ICONOMI - Live for today. Invest for tomorrow.

[Mendeleev]

So we are back to selective quotes?

Perhaps the new terminology is being rewritten and due to legal restrictions the team is not allowed to comment on it yet? That makes much more sense to me than "the team lied to us, muuh dividends"
Everyone should make his/her own decisions. If it smells fishy - get out, as simple as that. That's what I'd do anyway.
That goes for both fanboys and trolls.

Where is the value? People could use their head for a chance. Value is a sum of assets under management and future speculations. Currently Iconomi has almost 28M usd worth of assets in ICNP and at least the same amount for daily operation. How much doggie has?
You know what, let's take a legit (IMO) project as an example - SIA. How much money SIA team has? They got 750K usd ~6 months ago, and yet their market cap is higher than Iconomi's.

"Why haven't you answered to questions from the previous AMA" is a legit question to the team. I do believe it's better to write "we cannot comment on that yet" than leave it unanswered.
In any case, I attend to create a reddit post before the AMA that will collect questions for people, mainly for 2 reasons - to let people up/down vote in advance and as a service to those who won't be able to attend (I will repost the questions)

What are you talking about "selective quotes"? I just don't include your whole post, so that it's not a big wall of text. The links to your original posts are still there. Nothing is taken out of context. It's just a cleaner way to respond to you. Calm down.

I've not said they lied, or "muh dividends" either. And I agree that there might be issues beyond their control which are causing the changes. You're ascribing meaning/intent to my post that simply isn't there.

I also agree people can just get out if they don't like it. That doesn't mean the matter is off the table for discussion.

Where is the value? People could use their head for a chance. Value is a sum of assets under management and future speculations.

Then please ask for that to be added to the terminology page. ICNX and ICNP have much more detailed explanations on there. ICN's entry is just like "Err, ICN is an ERC20 token that we gave people at the ICO".

Again, your summation of where the value comes from is currently meaningless. There's an important factor in determining value that you, and others, seem to be misunderstanding - and it seems difficult to communicate to you just what that is. But it is clear that others understand this, which is why questions are asked. It doesn't mean they aren't using their heads. It means they are using their heads. Your defensive stance on this matter does nobody any good.

SIA is a good example of a token that has a clear value, by the way. ICN is (currently) not.

As for the AMA... it is much simpler to complete the first one. The questions are already there, ready to be answered. Additionally, the team are effectively granted extra chance to come up with the answers (i.e. the questions are a month old, so it's easier than answering a brand new question on the day). This works out great for the people who asked the questions last time, and it makes it easier for the team. And it will also look good for the team to say "Hey guys, we've finished answering all of those questions!" and then hold a fresh AMA a month from now. That would make a lot of people happy.

[1714055682]

1714055682

[spendawgs]

I think Fuders are back.Time to buy more as price drops and make more profit when icn goes to moon but I do not think ICN will ever go back to 30k now

I agree. Its up here to stay now. Damn should have bought more earlier

[Red_Sanford]

Has the date been announced for the next AMA ? I am really looking forward to hear some solid answers. We need to have a website that is updated real time with the value and holdings. This is supposed to be transparent.

   I find it really ironic that cofoundit is being spun off of Iconomi when it seems like they make so many mistakes regarding transparency and honesty.

 I have a decent investment and like the fact that this is a real company with a real product but without knowing how close we are to launch I am hesitant to purchase anymore.

Looks like fudding is back in the menu, boys!

Can you point to some of the honesty mistakes?
You know what I find ironic? Bringing cofound.it now, after it was announced more than a month ago

You are frequently on this board so maybe you can answer this question
https://www.reddit.com/r/ICONOMI/comments/6d9ci1/where_the_the_value_of_the_icn_token_derived_from/

What gives ICN value? What is the utility for it? Read some of the comments from this reddit post

These things will be cleared soon enough. You think they knew back then how things will roll out in 6-8 months, while being in this untested waters and kept it away from investors? Or perhaps you think that a startup in the crypto sphere that builds a product that does not exist yet, with no legal infrastructure yet should stay stagnant? And follow the original idea and white paper no matter what happens in reality?
Look around you boy. Most successful startups in the old economy had adapted to the environment and changed their business model, focus and even the core product.

What brings doggie value? or 99% of the alts on coinmarketcap? ffs, it's one of the very few projects that has a real use case with huge market potential.

