penalties solely for ICO securities offering registration violations. Both companies have agreed to return funds to harmed investors, register the tokens as securities, file periodic reports with the Commission, and pay penalties.... Hello you cunts. long time no see. ICOs are starting to get rekt by the SEC Hope Jani has enough money stashed for refunds.  SEC can go fuck itself. Doesn't apply to this project. Only US start-ups and investors should be concerned. |
|
|
|
Can anybody explain what Jani meant here?
"Currently ICNP’s assets represents approximately 45% of ICONOMI’s total assets. This value is embedded in the ICN tokens."
Iconomi has assets for daily operations, and assets under management in ICNP. After the ICO, approximately 60% of ICO money was set for platform use (operational costs) and the rest seeded ICNP Daparski thanks. So if someone owns lets say 1% of all ICN tokens he also owns 1% of all ICNP assets, does this means so? Yep. Here's a link to May AMA answer. |
|
|
|
Any info when the quarterly report will be availble?
Usually reports are to be published within a month. So I would expect it mid to late July. |
|
|
|
The price currently is really high and I think is just a pump rather the real value of ICN.
With all those great projects Iconomi invested in... if at least some of them deliver a working product, ICNP alone can have a billion market cap. “If you wait by the river long enough, the bodies of your enemies will float by.”
― Sun Tzu |
|
|
|
People talk about buying lambos, quitting their jobs, buying 15 houses to live on 150k yearly on rental fees, and I talk about paying off my father's current mortgage (7 more years to go to finish that up under normal circumstances), and possibly buy a house for myself, etc and etc. But I ask the following questions specially for those that live in the USA, HOW, just HOW are you going to withdraw enough of these in order to make your dreams come true without facing the most probable risk of getting your bank account closed?
I know all about using Credit Unions instead of regular banks such as Chase, BoA, Wells Fargo, etc... But there are more problems:
I have been researching online and have discovered people complaining that Coinbase has been closing their account the minute the user deposits a large balance of Bitcoin in it, and by large I am referring over $10,000 worth of Bitcoins but not precisely exactly, can be more or less than this amount depending on the luck of the user and Coinbase is the only highly verified method that I have in order to sell Bitcoins to USD and send it to my bank which is a Credit Union by the way. Last year I did a test to make sure Coinbase did honor their withdrawal, I bought 1 BTC for like $500 and then a week later or two I sold the same BTC back to my bank account, sure I incurred some loss, the price had gone to $450 but I was interested in making sure Coinbase "payed" and sure about 4 days or so later those $450 made it to my bank checking account. But that was a $450 withdrawal, I have yet to perform the maximum daily $10,000 withdrawal.
So with all that said, I would like to hear your review of Coinbase, have you as a US user, been able to withdraw a large amount into your bank account without any problems? maybe those users that I read about attempted to cash out Bitcoins that were 'tainted' up to a certain degree? Meaning Bitcoins sent to them by other users such as selling stuff publicly online and accepting Bitcoins as payment from random online strangers, but I do none of that, my Bitcoins in my CB account always come from my own pockets or from the exchanges when I trade my own Bitcoins to partake into ICO's such as this one.
The other problem I have been reading is that some users are getting their Credit Unions closed for dealing with Bitcoins, so it looks like that not even the use of a Credit Union can give you the assurance to be able to withdraw your Bitcoins trouble free. So the day that I decide to withdraw enough to start making my dreams and objectives a reality, what options do I have? I feel like I am trapped in my choices, specially as a New Yorker, I am further limited to exchanges that do have a bit license such as Coinbase, bitstamp, possibly Gemini, bitrrex (can't sell to bank account there, just alts), etc and if push comes to shove I have contemplated moving to New Jersey,just 10 miles away from my current residence (my parents house) to become a permanent NJ resident that way all Ney York restrictions are gone but that would take time over 7 mo the of living in NJ before I can qualify as a "permanent ent resident" on that state other options: Pennsylvania.
So let's say you were to decide to buy a lambo when the price hits like $30+ ICN, how exactly you will get enough of the money out without getting something frozen or closed?
