[ANN] [ICO is complete!] Market.space - Decentralized Host Aggregator

[xdbitcoin]

I didn't know that and it is also impossible to verify whether they are independent or not. We all know how the three big ratings agencies did their job right before the financial crisis They claimed to be independent, but obviously they weren't.

All the ratings are sooo biased... if you just delve into the info about the project and shape your own opinion, and then go to check all these rates assigned by the "independent" experts, you'll that it's all not worth looking at

I would not trust these shitty ratings either... for instance, Mark Space have 4.1 on ICOBench, but they're scammers, and everyone knows that. So which on earth  "expert" ratings are we talking about  

At least Ico Bench have quite a right rate for Filecoin, so it's not as hopeless as I thought

Filecoin? Oh, I'm starting to smell a rat    The last update dated by the 1st of January, and no presence in networks like Medium or else, only blog

Come off that... I quite like that project and idea, you know. Not every project shows off a lot in the media... Although I agree that keeping people informed and not losing touch is very very important

I don't want to enter a discussion, as it would be off topic in this thread, and quite time taking. I'd only say that it's rather naive to think that not having a MVP + making very rare updates can result in delivered promises. Again, it's all my humble opinion

[ioang]

Ok, but they made SAFT which is quite comforting, I think. Kind of sealing the deal legally

[kruseno]

Ok, but they made SAFT which is quite comforting, I think. Kind of sealing the deal legally

SAFT or SAFTE, whatever - all ICO projects have that kind of legal stuff to pool the wool over the customers' eyes. Don't fall for it, as there should be other criteria to judge by

[kruseno]

I didn't know that and it is also impossible to verify whether they are independent or not. We all know how the three big ratings agencies did their job right before the financial crisis They claimed to be independent, but obviously they weren't.

All the ratings are sooo biased... if you just delve into the info about the project and shape your own opinion, and then go to check all these rates assigned by the "independent" experts, you'll that it's all not worth looking at

I would not trust these shitty ratings either... for instance, Mark Space have 4.1 on ICOBench, but they're scammers, and everyone knows that. So which on earth  "expert" ratings are we talking about  

At least Ico Bench have quite a right rate for Filecoin, so it's not as hopeless as I thought

Filecoin? Oh, I'm starting to smell a rat    The last update dated by the 1st of January, and no presence in networks like Medium or else, only blog

Come off that... I quite like that project and idea, you know. Not every project shows off a lot in the media... Although I agree that keeping people informed and not losing touch is very very important

Hm... which projects with a poor media coverage and presence have you invested in? Or planning to? Just wondering whether that loyalty has any ground

What is meant by "poor" here, by the way? For instance, I'm looking closely at the Medium blog and personal pages of the keynote people in an ICO, but I won't be hooked for a large telegram community - so many dummies here put by the nifty promoters.

[kaicrypzen]

And how many tokens are allocated for advisors and will they be vested?

Here is a quote from btcapparel about that:

How many tokens will be distributed to advisors and bounty compaign?

2.5% of the aggregate token number to Advisors, 2.5% to Bounty. The aggregate number will depend on the number of tokens sold (as it's limited in time, not in amount).

Tokens sold during the ICO = 60% of the aggregate token supply

See https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2961359.msg33209447#msg33209447.

So once the number of tokens sold during the ICO is known, let it be n, the advisors will have 2.5% of (100*n)/60.

hey, not everyone on this forum actually reads the whole thread, so I'd take it easy if I were you I am now wondering if you are from the Market Space team too  

I wasn't actually implying to read the whole thread , I was simply pointing to the answer that was given by OP instead of repeating it, I guess I'm taking it quite easy . And I'm not from the team, just hanging around.

[bulldogtattoo]

saw you in the STORJ thread. I wonder why don't you stick to one token

As they say that going to develop the market itself

[bulldogtattoo]

And how many tokens are allocated for advisors and will they be vested?

Here is a quote from btcapparel about that:

How many tokens will be distributed to advisors and bounty compaign?

2.5% of the aggregate token number to Advisors, 2.5% to Bounty. The aggregate number will depend on the number of tokens sold (as it's limited in time, not in amount).

Tokens sold during the ICO = 60% of the aggregate token supply

See https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2961359.msg33209447#msg33209447.

So once the number of tokens sold during the ICO is known, let it be n, the advisors will have 2.5% of (100*n)/60.

hey, not everyone on this forum actually reads the whole thread, so I'd take it easy if I were you I am now wondering if you are from the Market Space team too  

I wasn't actually implying to read the whole thread , I was simply pointing to the answer that was given by OP instead of repeating it, I guess I'm taking it quite easy . And I'm not from the team, just hanging around.

