[ANN] Lykke - Trade Bitcoin, Ethereum, FX and Digital Assets

[mtnsaa]

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).

[1713494632]

1713494632

[1713494632]

1713494632

[tempus]

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!". ;-)

[mtnsaa]

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.

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.

[tempus]

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.pdf

Just 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.

[franc0]

You compare ripple vs lykke. What about the similarity between bitshares and lykke?

Bitshares is a trading platform too, completely decentralized. In bitshares you can create any asset you want, BitUSD, bitEUR, BITgold, bitAppleshare, bit whatever you can think of. The only problem with bitshares is the low liquidity but that may change soon, the chart of bitshares is getting tight, I expect a bitshares pump. If bitshares suddenly becomes very liquid, what it will be of lykke?

[mummybtc]

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.

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.

Talk of greed you find most among the blockchain developers looking to exploit novice investors here with their ridiculous offering of valueless tokens, they do things they can't even think to offer to VCs to their ICO investors. There is free money in the cryptospace now thanks to the rise of Bitcoin to $1000 and they are bent on milking the money out of the system

Bank would not collapse, some would adapt to the new world the way they do with internet and other would be left behind may be acquired by blockchain companies

[freequant]

What is the purchase process for the forward? Unlike the ICO there is near zero explanation. We don't even know if the purchase will require using the Lykke wallet and what payment methods are accepted.

[bitpotter]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-vk68j7Lsw&feature=youtu.be fixed audio. more videos this week as i edit everything.

I like it! Best!

[tempus]

What is the purchase process for the forward? Unlike the ICO there is near zero explanation. We don't even know if the purchase will require using the Lykke wallet and what payment methods are accepted.

The process in short is this way: After clicking "commit" here: https://forward.lykke.com

1. A (potential) Investor gives in his infos and the amount he would like to invest, let's say in $
2. One of the infos is "EMAIL USED TO REGISTER THE LYKKE WALLET" --> so yes, it needs the Lykke-App
3. Somebody of Lykke will take contact per mail.


Currently there are only Fiat-currencies to let Lykke know how much somebody wants to invest, but if one wants to buy with Bitcoin it's also possible.

I believe the reason why it's not an automated process yet, is because the decision to do a crowdfunding open for potentially everybody was made just a short time before the Lykke-Talk in Zurich. Or with other words: It would have been not fair to offer only an opportunity only to those who were at the conference but nobody else. That's why I call it "Ninja-Crowdfunding" ;-)

But I agree, the explanations could be better and I've already let them know that some things would be good to improve.

It's not a usual crowdfunding, also no big announcement some time before in combination with more marketing efforts. Richard Olsen told me that he sees it as kind of a "test run", to find out if there is demand for this kind of financial instrument, because what can be purchased here is in fact a "contract-token" - with the feature to push the 365 trigger whenever somebody choses to do so, or even never, but to trade it as collateral for LKK once margin trading will be enabled.

[tempus]

You compare ripple vs lykke. What about the similarity between bitshares and lykke?

Bitshares is a trading platform too, completely decentralized. In bitshares you can create any asset you want, BitUSD, bitEUR, BITgold, bitAppleshare, bit whatever you can think of. The only problem with bitshares is the low liquidity but that may change soon, the chart of bitshares is getting tight, I expect a bitshares pump. If bitshares suddenly becomes very liquid, what it will be of lykke?

I can't say much about Bitshares because I only know very basic things about the project. Reason is mostly the price itself. I've seen it rising in 2014 when I was pretty new to all this (before I was focused only on Bitcoin) but since that time it seemed only to go down and it's superficial of course but I always assumed a serious reason for the downfall and the lack of adoption.

I really like the DPOS-concept but otherwise I'm not so sure if it's effective or if it's maybe too complex. What I wonder about is: If it would be something like the "best Algo", why is it not used by many others like Ethereum? I know that there are projects with similar design but still not many.

But either way it's different to Lykke. Bitshares is fully decentralized as far as I know. That has advantages of course but also some disadvantages. Lykke has decentralized settlement and a central matching engine to combine the best of both. It ensures direct ownership but also that everything is possible what is possible on high-speed exchanges. And Lykke will be much more professional than Crypto-exchanges as we know them - most likely more like Oanda.

