ICONOMI - Live for today. Invest for tomorrow.

[Iabamba]

When will buyback happen? it is already 3rd April, will ICONOMI stick to their plan?

I want to see this burn address

I'm sure you will.

Of course, everyone really want to see the verifiable unspendable address.

I have my issues with Iconomi, but there's no way they can "pretend" to burn tokens (as we can see this on the blockchain) and no reason why they won't follow through with this.

So I'm confident you'll be able to monitor this.

If you're interested in monitoring ICN, you should ask about the team's ICN share, which they stated you'd be able to monitor from January 2017, here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ICONOMI/comments/5ghrp5/askmeanything_icnx_and_iconomiindex_edition/dawl8c3/

It's April now, so maybe follow that up. As we haven't been able to track their ICN, and all ICN was originally held at one address, it's anybody's guess which ICN actually belonged to the team for the past 6 months. They may have been trading with it, increasing their share, using it to profit in BTC/ETH ... we really have no way of knowing, because they never actually moved their ICN to one address which we could monitor.

They also promised quarterly expense reports, which haven't happened yet, so you could ask about that if you like to monitor things.

Hope this helps.

Oh man my Mendeleev. Just use etherscan to track ICN Tokens, so plain and simple.

I guess you are no ICO investor. If you are an ICO ICONOMI Investor then Google research about the ICN Tokens is one simple solution.

Just remember

#1 is the ICONOMI Investors and ICO Team. Address:    0x29d38fdf26d64fa799276e6615759d27db1f1fcd

#2 is with Kraken. Address:    0xcf40d0d2b44f2b66e07cace1372ca42b73cf21a3

https://etherscan.io/token/ICONOMI#balances

Do you also want their BTC Address? I could give it too. Just stop spreading false rumors that they have been trading ICN tokens for their own benefit to profit.

Okay man? No hard feelings. Just let go of that emotions.

You're not very bright, are you?

Anyone with half a brain would be able to understand the points I made there.

Please tell me how you know which ICN belongs to which person as it leaves the ICO site? Go find the ICN I withdrew last year, if you think you can do that on etherscan.

It's not a "false rumour"; it's a possibility that we can't verify one way or the other. In fact, even WITH a watch address, we still wouldn't know for sure. It's unlikely somebody is going to dedicate their time to verifying the figures add up after every ICN has left the ICO address (if it ever does)

The main point here is accountability. I am not saying any profiteering actually occured - only that 13 million ICN did not get moved off site as it was stated it would.

How is this any different than wanting to see a burn address for investor peace of mind?

As for expense reports, 1) Blockchain transactions are not the same thing at all. They have fiat too, you know... and 2) The main issue is that they stated they would happen, so again... if people are concerned about the financial activity of the company they invested it, this would be something worth persuing.

It's nice that you tried to join in with the "put Mendeleev down" game, but you need to have some clue what you're talking about first.

Imagine they DON'T show you the burn address after they said they would. And you couldn't find it on etherscan yourself. But they still said "oh we burnt it. Trust us."... would you accept that?

I guess YOU probably would.

But as you probably only hold 100 ICN, I guess you don't need to worry much anyway.

Well certainly I know #1 and #2 huge addresses are correctly stated.

About 13,000,000 tokens you are finding.

They are shared amongst Dev team. There is nothing free in this world Mendeleev.

I'm gonna ask you fact to fact. Are you gonna work for free? Without a salary?

About burn address if they are ever burning? Let's find it. June is not yet finished. If ever they have proof that it is burned/left to trash, better you move on.

I will never say to you not to talk, because In crypto we are free to say.

smh.

Your last point is not true for I hold 5 Digits digits worth of ICN. It does not make me rich today though.  

When Bull is raging. The Bear is sleeping.

[1714281722]

1714281722

[1714281722]

1714281722

[1714281722]

1714281722

[Pipesnake]

Price down from 60k to 48k on liqui now,if btc rises more we can grab few cheap ICN before the buyback ends

[chohav]

seriously there's no points asking these idiots questions.

it will merely be passed off as fudding and Daparski will just delete everything and stifle any debate.

better let them keep on circle jerking themselves  while pretending everything is fine and dandy with their 100 ICN.

They don't seem to realise that it's the people who hold a shit load of ICN who are actually asking pertinent questions about the status of their investment.

Maybe when ICN takes a real beating price wise when people start to exit is that they will realise that the questions being asked are actually key.

Anyways, back to the MOON , LAMBO and whatever other delusions of grandeur these blooming muppets have...

LOL, the ten day old account is worried about the investors... Come on!
Actually, do you have any ICN at all?

