Why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line not conduct ICO?

[Tory-Tory]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

[1715557823]

1715557823

[DianaZher3]

I don't think they need it. They are most likely waiting for the creation of a blockchain platform that they can use for their needs. It is not necessary to create your own blockchain for each company.

[boyptc]

Line is planning to launch it's own global crypto exchange so it's up to them if they'll add an ICO for it.

https://www.ccn.com/messaging-giant-line-announces-new-global-crypto-exchange-excludes-u-s-japan/

[fillippone]

I think because they are well funded companies with values brands. They don’t need to scam their customers with a potentially scammy ICO to raise a few (hundred?) millions ruining their business.
Disclaimer:
I still have to find s single ICO that is not SCAM.

My two cents,
F1

[neliawesome]

Maybe because they dont need it.They gain lots of money already without conducting ICO project.There are lots of scam ICO project they might afraid it will give negative feedbacks in their company.So they rather stick to what they have and improved it more than risking the reputation of their company.

[zakariajaki]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

my view on the topic of why the messaging app service does not work with the crypto platform, my opinion the developers and also the owner of the message service is not unnecessary but both are not wanting to mix business affairs with personal affairs because my view the nature and function of different messaging services and preferably to personalized users' services, although they may also be associated with a business-based message but the message service owner must have read the opportunity, one of which is to prioritize personal interests rather than business interests, and if it is imposed the likelihood that the user of the message service will be reduced and reduce the reputation of the messaging service, may be useful and successful for all of us

[jseverson]

Because not everything needs to be built on the blockchain and not every network needs to run on coins. Even Telegram, which seemed to have a good idea on how to utilize the blockchain for their upcoming project is stuck in a controversy. It's a massive financial success for sure, but you have to keep in mind that they haven't delivered anything at all. This situation has proven that these giants can raise money, but whether or not they can put out a good project is yet to be seen.

Personally, I can only assume that the others don't see how developing a system that runs on the blockchain can help their business despite the fact that it's extremely likely for investors to line up and provide more funding than they'd need. That, to me, speaks volumes about their confidence/interest or lack thereof. Telegram didn't take much of a financial risk considering the amount of money they raised, but it's going to hurt their brand if their project flops -- more money means higher expectations after all.

[drwhobox]

Their project is really well funded tbh. there are no things to add up for their application(s) for most but WeChat has a payment system build exclusively for China (Not blockchain based still a payment system) and Line from Korea is planing to Build their own Blockchain in the future more and more are adding stuffs for each countries.

[carlisle1]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

They are gaining even without the company of this scammers ico project so why needed fo be part of this problematic profit provider.

And besides they wanna protect their interest and same as the interest of theyre followers and subscribers .so for me i support theyre stands in this matter

[Bardman]

Because it's not very legal, look at USA in regards to ICO's. Most ICO's nowadays don't even allow us investors, maybe in their private sale. Regulations are still not clear, why would snap chat risk something like that. They also don't need the money, for normal businesses the money you raise with ICO's is amazing for snapchat not so much considering the risks.

[viananda2525]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

maybe they had made plan about this ,or maybe they dont wont join in crypto platform.each company have their own business strategy to growth their profit.

[audaciousbeing]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

The question you need to ask is why do business do either ICO, IPO, Right Issue or any form of fund raising? Because it seems you think its just to raise money but behind that, there is also other reason which is the main thing, the idea or the project. Its just the crypto market that promised freedom and less paper works that a lot of people have abused and have seen as the easiest way to make money. In the capital market, before a company will come to raise money, a lot of paper works and analysis would have been done and more to be complied with even after raising such fund and must be used for the purpose why it is raised in the first place.

All those big companies, have the money they need to expand and even some of them have enough money that would be enough for them for the next 10 years and with their popularity increasing by the day, their share price increase then investors won't be hard to come by. In the near future, they might deploy the use of blockchain in their activities, but I don't see them coming to the market to raise funds for their expansion.