[tempus]

But I have a question, if I have a seed to a mobile wallet, but I lost it, I can in the mobile wallet to recover seed, or generate a new one? I have not seen this feature in your wallet, maybe I'm missing anything.

Just to clarify: It's not about using the seed to recover a lost wallet but about getting a new seed, right?

The purpose of the seed is security, to make it possible that one can recover a wallet in case of loss or a damaged phone or even theft. That's why it's not possible as far as I know to get a new seed of an existing App.

What I would maybe do in such a situation is to send funds to another wallet and to make a fresh installation of the Lykke-App. But I will ask if there is a more elegant way.

[tempus]

But I have a question, if I have a seed to a mobile wallet, but I lost it, I can in the mobile wallet to recover seed, or generate a new one? I have not seen this feature in your wallet, maybe I'm missing anything.

Just to clarify: It's not about using the seed to recover a lost wallet but about getting a new seed, right?

The purpose of the seed is security, to make it possible that one can recover a wallet in case of loss or a damaged phone or even theft. That's why it's not possible as far as I know to get a new seed of an existing App.

What I would maybe do in such a situation is to send funds to another wallet and to make a fresh installation of the Lykke-App. But I will ask if there is a more elegant way.

What I wrote above is not correct. It is possible.

If the user still has access to the wallet (password or already logged in) he can get a new seed this way:

Settings->Backup private key

But these will be the same 12 words as the first time

[mtnsaa]

You compare ripple vs lykke. What about the similarity between bitshares and lykke?

Bitshares is a trading platform too, completely decentralized. In bitshares you can create any asset you want, BitUSD, bitEUR, BITgold, bitAppleshare, bit whatever you can think of. The only problem with bitshares is the low liquidity but that may change soon, the chart of bitshares is getting tight, I expect a bitshares pump. If bitshares suddenly becomes very liquid, what it will be of lykke?

I can't say much about Bitshares because I only know very basic things about the project. Reason is mostly the price itself. I've seen it rising in 2014 when I was pretty new to all this (before I was focused only on Bitcoin) but since that time it seemed only to go down and it's superficial of course but I always assumed a serious reason for the downfall and the lack of adoption.

I really like the DPOS-concept but otherwise I'm not so sure if it's effective or if it's maybe too complex. What I wonder about is: If it would be something like the "best Algo", why is it not used by many others like Ethereum? I know that there are projects with similar design but still not many.

But either way it's different to Lykke. Bitshares is fully decentralized as far as I know. That has advantages of course but also some disadvantages. Lykke has decentralized settlement and a central matching engine to combine the best of both. It ensures direct ownership but also that everything is possible what is possible on high-speed exchanges. And Lykke will be much more professional than Crypto-exchanges as we know them - most likely more like Oanda.

I don't know much about Bitshares either but the problem it's very simple, I think they don't have fiat gateways/payments. Lykke being a full fledge company and located in Switzerland aims to bring all people on board with a simple KYC approach. Bitshares seems to be for crypto nerds only, as many of these projects and we are scattered around many sites and coins. Most crypto fans think it's so easy to have BTC or to even have access to BTC, why would you need to buy BTC to then buy other assets? You are just losing money, people just don't get it but that how most of these projects work. So fiat gateways are the top priority here, however that's very hard to achieve, many promise they can pull it off, like Waves for example, which could also be compared and Ripple was eventually considered to be a digital marketplace like this. If you check Gatehub they offer some assets and some gateways.

I think what mostly separates Lykke from this is that it's an hybrid of centralized and decentralized approaches as tempus said, so far it works flawlessly and it is very intuitive, these two things may seem irrelevant for the average crypto user but they may be the most important aspects for blockchain companies to make it and be successful. I also see the comparison with Factom tempus mentioned, the project itself isn't that much complicated, I'm sure an engineer or very experienced dev can implement the op_return option and register data for a company in either Ethereum or Bitcoin blockchain. But Factom, similar to Lykke are actually aiming to create a product they can use and consume, make a bridge to the old ways, guiding old industries and business. This is similar to the old Apple debate about Wozniak and Jobs, the only way to bring technology to the average consumer is to make it friendlier, easier, fun to use. Most engineers and developers live in their own little world and are just waiting for people to discover and improve the by tech themselves.