[Daparski]

****
#1 is the ICONOMI Investors and ICO Team. Address:    0x29d38fdf26d64fa799276e6615759d27db1f1fcd
****
https://etherscan.io/token/ICONOMI#balances
***

mate are you sure 50m ICN to burn ?
PS: how that devs token are suppose to be locked if they all are in same address ?
How you can find out dev token parameters ?

PS: BTC rise ICN down nothing new chill out ^^

Devs tokens are locked until end of April. They will create and publish the addresses when they will be moved from ICO address

They could be locked on an address containing 13 million. Then we could see they're locked, and verify the vesting etc.

This is what was stated would happen. As XbladeX asked, how do you keep tabs on that if it's all still on the ICO address?

This is pure faith you'd be operating on. You're letting accountability slide. And Daparski, it was YOUR question I linked in the reddit link earlier. This is the answer that was given to you personally. Did you feel assured when Jaka gave that answer? I bet you did. So why would you let it slide now?

True, those 13M ICN could be transferred to different address earlier. The thing is that it's not a 5 min effort. This has to be configured (smart contract, multi-sig and stuff like that, you know), tested, and retested. Or in other words - shifting focus from core development into this.
Priority was releasing the platform for beta testers, which will lead to earlier public release (so you can finally buy ICNX and perhaps be a little bit less bitter).

Call me crazy, but I have the feeling that if they would do that you or someone else would complain about loosing focus on the main goal.

13M ICN will removed from ICO address, I still can't see how this is less transparent doing it before the vesting starts.

[Sharma]

When will buyback happen? it is already 3rd April, will ICONOMI stick to their plan?

The announcement will only be made at the end of June, it is not for public consumption presently and also depends on the price of the tokens on the market because it will be stupid to be buying at the top

So we wait till 25k again for buying back with rissing BTC?

Maybe ICONOMI is behind this price fall.They want to burn as many ICN as possible with their allocated budget for buyback.
I guess this price fall is good from ICN holders point of view as well.
Less price means more icn bought back.More icn buyback means more burnt ICN.
More burnt ICN means less ICN.
Less ICN means higher value for available ICN

In crypto you never know.This is one possibility you can not rule out.They would prefer price to touch down the ICO level before buyback.

[Daparski]

...troll...

...

Fact is, that watch address was a really good idea, and takes minutes to set up. That's why it's a potential concern. It might mean absolutely nothing, but where's the harm in following through with what they said?

How do you know it takes minutes to set it up? How many smart contracts, multi-sig, watch addresses have you set up?

[Iabamba]

****
#1 is the ICONOMI Investors and ICO Team. Address:    0x29d38fdf26d64fa799276e6615759d27db1f1fcd
****
https://etherscan.io/token/ICONOMI#balances
***

mate are you sure 50m ICN to burn ?
PS: how that devs token are suppose to be locked if they all are in same address ?
How you can find out dev token parameters ?

PS: BTC rise ICN down nothing new chill out ^^

Nah I did not say 50m ICN to be burn don't overstate it dude.

That address I showed is the Tokens of ICN Investors and ICN Team *BountyCrowd*

DevsTeams deserved to have the remaining 13,000,000  tokens which is still locked as stated by Daparski.

No Free work brother, be true to fact.

[Daparski]

...troll...

...

Fact is, that watch address was a really good idea, and takes minutes to set up. That's why it's a potential concern. It might mean absolutely nothing, but where's the harm in following through with what they said?

How do you know it takes minutes to set it up? How many smart contracts, multi-sig, watch addresses have you set up?

oh really.

being confronted with facts is now called trolling

you are pathetic Daparski.

 

If by facts you mean your writing style (curse , p&d, FUD) then yes, proudly

[DomainMagnate]

****
#1 is the ICONOMI Investors and ICO Team. Address:    0x29d38fdf26d64fa799276e6615759d27db1f1fcd
****
https://etherscan.io/token/ICONOMI#balances
***

mate are you sure 50m ICN to burn ?
PS: how that devs token are suppose to be locked if they all are in same address ?
How you can find out dev token parameters ?

PS: BTC rise ICN down nothing new chill out ^^

Nah I did not say 50m ICN to be burn don't overstate it dude.

That address I showed is the Tokens of ICN Investors and ICN Team *BountyCrowd*

DevsTeams deserved to have the remaining 13,000,000  tokens which is still locked as stated by Daparski.

No Free work brother, be true to fact.

" 1,000 ETH will be used to
purchase ICN in a 90 day
period starting from 1st of
April 2017."
Now you do the calculation how many ICN can be bought with 1000 ETH at current market price.
ICONOMI will buyback ICN on weekly basis over a period of 90 days

[xcajun21]

Their plan is to burn 86037 Icn for 42.19btc /1000 eth.  Well, the volume in 24h is
482.25 BTC. The price drop seems to be due altcoins down trend on major fields.