[boyknightvn]

Because Blockchain is a technology, this is not a form of capital raising, this is an improvement on technology. So, making ICO should also drive their products based on the basis of these technologies, which will require the developer transfer of the technology they are using.
If in the situation: they should use the ICO channel to raise their capital, but after that they just take the capital and do not use the platform which they use to raise the capital, this will easy to affect their credibility, make they are thought to be bad guys.
I think this really is not worth it.

[yslyv]

Telegram will be the beginning for them. When they see the success they will also want to join for sure. It is normal for them to hesitate for such a new technology.

[stompix]

Because not everything needs to be built on the blockchain and not every network needs to run on coins. Even Telegram, which seemed to have a good idea on how to utilize the blockchain for their upcoming project is stuck in a controversy.

This!!! One hundred times!!!

The blockchain is a database, nothing more.
We don't need a token for buying bread, a token for going to the toilet in a park, a coin to buy railway tickets, a coin to rent a movie, a coin to  post pictures on the internet , a coin to buy coins, a token to buy coins to invest in tokens , a coin to speak with grandpa, a coin that the milkman will exchange for waffles and the waffles man will exchange for milk.

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?

Because somewhere there is a God!!!!

[hatshepsut93]

1. They might not need additional investments.

2. They might be not that interested in blockchain to jump in this bandwagon at the current moment.

Blockchain/ICO's might be a double-edged sword - for now it seems like a very easy way to grab millions from investors or boost your stock, but if this technology will fail to live up to expectations, it might very negatively affect those companies that have committed to it. This is why most of the blockchain stances from big companies are very careful - they all say that they are excited, that they will launch trials, but they don't rusk issuing their own tokens or promising to move everything onto blockchain in the next few years - so if blockchain will fail, their reputation won't suffer.

[Crypdon]

These companies are already worth billions and have no need to venture into the unknown. Line is the first one to try an exchange, if successful i'm sure the others will follow

[Pancheng]

The owner and its team maybe deciding to enter ICO but there are factors that may or can effect the system function when they do it so, this may effect their quality service overtime so they need to plan it carefully.

[Harribel03]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

Maybe, they are just looking towards the capability of having an ICO to their application. In fact, they will surely think the cost and effort they will put whenever the conduct an ICO. They are already popular and one of the best social sites that is being used nowadays, it will just make their sales ruin if they fail in ICO. Probably, they are just looking for cryptocurrency partnership.

[frowsiter]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

I dont think those are kind of social platforms which can manage the ICO or crypto marketing at all. The Facebook and telegram, twitter are all more engaging as compared to what you have listed here. The list you made here is more or less just an entrain platform where people literally dont get serious about such stuff. There is no way to share the files, medias and links in the perfect way as you would do over the telegram and plus the capacity is not tolerable for them. May be they are not the perfect in terms of engaging the audience of crypto kind. This is my general thought about it.

[khufuking]

Because maybe Kik and Telegram did not need ICO in first place, in my opinion they just doing it for extra money, its like lets get millions of dollars for doing the exact same thing we are already doing . I do agree with some comments above not everything have to be build on blockchain and most of the time startups just threw blochchain word in for the sake of raising easy money, raising money in crypto space is much more easier than outside it, and in fact in my opinion one of the reason market suffering lately is we have a lot of outsider that do not care about crypto, they just make there ICO and liquidate what worth of millions of dollars of tokens into fiat and move on, and we have been milked that way since long .
I remember an DEX exchange that was really working great and I used it a lot we all know it " etherdelta " they had a working dex and everything and suddenly they decided to start an ICO, for some reason they wanted to raise millions for an already fully working project .

[hachiman13]

These companies have no need to tokenize their services; it is functioning as it should be.

The problem now is that because of the popularity of the blockchain tech, many people think that integrating blockchain into any concept/system/franchise/etc would be a good idea. But that is not the case.

[inesterdd]

As far as I know, the head of the messenger  Viber, reported earlier that the company is considering the possibility of issuing its own cryptocurrency. Other messengers may also consider this type of currency! A matter of time!

[neo10w]

This idea is a bit funny. They are all traditional industries. They are things that happened long ago. They are not coming out now.