The problem I see so far with Lykke in this early stage is that many people won't use an app for trading, so a desktop/web version could be the killer app here (I know it's coming soon). If they add more assets and options with time (I know they will) I'll definitely move most of my trading to them in a second.

[tempus]

Interesting interview with Anton Golub about:

How will the blockchain of bitcoin be integrated within the financial system? Anton Golub, Lykke.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM_QHvk-K6s

[tempus]

You compare ripple vs lykke. What about the similarity between bitshares and lykke?

Bitshares is a trading platform too, completely decentralized. In bitshares you can create any asset you want, BitUSD, bitEUR, BITgold, bitAppleshare, bit whatever you can think of. The only problem with bitshares is the low liquidity but that may change soon, the chart of bitshares is getting tight, I expect a bitshares pump. If bitshares suddenly becomes very liquid, what it will be of lykke?

I can't say much about Bitshares because I only know very basic things about the project. Reason is mostly the price itself. I've seen it rising in 2014 when I was pretty new to all this (before I was focused only on Bitcoin) but since that time it seemed only to go down and it's superficial of course but I always assumed a serious reason for the downfall and the lack of adoption.

I really like the DPOS-concept but otherwise I'm not so sure if it's effective or if it's maybe too complex. What I wonder about is: If it would be something like the "best Algo", why is it not used by many others like Ethereum? I know that there are projects with similar design but still not many.

But either way it's different to Lykke. Bitshares is fully decentralized as far as I know. That has advantages of course but also some disadvantages. Lykke has decentralized settlement and a central matching engine to combine the best of both. It ensures direct ownership but also that everything is possible what is possible on high-speed exchanges. And Lykke will be much more professional than Crypto-exchanges as we know them - most likely more like Oanda.

I don't know much about Bitshares either but the problem it's very simple, I think they don't have fiat gateways/payments. Lykke being a full fledge company and located in Switzerland aims to bring all people on board with a simple KYC approach. Bitshares seems to be for crypto nerds only, as many of these projects and we are scattered around many sites and coins. Most crypto fans think it's so easy to have BTC or to even have access to BTC, why would you need to buy BTC to then buy other assets? You are just losing money, people just don't get it but that how most of these projects work. So fiat gateways are the top priority here, however that's very hard to achieve, many promise they can pull it off, like Waves for example, which could also be compared and Ripple was eventually considered to be a digital marketplace like this. If you check Gatehub they offer some assets and some gateways.   

Yes, I believe the problem is: If there is a totally decentralized exchange, that completely runs over the blockchain, it may be harder to get the license it would need to connect with banks. And banks are needed when it's about Fiat, since tokens on the blockchain only represent Fiat that is stored on bank-accounts. But I'm only guessing here. In general I believe it will come as well - fully decentralized exchanges with Fiat-access. But they won't be as fast as Lykke.

   
I think what mostly separates Lykke from this is that it's an hybrid of centralized and decentralized approaches as tempus said, so far it works flawlessly and it is very intuitive, these two things may seem irrelevant for the average crypto user but they may be the most important aspects for blockchain companies to make it and be successful. I also see the comparison with Factom tempus mentioned, the project itself isn't that much complicated, I'm sure an engineer or very experienced dev can implement the op_return option and register data for a company in either Ethereum or Bitcoin blockchain. But Factom, similar to Lykke are actually aiming to create a product they can use and consume, make a bridge to the old ways, guiding old industries and business. This is similar to the old Apple debate about Wozniak and Jobs, the only way to bring technology to the average consumer is to make it friendlier, easier, fun to use. Most engineers and developers live in their own little world and are just waiting for people to discover and improve the by tech themselves.

The problem I see so far with Lykke in this early stage is that many people won't use an app for trading, so a desktop/web version could be the killer app here (I know it's coming soon). If they add more assets and options with time (I know they will) I'll definitely move most of my trading to them in a second.

Very true what you say about the App! My impression really is that people who download and use it like it, and recognize how great it's designed (great example for useful-design) but also: Many who know the project but not much about it seem to think of Lykke as "nice App" or even just "Smartphone-Wallet-Provider" while missing the point about what Lykke will be about and what it will make possible.

But, like you say: Desktob/Web-Version could become a killer App not only because many will find it more practical, but also because of the more psychological effect. It will make visible what this is about.