Keep fudding, we will keep accumulating. Let's see who will be where in 12 months

Absolutely owned!

Doge derives its value and utility as a tipping token

OK cheerleader. He didn't explain it, so maybe you can. Why does something that has no utility grow in value because of scarcity

[Daparski]

What are you talking about "selective quotes"? I just don't include your whole post, so that it's not a big wall of text. The links to your original posts are still there. Nothing is taken out of context. It's just a cleaner way to respond to you. Calm down.

I've not said they lied, or "muh dividends" either. And I agree that there might be issues beyond their control which are causing the changes. You're ascribing meaning/intent to my post that simply isn't there.

I also agree people can just get out if they don't like it. That doesn't mean the matter is off the table for discussion.

Where is the value? People could use their head for a chance. Value is a sum of assets under management and future speculations.

Then please ask for that to be added to the terminology page. ICNX and ICNP have much more detailed explanations on there. ICN's entry is just like "Err, ICN is an ERC20 token that we gave people at the ICO".

Again, your summation of where the value comes from is currently meaningless. There's an important factor in determining value that you, and others, seem to be misunderstanding - and it seems difficult to communicate to you just what that is. But it is clear that others understand this, which is why questions are asked. It doesn't mean they aren't using their heads. It means they are using their heads. Your defensive stance on this matter does nobody any good.

SIA is a good example of a token that has a clear value, by the way. ICN is (currently) not.

As for the AMA... it is much simpler to complete the first one. The questions are already there, ready to be answered. Additionally, the team are effectively granted extra chance to come up with the answers (i.e. the questions are a month old, so it's easier than answering a brand new question on the day). This works out great for the people who asked the questions last time, and it makes it easier for the team. And it will also look good for the team to say "Hey guys, we've finished answering all of those questions!" and then hold a fresh AMA a month from now. That would make a lot of people happy.

What are you talking about "selective quotes"?

As you took just the doggie example and you based your respond on it, instead of the context in which it was said.

I've not said they lied, or "muh dividends" either.

I clearly wasn't referring to you since I replied to someone else, but you already know that

SIA is a good example of a token that has a clear value, by the way. ICN is (currently) not.

Care to explain how SIA has a clear value and Iconomi doesn't? SIA is still deep in the beta stage with some users using the network. (don't know how much)
Iconomi is at the end of the beta phase with few hundred users at least that are using the platform.

If we take out the future speculation out of the equation, in both cases we can see the "net" value which is user-base.
For SIA - the more hosts/users are actively using its network - the more SIA tokens are needed/locked
For Iconomi - the more users are using the platform, the more fees are collected and the more ICN tokens are burned
What's not clear about it?

Again, your summation of where the value comes from is currently meaningless. There's an important factor in determining value that you, and others, seem to be misunderstanding - and it seems difficult to communicate to you just what that is.

Please make the efforts and try

[Daparski]

TL;DR for the latest session with Uncle Mendeleev:

If price was 10, or even 5 usd - I am 100% sure that no one would be concerned, worried, wondering where is the white paper, why questions on the AMA were not answered and the rest of the collection.
That leads me to the simple conclusion that the same concerned investors wanted 50x gains in the first 6 months of the project.

[Mendeleev]

As you took just the doggie example and you based your respond on it, instead of the context in which it was said.

The context was not altered. Your position was that Iconomi is one of the only projects with any real use case. I responded to that position and stated that nobody is saying the project itself has no value. Where is your issue?

I clearly wasn't referring to you since I replied to someone else, but you already know that

You said it to me, without making it clear who you were referring to. I accept that you were talking in a more general sense, and not about me specifically.

Care to explain how SIA has a clear value and Iconomi doesn't? SIA is still deep in the beta stage with some users using the network. (don't know how much)
Iconomi is at the end of the beta phase with few hundred users at least that are using the platform.

If we take out the future speculation out of the equation, in both cases we can see the "net" value which is user-base.
For SIA - the more hosts/users are actively using its network - the more SIA tokens are needed/locked
For Iconomi - the more users are using the platform, the more fees are collected and the more ICN tokens are burned
What's not clear about it?

Please make the efforts and try

I will try...

SIA has a usage as payment on the network. That is its value. The same as GNT on Golem, or ETH on Ethereum.

Iconomi's original proposed value was that of a share in the platform. It is currently unclear if this is still the case, due to lack of response on the matter, and the vague description on the terminology page.