[Tory-Tory]

My personal opinion is this: for companies registered in the US, the main obstacle is regulators, which can complicate the main activities. But for those who are registered in other countries, this is not needed for some reason, except for the Line

Line is planning to launch it's own global crypto exchange so it's up to them if they'll add an ICO for it.

https://www.ccn.com/messaging-giant-line-announces-new-global-crypto-exchange-excludes-u-s-japan/

[Dortira]

 I saying this is because they are not considering ICO as those things that you have said, advertisements hype and money earnings. Maybe they just don't trust cryptocurrency.

[ThunderFive]

Because they can be funding easily from IPO to get attracted by the big investment funds

[Ewox]

Its either they dont need it yet or maybe they have think about joining and conducting an ICO but its just not now. Maybe they are still thinking or still trying to figure out how they go about their ICO or something like that.

[Matic]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

Maybe they are just waiting for the cryptocurrencies market to gain some more stability, and then they would be happy to issue their own cryptocurrency that you can exchange to the Bitcoin and pay for the services and goods.

[sindikat]

In any business you need to do only what you know well. Cryptocurrencies are financial projects. They should be engaged in financiers. Messengers are more technical projects whose main task is to provide good communication and privacy. Why risk a well-established business. In addition, cryptocurrencies are still very common in order to attract such companies.

[bitbunnny]

Probably the answer is very simple, they don't have relevant business case. Just because something is popular and will bring profit to one company that doesn't mean that is also good choice for some other.
Probably they have estimated that such project would not be profitable and cost benefit for them although it might bring them some extra popularity.
But there is no rush with time maybe the circumstances will change and they will make different businesses decision.

[BigDig]

everything is very simple, as i think. such digital whales will prefer to keep the current state of things and not risk the crypto market. Telegram's example is very exciting but as long as the platform does not fully function, I do not think that someone will follow their path.

[el kaka22]

Maybe because they dont need it.They gain lots of money already without conducting ICO project.There are lots of scam ICO project they might afraid it will give negative feedbacks in their company.So they rather stick to what they have and improved it more than risking the reputation of their company.

Yeah, if I have a product, the essence of looking for fund through ICO is to at least be able to use that fund to build the product further and develop it to a standard level for global usage and all I need is to get those who can believe in me and the product based on that aspect.

For products such as the ones mentioned by the OP, these are products that are already doing well in the social media and chat space, so trying to conduct ICO simply makes no sense to me. They will not be the first to do this anyway, as I have seen several old cargoes trying to eat the piece of the ICO cake, but it makes no single sense. In fact, I would suspect such move a whole lot.

[gambitcoin53]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

uhm maybe their resources are just limited to being a social network, and their portfolios are intended to sustain them being a social network, plus they are prone to be hacked and has a secruty issues, unlike telegram, i think they have different system and platforms. funds are basically one of the reasons why.

[2start]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

I don't think it does not make, but have not made. Maybe they're planning it and waiting for the right moment to publicize it. They are big companies, they have a lot of money, if they are launching ICO is definitely well planned first.

[upsidedown75]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

These are working products from companies making huge amount of money with possible shareholders; thereby conducting an ICO is not necessary. ICO should be for new companies with product which could be a very huge one if pushed out and then funding is needed to do so which is more like buying stakes or shares in a company your believe will give you long term profit in the long run.

This is the reason why I feel a lot of companies running ICO on the same product that has been fetching them a lot of profit for years do not make any sense, unless of course, they are trying to introduce a new product.

[jaocoincrypto18]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

ICO is only better for those products that will need to be introduce to the masses that is why most of the ICO are just new names in the market and not popular unlike the companies that you have mention, they are all already have their names in the market and already have build their reputations before the ICO was introduced so therefore they don't need this kind of marketing anymore.

[coinplus]

I think because they are well funded companies with values brands. They don’t need to scam their customers with a potentially scammy ICO to raise a few (hundred?) millions ruining their business.
Disclaimer:
I still have to find s single ICO that is not SCAM.

My two cents,
F1

Usually, the essence of public funding is to generate funds to build a start up with a product and use those funds to get it out there and take it to the top. For products that are already doing great for a very long time now and being used, where the owners are making shitloads from some of them at least, I do not  see any reason for ICO. Although, if conducted anyway, I do not know how the investors are going to perceive it, but one way, unless they want to integrate blockchain technology, I really do not see any point.