Where you got the news? Any information regarding on this?  I was finding the amount of they buyback and burn

https://medium.com/iconominet/iconomi-introduces-repayment-programme-54bfa449d458

[Mendeleev]

True, those 13M ICN could be transferred to different address earlier. The thing is that it's not a 5 min effort. This has to be configured (smart contract, multi-sig and stuff like that, you know), tested, and retested. Or in other words - shifting focus from core development into this.
Priority was releasing the platform for beta testers, which will lead to earlier public release (so you can finally buy ICNX and perhaps be a little bit less bitter).

Call me crazy, but I have the feeling that if they would do that you or someone else would complain about loosing focus on the main goal.

13M ICN will removed from ICO address, I still can't see how this is less transparent doing it before the vesting starts.

What gives it the most weight is that it was stated it would happen, by a representative of the team. If you hadn't asked, and Jaka never gave you that answer, I doubt I would have came up with the idea myself.

The "smart contract" or whatever else could come later. Moving it to a new addres is easy, and could have been done months ago. As it stands, we have no way of knowing whether or not the team have played with their ICN. I'm not saying they definitely have, but at this stage it is unknown. Once the ICN IS moved, we would have a better idea, but that's in the future, so not relevant until it happens.

Just popping 13 million on a different address in January would have sufficed, and would have been one less thing to call out.

It may ultimately be of minimal concern, but it's just an example of transparency/accountability, and funny how people asked about the burn address.

Just imagine if 3 months from now, they said "yeah the burn address requires a smart contract to be written and we're focusing on the platform right now. Until then, we'll keep the ICN on Kraken" ... very unlikely, but it'd be a similar level of saying one thing, and doing another. Then you might say "relax guys, the ICN is still off the market. I don't see the difference"

Where does it end? Hold them to account, I say. It's like they get away with little things piece by piece, and the notion of accountability is slowly worn away.

You see?

[Daparski]

True, those 13M ICN could be transferred to different address earlier. The thing is that it's not a 5 min effort. This has to be configured (smart contract, multi-sig and stuff like that, you know), tested, and retested. Or in other words - shifting focus from core development into this.
Priority was releasing the platform for beta testers, which will lead to earlier public release (so you can finally buy ICNX and perhaps be a little bit less bitter).

Call me crazy, but I have the feeling that if they would do that you or someone else would complain about loosing focus on the main goal.

13M ICN will removed from ICO address, I still can't see how this is less transparent doing it before the vesting starts.

What gives it the most weight is that it was stated it would happen, by a representative of the team. If you hadn't asked, and Jaka never gave you that answer, I doubt I would have came up with the idea myself.
...

So your concern is with the way it was communicated, and not with them actually secretly trading?
Otherwise it would make no sense to even state something. If they wanted to do that, why not just saying that the addresses will be created short time before the vesting starts? Much easier to trade them locked ICN, no?

[ShinyDiscoBalls]

actually you know what, it's out of order for me to be venting my frustration on the shenanigans of the ICONOMI team on Daparski.

so I apologise to Daparski cause I actually like the muppet.

I just hope that the team actually hire some PR person to handle communications more effectively.

They've been seriously lacking in that department.

[Daparski]

...

lol

what you want is a pump. nothing to do with communications

[ShinyDiscoBalls]

...

lol

what you want is a pump. nothing to do with communications

who in their right mind would not want a pump?

[Mendeleev]

True, those 13M ICN could be transferred to different address earlier. The thing is that it's not a 5 min effort. This has to be configured (smart contract, multi-sig and stuff like that, you know), tested, and retested. Or in other words - shifting focus from core development into this.
Priority was releasing the platform for beta testers, which will lead to earlier public release (so you can finally buy ICNX and perhaps be a little bit less bitter).

Call me crazy, but I have the feeling that if they would do that you or someone else would complain about loosing focus on the main goal.

13M ICN will removed from ICO address, I still can't see how this is less transparent doing it before the vesting starts.

What gives it the most weight is that it was stated it would happen, by a representative of the team. If you hadn't asked, and Jaka never gave you that answer, I doubt I would have came up with the idea myself.
...

So your concern is with the way it was communicated, and not with them actually secretly trading?
Otherwise it would make no sense to even state something. If they wanted to do that, why not just saying that the addresses will be created short time before the vesting starts? Much easier to trade them locked ICN, no?

You aren't addressing the point I'm making. Just focused on one line, too.