By the way I have a little bit more than 50,000 ICN got in with over $68xx worth of Bitcoins and now it's worth approx a little bit more than $250,000 enough to max out a single checking account in terms of FDIC insurance not saying that I plan to cash out anytime soon, I plan to HOLD until price reaches way higher, I believe that price can go higher that $50+ that burn program in combination with FOMO can make that a reality, don't be surprised if we see ICN tying ETH $ wise. For me, for every $20 ICN goes up in price, it's a million dollars, so if ICN gets to $350 I would have 18 million dollars.
And finally, the last problem I would like to take: some people are having issues sending ICN to exchanges or a different wallet because of some problem with Ethereum? It's being a hit or miss for them. What exactly is going on with Ethereum? You know that a price of $350, or even a price of $1000 is meaningless if we cannot move our tokens from our Ethereum wallets, that is the problem and what's been done as a resolution to fix this?
That's a really good question. Would love to see some thoughts and discussion on this. I'm not from US, neither have any experience with Coinbase. However the issue applies to many jurisdictions and banks. As I see this, to unfreeze you b/a you have to provide some proof of origin of funds. But when this is done you are charged with tax by IRS in full. Not really an option to give away a hefty share of your profit. One way around this could be setting up an entity somewhere in Isle of Man, for example, a jurisdiction that has no CGT. Then you just open a business account with a crypto-exchange and you're good to go. If the amount isn't worth the effort - there are some options like bitcoin debit cards etc. Token card, for example, when launched, could become a good solution - you could store all you funds in smart contracts (probably even a token tied to USD to avoid exchange risks) and never disclose all your holdings to a third party. It might be restricted to US citizens, however... but there should be some ways around this too  |
|
|
|
Hi eliess. You can check Etherscan if your transaction got confirmed. Currently it is quite heavy traffic on the eth network. https://etherscan.io/token/ICONOMIIf you can not find your transaction just enter your txhash in the search. Yeah, seems like Status ICO flooded the network.. waiting about an hour for my ETH transfer - not even on blockchain yet |
|
|
|
Iconomi is not as potentially decoupled from crypto as Factom. Factom value is based on protocol use by actual clients (sky is the limit if they capture even a small share in say the mortgage market), Iconomi derives its value from how well crypto is doing and with the growing risk of a bubble collapse, that's not something you want all your money in.
You aren't being objective here. You should never want all your money in one project. Iconomi removes barriers to invest in crypto market. And it also is to be used by real clients including those unfamiliar with crypto. Capture even a fraction of this market and even sky isn't the limit. Whether you mix it with mortgage-backed securities or anything else is up to you. |
|
|
|
Ok, $1m trade volume is generous, but a good round number...so $100k in buy back everyday on top of the normal amount, so like you said, a 20% increase in demand. A 20% increase in demand would result in a higher magnitude change in the actual price of the token, not just a 20%. This would result in some serious upward momentum based on economic theory assuming a normal elasticity...ICN's supply is inelastic since quantity is fixed (BUT quantity decreases as buybacks occur). There is multiple factors occurring where these buybacks could get out of hand quickly. Here is a perfectly inelastic supply line. Note Do moving to D1 and how Po goes to P1: https://econmicro.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/perfectly-inelastic-supply-in-market-period1.jpgAnd here is a "normal" supply (fiat currency): https://www.ezyeducation.co.uk/images/Lexicon_Images/supply_cuve_shifts.pngNOW decrease the supply and your price change is even greater... SO, looking at the first graph, move S to the left (call is S'). You'll now be let with a new P- price (call it P2),which will be even higher than P1 since the equilibrium will be where D1 and S' theoretically cross. There are 3 factors causing the magnitude of change to be more than 20% (increase in demand, decrease in supply, and the fact supply is inelastic). I'm not really offering a solution, just noting the problem. We are talking about different things - I was trying to say that limit orders during buybacks will be filled and there is no need to buy at market price. You say 20% increase in demand will cause disproportionate increase in price. Sure, I agree. However, markets are slightly more complicated than what your drawings show.  In the short run supply curve heavily depends on subjective beliefs and can wobble frequently. Overall the supply curve of ICN looks something like this and shifts back with every burn. |
|
|
|
What do you think of his comment? But one thing is for sure, if Iconomi doesn't start market buying with their profits, they will quickly have $millions worth of assets backed up sitting in buy orders on exchanges. For example, there is only around $1,000,000 worth of ICN for sell on Kraken at any given day, but the ICNP is already sitting on a potential $9 million worth of buybacks if they break even on all sold investments. If they don't use some to market buy and move the price, nobody would ever sell.