[squog]

With the bad press associated with ICOs i doubt these companies will risk their golden honor in allowing ICOs to advertise in their apps. Well i see youtube and other games in google stores and app stores actually advertising ICOs but then again it's a free for all. Maybe these communication apps could do it but i doubt it.

[Hui8]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

They are already pretty much billionaires in what they are doing. They have billions of customers and get paid from the memberships all the time. I guess they are earning money money from what they have already achieved.
Marketing? Why they need it at all? These kind of stuffs are already over the market and if you open the App Store and check the number of users then they have already achieved billions of downloads and more than 4.9 star ratings for their platforms. I dont really see any significance of jumping into an ICO for them.

[localcrypto]

telegram and twitter are widely used for ico promotions and these social media we can see the followers for ico coins and altcoins and cryptocurrencies there is large conversion for ico advertising companies

[SirLancelot]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

Do you know the first question I asked myself when I saw this topic? I was like “what kind of human being will be asking this funny question?”🤔 dude, like seriously how can you be asking us such a question? Who told you that these companies are not popular? WhatsApp has more than one billion downloads on just Android play store and is one of the most downloaded apps.

There are also users that makes use of their computers in using it. How can you say they are not popular while it’s being owned by Facebook?.

[rickadone]

I don't think they need it. They are most likely waiting for the creation of a blockchain platform that they can use for their needs. It is not necessary to create your own blockchain for each company.

They actually do not need it at least for now, unless they are trying to launch something on the blockchain technology and pretty much want to blend with the trend going on now with some social platforms popping up which is built on the blockchain technology. The thing is that in terms of a lot of them being a full blown company, they have been funded right from the onset, and coming up with another funding to me sounds suspicious in a way if there is really no need for it.

[r32godzilla]

I think that these companies are now self-sufficient and now they are not in need of launching ICOs and collecting funds.And if OP is mentioning about allowing ads about ICOs,then I think that the project launchers would have found Facebook and Twitter to be much popular and convenient in reaching the targeted investors.

[viewcoins]

Just did Viber already closely begins to address the issue =). About it dazzle on many news portals. I am sure that soon the rest will also catch up to this process.

[eduardoabordo]

i think it's because crypto currency is not related in the apps that you have in you topic. it depends in there developer if they want to agree to join the bitcoin in there website.

[shesheboy]

i think it's because crypto currency is not related in the apps that you have in you topic. it depends in there developer if they want to agree to join the bitcoin in there website.

so , do you think that telgram , discord and slack are fully related to cryptos ? no . those apps are only created for messaging or groups purpose . i guess the only reason that these apps are mainly used for comunication it is because they are the most fastest and easy to use among other messaging
apps that op have been mentioned .

other crypto transactions are infact also using other apps such as skype and gmail , which i think it also depends on the person if what he prefer.

[rlm42]

It seems to me that they do not really need it. ICO and cryptocurrency maintain the use of blockchain technology.
Does it need for usual messengers? The answer is obvious - no.
On the good and for telegram it was not necessary, but the trend required.

[erikoy]

yeah i thought of this also maybe lets give some time for this other outlets of social media to get the chance to have a crypto ads even though we know that most of the investors and bounty hunters are in the facebook, twitter, reddit, youtube and etc. This will open also to other doors of other who were not able to get the chance or do not know for what is cryptocurrency. This could lead another positive increase for bitcoin in the near future if these social media will be utilize for cryptocurrency.

[BitcoinTurk]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

The companies, services and products you specify are companies that do not need extra money. For this reason, ICO regulations will not make much sense, and it will also shake the trust of some users. I also think that this process does not take place because of an important obstacle like the state. In the coming years I think that their services can be a crypto money production that can be used in applications, despite all the obstacles I have mentioned.

[miyaka26]

When there's an alternative platform to replace the current one it doesn't mean it's going to be beneficial, number one point does not matter as long as the company is well funded and its still profitable and the number two point seems pretty unrealistic as the current ICO's right know it will not going to add hype and popularity among other users that much we know the reputation of some the ICO's right now.