Let's say I find it unlikely they would be secretly trading. But I don't KNOW that. I have to just believe it and trust it.

You're right... if you planned to do that, you would be less likely to tell the investors about moving it to a new address. But that assumption proves nothing. E.g. Jaka may have slipped up there. Or they may have decided to mess with their ICN weeks after that AMA. It doesn't matter, because you - as an investor - still have nothing to prove it one way or the other. You must revert to trust/faith.

I'm not saying any of that ACTUALLY happened, but the fact remains... they stated this move would be made, for investor peace of mind, and then didn't follow through. Same with the expense reports.

My way of approaching this is "If they have nothing to hide, then let us see that info"... the info that was promised. Then nobody loses. We have the transparency that was promised, and nothing changes for them.

Your way is like "But do we really need to see that right now? I'm pretty sure there's no funny business going on, so it's not a big concern"

That's the sort of "looking the other way" that people can take advantage of.

I'm not drawing any solid conclusions, except maybe "the team don't stick to what they say"

If they'd said "Our ICN will be locked on the ICO site" at the start, at least I wouldn't be able to argue about it now. But they said something that sounded better. Investors like to hear things like that, yes? ... So when it's not followed through, it is worth pursuing.

Your response doesn't address that. You might as well say "If they were up to no good, why didn't they just take all the funds and run?" ... It's more compicated than that.

Why would you fight this? If I got my way right now, and they put 13 million ICN into a new address, would that be a bad thing for you? Or for anyone?

Like I say, it's just about doing the things you said you'd do.

People are disappointed in things like this. Poor communication. Details not being fleshed out properly. Lack of transparency. None of it necessarily means they don't trust the team. But it is disappointing.

Don't you find it strange that I'm one of the few that is putting things like this into words, amid a sea of hype and moon talk? There's very few people on here capable of discussing things in this way. Same with the Slack.

Basically: I feel like there's a lot of leniency being given to this team, and that is a bad thing in business. Not enough people are holding the team to account. You see maybe one new person every 2 weeks or so, with genuine concerns. They get ignored, or called a troll, then back to the hype and everybody forgets about that person. This isn't a good thing.

[andraxyz]

True, those 13M ICN could be transferred to different address earlier. The thing is that it's not a 5 min effort. This has to be configured (smart contract, multi-sig and stuff like that, you know), tested, and retested. Or in other words - shifting focus from core development into this.
Priority was releasing the platform for beta testers, which will lead to earlier public release (so you can finally buy ICNX and perhaps be a little bit less bitter).

Call me crazy, but I have the feeling that if they would do that you or someone else would complain about loosing focus on the main goal.

13M ICN will removed from ICO address, I still can't see how this is less transparent doing it before the vesting starts.

What gives it the most weight is that it was stated it would happen, by a representative of the team. If you hadn't asked, and Jaka never gave you that answer, I doubt I would have came up with the idea myself.
...

So your concern is with the way it was communicated, and not with them actually secretly trading?
Otherwise it would make no sense to even state something. If they wanted to do that, why not just saying that the addresses will be created short time before the vesting starts? Much easier to trade them locked ICN, no?

You aren't addressing the point I'm making. Just focused on one line, too.

Let's say I find it unlikely they would be secretly trading. But I don't KNOW that. I have to just believe it and trust it.

You're right... if you planned to do that, you would be less likely to tell the investors about moving it to a new address. But that assumption proves nothing. E.g. Jaka may have slipped up there. Or they may have decided to mess with their ICN weeks after that AMA. It doesn't matter, because you - as an investor - still have nothing to prove it one way or the other. You must revert to trust/faith.

I'm not saying any of that ACTUALLY happened, but the fact remains... they stated this move would be made, for investor peace of mind, and then didn't follow through. Same with the expense reports.

My way of approaching this is "If they have nothing to hide, then let us see that info"... the info that was promised. Then nobody loses. We have the transparency that was promised, and nothing changes for them.

Your way is like "But do we really need to see that right now? I'm pretty sure there's no funny business going on, so it's not a big concern"

That's the sort of "looking the other way" that people can take advantage of.

I'm not drawing any solid conclusions, except maybe "the team don't stick to what they say"

If they'd said "Our ICN will be locked on the ICO site" at the start, at least I wouldn't be able to argue about it now. But they said something that sounded better. Investors like to hear things like that, yes? ... So when it's not followed through, it is worth pursuing.

Your response doesn't address that. You might as well say "If they were up to no good, why didn't they just take all the funds and run?" ... It's more compicated than that.

Why would you fight this? If I got my way right now, and they put 13 million ICN into a new address, would that be a bad thing for you? Or for anyone?

Like I say, it's just about doing the things you said you'd do.