Seems pretty valid at first, but I still think market orders are only good in short-term and will eventually do more harm than good. Let's try to analyse this: For the sake of simplicity assume $1m daily trading volume split half and half between "buys" and "sells" Also assume Iconomi makes $9m in profits to distribute each quarter (90 days) So about $100k worth of buybacks every day. That meets about 20% of all "sells". Shouldn't be a problem really. Also, Kraken isn't the only place to trade and I think more big exchanges will list ICN eventually. What could be an issue (although not necessary) - a development of clever algorithm that would be constantly adjusting to ever-changing crypto-market conditions and placing right bids at the right time. |
|
|
|
On the liquidity fund... I suppose one advantage would be an extra place to sell, if we're still stuck on Kraken, or whatever, without causing dumps. I just thought it was an interesting addition. I don't necessarily think Iconomi should implement it.
I agree, crypto-community is indeed very irrational. Extra place to sell is always a good thing, but it must ensure that benefits (such as marketing, reputation, fees, etc.) outweigh the expenditure required to setup and upkeep this system plus any possible price discrepancy. As an amusing side note (regardless of which is right or wrong) if Iconomi's original plan was to buy straight from the market, I bet you would have said "Hey guys! Maybe Iconomi should just place support bids instead! What do you guys think?" |
|
|
|
For example, I came across this 'APX ventures', who are using a buyback system too, but their approach is different: 70% will go towards market buys on exchange
20% will go towards buy support @ 10% below market price.
10% will go towards the APX Liquidity Fund (ALF) which will held as BTC off-exchange, available for anyone to access if they wish to convert their APX for BTC without disrupting the market.
All APX acquired through this process will be verifiably burned.
Source: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByqyVzIU5PtFLXp2UGZPcUFYd1U/viewThe liquidity fund idea is interesting, but I'm mainly drawn towards the fact that they will offer market buys, as well as buy support. I'd be interested in people's thoughts on this approach - is it better or worse? Has this been discussed on the slack at all, or with the team? Such breakdown won't benefit this fund, IMO. A company should always aim to buy back its stock at the lowest possible price: 1. more shares are burned for the same amount of cash 2. solid support level below market price reduces volatility 3. it also brings stability and provides confidence 4. buying at market artificially inflates price and when buybacks are done a dump will follow. 20% won't hold that. 5. the fund ends up overpaying for its stock - which is a loss basically The "liquidity fund" is not a new concept. Again, a company is likely to end up paying more than it could have paid - BTC x-rate is still tied to the market so the price should include some premium to attract sellers. We have a "free market"-style transparent exchanges, why should we use tools from another era? Correct me if I'm wrong, let's discuss it |
|
|
|
The solution to the ICO trust/ownership problem is Aragon. We have to wait 1-2 more years for it to be ready though. The fact that ICNP put 15k ETH into Aragon suggests Iconomi also understands and is affected by the ICO trust/ownership problem. ♪♪♫ I fell into a circlejerk of fire I fell in to a circlejerk of fire steem steem steem and the payments went higher and I'm porr porr porr, circlejerk of fire, circlejerk of fire ♫♪ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GK3asGrbdU0whats that* Aragon have got some legal problems  No, that relates to our discussion with Mendeleev a couple pages back about trust, legal and ownership issues in crypto space.  |
|
|
|
Congrats!If you did not apply for beta and now granted the access,it means it is now opened for ICO investors.
I think only those ICO paericipants who keeping their ICN on ICONOMI website will get access.I invested in ICO but moved my ICN to kraken.Will I be still considered an ICO participant?Is there any way to move my ICN back to iconomi website?
