Bitcoin Forum
November 15, 2019, 07:19:59 AM *
News: Help collect the most notable posts made over the last 10 years.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 [179] 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 ... 458 »
  Print  
Author Topic: ICONOMI - Live for today. Invest for tomorrow.  (Read 558765 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
SEOcrypto
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 114
Merit: 10


View Profile
April 12, 2017, 05:47:50 PM
 #3561

Daparski is turning people off

There were legitimate concerns in this thread that were blocked / tagged as FUD

Horrible moderation in this thread - why does the team let this person continue like this?
The Bitcoin Forum is turning 10 years old! Join the community in sharing and exploring the notable posts made over the years.
loremipsum
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 501


View Profile
April 12, 2017, 05:50:40 PM
 #3562

Daparski is turning people off

There were legitimate concerns in this thread that were blocked / tagged as FUD

Horrible moderation in this thread - why does the team let this person continue like this?

Not true. All deleted posts were FUD. Especially newbie accounts that are so easily identified as alts..

SEOcrypto
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 114
Merit: 10


View Profile
April 12, 2017, 05:55:05 PM
 #3563

Daparski is turning people off

There were legitimate concerns in this thread that were blocked / tagged as FUD

Horrible moderation in this thread - why does the team let this person continue like this?

Not true. All deleted posts were FUD

That's just not true at all.  Maybe they were deleted before you saw them - but I saw them.

People were raising legitimate concerns in the change of business model (dividends vs. buyback) and the language binding ICONOMI to follow through on the buyback.

These were legitimate concerns from people who invested in the project.

Overall, the way this change was communicated was extremely poor.  The post you referenced (https://medium.com/iconominet/iconomi-introduces-repayment-programme-54bfa449d4580) should have addressed the unintentional 'bait and switch' nature of the change of business model.

You can't raise millions of dollars saying your business model is X, then not address WHY you are changing it.  This post was incredibly weak in my opinion - they needed to explain the change in strategy/direction - not just pretend this was always the plan.

EDIT - Furthermore, ETH dividends were a big reason why this project was attractive to many.  Dismissing these investor concerns as FUD is incredibly toxic.  Not every post is/has been deleted - but this moderator has been out of control (IMO)
The Crypto Baron
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294
Merit: 250



View Profile
April 12, 2017, 05:58:57 PM
 #3564

Snapped up some more at 330 this AM  Cool

Love ICN and will be accumulating more and more for a long time

loremipsum
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 501


View Profile
April 12, 2017, 06:03:37 PM
 #3565

I personally like the buyback option but I agree they should have explained the reasons they changed their mind on dividents. Two of the main reasons are transaction fees and the compatibility with major exchanges IMO; they could have explained it better.

But I didn't see any genuine posts regarding these.. What I saw was FUD from newbie accounts!

The Crypto Baron
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294
Merit: 250



View Profile
April 12, 2017, 06:12:36 PM
 #3566

I personally like the buyback option but I agree they should have explained the reasons they changed their mind on dividents. Two of the main reasons are transaction fees and the compatibility with major exchanges IMO; they could have explained it better.

But I didn't see any genuine posts regarding these.. What I saw was FUD from newbie accounts!

Dividends also walk a tighter legal rope with different nation's government tax agencies liability.

Less legal exposure, save substantial money in fees, avoid compatibility issues, and all for the same impact on the bottom line... I love the decision.

SEOcrypto
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 114
Merit: 10


View Profile
April 12, 2017, 06:20:07 PM
 #3567

I personally like the buyback option but I agree they should have explained the reasons they changed their mind on dividents. Two of the main reasons are transaction fees and the compatibility with major exchanges IMO; they could have explained it better.

But I didn't see any genuine posts regarding these.. What I saw was FUD from newbie accounts!

Dividends also walk a tighter legal rope with different nation's government tax agencies liability.

Less legal exposure, save substantial money in fees, avoid compatibility issues, and all for the same impact on the bottom line... I love the decision.

Agreed with this - the rationale for doing buybacks instead of dividends makes sense from a legal / management perspective.  What that means from a token value perspective - and how that impacts the investors - is something I don't fully understand.  (among many others)

Although I understand some of the WHY - I was offput by the ICONOMI team not addressing the change from dividends to buyback.