And that in combination with Ethereum-implementation, US-regulation, some good news from the business-front, first steps into Payment and Debit Card - won't be easy to ignore Lykke. ;-)

[tempus]

Two articles about the Crowdfunding:

Swiss Company Lykke Offers Forward Contract with 20% Discount on Cryptocurrency <----- S H A R E S ! ! ! ;-)
https://www.crowdfundinsider.com/2017/02/95978-swiss-company-lykke-offers-forward-contract-20-discount-cryptocurrency/

TOKEN SALE - Lykke Token Sale: a colored coin exchange platform
https://www.smithandcrown.com/lykke-token-sale-colored-coin-exchange-platform/


Who wants to get a well designed overview about Lykke:

Investor Deck
https://forward.lykke.com/files/Investor_deck.pdf

[franc0]

You compare ripple vs lykke. What about the similarity between bitshares and lykke?

Bitshares is a trading platform too, completely decentralized. In bitshares you can create any asset you want, BitUSD, bitEUR, BITgold, bitAppleshare, bit whatever you can think of. The only problem with bitshares is the low liquidity but that may change soon, the chart of bitshares is getting tight, I expect a bitshares pump. If bitshares suddenly becomes very liquid, what it will be of lykke?

I can't say much about Bitshares because I only know very basic things about the project. Reason is mostly the price itself. I've seen it rising in 2014 when I was pretty new to all this (before I was focused only on Bitcoin) but since that time it seemed only to go down and it's superficial of course but I always assumed a serious reason for the downfall and the lack of adoption.

I really like the DPOS-concept but otherwise I'm not so sure if it's effective or if it's maybe too complex. What I wonder about is: If it would be something like the "best Algo", why is it not used by many others like Ethereum? I know that there are projects with similar design but still not many.

But either way it's different to Lykke. Bitshares is fully decentralized as far as I know. That has advantages of course but also some disadvantages. Lykke has decentralized settlement and a central matching engine to combine the best of both. It ensures direct ownership but also that everything is possible what is possible on high-speed exchanges. And Lykke will be much more professional than Crypto-exchanges as we know them - most likely more like Oanda.

I don't know much about Bitshares either but the problem it's very simple, I think they don't have fiat gateways/payments. Lykke being a full fledge company and located in Switzerland aims to bring all people on board with a simple KYC approach. Bitshares seems to be for crypto nerds only, as many of these projects and we are scattered around many sites and coins. Most crypto fans think it's so easy to have BTC or to even have access to BTC, why would you need to buy BTC to then buy other assets? You are just losing money, people just don't get it but that how most of these projects work. So fiat gateways are the top priority here, however that's very hard to achieve, many promise they can pull it off, like Waves for example, which could also be compared and Ripple was eventually considered to be a digital marketplace like this. If you check Gatehub they offer some assets and some gateways.   

Yes, I believe the problem is: If there is a totally decentralized exchange, that completely runs over the blockchain, it may be harder to get the license it would need to connect with banks. And banks are needed when it's about Fiat, since tokens on the blockchain only represent Fiat that is stored on bank-accounts. But I'm only guessing here. In general I believe it will come as well - fully decentralized exchanges with Fiat-access. But they won't be as fast as Lykke.

   
I think what mostly separates Lykke from this is that it's an hybrid of centralized and decentralized approaches as tempus said, so far it works flawlessly and it is very intuitive, these two things may seem irrelevant for the average crypto user but they may be the most important aspects for blockchain companies to make it and be successful. I also see the comparison with Factom tempus mentioned, the project itself isn't that much complicated, I'm sure an engineer or very experienced dev can implement the op_return option and register data for a company in either Ethereum or Bitcoin blockchain. But Factom, similar to Lykke are actually aiming to create a product they can use and consume, make a bridge to the old ways, guiding old industries and business. This is similar to the old Apple debate about Wozniak and Jobs, the only way to bring technology to the average consumer is to make it friendlier, easier, fun to use. Most engineers and developers live in their own little world and are just waiting for people to discover and improve the by tech themselves.

The problem I see so far with Lykke in this early stage is that many people won't use an app for trading, so a desktop/web version could be the killer app here (I know it's coming soon). If they add more assets and options with time (I know they will) I'll definitely move most of my trading to them in a second.