It doesn't matter where you keep your ICN, if you invested during ICO you will get an access and you can move ICN back to platform if you wish. I received mine a few days ago and don't hold any on their website. The platform is great btw, everything just works as it should. There are some minor things that can be improved further though. |
|
|
|
That proves ownership of ICN. Not ownership of Iconomi. That's my whole point.
What proof of ownership would you like to see? Do you require a piece of paper written by a legal institution or what? What proves ownership of AAPL by Apple? Crypto doesn't work like that, at least yet and I'm sure you know that. Or am I wrong? What crypto token has that? As I already said, soon we'll have services like Aragon that will act as companies register and will provide all the features we are used to and even more. The token and the platform aren't the same thing, and there's nothing linking them together - other than the buybacks.
Sure these aren't the same thing. ICN is stock - platform is product or asset that contributes towards its value. But you are wrong that there is no link. - ICO was conducted on Iconomi platform. Many ICOs at that time (many are still this way) were done on the platform - it gives a number of advantages
- the platform received seed money and distributed ICN to investors to represent their share in the project - Iconomi team is in control of this money and you control your shares. Yes, these shares don't pay dividends - it's very common in the markets to do buybacks, but it doesn't make these shares less valuable. In fact it is often other way around.
- you can use Etherscan (or any other Eth chain explorer) to view this information
- Iconomi communication channels explicitly state that ICN is the token representing Iconomi stock. Yes, ICN is non-voting stock yet, like any other ERC20 token in practice - but this doesn't reduce its value much (compare GOOGL and GOOG price)
what else you require? But anybody can buy them, or create support levels. This doesn't demonstrate that your ICN token is linked to Iconomi's assets or profits, or why Iconomi's success should increase the value of ICN. The market doesn't care who is providing support levels. This works different with regular shares. With ICN, it's just a case of "here's your token. This represents Iconomi" and we just have to believe that based on... what?
First of all, this works the same way with "regular" shares. Of course anybody can buy - it's publicly traded. Iconomi uses its profits to buyback its shares - what isn't clear about that? But market cares who is providing support levels - "buy and burn" is different to "buy and sell later" - don't pretend you don't get it. With ICN, it's just a case of "here's your token. This represents Iconomi" and we just have to believe that based on... what?
If in a banana republic a Banana Corp. offered you BNNA - what would make you believe it's legit? - the answer is trust. You choose who to trust for yourself. And you don't have to believe, if you don't - just stay away from this stock or you can take the risk. High yield means high risk and often vv. and Iconomi has a pretty decent risk-reward ratio in my opinion, far better than many crypto projects out there. This is probably why Iconomi are trying to create a new use for the token. Why would they bother inventing a new use for it otherwise?
This isn't why. New use is being invented to bring more value. Anyway, unless Iconomi can solve this, I predict this outcome: ICN will become a token used to complete actions on the platform. And that will be its only value. I predicted that dividends would be scrapped, by the way. So if I'm right about this, I expect you all to kiss my sweaty feet  This prediction is worth nothing after Jani confirmed that And again the concept of value - it will bring additional value, but in no way it will be it's "only value". With statements like that you sound like a troll - a well disguised one but still. Overall, I think I've answered all your questions. Should you wish to continue discussion please attempt to answer at least one of mine and please don't make unjustified statements that you aren't able to prove or support. |
|
|
|
Edit: Oh, one last thing... can you point me to what you're referring to in the contract here: That "here" links to Etherscan where you can read the contract source code and find a proof of your stake in the company. ... I don't see any proof of anything there. What do you mean, exactly? There is a tab "Read contract" you can query your balance there to see the proof of ownership. You can also explore contract address https://etherscan.io/address/0x888666CA69E0f178DED6D75b5726Cee99A87D698No doubt everyone's perception of value is different. What I was trying to say is that every statement should be justified and backed by proof. I tried to prove the fact that Iconomi's decision to do buybacks instead of paying dividends does not adversely affect it's value or makes it unclear and in no way makes ICN as useless as and abstract MEND token. This discussion can go on for ever - must admit it is better to leave it where it is. |
|
|
|
If ICNP goes BTC->ETH->ERC20, then what is the base currency for the P/L calculation in that case?
