nonconformist
Full Member
 Offline
Activity: 386
Merit: 104
IDENA.IO - Proof-Of-Person Blockchain
|
 |
November 04, 2017, 05:15:44 PM |
|
SOMA needs your help! There were a lot of questions about the tokens and what will be burned and what not. We told we would hold a liquidity reserve to support the smooth functioning of the SOMA platform. We were thinking about 10% of the unsold tokens. For the moment nothing is created, so there is no liquidity reserve. We think this reserve would help any liquidity problems with the SCT to support smooth fuctioning of the SOMA platform. If investors hold on there SCT we think there should be a problem with the liquidity. So with this reserve, users can still buy SCT after ICO to be used on the platform, this will not be at ICO price. The devs have decided to listen to our great community.
We will consider based on the feedback if the liquidity reserve will be created or not.So please give us a well argumented feedback on what you think its best for SOMA and his future. We will listen to you guys. No reserve of liquidity is needed. If even on the site the price will be higher than at the ICO, how will this help, if prices fall on exchanges? And if there is a reserve of liquidity, it will. Why reserve liquidity? Are SOMA tokens not decimal? I think that investors who bought with confidence that unsold tokens will be burned, will be dissatisfied with the appearance of this liquidity reserve. Maybe you don't understand what the liquidity is. It's not about token's price, it's about tokens in circulation, if there will be a small about circulating on the platform, there will be a liquidity problem. I suggest FIEX to point this out because people are misunderstanding this I understand what liquidity is. And you understand that the more tokens in circulation, the lower their price. The problem of liquidity is invented. There is no such problem. Tokens are divided up to 18 decimal places. Do you agree with me that decimals are being used right now only with few coins? Or you expect SCT to go to $300 right after ICO? The price of tokens will depend on the amount in circulation. Maybe $300. A hypothetical liquidity crisis was invented to sell tokens after the ICO. Because now sales are not going very well. 300$ is this per coin? Isn't it too large? But yes I think the use of decimals is an overlooked but important aspect of a coin. Just like in bitcoins, btc can be divided into 8 decimal places. and Ether can be divided in 18 decimal places. So if in the future I will buy a can of coke, the vendor will tell me, that's just 0.0000088 btc. It's not very human whereas if it's just 2 decimal places, it will be easier to transact and it is very human and easy to calculate and to understand. I don't know, for me, at least. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The forum strives to allow free discussion of any ideas. All policies are built around this principle. This doesn't mean you can post garbage, though: posts should actually contain ideas, and these ideas should be argued reasonably.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
Voltaje
|
|
November 04, 2017, 05:16:53 PM |
|
The reserve of liquidity is not a bad idea, they will not use it to lower the price, but just to be sure that the liquidity will be enough for the market so people can trade easily. If soma team handle it nicely it will be helpful.
The idea is that not to lower the value of the tokens, so locking team or founders tokens for an amount of time is kind of normal in some ICOs, sometimes it works perftly, sometimes it doesn't, it depends on what the founders do to the tokens or how is carried out. |
|
|
|
|
|
Elkmar
|
|
November 04, 2017, 05:26:09 PM |
|
Do soma has any agreement with their angel investors that they can't sell their share before some time? Like 6 months or 1 year?
I think it would be appropriate if the shares of angel investors have a lock in period / frozen state for at least 6 months up in order to boost investors confidence. I would suggest team members share should also be blocked and released in intervals if necessary. Normally there are contracts like these for angel investors. |
|
|
|
|
Jay2408
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 518
Merit: 101
🚀🚀 ATHERO.IO 🚀🚀
|
|
November 04, 2017, 05:34:15 PM |
|
Do soma has any agreement with their angel investors that they can't sell their share before some time? Like 6 months or 1 year?
I think it would be appropriate if the shares of angel investors have a lock in period / frozen state for at least 6 months up in order to boost investors confidence. I would suggest team members share should also be blocked and released in intervals if necessary. Normally there are contracts like these for angel investors. Yes, that's normally the case. It would be good if FIEX could get a confirmation of the SOMA team. |
|
|
|
|
belechau
|
|
November 04, 2017, 05:50:39 PM |
|
Angel investors should not be in a hurry to carry out their assets, invested in the certainty of Ico's success and the entire project itself, support the temporary blockade and think most of them see no problem, pass on confidence to new investors and get the reach of the objective of Ico is fundamental
|
|
|
|
|
|
haxllega
|
|
November 04, 2017, 06:22:36 PM |
|
The reserve of liquidity is not a bad idea, they will not use it to lower the price, but just to be sure that the liquidity will be enough for the market so people can trade easily. If soma team handle it nicely it will be helpful.
But the reserve of tokens shouldn't be to high. Enough liquidity would be even provided if they only have a low reserve. |
|
|
|
|
lvsca
|
|
November 04, 2017, 06:33:04 PM |
|
Do soma has any agreement with their angel investors that they can't sell their share before some time? Like 6 months or 1 year?