Very true what you say about the App! My impression really is that people who download and use it like it, and recognize how great it's designed (great example for useful-design) but also: Many who know the project but not much about it seem to think of Lykke as "nice App" or even just "Smartphone-Wallet-Provider" while missing the point about what Lykke will be about and what it will make possible.

But, like you say: Desktob/Web-Version could become a killer App not only because many will find it more practical, but also because of the more psychological effect. It will make visible what this is about.

And that in combination with Ethereum-implementation, US-regulation, some good news from the business-front, first steps into Payment and Debit Card - won't be easy to ignore Lykke. ;-)

Why you need lykke or bitshares to connect with banks? Bitcoin is already connected to banks, you can trade bitshares in their exchange (BITusd/BITeur for example), then whatever you traded and profit there exchange it to bitcoin and sell your bitcoins for your national currency in your local or national bitcoin exchange. SO why withdraw USD from lykke exchange if you can withdraw BTC and then you sell your btc in your national bitcoin exchange. Lykke will take days to complete the withdraw to my bank as is a International transfer, while selling my bitcoin in my national exchange will deposit the $ to my bank account the same day.

[tempus]

You compare ripple vs lykke. What about the similarity between bitshares and lykke?

Bitshares is a trading platform too, completely decentralized. In bitshares you can create any asset you want, BitUSD, bitEUR, BITgold, bitAppleshare, bit whatever you can think of. The only problem with bitshares is the low liquidity but that may change soon, the chart of bitshares is getting tight, I expect a bitshares pump. If bitshares suddenly becomes very liquid, what it will be of lykke?

I can't say much about Bitshares because I only know very basic things about the project. Reason is mostly the price itself. I've seen it rising in 2014 when I was pretty new to all this (before I was focused only on Bitcoin) but since that time it seemed only to go down and it's superficial of course but I always assumed a serious reason for the downfall and the lack of adoption.

I really like the DPOS-concept but otherwise I'm not so sure if it's effective or if it's maybe too complex. What I wonder about is: If it would be something like the "best Algo", why is it not used by many others like Ethereum? I know that there are projects with similar design but still not many.

But either way it's different to Lykke. Bitshares is fully decentralized as far as I know. That has advantages of course but also some disadvantages. Lykke has decentralized settlement and a central matching engine to combine the best of both. It ensures direct ownership but also that everything is possible what is possible on high-speed exchanges. And Lykke will be much more professional than Crypto-exchanges as we know them - most likely more like Oanda.

I don't know much about Bitshares either but the problem it's very simple, I think they don't have fiat gateways/payments. Lykke being a full fledge company and located in Switzerland aims to bring all people on board with a simple KYC approach. Bitshares seems to be for crypto nerds only, as many of these projects and we are scattered around many sites and coins. Most crypto fans think it's so easy to have BTC or to even have access to BTC, why would you need to buy BTC to then buy other assets? You are just losing money, people just don't get it but that how most of these projects work. So fiat gateways are the top priority here, however that's very hard to achieve, many promise they can pull it off, like Waves for example, which could also be compared and Ripple was eventually considered to be a digital marketplace like this. If you check Gatehub they offer some assets and some gateways.  

Yes, I believe the problem is: If there is a totally decentralized exchange, that completely runs over the blockchain, it may be harder to get the license it would need to connect with banks. And banks are needed when it's about Fiat, since tokens on the blockchain only represent Fiat that is stored on bank-accounts. But I'm only guessing here. In general I believe it will come as well - fully decentralized exchanges with Fiat-access. But they won't be as fast as Lykke.

 
I think what mostly separates Lykke from this is that it's an hybrid of centralized and decentralized approaches as tempus said, so far it works flawlessly and it is very intuitive, these two things may seem irrelevant for the average crypto user but they may be the most important aspects for blockchain companies to make it and be successful. I also see the comparison with Factom tempus mentioned, the project itself isn't that much complicated, I'm sure an engineer or very experienced dev can implement the op_return option and register data for a company in either Ethereum or Bitcoin blockchain. But Factom, similar to Lykke are actually aiming to create a product they can use and consume, make a bridge to the old ways, guiding old industries and business. This is similar to the old Apple debate about Wozniak and Jobs, the only way to bring technology to the average consumer is to make it friendlier, easier, fun to use. Most engineers and developers live in their own little world and are just waiting for people to discover and improve the by tech themselves.