I have went over this in the past - but a dividend paying asset has clear utility, as you purchase the token in order to be granted the right to receive a dividend. Put aside the dividend/buyback debate - it is a fact that this use case would have dictated the value of the token. We would't need to worry about legalities in that sense, because the proof of value would be in the returns themselves (even if they were poor.)

Now we move forward to buybacks. Buying back the tokens does not give them value alone. They must have a base value to begin with. Now, if this were a share in the "real" world, it would be backed by the assets Iconomi holds - because there would be a legal, regulated binding to the platform. That would be the "proof" in that case, which would guarantee the base value: ownership. This is not the case right now. Your token grants you no rights to anything. It could possibly be used as an IOU in order to claim shares in future, but it is not - in and of itself - a share of anything. It is just a token on the network, that isn't doing anything, and isn't actually connected to the Iconomi assets. It is connected in people's minds - but not in any official capacity.

Because there is no clear concrete connection to the platform, no official response from the team, no whitepaper, and only a vague description of the token on the help pages, the token can be said to have no clear value at this moment in time.

That is not to say it has no value to you, or won't have a clear value in future. Your value comes in the form of expecting it to be objectively valuable one day. This is its only speculative value at this current moment in time.

Now this future value could come in the form of a more concrete explanation of how the token is backed by the assets Iconomi holds, or it could come in the form of a transition into a usage token on the platform itself. And, as I said, it could be used as an IOU to claim actual real world shares.

In the most loosely tied case, the value just comes from everybody collectively agreeing that this token represents Iconomi. That is the case that most people are running with at the moment. But that would be no better than creating my own token myself, and saying "If Iconomi does well, this token should increase in value" and expecting people to buy my token at a higher price later on. It's like making a bet, without a bookie, and just expecting some random person to pay you if you win.

Now, despite this in depth explanation, I'm confident that you still won't actually understand any of this - because you haven't understood it so far. However, I can see that plenty of other people DO understand it.

I'm trying to explain to you WHY people ask about the value. The above reasons are why. Disagree with them all you like, but that is the thought process that is driving people to question the value - and it is perfectly valid reasoning.

[Enjorlas]

Someone asked what the price of ICN was going to be so let me give you an idea.

The ICNP is currently valued at $27.5 million. That equates to $5.5 million in buybacks if Iconomi just breaks even on all investments made.

Let me spell it out for you. There aren't $5.5 million worth of ICN on exchanges to buy right now.

Mendeleev and any other concern troll who tries to tell you that an asset whose demand will soon outstrip supply doesn't have a value can get fucked.

[Mendeleev]

Let me spell it out for you. There aren't $5.5 million worth of ICN on exchanges to buy right now.

Mendeleev and any other concern troll who tries to tell you that an asset whose demand will soon outstrip supply doesn't have a value can get fucked.

I'm not stating anything other than "there is no clear value", and I've explained the reasons for that.

Reduction of supply does not drive value on its own. It increases value of things that are valuable to begin with. That value, for ICN, is not currently clear.

It's possible that ICN will just become a usage token on the platform (and not a share), which will make it valuable. But that will not be the value that people think it has at the moment. It will be very different from what was originally promised. And that's fine. At least it will have some clear value then.

I've seen a number of posts from you, and they're all pretty much "moon time" nonsense from somebody who has no understanding of what he's talking about, and a complete disdain for any discussion that doesn't align with his "moon time" attitude. Posts like mine are a lot more informative and useful than the vacuous drivel that comes from people like you, who have nothing of any value to add to a discussion.

People might not like to read what I have to say, but at least I make well constructed points, and contribute to a discussion. I'm not trolling, or trying to manipulate anything. I'm just explaining why people question the value.

Contrary to what Daparski thinks, I'd still explain it even if ICN was $10 right now. However, I believe if it was $10 right now, it would be because people already have a clear understanding of its value enough to drive the price up to $10 to begin with.

By the way, there are $22 million dollars worth of ICN on Kraken right now, of which nearly $8 million (ask) are in sell orders on the BTC pairing alone. So I'm not sure where you're getting your figures from.

Edit: Oh, wait. You're valuing every single ICN on the sell side at the last price. Why would you do that? I thought you believed ICN was worth more? ... Strange that.

[zxdcv]

Someone asked what the price of ICN was going to be so let me give you an idea.