That post doesn't address that there was a change in business model at all.  The whole thing was just bizarre to me and doesn't reflect well on ICONOMI.

Then the way the thread is moderated it's really a bad look.
Mendeleev
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 255


View Profile
April 12, 2017, 06:24:35 PM
 #3568

EDIT - Furthermore, ETH dividends were a big reason why this project was attractive to many.  Dismissing these investor concerns as FUD is incredibly toxic.  Not every post is/has been deleted - but this moderator has been out of control (IMO)

Nah, he's left loads of critical posts in. It's mostly the 'newbie' posts which are being removed. I do think that the points raised by e.g. TheTruthIsOutThere have been valid, though. But he is also a bit of a troll  Roll Eyes


I personally like the buyback option but I agree they should have explained the reasons they changed their mind on dividents. Two of the main reasons are transaction fees and the compatibility with major exchanges IMO; they could have explained it better.

But I didn't see any genuine posts regarding these.. What I saw was FUD from newbie accounts!

I've seen a lot of genuine posts about this, on here, and on reddit. I'm surprised you've missed them.
SEOcrypto
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 114
Merit: 10


View Profile
April 12, 2017, 06:27:43 PM
 #3569

EDIT - Furthermore, ETH dividends were a big reason why this project was attractive to many.  Dismissing these investor concerns as FUD is incredibly toxic.  Not every post is/has been deleted - but this moderator has been out of control (IMO)

Nah, he's left loads of critical posts in. It's mostly the 'newbie' posts which are being removed. I do think that the points raised by e.g. TheTruthIsOutThere have been valid, though. But he is also a bit of a troll  Roll Eyes


I personally like the buyback option but I agree they should have explained the reasons they changed their mind on dividents. Two of the main reasons are transaction fees and the compatibility with major exchanges IMO; they could have explained it better.

But I didn't see any genuine posts regarding these.. What I saw was FUD from newbie accounts!

I've seen a lot of genuine posts on this, on here, and on reddit. I'm surprised you've missed them.

Maybe I'm being too harsh - I have seen genuine criticisms here, on reddit, etc.

My issue is during the days following the buyback announcement I remember following the thread closely.  There were some real, legitimate perspective that the moderator was censoring.  It made no sense to me and looked horrible for ICONOMI.
The Crypto Baron
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294
Merit: 250



View Profile
April 12, 2017, 06:32:08 PM
 #3570

I personally like the buyback option but I agree they should have explained the reasons they changed their mind on dividents. Two of the main reasons are transaction fees and the compatibility with major exchanges IMO; they could have explained it better.

But I didn't see any genuine posts regarding these.. What I saw was FUD from newbie accounts!

Dividends also walk a tighter legal rope with different nation's government tax agencies liability.

Less legal exposure, save substantial money in fees, avoid compatibility issues, and all for the same impact on the bottom line... I love the decision.

Agreed with this - the rationale for doing buybacks instead of dividends makes sense from a legal / management perspective.  What that means from a token value perspective - and how that impacts the investors - is something I don't fully understand.  (among many others)

Although I understand some of the WHY - I was offput by the ICONOMI team not addressing the change from dividends to buyback.

That post doesn't address that there was a change in business model at all.  The whole thing was just bizarre to me and doesn't reflect well on ICONOMI.

Then the way the thread is moderated it's really a bad look.

When a stock pays a dividend, the price is reduced by the amount of the dividend when it is paid out (termed the "ex dividend date")

So say you own 100 shares of XYZ at $10 each.  XYZ decides to pay a $1 dividend to owners.  When it pays that amount, the price of XYZ is reduced to $9 per share, but you were paid the $1 dividend.

So under a dividend system, you have $9 and a $1 dividend.  Without paying a dividend, you have a $10 investment.

ICN would function under the same principal... there is no change and as "part owners", ICN owners should applaud the more efficient "burn" decision.

SEOcrypto
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 114
Merit: 10


View Profile
April 12, 2017, 06:35:32 PM
 #3571

I personally like the buyback option but I agree they should have explained the reasons they changed their mind on dividents. Two of the main reasons are transaction fees and the compatibility with major exchanges IMO; they could have explained it better.

But I didn't see any genuine posts regarding these.. What I saw was FUD from newbie accounts!

