I simply replied on the points you have put on the table. And I've done this here and on reddit. And if you read my previous explanations here and on reddit and this post of you: You can only continue this way by ignoring pretty much everything what I've explained and that is what you do. You want to place your message with a megaphone and you don't want to get answers on questions. You want to state your personal assumptions as facts and it's not that much of a secret that you want to convince others to share your very personal view.
In the beginning I didn't agree with you but I understand that you, and maybe also others, might have questions, maybe even be concerned. But you are the only one who makes such a drama out of the website coinmarketcap.com, that you call "industry standard" (what is kind of funny, isn't it?) and you are the only one who tries to attack that hard with a focus on integrity and credibility and the paradox is: You make moves here that are very dishonest, manipulative attempts and you can keep on with that, but pretty much everything also tells a story about yourself.
Pure conjecture. You could have just deleted this from your reply as its just taking up space
1) That can be your personal conclusions, but it wouldn't be bad to word it that way
2) Arguments are missing
3) If you claim that Richard Olsen "says so" you should be able to quote where he exactly says that. Is that possible?
Your trying to defend something when theres nothing to defend....
See here from Olsen in reference to the reddit post:
"Thank you for all the comments about the valuation of Lykke.
Coinmarketcap computes the market capitalization of Lykke based on the coins that are held in the trading wallets and does not include the coins held in other wallets. When Lykke was founded and started the first rounds of fund raising, the coins were issued to other wallets, because the trading wallet was not yet developed. In June we will move all the Lykke coins to the trading wallet. If the price of LKK does not change and remains at 0.374716 USD the total market capitalisation will jump to 481,772,471 USD.
Every buyer of LKK needs to be aware that the Lykke project is high risk – we are reinventing finance and build an emergent organization that is inspired by the principles employed by nature and where all the software and knowledge is open source. We will make mistakes and these mistakes can be costly, so there is risk and any investor should only buy LKK, if he can afford to lose his money."
Of course Olsen isnt going to directly say he's correcting a mistake - that would be stupid of him to do. If you're expecting that from him then I would be asking serious questions about you and what you actually know about the basics of positioning
He is alluding to the mistake by talking about it...its called positioning to put a positioned spin on the situation whilst maintaining a professional attitude.
Last question again: Does he say that he is doing that to correct a mistake?
Interesting is that you ask questions and then you give the answers yourself - what does that tell me about you? ;-)
Yes, he is alluding to saying he's correcting a mistake...its called positioning - something that you aren't understanding because sorry, I can see you lack the ability to "read between the lines". No offence intended. Nobody is going to go out and say he made a mistake..that would be suicide for him to do.
He refers only to coinmarketcap.com and that also was the context of the discussion. And I've explained over and over again that also coinmarketcap.com changed over time. Maybe you don't know that, since your account is pretty "fresh". But what always was displayed as well is the total supply. That was never hidden, Lykke has never made a secret out of anything but it was explained before how it is calculated and one consequence is: If LKK are moved out of the trading-section, the number goes down and the other way around. Actually that's not that bad, it can be an interesting indicator. But if people don't know that they wonder why both charts (price and circulating supply) may not correlate in certain situations. Or to be more precise: It needs the information how it is done to recognize that it's not that bad. But because not everybody is good enough informed (not meant critical) it can lead to questions of course.
But most important to know are some infos and explanations, I've already given you here and on reddit - but you didn't pay any attention!
This is confusing the issue. Lykke coins being or not being in the trading wallet shouldn't affect the market cap. This is called playing games with the system and making a mockery out of it, thinking Lykke can just make up the rules for itself as it goes along
Yes, the market cap counting all the coins wasnt hidden...so why is Olsen only wanting the circulating supply to display a lower market cap on coinmarketcap?? You have literally no answer to that whatsoever.I am just putting that in red to emphasis it. The full total supply market cap is well known, so why does Olsen put only the circulating supply and agree with the industry-leading coinmarketcap to show a lower valuation?
You are digging a bigger hole for yourself with this...those are the FACTS of the situation..total facts.
He said several times that Lykke is a high risk investment, independently of this super important coinmarketcap-site. What you try here is to turn his openness and honesty against him.
You're missing the point completely. He is talking about a chain of thought of related themes...all which are relevant to each other within the context of the post.
He's saying its high risk because he's just made a high risk move. If you aren't intelligent enough to notice this then that's something you'll need to deal with yourself, its nothing to do with me.
Same here - again you try to use something against him that is in fact a quality: Honesty! He does not try to hype Lykke. He does not try to paint a perfect picture of Lykke. He simply reminds about a fact: Nothing and nobody is perfect.
You are getting massively confused here. Nobody is saying Olsen is dishonest or that honesty is in question here.
He is saying those things to maintain a professional attitude to the mistake that has been made. Otherwise why is there such a big question about the valuation of lykke?? Why do other coins not have this issue? (and please dont point out specific cases of coins where there are issues..im talking about the overall general market. Most coins and techs dont have these glaring massive issues with their valuations due to technicalities)
Olsen is making the mistake that XRP and ripple have managed to avoid. By ripple and XRP declaring that their held-XRP won't be added to the free market, they have given investors assurance. On the flip side, Olsen is flooding his coins onto the market in an attempt to resolve valuation issues, whilst the technology is still at an early stage. Though better for the lykke project long term, this isnt an investor assuring move.