The ICNP is currently valued at $27.5 million. That equates to $5.5 million in buybacks if Iconomi just breaks even on all investments made.

Let me spell it out for you. There aren't $5.5 million worth of ICN on exchanges to buy right now.

Mendeleev and any other concern troll who tries to tell you that an asset whose demand will soon outstrip supply doesn't have a value can get fucked.

What if....Iconomi the company buys ALL of the ICN off of Kraken and will not allow other exchanges to list the coin for this reason.

The reason for this is to attempt to own a majority share of the company before they de-list the coin on Kraken and turn ICN into actual shares

of the company. This was one of my possibility speculations. That way we base the value of ICN on the performance/profits of the company. If they

advertised this scenario to the ICN holders...then the listing ICN prices would be ridiculously high based on the knowledge of an imminent once and

for all buy-back. If ICN was to be made a utility token then buybacks would hurt the company and cause a scaling issue. The only way buybacks will

work is if ICN becomes a private share and eventually a public share of the company which would increase the company's value. Sorry for the sloppy

typing, I have to take a leak really bad. Thoughts?

[Daparski]

As you took just the doggie example and you based your respond on it, instead of the context in which it was said.

The context was not altered. Your position was that Iconomi is one of the only projects with any real use case. I responded to that position and stated that nobody is saying the project itself has no value. Where is your issue?

I clearly wasn't referring to you since I replied to someone else, but you already know that

You said it to me, without making it clear who you were referring to. I accept that you were talking in a more general sense, and not about me specifically.

Care to explain how SIA has a clear value and Iconomi doesn't? SIA is still deep in the beta stage with some users using the network. (don't know how much)
Iconomi is at the end of the beta phase with few hundred users at least that are using the platform.

If we take out the future speculation out of the equation, in both cases we can see the "net" value which is user-base.
For SIA - the more hosts/users are actively using its network - the more SIA tokens are needed/locked
For Iconomi - the more users are using the platform, the more fees are collected and the more ICN tokens are burned
What's not clear about it?

Please make the efforts and try

I will try...

SIA has a usage as payment on the network. That is its value. The same as GNT on Golem, or ETH on Ethereum.

Iconomi's original proposed value was that of a share in the platform. It is currently unclear if this is still the case, due to lack of response on the matter, and the vague description on the terminology page.

I have went over this in the past - but a dividend paying asset has clear utility, as you purchase the token in order to be granted the right to receive a dividend. Put aside the dividend/buyback debate - it is a fact that this use case would have dictated the value of the token. We would't need to worry about legalities in that sense, because the proof of value would be in the returns themselves (even if they were poor.)

Now we move forward to buybacks. Buying back the tokens does not give them value alone. They must have a base value to begin with. Now, if this were a share in the "real" world, it would be backed by the assets Iconomi holds - because there would be a legal, regulated binding to the platform. That would be the "proof" in that case, which would guarantee the base value: ownership. This is not the case right now. Your token grants you no rights to anything. It could possibly be used as an IOU in order to claim shares in future, but it is not - in and of itself - a share of anything. It is just a token on the network, that isn't doing anything, and isn't actually connected to the Iconomi assets. It is connected in people's minds - but not in any official capacity.

Because there is no clear concrete connection to the platform, no official response from the team, no whitepaper, and only a vague description of the token on the help pages, the token can be said to have no clear value at this moment in time.

That is not to say it has no value to you, or won't have a clear value in future. Your value comes in the form of expecting it to be objectively valuable one day. This is its only speculative value at this current moment in time.

Now this future value could come in the form of a more concrete explanation of how the token is backed by the assets Iconomi holds, or it could come in the form of a transition into a usage token on the platform itself. And, as I said, it could be used as an IOU to claim actual real world shares.

In the most loosely tied case, the value just comes from everybody collectively agreeing that this token represents Iconomi. That is the case that most people are running with at the moment. But that would be no better than creating my own token myself, and saying "If Iconomi does well, this token should increase in value" and expecting people to buy my token at a higher price later on. It's like making a bet, without a bookie, and just expecting some random person to pay you if you win.

Now, despite this in depth explanation, I'm confident that you still won't actually understand any of this - because you haven't understood it so far. However, I can see that plenty of other people DO understand it.

I'm trying to explain to you WHY people ask about the value. The above reasons are why. Disagree with them all you like, but that is the thought process that is driving people to question the value - and it is perfectly valid reasoning.