The problem I see so far with Lykke in this early stage is that many people won't use an app for trading, so a desktop/web version could be the killer app here (I know it's coming soon). If they add more assets and options with time (I know they will) I'll definitely move most of my trading to them in a second.

Very true what you say about the App! My impression really is that people who download and use it like it, and recognize how great it's designed (great example for useful-design) but also: Many who know the project but not much about it seem to think of Lykke as "nice App" or even just "Smartphone-Wallet-Provider" while missing the point about what Lykke will be about and what it will make possible.

But, like you say: Desktob/Web-Version could become a killer App not only because many will find it more practical, but also because of the more psychological effect. It will make visible what this is about.

And that in combination with Ethereum-implementation, US-regulation, some good news from the business-front, first steps into Payment and Debit Card - won't be easy to ignore Lykke. ;-)

Why you need lykke or bitshares to connect with banks? Bitcoin is already connected to banks, you can trade bitshares in their exchange (BITusd/BITeur for example), then whatever you traded and profit there exchange it to bitcoin and sell your bitcoins for your national currency in your local or national bitcoin exchange. SO why withdraw USD from lykke exchange if you can withdraw BTC and then you sell your btc in your national bitcoin exchange. Lykke will take days to complete the withdraw to my bank as is a International transfer, while selling my bitcoin in my national exchange will deposit the $ to my bank account the same day.

But you can only sell your Bitcoin on the exchange you usually use because they are connected with a bank. And Lykke will not only be connected with one bank, but the goal is to be licensed and connected into the financial system all over the world to ensure high flexibility and high speed of all involved processes. You can think of Lykke as a combination of the best of both worlds, at the same time a little bit like a very fast revolving door between the "systems".


And if you look on their Roadmap:

 

(It's a screenshot out of the Investor-Deck: https://forward.lykke.com/files/Investor_deck.pdf)

It will also be about Lykke as payment-system and about Lykke Debit-Cards etc.. In short: Lykke will make much more possible than most people believe right now. It's not only be about being a crypto-exchange. And one major focus is also on forex-trading of course.

For those who doesn't know yet: The CEO of Lykke, Richard Olsen, is Co-founder and former CEO of the forex-platform https://www.oanda.com.

[mtnsaa]

You compare ripple vs lykke. What about the similarity between bitshares and lykke?

Bitshares is a trading platform too, completely decentralized. In bitshares you can create any asset you want, BitUSD, bitEUR, BITgold, bitAppleshare, bit whatever you can think of. The only problem with bitshares is the low liquidity but that may change soon, the chart of bitshares is getting tight, I expect a bitshares pump. If bitshares suddenly becomes very liquid, what it will be of lykke?

I can't say much about Bitshares because I only know very basic things about the project. Reason is mostly the price itself. I've seen it rising in 2014 when I was pretty new to all this (before I was focused only on Bitcoin) but since that time it seemed only to go down and it's superficial of course but I always assumed a serious reason for the downfall and the lack of adoption.

I really like the DPOS-concept but otherwise I'm not so sure if it's effective or if it's maybe too complex. What I wonder about is: If it would be something like the "best Algo", why is it not used by many others like Ethereum? I know that there are projects with similar design but still not many.

But either way it's different to Lykke. Bitshares is fully decentralized as far as I know. That has advantages of course but also some disadvantages. Lykke has decentralized settlement and a central matching engine to combine the best of both. It ensures direct ownership but also that everything is possible what is possible on high-speed exchanges. And Lykke will be much more professional than Crypto-exchanges as we know them - most likely more like Oanda.

I don't know much about Bitshares either but the problem it's very simple, I think they don't have fiat gateways/payments. Lykke being a full fledge company and located in Switzerland aims to bring all people on board with a simple KYC approach. Bitshares seems to be for crypto nerds only, as many of these projects and we are scattered around many sites and coins. Most crypto fans think it's so easy to have BTC or to even have access to BTC, why would you need to buy BTC to then buy other assets? You are just losing money, people just don't get it but that how most of these projects work. So fiat gateways are the top priority here, however that's very hard to achieve, many promise they can pull it off, like Waves for example, which could also be compared and Ripple was eventually considered to be a digital marketplace like this. If you check Gatehub they offer some assets and some gateways.   