People are disappointed in things like this. Poor communication. Details not being fleshed out properly. Lack of transparency. None of it necessarily means they don't trust the team. But it is disappointing.

Don't you find it strange that I'm one of the few that is putting things like this into words, amid a sea of hype and moon talk? There's very few people on here capable of discussing things in this way. Same with the Slack.

Basically: I feel like there's a lot of leniency being given to this team, and that is a bad thing in business. Not enough people are holding the team to account. You see maybe one new person every 2 weeks or so, with genuine concerns. They get ignored, or called a troll, then back to the hype and everybody forgets about that person. This isn't a good thing.

If you'd put the same amount of effort into something else than posting in this thread I believe you'd already be a millionare. The cure for aids would be a piece of cake for such an analytical mind.

[Piston Honda]

h0ld0r!

[Mendeleev]

If you'd put the same amount of effort into something else than posting in this thread I believe you'd already be a millionare. The cure for aids would be a piece of cake for such an analytical mind.

You might be right there.

Can't argue with that.

Anybody have Martin Shkreli's number? I have a business proposition for him...

[Daparski]

True, those 13M ICN could be transferred to different address earlier. The thing is that it's not a 5 min effort. This has to be configured (smart contract, multi-sig and stuff like that, you know), tested, and retested. Or in other words - shifting focus from core development into this.
Priority was releasing the platform for beta testers, which will lead to earlier public release (so you can finally buy ICNX and perhaps be a little bit less bitter).

Call me crazy, but I have the feeling that if they would do that you or someone else would complain about loosing focus on the main goal.

13M ICN will removed from ICO address, I still can't see how this is less transparent doing it before the vesting starts.

What gives it the most weight is that it was stated it would happen, by a representative of the team. If you hadn't asked, and Jaka never gave you that answer, I doubt I would have came up with the idea myself.
...

So your concern is with the way it was communicated, and not with them actually secretly trading?
Otherwise it would make no sense to even state something. If they wanted to do that, why not just saying that the addresses will be created short time before the vesting starts? Much easier to trade them locked ICN, no?

You aren't addressing the point I'm making. Just focused on one line, too.

Let's say I find it unlikely they would be secretly trading. But I don't KNOW that. I have to just believe it and trust it.

You're right... if you planned to do that, you would be less likely to tell the investors about moving it to a new address. But that assumption proves nothing. E.g. Jaka may have slipped up there. Or they may have decided to mess with their ICN weeks after that AMA. It doesn't matter, because you - as an investor - still have nothing to prove it one way or the other. You must revert to trust/faith.

I'm not saying any of that ACTUALLY happened, but the fact remains... they stated this move would be made, for investor peace of mind, and then didn't follow through. Same with the expense reports.

My way of approaching this is "If they have nothing to hide, then let us see that info"... the info that was promised. Then nobody loses. We have the transparency that was promised, and nothing changes for them.

Your way is like "But do we really need to see that right now? I'm pretty sure there's no funny business going on, so it's not a big concern"

That's the sort of "looking the other way" that people can take advantage of.

I'm not drawing any solid conclusions, except maybe "the team don't stick to what they say"

If they'd said "Our ICN will be locked on the ICO site" at the start, at least I wouldn't be able to argue about it now. But they said something that sounded better. Investors like to hear things like that, yes? ... So when it's not followed through, it is worth pursuing.

Your response doesn't address that. You might as well say "If they were up to no good, why didn't they just take all the funds and run?" ... It's more compicated than that.

Why would you fight this? If I got my way right now, and they put 13 million ICN into a new address, would that be a bad thing for you? Or for anyone?

Like I say, it's just about doing the things you said you'd do.

People are disappointed in things like this. Poor communication. Details not being fleshed out properly. Lack of transparency. None of it necessarily means they don't trust the team. But it is disappointing.

Don't you find it strange that I'm one of the few that is putting things like this into words, amid a sea of hype and moon talk? There's very few people on here capable of discussing things in this way. Same with the Slack.

Basically: I feel like there's a lot of leniency being given to this team, and that is a bad thing in business. Not enough people are holding the team to account. You see maybe one new person every 2 weeks or so, with genuine concerns. They get ignored, or called a troll, then back to the hype and everybody forgets about that person. This isn't a good thing.

You see, when you want you can post constructive criticism  
Valid points, all I can say is that it always comes down to trust. You invested during the ICO not because of dividends payments, but firstly because you had trust that the team and escrow won't run away with the funds.
The same trust applies now, that they are not doing those fishy things. That's why I stopped asking about the devs address at the time.

Transparency and communications are super important. I do believe they will be addressed soon.