Dividends also walk a tighter legal rope with different nation's government tax agencies liability.

Less legal exposure, save substantial money in fees, avoid compatibility issues, and all for the same impact on the bottom line... I love the decision.

Agreed with this - the rationale for doing buybacks instead of dividends makes sense from a legal / management perspective.  What that means from a token value perspective - and how that impacts the investors - is something I don't fully understand.  (among many others)

Although I understand some of the WHY - I was offput by the ICONOMI team not addressing the change from dividends to buyback.

That post doesn't address that there was a change in business model at all.  The whole thing was just bizarre to me and doesn't reflect well on ICONOMI.

Then the way the thread is moderated it's really a bad look.

When a stock pays a dividend, the price is reduced by the amount of the dividend when it is paid out (termed the "ex dividend date")

So say you own 100 shares of XYZ at $10 each.  XYZ decides to pay a $1 dividend to owners.  When it pays that amount, the price of XYZ is reduced to $9 per share, but you were paid the $1 dividend.

So under a dividend system, you have $9 and a $1 dividend.  Without paying a dividend, you have a $10 investment.

ICN would function under the same principal... there is no change and as "part owners", ICN owners should applaud the more efficient "burn" decision.

Thanks for the explanation.  To me (in my noob opinion), this changes the supposed value of the token. 

By eliminating ETH dividends and using a ICN buyback method, the sole value of the token is related to the buyback.

The concept of ETH dividends made sense to me, as I'm trying to increase my ETH stash.  If my ICN are working for me and making me ETH, I see value in holding the tokens.

Again this is my noob brain talking, plz correct me - it'll prob be helpful for others too
The Crypto Baron
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294
Merit: 250



View Profile
April 12, 2017, 06:47:32 PM
 #3572

Thanks for the explanation.  To me (in my noob opinion), this changes the supposed value of the token. 

By eliminating ETH dividends and using a ICN buyback method, the sole value of the token is related to the buyback.

The concept of ETH dividends made sense to me, as I'm trying to increase my ETH stash.  If my ICN are working for me and making me ETH, I see value in holding the tokens.

Again this is my noob brain talking, plz correct me - it'll prob be helpful for others too

Yes, you're correct.  A more detailed explanation of how it will work in this case:

The market cap is just the Price x # of coins.

So to make this easy with simpler #s, lets say in this example ICN is worth $87 million, at $1 per coin with a supply of 87 mill coins.

Let's say ICN makes $13 million... they can pay that in ETH through a dividend or they can buy $13 million coins to burn.

If they pay in ETH, every coin holder will earn $0.149 ($13 million profit/87 mill total coins) for every coin they own (MINUS TRANSACTION FEES, LABOR COSTS TO PROCESS, ETC)

If they do a buy-back burn, they can buy 13 million coins ($13 million profit/$1 per coin), and destroy them, reducing the # of coins to 74 million.  Now that $87 million market/74 million (the new coin supply)=$1.176 per coin

So not only do you save on fees and costs, but you make more money... you just have to manually sell some ICN to have the same effect as a dividend payment.

Make sense?

Daparski
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 12, 2017, 06:49:20 PM
 #3573

Daparski is turning people off

There were legitimate concerns in this thread that were blocked / tagged as FUD

Horrible moderation in this thread - why does the team let this person continue like this?

Not true. All deleted posts were FUD

That's just not true at all.  Maybe they were deleted before you saw them - but I saw them.

People were raising legitimate concerns in the change of business model (dividends vs. buyback) and the language binding ICONOMI to follow through on the buyback.

These were legitimate concerns from people who invested in the project.

Overall, the way this change was communicated was extremely poor.  The post you referenced (https://medium.com/iconominet/iconomi-introduces-repayment-programme-54bfa449d4580) should have addressed the unintentional 'bait and switch' nature of the change of business model.

You can't raise millions of dollars saying your business model is X, then not address WHY you are changing it.  This post was incredibly weak in my opinion - they needed to explain the change in strategy/direction - not just pretend this was always the plan.