I don't agree with your educated answer. Here is why:

SIA token value comes from the usage of their network. That's where the value is. The payment structure itself is meaningless if no one is using their service. SIA current value/price of the token is backed up by less than 700K usd - the rest of its current price is pure speculation.

Iconomi token is backed up by ICNP and platform assets. ICNP is currently worth 28M usd, I'd say they have at least 20M usd for expenses. And ICNP has not kicked in yet.
The rest comes from speculation that the product will be released, good and used...
From the last AMA:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ICONOMI/comments/697cbr/iconomi_ama_may_2017/dh548ay/
I'm sure you've read it

I have to add something about ICNP. I think people don't realize how powerful this is. Those who wait enough until the initial seed money is invested in ICOs, and have ICNP realize even 50% of the investments with a humble 2x profit - it's 48M usd going back to ICNP for future investments and 12M usd profits for ICN - it means 1M usd buybacks every month. Even at price of $10 it means 100K ICN burned every month just from ICNP profits. Still can't see a value here?

The never ending dividends vs. buybacks debate will clearly not come to consensus. I hope we could at least agree that both dividends and buybacks are subject to profits generated by Iconomi platform.
Personally I prefer the buybacks option, at least until there will be some legal framework to operate within. It is also better to have a steady, constant buy support on the market in the first year than send some crumbs as dividends.

Buying back the tokens does not give them value alone. They must have a base value to begin with

Yes, it does! It is a proof that the platform is generating profits. Base value to begin with - ICN is more than 2x in BTC since ICO before the platform is even launched.
Can you tell us how much dividends Apple paid to the shareholders? And how it is reflected in the stock price?

In the most loosely tied case, the value just comes from everybody collectively agreeing that this token represents Iconomi. That is the case that most people are running with at the moment. But that would be no better than creating my own token myself, and saying "If Iconomi does well, this token should increase in value"

That wasn't the smartest thing you wrote here in the last couple of months. If you create Mendeleev token and link it to Iconomi success the market won't buy it simply because your token doesn't represent a thing. How it is the same with ICN token, where you have ~50M usd under management, a team of 20 people working on the project and a platform to be released soon

Yes, Iconomi's original proposed value was that of a share in the platform. Yes, we don't know the details yet. You choose to think it is because of whatever, I choose to believe this is because it is still being developed. And you don't release an official statement before you have everything on place. It's not like the team is hiding, unknown, or working from an unknown location.

[Mendeleev]

What if....Iconomi the company buys ALL of the ICN off of Kraken and will not allow other exchanges to list the coin for this reason.

The reason for this is to attempt to own a majority share of the company before they de-list the coin on Kraken and turn ICN into actual shares

of the company. This was one of my possibility speculations. That way we base the value of ICN on the performance/profits of the company. If they

advertised this scenario to the ICN holders...then the listing ICN prices would be ridiculously high based on the knowledge of an imminent once and

for all buy-back. If ICN was to be made a utility token then buybacks would hurt the company and cause a scaling issue. The only way buybacks will

work is if ICN becomes a private share and eventually a public share of the company which would increase the company's value. Sorry for the sloppy

typing, I have to take a leak really bad. Thoughts?

I think your end scenario is the most favourable for anyone who holds onto their ICN, and it's one that I'd find the most impressive.

Although, if ICN moved to the stock market, things might get a bit more complicated for smaller investors.

As they've already mentioned making ICN a usage token, it seems unlikely that this will happen. And Iconomi believes in a "tokenised economy", so it would conflict with that message.

[zxdcv]

ICN does not represent the underlying assets hence the creation of ICNX.

ICN cannot represent ownership of the platform because the platform no longer pays dividends.

Buying back ICN does nothing as of now because ICN does not have a clear value. Decrease the tokens to increase the value of what? Not dividends.

ICN can be used to participate in the ICNP performance fund but to my knowledge you had to have been an ICO participant. ICNP is invite only (Correct

me if I'm wrong).

ICN can't represent gas for the platform if buybacks are in place or you would have scaling issues. (Running out of gas due to increased demand)

The only way I see ICN having true value for ICN holders is to go back to the original plan minus the dividend payout and get listed on a stock

exchange.

Just throwing out some thoughts. Please feel free to chime in, agree, or disagree. I'm always willing to learn from your comments.  

[zxdcv]

What if....Iconomi the company buys ALL of the ICN off of Kraken and will not allow other exchanges to list the coin for this reason.