I think it would be appropriate if the shares of angel investors have a lock in period / frozen state for at least 6 months up in order to boost investors confidence. I would suggest team members share should also be blocked and released in intervals if necessary. It's called vesting and this is great idea! This will prevent sudden dumps of soma tokens  I would rather do this for bounty hunters, they are usually the one who dump their coins first. Why nobody does that? i think, better ways is lock up for all investor (ICO buyer) for some months, maybe 2 months. but, not locked up for bounty hunter, so if all token (at least 50% of total token that held by bounty hunter) has sold on market, the price will stable for long time, and dev has more time to developed their project and the token will more valuable. |
|
|
|
|
magisterr
|
|
November 04, 2017, 06:42:01 PM |
|
Yes, better way lock bounty tokens for one month or so. Investors must receive tokens first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
ubercool
|
|
November 04, 2017, 06:45:43 PM |
|
Yes, better way lock bounty tokens for one month or so. Investors must receive tokens first of course.
Even investors are dumping these days because of the bullish nature of Bitcoin. They just fear that Bitcoin will dominate everything and no token will have chance to stand. |
|
|
|
|
|
magisterr
|
|
November 04, 2017, 07:06:53 PM |
|
Yes, better way lock bounty tokens for one month or so. Investors must receive tokens first of course.
Even investors are dumping these days because of the bullish nature of Bitcoin. They just fear that Bitcoin will dominate everything and no token will have chance to stand. They will finish ICO in 11 days, and segwit in 12 days will end. So dont worry |
|
|
|
|
|
haxllega
|
|
November 04, 2017, 07:24:14 PM |
|
Yes, better way lock bounty tokens for one month or so. Investors must receive tokens first of course.
Even investors are dumping these days because of the bullish nature of Bitcoin. They just fear that Bitcoin will dominate everything and no token will have chance to stand. They will finish ICO in 11 days, and segwit in 12 days will end. So dont worry I think after segwit a lot of ICO money will flood again into ICOs like SOMA. Of course, only the best will survive over time. |
|
|
|
|
SEELE^^01
|
|
November 04, 2017, 07:46:48 PM |
|
Yes, better way lock bounty tokens for one month or so. Investors must receive tokens first of course.
Even investors are dumping these days because of the bullish nature of Bitcoin. They just fear that Bitcoin will dominate everything and no token will have chance to stand. but bitcoin is just a big bubble and has no real value, just gets pushed by forks... atm. instead icos are like kickstarterts with a purpose behind it, but yes, can fail too  |
|
|
|
|
|
Rigorous
|
|
November 04, 2017, 08:32:07 PM |
|
SOMA needs your help! There were a lot of questions about the tokens and what will be burned and what not. We told we would hold a liquidity reserve to support the smooth functioning of the SOMA platform. We were thinking about 10% of the unsold tokens. For the moment nothing is created, so there is no liquidity reserve. We think this reserve would help any liquidity problems with the SCT to support smooth fuctioning of the SOMA platform. If investors hold on there SCT we think there should be a problem with the liquidity. So with this reserve, users can still buy SCT after ICO to be used on the platform, this will not be at ICO price. The devs have decided to listen to our great community.
We will consider based on the feedback if the liquidity reserve will be created or not.So please give us a well argumented feedback on what you think its best for SOMA and his future. We will listen to you guys. No reserve of liquidity is needed. If even on the site the price will be higher than at the ICO, how will this help, if prices fall on exchanges? And if there is a reserve of liquidity, it will. Why reserve liquidity? Are SOMA tokens not decimal? I think that investors who bought with confidence that unsold tokens will be burned, will be dissatisfied with the appearance of this liquidity reserve. Maybe you don't understand what the liquidity is. It's not about token's price, it's about tokens in circulation, if there will be a small about circulating on the platform, there will be a liquidity problem. I suggest FIEX to point this out because people are misunderstanding this I understand what liquidity is. And you understand that the more tokens in circulation, the lower their price. The problem of liquidity is invented. There is no such problem. Tokens are divided up to 18 decimal places. Do you agree with me that decimals are being used right now only with few coins? Or you expect SCT to go to $300 right after ICO? The price of tokens will depend on the amount in circulation. Maybe $300. A hypothetical liquidity crisis was invented to sell tokens after the ICO. Because now sales are not going very well. Soma is not the first one with a liquidity fund. Paragon has a Controlled Reserve Fund and so far it does little to keep to price in control, decreasing from $2-something to $0.35. The fund has backfired as investors are accusing Paragon of dumping tokens. Paragon can not buy back any tokens as they have no revenue.  The problem is not too few tokens on the market, it is the opposite: too many tokens! |
|
|
|
|
|
helloal
|
|
November 04, 2017, 08:41:34 PM |
|
I watch sales stopped, the counter does not grow. Apparently there are two reasons: the fork BTC and the lack of developer activity.