EDIT - Furthermore, ETH dividends were a big reason why this project was attractive to many.  Dismissing these investor concerns as FUD is incredibly toxic.  Not every post is/has been deleted - but this moderator has been out of control (IMO)


mmm, No. "People" were newbies sock puppets accounts. If you don't like the moderation, you are welcome to contact the team about it
Mendeleev
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 255


View Profile
April 12, 2017, 06:50:24 PM
 #3574

Maybe I'm being too harsh - I have seen genuine criticisms here, on reddit, etc.

My issue is during the days following the buyback announcement I remember following the thread closely.  There were some real, legitimate perspective that the moderator was censoring.  It made no sense to me and looked horrible for ICONOMI.

Yeah, there was a lot more being deleted around that time. I think a lot of people (including the moderator) genuinely thought this was FUD/trolling, but now people are starting to accept that these concerns are genuine.

ICN would function under the same principal... there is no change and as "part owners", ICN owners should applaud the more efficient "burn" decision.

You are operating under the assumption that ICN represents ownership of anything. One of the concerns is that the token 'ICN' is now completely divorced from the platform, and serves purely as a stake in the company's success, with its value driven by nothing but speculation. Under this sort of set-up, the value of the token is not necessarily driven by the success of the platform.

You might say "Yes, the whitepaper said it represents ownership", but you'd have said the same about dividends at one time. What else might have changed?

At this stage, we don't really know either way. That's why people have raised concerns, and want answers.

There are other concerns too. The above is just a small portion of what people have been asking. And they want answers from the team - not just from other users/investors like you or I.
Piston Honda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1040


Juicin' crypto


View Profile
April 12, 2017, 06:51:07 PM
 #3575

Thanks for the explanation.  To me (in my noob opinion), this changes the supposed value of the token. 

By eliminating ETH dividends and using a ICN buyback method, the sole value of the token is related to the buyback.

The concept of ETH dividends made sense to me, as I'm trying to increase my ETH stash.  If my ICN are working for me and making me ETH, I see value in holding the tokens.

Again this is my noob brain talking, plz correct me - it'll prob be helpful for others too

Yes, you're correct.  A more detailed explanation of how it will work in this case:

The market cap is just the Price x # of coins.

So to make this easy with simpler #s, lets say in this example ICN is worth $87 million, at $1 per coin with a supply of 87 mill coins.

Let's say ICN makes $13 million... they can pay that in ETH through a dividend or they can buy $13 million coins to burn.

If they pay in ETH, every coin holder will earn $0.149 ($13 million profit/87 mill total coins) for every coin they own (MINUS TRANSACTION FEES, LABOR COSTS TO PROCESS, ETC)

If they do a buy-back burn, they can buy 13 million coins ($13 million profit/$1 per coin), and destroy them, reducing the # of coins to 74 million.  Now that $87 million market/74 million (the new coin supply)=$1.176 per coin

So not only do you save on fees and costs, but you make more money... you just have to manually sell some ICN to have the same effect as a dividend payment.

Make sense?

amen.  well put.

this coin should have a very solid few months coming....

www.dlsag.com ~ 1ex.trade
SEOcrypto
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 114
Merit: 10


View Profile
April 12, 2017, 06:55:18 PM
 #3576

@cryptobarron, thanks for the explanation

@mendeleev, agree 100% with what you're saying.  The team needs to address this.

The comments in the 'Buy Back Announcement Thread' - https://medium.com/iconominet/iconomi-introduces-repayment-programme-54bfa449d458 thread - have they been addressed by the ICONOMI team?

Have they actually announced how the buyback will work over time?  Will all ICONOMI.PERFORMANCE realized investment profits be used in the buyback program?  

'“Burning” means that purchased tokens will be taken off the market, with the consequence that the total supply of ICN tokens will decrease. This option represents a fair way for everyone, especially if conducted transparently.'

^especially if conducted transparently?  How about ONLY if conducted transparently.  


The more I read this announcement post...


It's mind boggling to me just how little regard it seems ICONOMI has for it's original investors.
The Crypto Baron
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294
Merit: 250



View Profile
April 12, 2017, 06:57:12 PM
 #3577

You are operating under the assumption that ICN represents ownership of anything. One of the concerns is that the token 'ICN' is now completely divorced from the platform, and serves purely as a stake in the company's success, with its value driven by nothing but speculation. Under this sort of set-up, the value of the token is not necessarily driven by the success of the platform.