I actually saw a lot of your messages in this thread. What do you personally think about this project in general?

[apmapm12]

Quite a lot of countries mentioned here. Others are just asking to confirm you are not from China or the USA. Quite a bothering trend - to know that all these countries reject ICOs and crypto or stigmatize them as "illegal"

The rumour has it that 80% of ICOs are scamful, that's why they are prohibiting. I even came across such a "study" recently.

Another thing is that no one wants to analyze the projects and put some efforts to getting the details. It's much easier to blame the project you invested in that acknowledge that it is actually you who bears all the responsibility for investing.

Sorry for digressing in this thread, it's just a very painful topic for me

Yeah, i read this article too. They picked the ICOs that had a minimum market cap of $50M and were expected to go into active trading and categorized them into six different groups: Scam, Failed, Gone Dead, Dwindling, Promising, and Successful.The study results reveal that of the whole pie, a whopping 81 percent of the ICOs turned out to be scams. Another 6 percent fell into the Failed category, and 5 percent had Gone Dead, taking the total for “Failure to List” group to 92 percent.

[serjio]

Quite a lot of countries mentioned here. Others are just asking to confirm you are not from China or the USA. Quite a bothering trend - to know that all these countries reject ICOs and crypto or stigmatize them as "illegal"

The rumour has it that 80% of ICOs are scamful, that's why they are prohibiting. I even came across such a "study" recently.

Another thing is that no one wants to analyze the projects and put some efforts to getting the details. It's much easier to blame the project you invested in that acknowledge that it is actually you who bears all the responsibility for investing.

Sorry for digressing in this thread, it's just a very painful topic for me

Yeah, i read this article too. They picked the ICOs that had a minimum market cap of $50M and were expected to go into active trading and categorized them into six different groups: Scam, Failed, Gone Dead, Dwindling, Promising, and Successful.The study results reveal that of the whole pie, a whopping 81 percent of the ICOs turned out to be scams. Another 6 percent fell into the Failed category, and 5 percent had Gone Dead, taking the total for “Failure to List” group to 92 percent.

And despite all these negative and depressing statistics we're still participating in ICOs, 'couse we trully believe in these 8%

[i82blikeu]

Quite a lot of countries mentioned here. Others are just asking to confirm you are not from China or the USA. Quite a bothering trend - to know that all these countries reject ICOs and crypto or stigmatize them as "illegal"

The rumour has it that 80% of ICOs are scamful, that's why they are prohibiting. I even came across such a "study" recently.

Another thing is that no one wants to analyze the projects and put some efforts to getting the details. It's much easier to blame the project you invested in that acknowledge that it is actually you who bears all the responsibility for investing.

Sorry for digressing in this thread, it's just a very painful topic for me

Yeah, i read this article too. They picked the ICOs that had a minimum market cap of $50M and were expected to go into active trading and categorized them into six different groups: Scam, Failed, Gone Dead, Dwindling, Promising, and Successful.The study results reveal that of the whole pie, a whopping 81 percent of the ICOs turned out to be scams. Another 6 percent fell into the Failed category, and 5 percent had Gone Dead, taking the total for “Failure to List” group to 92 percent.

And despite all these negative and depressing statistics we're still participating in ICOs, 'couse we trully believe in these 8%

Sorry to intrude, but how to spot a great ICO and avoid scam?

[aryan7980]

Quite a lot of countries mentioned here. Others are just asking to confirm you are not from China or the USA. Quite a bothering trend - to know that all these countries reject ICOs and crypto or stigmatize them as "illegal"

The rumour has it that 80% of ICOs are scamful, that's why they are prohibiting. I even came across such a "study" recently.

Another thing is that no one wants to analyze the projects and put some efforts to getting the details. It's much easier to blame the project you invested in that acknowledge that it is actually you who bears all the responsibility for investing.

Sorry for digressing in this thread, it's just a very painful topic for me

Yeah, i read this article too. They picked the ICOs that had a minimum market cap of $50M and were expected to go into active trading and categorized them into six different groups: Scam, Failed, Gone Dead, Dwindling, Promising, and Successful.The study results reveal that of the whole pie, a whopping 81 percent of the ICOs turned out to be scams. Another 6 percent fell into the Failed category, and 5 percent had Gone Dead, taking the total for “Failure to List” group to 92 percent.