I would assume when ERC20 profits are realised, these would be expressed in ETH because ETH was used to purchase them. If Iconomi used BTC to invest in ETH it would measure profits in BTC. But if Iconomi had no ETH and decided to invest in ERC20 token ICO that only accepts ETH, it would convert BTC to ETH then buy ERC20. So, as to my understanding, that means investing BTC in ERC20, so profits should be expressed in BTC. That's just my point of view, I might be wrong. |
|
|
|
Welshminer, the issue here is that YOU are comparing normal stocks to an Ethereum token, and my arguments are based on the fact that they are totally different. How's that for apples and dollars?
...
What you're saying works in a world where you can prove you own a share of a company, have voting rights etc. What I'm saying, or rather asking, is for proof of this same value when discussing ICN.
It's not much different - the economic principles are the same. The Value concept is the same. The key difference is how shares are registered - Companies House, Secretary of State etc. vs blockchain. ICN is registered on Ethereum chain. It guarantees that 3 something shares of Iconomi are owned by you. It's up to you whether you trust blockchain or not. Similarly it is up to you to trust Companies Register, US government, Google, Apple, Iconomi or whoever. So yeah, I can prove I own ICN.
Your response still rests on the assumption that ICN has value.
Sure it does. ICN like any other stock has intrinsic value that is subject to the value of underlying tangible and intangible assets plus subjective expected utility of the project. If it were the same, it would state that on the terminology page here.it says "More information about the ICONOMI smart contract and ERC20 compliant ICN app tokens can be found here." That "here" links to Etherscan where you can read the contract source code and find a proof of your stake in the company. Obviously it's not outlined as clear as one would wish it was - but it's just a matter of time. The team has plenty of work to do, including legal part that will make all definitions. BTW, why are you being so picky? What other crypto token has all of the above?
That is the assumption I am challenging - something which must first be proven in order to progress with your argument. And you haven't proven it.
... - and so I will dismiss that claim as nothing more than conjecture until you can prove otherwise.
I don't have to prove you that. This is how markets work (not just stocks and not just crypto) - if crypto-community decides MEND tokens are worth something and demand meets supply then MEND will have its value. Moreover, in Roman law there is such notion as presumption of innocence. Market values ICN @ $1.2 - you have declared ICN has no value - you have a burden of proof. |
|
|
|
The fact that some profits will be used to provide a support level on the market does not increase ICN's value. People wanting to possess ICN is what would increase its value.
Your statements make no sense. Profits are used to provide support level - this what makes people wanting to possess ICN, this what creates value. Otherwise it can be said that none of blue chip companies that don't pay dividends but rather do buybacks have any value whatsoever. Also what you are saying is that GOOGL is as worthless as MEND Like it or not, business and economy in general are built on trust. The majority believes ICN is the true token that represents Iconomi, not MEND or any other. I am sure that in the nearest future Iconomi will move on to Aragon network or a similar project to give token holders voting rights and transparency. We are at such an early stage of crypto-world development. Also from your statement ETH has value because ETH is required to use the platform, to pay for gas
(your other two points are the same as for ICN). So... I guess I can use Google without owning GOOGL.... Now prove me it has no value. And before you say about voting rights - one can also buy a class C GOOG. BTW, it's not quite appropriate to compare ETH to ICN. It's like comparing USD to AAPL - different asset classes with different usage and purpose. |
|
|
|
Understanding the value of any crypto coin requires some abstract knowledge of what value is. And people here are either 1. not intelligent enough to understand it, or 2. are concern trolling.
Put it this way, if Warren Buffet announced that he was going to start buying $1 billion worth of 90's beanie babies per month, 90's beanie babies would suddenly have alot more value to alot of people.
So true. Many people here just don't get basic econ. This proves the usefulness of Iconomi project though. A no-brainer - just buy ICNX/ICNP and get your $. You also have a sleek, easy and fool-proof design of the platform for this same reason. |
|
|
|
|