You might say "Yes, the whitepaper said it represents ownership", but you'd have said the same about dividends at one time. What else might have changed?

At this stage, we don't really know either way. That's why people have raised concerns, and want answers.

There are other concerns too. The above is just a small portion of what people have been asking. And they want answers from the team - not just from other users/investors like you or I.

That is EXACTLY what I want.

IDGAF about the platform, tbh.  I care about ICN and its unique opportunity to capture the huge influx of money heading to the crypto space (in a few years, the crypto market cap will be measured in the TRILLIONS, not billions).

My career is with major financial firms in the US.  ICN represents the opportunity to own a chunk of the future Merrill Lynch/JP Morgan... and you're fucking right I'm snapping up all I can get my paws on.

In 2008, after a huge financial collapse, Bank of America paid $50 billion for a hugely discounted Merrill Lynch... ICN valued at $35 million in a historically ripe growth market?  

Sign.

Me.

The.

Fuck.

Up.

(disclaimer: also hugely bullish on BTC, ETH, PIVX, NEM)

Daparski
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 12, 2017, 06:59:23 PM
 #3578

@cryptobarron, thanks for the explanation

@mendeleev, agree 100% with what you're saying.  The team needs to address this.

The comments in the 'Buy Back Announcement Thread' - https://medium.com/iconominet/iconomi-introduces-repayment-programme-54bfa449d458 thread - have they been addressed by the ICONOMI team?

Have they actually announced how the buyback will work over time?  Will all ICONOMI.PERFORMANCE realized investment profits be used in the buyback program?  

'“Burning” means that purchased tokens will be taken off the market, with the consequence that the total supply of ICN tokens will decrease. This option represents a fair way for everyone, especially if conducted transparently.'

^especially if conducted transparently?  How about ONLY if conducted transparently.  


The more I read this announcement post...


It's mind boggling to me just how little regard it seems ICONOMI has for it's original investors.

Most of your questions are answered in the medium post. All profits will be used for buy/burn, not just ICNP.
Burning means sending them to an address that cannot be used for withdraw.
Daparski
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 12, 2017, 07:05:40 PM
 #3579

Maybe I'm being too harsh - I have seen genuine criticisms here, on reddit, etc.

My issue is during the days following the buyback announcement I remember following the thread closely.  There were some real, legitimate perspective that the moderator was censoring.  It made no sense to me and looked horrible for ICONOMI.

Yeah, there was a lot more being deleted around that time. I think a lot of people (including the moderator) genuinely thought this was FUD/trolling, but now people are starting to accept that these concerns are genuine.

ICN would function under the same principal... there is no change and as "part owners", ICN owners should applaud the more efficient "burn" decision.

You are operating under the assumption that ICN represents ownership of anything. One of the concerns is that the token 'ICN' is now completely divorced from the platform, and serves purely as a stake in the company's success, with its value driven by nothing but speculation. Under this sort of set-up, the value of the token is not necessarily driven by the success of the platform.

You might say "Yes, the whitepaper said it represents ownership", but you'd have said the same about dividends at one time. What else might have changed?

At this stage, we don't really know either way. That's why people have raised concerns, and want answers.

There are other concerns too. The above is just a small portion of what people have been asking. And they want answers from the team - not just from other users/investors like you or I.

Quote
You are operating under the assumption that ICN represents ownership of anything. One of the concerns is that the token 'ICN' is now completely divorced from the platform, and serves purely as a stake in the company's success, with its value driven by nothing but speculation. Under this sort of set-up, the value of the token is not necessarily driven by the success of the platform.

How is that different than previous profits distribution way, aka dividends, or from any other company in the world?

How is ICN completely divorced from the platform? Currently it's backed up by Iconomi assets - ICO money, ICNP and ICNX funds. the rest is speculation for future success.
How is that different than any other stock out there? If the company products/services are used by a lot of people, and the company has a solid business model - this will drive tits stock price up.
Same with Iconomi
zxdcv
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 142
Merit: 100


View Profile
April 12, 2017, 07:20:41 PM
 #3580

Lol. Are we still whining about the dividends? Some of you sound like a bunch PMS girls on the rag. Either sell or shut the fuck up.

Pages: « 1 ... 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 [179] 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 ... 458 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!