And despite all these negative and depressing statistics we're still participating in ICOs, 'couse we trully believe in these 8%

Sorry to intrude, but how to spot a great ICO and avoid scam?

I think one of the most obvious red flags is the lack of detail on how the technology works. So check the WP
And don't worry you need not be a technical geek in order to distinguish real from fake one. You just need to be attentive

[Bitcoin Marketinging]

Quite a lot of countries mentioned here. Others are just asking to confirm you are not from China or the USA. Quite a bothering trend - to know that all these countries reject ICOs and crypto or stigmatize them as "illegal"

The rumour has it that 80% of ICOs are scamful, that's why they are prohibiting. I even came across such a "study" recently.

Another thing is that no one wants to analyze the projects and put some efforts to getting the details. It's much easier to blame the project you invested in that acknowledge that it is actually you who bears all the responsibility for investing.

Sorry for digressing in this thread, it's just a very painful topic for me

Yeah, i read this article too. They picked the ICOs that had a minimum market cap of $50M and were expected to go into active trading and categorized them into six different groups: Scam, Failed, Gone Dead, Dwindling, Promising, and Successful.The study results reveal that of the whole pie, a whopping 81 percent of the ICOs turned out to be scams. Another 6 percent fell into the Failed category, and 5 percent had Gone Dead, taking the total for “Failure to List” group to 92 percent.

And despite all these negative and depressing statistics we're still participating in ICOs, 'couse we trully believe in these 8%

Sorry to intrude, but how to spot a great ICO and avoid scam?

Invest wisely and just invest in some amount you can afford to lose. This is a gambling world, your plane can either go to the moon or hit the ground hard, that's it.

[ccczarek123]

Quite a lot of countries mentioned here. Others are just asking to confirm you are not from China or the USA. Quite a bothering trend - to know that all these countries reject ICOs and crypto or stigmatize them as "illegal"

The rumour has it that 80% of ICOs are scamful, that's why they are prohibiting. I even came across such a "study" recently.

Another thing is that no one wants to analyze the projects and put some efforts to getting the details. It's much easier to blame the project you invested in that acknowledge that it is actually you who bears all the responsibility for investing.

Sorry for digressing in this thread, it's just a very painful topic for me

Yeah, i read this article too. They picked the ICOs that had a minimum market cap of $50M and were expected to go into active trading and categorized them into six different groups: Scam, Failed, Gone Dead, Dwindling, Promising, and Successful.The study results reveal that of the whole pie, a whopping 81 percent of the ICOs turned out to be scams. Another 6 percent fell into the Failed category, and 5 percent had Gone Dead, taking the total for “Failure to List” group to 92 percent.

And despite all these negative and depressing statistics we're still participating in ICOs, 'couse we trully believe in these 8%

Sorry to intrude, but how to spot a great ICO and avoid scam?

I think one of the most obvious red flags is the lack of detail on how the technology works. So check the WP
And don't worry you need not be a technical geek in order to distinguish real from fake one. You just need to be attentive

Agree!
From my pt of view, reading, not skimming, the white paper of the ICO is the most effective and easy way to check out whether it's a scam. Be patient if you don't want to be cheated.

[melsell1]

saw you in the STORJ thread. I wonder why don't you stick to one token

Here is the explanation of their CEO, if interested
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ico-updates-sia-storj-alexander-rakhmanov/

[hazenyc]

I didn't know that and it is also impossible to verify whether they are independent or not. We all know how the three big ratings agencies did their job right before the financial crisis They claimed to be independent, but obviously they weren't.

All the ratings are sooo biased... if you just delve into the info about the project and shape your own opinion, and then go to check all these rates assigned by the "independent" experts, you'll that it's all not worth looking at

I would not trust these shitty ratings either... for instance, Mark Space have 4.1 on ICOBench, but they're scammers, and everyone knows that. So which on earth  "expert" ratings are we talking about  

At least Ico Bench have quite a right rate for Filecoin, so it's not as hopeless as I thought

Filecoin? Oh, I'm starting to smell a rat    The last update dated by the 1st of January, and no presence in networks like Medium or else, only blog

Come off that... I quite like that project and idea, you know. Not every project shows off a lot in the media... Although I agree that keeping people informed and not losing touch is very very important

I don't want to enter a discussion, as it would be off topic in this thread, and quite time taking. I'd only say that it's rather naive to think that not having a MVP + making very rare updates can result in delivered promises. Again, it's all my humble opinion

I like the recent development in the ICO space that it is not so easy anymore to raise a fortune with just a white paper and mediocre communication. It becomes more selective step by step, which is a good thing.