[Grayy]

The aforementioned apps have other means of enticing investors(traditional ways of investment are still valid and less volatile). These apps have the all the publicity they need already. Telegram may have done it because of its popularity amongst crypto investors.

[cryptobiolog]

Because cryptocurrency is created for the purpose of introducing any functionality, and in such messengers so there are the necessary functions. Maybe there is simply no understanding of the cryptocurrency market and technologies.

[localcrypto]

to my knowledge Line already conducted ICO and rest of the messenger app may do ICO in the coming days

[eternalgloom]

Not everything has to have a blockchain, you know... It's good that not everyone is jumping on the ICO bandwagon, because most current ICO's could have just started their service without it.
These companies are able to get investments through other means, so why would they even think about doing an ICO?

[googs84]

Looks like they are are lady well established and dont need funds for their developments. To be honest, they will never ever think about it because they are already running pretty well and having success in what they have offered. Plus, ICO's and stuff is for those who are new start ups wanting to start a projects from the scratch or have the project but dont have enough funds to run further. An ICO is not for such well established multi billion companies who are already gaining huge profits from their users. Plus they have reputation and faith of millions which is enough for them to run furthermore. 

[molla_corda]

Because to hold an ICO is not to snap your fingers. This is a Department of serious analysts, developers, advertising campaign. All this costs, all messengers earn good money and other services.

[BTChannell]

They do not conduct their ICO because the US has quite strict legislation in this area, which limits this possibility. There is such a structure as the securities and exchange Commission, which protects US citizens from actions by potential fraudsters. And there are precedents of criminal cases against the organizers of the ICO.

[Rhegar011]

most of these are owned by google, facebook, tencent and similar companies which dont have any plans to get into crypto economy as of now. beside that these are well established companies with tons of financial backing which means they dont need money for further development, operations, marketing. so no ICOs for them. where as telegram was self funded by founders and non profit making as i recall. ICO makes complete sense for them for future plans.

[scoin9]

Whatsapp is owned by Facebook, Skype is owned by Microsoft these are huge companies with tried and trusted business models and a lot of investors from the IPO they have already launched. IPO means initial public offering which is similar to ICO but for fiat so they do not need to get into the cryto world yet, that's why the haven't conducted an ICO.

[ethereumhunter]

maybe the owner of Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line still looking their chance to get involve in the cryptocurrency and I am sure that they will join into cryptocurrency soon. I am sure that they want to make another income from their apps and they have a big fan which are using their apps to communicate with the other. so I think we are only waiting for what they will do in the future and I guess that this will not be too long for them to introduce cryptocurrency to their fans.

[andriw]

first, maybe they already have enough funds to run and develop their products, secondly, maybe what they do to raise funds is not by way of ICO but do an IPO (Initial Public Offering) on the stock exchange. The IPO is the stock that is traded and about the company's promotional capabilities. If you are able to convince the public to buy IPO shares, then surely the company will get an extraordinary amount of money.

[tosmartak]

maybe the owner of Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line still looking their chance to get involve in the cryptocurrency and I am sure that they will join into cryptocurrency soon. I am sure that they want to make another income from their apps and they have a big fan which are using their apps to communicate with the other. so I think we are only waiting for what they will do in the future and I guess that this will not be too long for them to introduce cryptocurrency to their fans.

What chance are they looking for? These are established organizations making shit loads of money everyday and they really do not need ICO. ICO basically should be for raising of funds for new start ups with promising good tech and product with a great team and not for a company that already have what it takes to keep running.

[hitrawal91]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

I don't think it is mandatory for everyone to release their crypto platform or any other kind of crypto services. It  all depends on their needs, requirement, and interest. I think all these social media platform will try to implement their platform soon by the upcoming months and years and we must just wait and watch for it.

[sensimilia]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

Two possible reasons peers that they are still not recognising the potential of ICO issuing, or they are thinking that if they will be too much pressing on it it would not be having such a affect the Telegram has.