Yes, I believe the problem is: If there is a totally decentralized exchange, that completely runs over the blockchain, it may be harder to get the license it would need to connect with banks. And banks are needed when it's about Fiat, since tokens on the blockchain only represent Fiat that is stored on bank-accounts. But I'm only guessing here. In general I believe it will come as well - fully decentralized exchanges with Fiat-access. But they won't be as fast as Lykke.

   
I think what mostly separates Lykke from this is that it's an hybrid of centralized and decentralized approaches as tempus said, so far it works flawlessly and it is very intuitive, these two things may seem irrelevant for the average crypto user but they may be the most important aspects for blockchain companies to make it and be successful. I also see the comparison with Factom tempus mentioned, the project itself isn't that much complicated, I'm sure an engineer or very experienced dev can implement the op_return option and register data for a company in either Ethereum or Bitcoin blockchain. But Factom, similar to Lykke are actually aiming to create a product they can use and consume, make a bridge to the old ways, guiding old industries and business. This is similar to the old Apple debate about Wozniak and Jobs, the only way to bring technology to the average consumer is to make it friendlier, easier, fun to use. Most engineers and developers live in their own little world and are just waiting for people to discover and improve the by tech themselves.

The problem I see so far with Lykke in this early stage is that many people won't use an app for trading, so a desktop/web version could be the killer app here (I know it's coming soon). If they add more assets and options with time (I know they will) I'll definitely move most of my trading to them in a second.

Very true what you say about the App! My impression really is that people who download and use it like it, and recognize how great it's designed (great example for useful-design) but also: Many who know the project but not much about it seem to think of Lykke as "nice App" or even just "Smartphone-Wallet-Provider" while missing the point about what Lykke will be about and what it will make possible.

But, like you say: Desktob/Web-Version could become a killer App not only because many will find it more practical, but also because of the more psychological effect. It will make visible what this is about.

And that in combination with Ethereum-implementation, US-regulation, some good news from the business-front, first steps into Payment and Debit Card - won't be easy to ignore Lykke. ;-)

Why you need lykke or bitshares to connect with banks? Bitcoin is already connected to banks, you can trade bitshares in their exchange (BITusd/BITeur for example), then whatever you traded and profit there exchange it to bitcoin and sell your bitcoins for your national currency in your local or national bitcoin exchange. SO why withdraw USD from lykke exchange if you can withdraw BTC and then you sell your btc in your national bitcoin exchange. Lykke will take days to complete the withdraw to my bank as is a International transfer, while selling my bitcoin in my national exchange will deposit the $ to my bank account the same day.

Maybe you should open your eyes and understand that BTC is hardly known to the average user, it's worthless as a payment method (and it's getting pretty expensive too) since you'll be exposed to huge volatility. A currency needs to be stable, that's the bottomline, the dream that many have of BTC taking over the world could happen because of its blockchain and revolutionary tech, that what's valuable about it. But paying with BTC is the equivalent as paying with Amazon shares or gold, it just doesn't make sense. No company or average individual will adopt bitcoin for his daily business knowing that tomorrow it could be worth half because some exchange got hacked on the other side of the world, that's just the reality. Bitcoin will never be stable enough no matter the price, the same goes with any S/P 500 company so we agree it will eventually continue to grow but who knows right?

This may come as a surprise but national currencies will continue to exist, people will still use credit card companies, banks and fiat money, no fear mongering is strong enough to change this, the world is not going to end, Bitcoin is not Jesus. However using blockchain technology as settlement a lot of delays will be cut from days and weeks to seconds, same goes with expenses.

Lykke will give us the option to use whatever you want to trade, bitcoin, apple shares, lykke coins, mexican pesos, euros, etc. And Lykke can kill the competition (FX/CDF/ETF Trading exchanges for example) around the world by taking advantage of using a system that it's much more efficient.

[tubehand]

Thank god. Someone with sense. Bitcoin is certiantly not jesus. Is grandma using bitcoin, is the average forex trader or swing trader using bitcoin, the soccer mom? Nope.

Bitcoin has its use. So did the Ford model T