The reason for this is to attempt to own a majority share of the company before they de-list the coin on Kraken and turn ICN into actual shares

of the company. This was one of my possibility speculations. That way we base the value of ICN on the performance/profits of the company. If they

advertised this scenario to the ICN holders...then the listing ICN prices would be ridiculously high based on the knowledge of an imminent once and

for all buy-back. If ICN was to be made a utility token then buybacks would hurt the company and cause a scaling issue. The only way buybacks will

work is if ICN becomes a private share and eventually a public share of the company which would increase the company's value. Sorry for the sloppy

typing, I have to take a leak really bad. Thoughts?

I think your end scenario is the most favourable for anyone who holds onto their ICN, and it's one that I'd find the most impressive.

Although, if ICN moved to the stock market, things might get a bit more complicated for smaller investors.

As they've already mentioned making ICN a usage token, it seems unlikely that this will happen. And Iconomi believes in a "tokenised economy", so it would conflict with that message.

True...but as you evolve you may have to shed some skin. They may have to do what they have to do.

[Daparski]

Way too much nonsense to respond to while on a mobile.
Will do later on

[zxdcv]

Dap you know we love you 

[Mendeleev]

I'll only respond to the more contentious parts of your post. The rest can be left to stand on its own as your opinion.

Iconomi token is backed up by ICNP and platform assets.

Who says? Where can I read that this is the case? How can you prove this to me, or to a new investor?

From the last AMA:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ICONOMI/comments/697cbr/iconomi_ama_may_2017/dh548ay/
I'm sure you've read it

Yes, I have. It's does sound good. However, it is only Jani's word, and a hypothetical that might never come to pass. It's a promise that "If we fail, we'll do this", but nothing more. It doesn't really answer the whole value thing, unless you're banking on them shutting down (Jani's response only gives value to a shutdown scenario)

That wasn't the smartest thing you wrote here in the last couple of months. If you create Mendeleev token and link it to Iconomi success the market won't buy it simply because your token doesn't represent a thing. How it is the same with ICN token, where you have ~50M usd under management, a team of 20 people working on the project and a platform to be released soon

I know my token won't represent a thing. My argument is just that. ICN doesn't represent that success either. You disagree. I understand that. In my argument, both ICN and MEND are just ERC20 tokens. The difference is in your head. And, as that terminology page says nothing more than "ICN is an ERC20 token", then the data supports my assertion at this point in time.

Until the moment that we are told more than "ICN is an ERC20 token" - then that is all it is, for all intents and purposes! This is what I'm trying to explain to you.

I understand that it is the official token that Iconomi issued (and not the one I issue), but that's its only real difference - and it's not a significant difference when we're discussing why it has any value.

Yes, Iconomi's original proposed value was that of a share in the platform. Yes, we don't know the details yet. You choose to think it is because of whatever, I choose to believe this is because it is still being developed. And you don't release an official statement before you have everything on place. It's not like the team is hiding, unknown, or working from an unknown location.

I think we both agree that it's still being developed. Now IF ICN becomes only a usage token (which is possible at this stage), there will be people who go along with that change. You will likely be one of those people. And there will be people who don't like it, feel like they were lied to etc. etc.

For this, we will have to wait and see.

[sud]

I agree that right now ICN has no real value, thats why it's being pumped and dumped based on limited information about beta platform and ICNP/ICNX going up. But once the platform will be launched it will represent the whole Iconomi.net as a profitable company IMO. But it would be great if there will be option to convert ICN to INCP/ICNX tokens at the ratio better than ETH/BTC. I don't know if it's possible or not, just an idea.

[Enjorlas]

Understanding the value of any crypto coin requires some abstract knowledge of what value is. And people here are either 1. not intelligent enough to understand it, or 2. are concern trolling.

Put it this way, if Warren Buffet announced that he was going to start buying $1 billion worth of 90's beanie babies per month, 90's beanie babies would suddenly have alot more value to alot of people.

[someonesomeone]

Just got THE email from Iconomi. I have been granted access to ICNX And I am in no way a top 10 ICN wallet holder. Heck I am probably not even in the top 100...

[Enjorlas]

Just got THE email from Iconomi. I have been granted access to ICNX And I am in no way a top 10 ICN wallet holder. Heck I am probably not even in the top 100...

Fantastic. So less than $10,000 you invested?