[Harlot]

WeChat already has a payment system in China and it is already popular. As for other messaging apps do they really need to create their own cryptocurrency? I mean what is the purpose of these tokens if they launch one? Not all messaging apps are not acting up as a mobile wallet like WeChat. If their sole purpose is to gain money I don't think that what you said is a good way as they can be creating their own stock via IPO which I think is a much better way to gain capital. Also this is a ver bad marketing promotion what if their token got dumped? Obviously their messaging service will also take a hit.

[South Park]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

Because they do not want it, they do not need it or both, it is not complicated, and even if they could find a use for a blockchain in their companies why do they need an ico? A healthy company with so many users and stream revenues does not need an ico at all, they could use some of the R&D budget to create their private blockchain and solve whatever need they have for it.

[pitiflin]

Because not everything needs to be built on the blockchain and not every network needs to run on coins. Even Telegram, which seemed to have a good idea on how to utilize the blockchain for their upcoming project is stuck in a controversy. It's a massive financial success for sure, but you have to keep in mind that they haven't delivered anything at all. This situation has proven that these giants can raise money, but whether or not they can put out a good project is yet to be seen.

Personally, I can only assume that the others don't see how developing a system that runs on the blockchain can help their business despite the fact that it's extremely likely for investors to line up and provide more funding than they'd need. That, to me, speaks volumes about their confidence/interest or lack thereof. Telegram didn't take much of a financial risk considering the amount of money they raised, but it's going to hurt their brand if their project flops -- more money means higher expectations after all.

This.

ICOs are also essentially for fund raisings. These companies that haven't conducted an ICO already have a lot of money. If they want to use blockchain, they can do it, but they choose not to for various reasons. Telegram fucked up big time here, but they have the money to get back, so wait for a year or two, to see some improvements, until then, just wait.

[voztata]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

This doesn’t make sense, why would they? Most of these chat platforms you mentioned don’t post ads, and I bet you that you won’t like it if WhatsApp should start to display ads, or maybe Skype starts to place ads everywhere in the chat. This is a dumb idea and makes no sense to me, there are already platforms like Facebook displaying advert on ICOs, so why on hell would you want all these you mentioned?

[PETES]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

Because they do not want it, they do not need it or both, it is not complicated, and even if they could find a use for a blockchain in their companies why do they need an ico? A healthy company with so many users and stream revenues does not need an ico at all, they could use some of the R&D budget to create their private blockchain and solve whatever need they have for it.

Definitely. They already have a running app so why the hell they'll conduct an ico? Like if they can provide for their updates then no need to do a crowdsale and let's just not fool ourselves here. Only those app that have a few users can think of this, and it will probably don't have a real usage, in the first place.

[batang_bitcoin]

DON'T CLICK THE LINK/IMAGE POSTED BY kthq426!!!

It is the same as this Jonata.

Expert Idea About This:
        

LOL, nice try to infect someone. "http://prntscr.com/khsz37"

[spongegar]

Maybe they don't believe in crypto currency. Maybe they don't beed crypto currency since the money they're making from ads are enough. Maybe they'll come aboard the crypto currency in the future. Maybe they don't have money to do so or the man power to create it. There are alot of variables as to why they don't have their own coin.

[ethereumhunter]

maybe the owner of Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line still looking their chance to get involve in the cryptocurrency and I am sure that they will join into cryptocurrency soon. I am sure that they want to make another income from their apps and they have a big fan which are using their apps to communicate with the other. so I think we are only waiting for what they will do in the future and I guess that this will not be too long for them to introduce cryptocurrency to their fans.

What chance are they looking for? These are established organizations making shit loads of money everyday and they really do not need ICO. ICO basically should be for raising of funds for new start ups with promising good tech and product with a great team and not for a company that already have what it takes to keep running.

I don't know what they looking for because I am not the owner of that company but if I am the owner, maybe I will launch one app that can gather more people to join in that apps and I will promote the apps especially if that app can help my ICO and get more investor. I am sure that every owner of that apps will have a plan and will think about the ICO euphoria and if they think that it is better to make the ICO for their apps, they will make one and they will invite people to join with them.