[Ireson]

Hi devs! When are u going to distribute bounty rewards?

[akramali]

Quite a lot of countries mentioned here. Others are just asking to confirm you are not from China or the USA. Quite a bothering trend - to know that all these countries reject ICOs and crypto or stigmatize them as "illegal"

The rumour has it that 80% of ICOs are scamful, that's why they are prohibiting. I even came across such a "study" recently.

Another thing is that no one wants to analyze the projects and put some efforts to getting the details. It's much easier to blame the project you invested in that acknowledge that it is actually you who bears all the responsibility for investing.

Sorry for digressing in this thread, it's just a very painful topic for me

Yeah, i read this article too. They picked the ICOs that had a minimum market cap of $50M and were expected to go into active trading and categorized them into six different groups: Scam, Failed, Gone Dead, Dwindling, Promising, and Successful.The study results reveal that of the whole pie, a whopping 81 percent of the ICOs turned out to be scams. Another 6 percent fell into the Failed category, and 5 percent had Gone Dead, taking the total for “Failure to List” group to 92 percent.

And despite all these negative and depressing statistics we're still participating in ICOs, 'couse we trully believe in these 8%

Sorry to intrude, but how to spot a great ICO and avoid scam?

There are sooooo many articles and threads about this man
choose any

[Abbie Hoffman]

Quite a lot of countries mentioned here. Others are just asking to confirm you are not from China or the USA. Quite a bothering trend - to know that all these countries reject ICOs and crypto or stigmatize them as "illegal"

The rumour has it that 80% of ICOs are scamful, that's why they are prohibiting. I even came across such a "study" recently.

Another thing is that no one wants to analyze the projects and put some efforts to getting the details. It's much easier to blame the project you invested in that acknowledge that it is actually you who bears all the responsibility for investing.

Sorry for digressing in this thread, it's just a very painful topic for me

Yeah, i read this article too. They picked the ICOs that had a minimum market cap of $50M and were expected to go into active trading and categorized them into six different groups: Scam, Failed, Gone Dead, Dwindling, Promising, and Successful.The study results reveal that of the whole pie, a whopping 81 percent of the ICOs turned out to be scams. Another 6 percent fell into the Failed category, and 5 percent had Gone Dead, taking the total for “Failure to List” group to 92 percent.

And despite all these negative and depressing statistics we're still participating in ICOs, 'couse we trully believe in these 8%

Sorry to intrude, but how to spot a great ICO and avoid scam?

Unfortunately where there is money, there will be scams.

[I-Love-BTCD]

Hi guys! How are you doing? How about bonuses? Will I have any bonuses if I buy tokens during the first week of sales?

Hello!
It's all fine, thank you!

Yes, sure we have special offers during the ICO include the following:
— 25% bonus for tokens bought within the first 24 hours
— 15% bonus for tokens bought within 10 days starting from the 2nd day of the ICO
— 10% bonus for tokens bought within 14 days starting from 12th day of the ICO

How can u ensure investors that bought tokens with 25% discount not to sell tokens immidiately after the excahnge listing?

I'm also worried that these users will dump all their tokens immidiately after listing. any plans how to stop this??

It depends if you're long-term or short-term investor.

[fulcare]

I didn't know that and it is also impossible to verify whether they are independent or not. We all know how the three big ratings agencies did their job right before the financial crisis They claimed to be independent, but obviously they weren't.

The one thing I really don't like and don't understand in ICObench is rating. There are several of so-called "experts" who have no idea about the tech behind blockchain and ICO. So they review projects and making grades for each project, but some of this experts are obviously don't know what these projects are about.

Yeah, this rating system is ridiculous, some great projects has 3.5-3.8 rankings

As for my opinion, every "expert" should be forced to describe his grades and leave a comment, so people can research and follow opinions not just the numbers.

I do agree with you guys, there should be a kind of explanation or the way to discuss ay least, but both of those experts haven't answered on LinkedIn.
But don't you worry, ICObench rating is one of preliminary ratings and having 5.0 is much more suspicious than say 3.8 or 4.3 as it's a result of some work done.
The final mark comes from the market anyway )

They have also been bad with their ratings at times when high quality of the project was very obvious. In that case they probably did an independent rating. Question remains whether they take money from some projects or not but I doubt that we will ever find out.