Please don't forget that the first part is only about coinmarketcap.com. Please don't forget that he said that an investment in Lykke is high risk before. It's a startup in a high risk sector. Please don't forget that Lykke is built by humans and if you know any human without making mistakes, let me know. If you know any company that didn't do mistakes let me know. But you also said that he said it was a mistake how it was done on coinmarketcap before - and that is not true.
Sorry, but it appears you dont understand why he's talking about mistakes in that context. You are lacking perspicacity and an ability to read what is really meant by statements. You are lacking the ability to understand positioning.
But what is the circulating supply? Lykke is transparent about last crowdfundings and about the distribution and about all important numbers. Pretty soon they will publish an actualized financial report. But also this one from February gives a lot of infos:
INFORMATION BROCHURE FOR COINHOLDERS FEBRUARY 2017
https://forward.lykke.com/files/Memorandum.pdfWhat is important to understand: Lykke has sold LKK to Investors. Instead of doing one hyped up monster-crowdfunding like some other projects, Lykke has done smaller sales without much advertising and PR. And those LKK's are obviously circulating supply. But there are also founders and team-members and the company itself. Nothing of that is locked up. Lykke is meant to be flexible and maybe you and maybe also some others would prefer some kind of "lock-up" of supply - but those who would need something like that to have enough trust will stay away anyway.
Well...you tell me what the circulating supply is...its what Lykke is playing about with to show a lower valuation in coinmarketcap!!
By playing games with the circulating supply and saying one coin counts and another doesn't...its causing clear issues with understanding and calculating the valuation.
Somebody like you could attack both whenever he wants. You can be critical about how it was done in the past. You can be critical about how it will be done in the future. And in fact you are.
I tell you what you could have done: Due diligence and getting your informations directly from Lykke. It's all there. And it's possible to ask questions. It's possible right here, on reddit, on two chats and even directly per mail. But you don't ask and if you ask you give the answers yourself.
And really, it's kind of interesting that you come up with that again and again but you ignore all explanations I've given before.
Im not here to attack - im here to make money and maximise my ROI - Olsen has made a move that will reduce my ROI and so I've sold my LKK...simple as that.
What you try is called spreading FUD. "Oh no! Nobody knows what will happen! It's a high risk move!"
But no, he is not saying that Lykke is high risk because of that. Lykke is high risk anyway. Find a project that is not high risk. Find any investment that is not high risk. Oil maybe.
As I've said you aren't able to read what's really written there and why things are being said in that particular context. Its clearer than daylight, which tells me you aren't in the same league as me, sorry to say.
You criticise that it would have been misleading in the past but now you are critical that it might not be misleading enough in future and your ROI would be less because of that. That's the whole point, isn't it? You haven't done due diligence but believed that only a fraction of LKK is free and the rest can't be moved and is locked up. And thing is: Technically that is not the case. Practically you can think about how likely it is that founders and company will act less carefully with the market than they've done it in the past.
You're getting confused here. In simple terms, the transparency could be better and Olsen realises this. By putting all the coins into the circulating supply, he is making an attempt to end the debate on the valuation
Thing is: I know how you really think - you only think about what other Investors might think and if an obvious high valuation might deter Investors who also don't do due diligence. Right or right?
I take into account a lot of things when investing, and how the market perceives a technology is obviously something I consider as well. That's not the only thing I consider though...
Please decide what you want to be critical about. I've already explained that it's not that simple to find the best solution that makes everybody happy, is precise and fits to how coinmarketcap.com handles such things.
Its simple. A) Put all your coins into the circulating supply at the very start and declare that as the contributor to your market cap or B) Say the 90% coins won't be put into the circulating supply and will be managed separately. All issues are solved there and then.
There is literally no complex issue or "we can't make everyone happy" problem here at all.
All of these issues are lykke's own making because its playing technical games with its valuation. Its simply made up its own rules as its gone along and now has changed it again.
But actually it is simple: If somebody believes in the potential of this project he might consider it as a buy. And the question if this has potential is the question if the people behind are able to build this and also will act carefully on the market. Those who believe that founders and team are dishonest and only want to make a quick buck: Don't buy.
You've made your decision and I respect that. What I don't respect are your megaphon-attempts to spread your manipulative attempts.
I believe lykke ultimately will be very successful. However what Im interested in is my ROI. My ROI has been decreased because of this move and so it's been time for me to sell. Simple as that. If you didnt understand it, you need more investing experience, end of story.
My suggestion would be always to do due diligence. If you feel misleaded about how it was done in the past I can tell you: Read this thread and you'll find out that it was explained and I've replied on all questions about it and others as well. Same on reddit. Sergey and others did that on telegram and slack. There is also a blog-post in which it is explained that also gives a lot of additional informations and tips how to get interesting informations. Nothing was ever hidden.
Thanks for the suggestion.
My suggestion to you is you need more investing experience with higher ROIs and an ability to understand positioning.
I've done a lot of due diligence on lykke and have been following this whole thread for a very long time. Olsen has made a move which reduces my ROI and so I've sold. End of story.
As for nothing being hidden, answer to me again why a smaller and wrong market cap is showing in coinmarketcap? That is hiding the true valuation right there. Why show a lower market cap there if its not the rightful market cap?