They have no control over the effect of the upcoming BTC fork, but they certainly can be more active on the communication side. Assigning a new community manager is a good step, they should have done that a long time ago. nobody can control btc fork effects only time will show us,some more updates and news would be very appreciated... by now it just needs to stay calm and keep a cool head Let's hope that the sales growth as the deadline approaches normally big investors strive to invest quick when the ico starts but lets see But there is also a final boost in sales when the deadline arrives Let's hope everything goes well. yeah i read in an other topic that investors tend to invest right before the ico closes. im wondering why but i hope the best As time passes, more information is potentially revealed, which allows investors to make a better decision on whether buying into an ICO is worth the risk. Hence buying at the last minute allows the investor to make the decision based on the most data possible. Other investors simply can't make up their mind, and hence don't make a decision until they are forced to (ie. the ICO end is nigh). Whatever is the case, I also wish SOMA the best. |
|
|
|
|
SEELE^^01
|
|
November 04, 2017, 08:48:25 PM |
|
SOMA needs your help! There were a lot of questions about the tokens and what will be burned and what not. We told we would hold a liquidity reserve to support the smooth functioning of the SOMA platform. We were thinking about 10% of the unsold tokens. For the moment nothing is created, so there is no liquidity reserve. We think this reserve would help any liquidity problems with the SCT to support smooth fuctioning of the SOMA platform. If investors hold on there SCT we think there should be a problem with the liquidity. So with this reserve, users can still buy SCT after ICO to be used on the platform, this will not be at ICO price. The devs have decided to listen to our great community.
We will consider based on the feedback if the liquidity reserve will be created or not.So please give us a well argumented feedback on what you think its best for SOMA and his future. We will listen to you guys. No reserve of liquidity is needed. If even on the site the price will be higher than at the ICO, how will this help, if prices fall on exchanges? And if there is a reserve of liquidity, it will. Why reserve liquidity? Are SOMA tokens not decimal? I think that investors who bought with confidence that unsold tokens will be burned, will be dissatisfied with the appearance of this liquidity reserve. Maybe you don't understand what the liquidity is. It's not about token's price, it's about tokens in circulation, if there will be a small about circulating on the platform, there will be a liquidity problem. I suggest FIEX to point this out because people are misunderstanding this I understand what liquidity is. And you understand that the more tokens in circulation, the lower their price. The problem of liquidity is invented. There is no such problem. Tokens are divided up to 18 decimal places. Do you agree with me that decimals are being used right now only with few coins? Or you expect SCT to go to $300 right after ICO? The price of tokens will depend on the amount in circulation. Maybe $300. A hypothetical liquidity crisis was invented to sell tokens after the ICO. Because now sales are not going very well. Soma is not the first one with a liquidity fund. Paragon has a Controlled Reserve Fund and so far it does little to keep to price in control, decreasing from $2-something to $0.35. The fund has backfired as investors are accusing Paragon of dumping tokens. Paragon can not buy back any tokens as they have no revenue. The problem is not too few tokens on the market, it is the opposite: too many tokens! but paragon is still at the beginning of their journey and the market is atm fully into bitcoin, so it is pretty normal that the price of the token fell. i am for burning the rest of the tokens |
|
|
|
|
|
majestymage
|
|
November 04, 2017, 09:03:02 PM |
|
this might be an interesting proposal but must be very well explained to the community. 10 % of the entire token supply is a lot
|
|
|
|
|
Rigorous
|
|
November 04, 2017, 09:10:11 PM |
|
Businesses on the traditional stock markets always have the option to raise more money through secondary offerings. That is not something that is possible in the cryptosphere, I think, once all public and reserved tokens are circulating. You could argue that keeping a token reserve to raise money in the future is not necessarily a bad thing.
On the other hand, trying to control the token price as if you are a central bank is frowned upon and is economically out of context. You cannot apply fractional reserve mechanisms that interact with national and international socioeconomic drivers to your company's tokens. There is a simple term for that: market manipulation.
|
|
|
|
|
Vaerros
Member
Offline
Activity: 185
Merit: 10
|
|
November 04, 2017, 09:27:01 PM |
|
What sectors of the social market would be the most developed then for this particular project?
|
|
|
|
|
levyashin
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 276
$CYBERCASH METAVERSE
|
|
November 04, 2017, 09:29:46 PM |
|
Do soma has any agreement with their angel investors that they can't sell their share before some time? Like 6 months or 1 year?
I think it would be appropriate if the shares of angel investors have a lock in period / frozen state for at least 6 months up in order to boost investors confidence. I would suggest team members share should also be blocked and released in intervals if necessary. Normally there are contracts like these for angel investors. Yes, that's normally the case. It would be good if FIEX could get a confirmation of the SOMA team. Probably FIEX will give us answer about this issue, he is great so far. |
|
|
|
|
Elkmar
|
|
November 04, 2017, 10:06:02 PM |
|
Do soma has any agreement with their angel investors that they can't sell their share before some time? Like 6 months or 1 year?
I think it would be appropriate if the shares of angel investors have a lock in period / frozen state for at least 6 months up in order to boost investors confidence. Angel investors own the majority of SCT tokens, that would be another problem about liquiditym if they lock up their tokens there are going to be a really small amount of tokens in circulation Well its kind of a dilemma with regards to the idea of liquidity reserve, I hoped they have come up with an agreement to allocate only a certain portion of Angel investors shares that can be tradable within a certain period of time Quite rare that investors lock their tokens if they're not forced to do so  |
|
|
|
|
|