[Fear]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

I think that they would not be able to repeat the success of telegram because people will be thinking that they are just posers, so it would not be a unique thing if everybody will repeat that.

[Raycheronef]

They either don't want to or don't need to do this.

[redoxet]

Perhaps at this stage, such companies giants do not feel the need for this, although such an AP as viber already in 2018 launches its own cryptocurrency in Russia.

[nguyenthanhvien]

I see that is not necessary. They are a company with income from advertising. If they do that then it will be very difficult for advertisers. And their company needs to have more manpower for management work that is troublesome and costly. So for those companies that ICO is not necessary.

[cryptosyss]

Perhaps they know that not everyone is ready for this. Or maybe they just carefully create it so that the result is reliable.

[Aiko23]

Maybe, they are not interested in ico or with the current conditions they are quite able to reap considerable profits. On the other hand, not all users of the application know Crypto and may be at risk if they feel complicated, they will replace other applications

[brotherwood12]

they have "their" product and its going well , i think adding something risky like ico make their product will get interference rather than profit IMO

[Sebas.tian]

These guys already have the fund to operate their ecosystem. They also have their services for free, so what they are essentially doing by introducing a token for their product is similar to downgrading; doing so might result in the opposite so that might be the reason.

[Bumblecoin]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

I think their company does not need to create ICO since they are already known and their product is going well already. And I think they find it too risky in here.

[TranTrongit]

They are all big companies, and have a good reputation. They can create their own blockchain network but they do not need to raise funds by ICO. I think they have enough capital and the ability to create their own projects. And ICO is almost a form of venture capital and is not legally recognized.

[aggeyysido]

These companies find funds in other niches, apparently not yet interested in this opportunity. Although in the future they will definitely join this.

[TheWolfCrypto]

ICO is the "primary distribution of coins", a peculiar variant of attraction of investments by analogy with the IPO, but instead shares are issued tokens of the company. All this applies to startups just starting their way in the market. This number of companies has long been out of the category of startups and belongs to large corporations in the IT industry.

[mcTether]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

It won't be nice for every social media platform to have its own crypto. Who then will patronize the other? It means we will be having too many cryptos.

[setialovers]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

I am believe they will doing ICO for their new project. Most big company waiting right moment to launch their ICO and waiting market become good again. Telegram already made huge success ICO and i am believe more company will follow

[plescruslo]

First of all ICO would mean they are giving away tokens of their companies to others in a shareholder deal, similar to going public on places like nasdaq and nyse. However when you are that small the preferable method is getting investments from people who are already good in the business. Whatsapp sold some part of their companies before the facebook acquisation and they got bigger that way and do you think it would have gotten that big with us? I doubt it.

They prefer giving bigger parts of their company to some known investments so that it will lead to an exit that worths billions of dollars. However telegram did an ICO, lets see how it will move, as I see I think the exit would create some legal problems because of the tokens.

[btc78]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

This are popular social media site and i believe they do not need to be part of this scammy ico project.

for the sake of arguments social media sites are useful and trustworthy for all of the users so theres no need to extend their popularity by means of opening a ICO

[andriarto]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

This are popular social media site and i believe they do not need to be part of this scammy ico project.

for the sake of arguments social media sites are useful and trustworthy for all of the users so theres no need to extend their popularity by means of opening a ICO

besides, i don't think that many governments legalize cryptocurrency, so that it will be constrained in the payment section. maybe at this time not yet, but in the future I think there is an opportunity to join, like Facebook news

[withlove99]

Telegram will be the beginning for them. When they see the success they will also want to join for sure. It is normal for them to hesitate for such a new technology.

I think so.
Not all social networks are initially interested in cryptocurrency.
Maybe they are waiting and planning to join after what the telegram has reached with cryptocurrency.

[crpytonation]

Cos they are legit companies and also they don't use blockchain

[ayambawang]

maybe they have not been interested and don't need it, they still feel enough with what they have achieved right now, if they knew how much they would benefit from ico or this technology, I think they would join this platform without thinking.

[m_f_o_c]

Instant messengers such as Viber, WhatsApp, Skype, Webchat, Snapchat and so on, guided by a huge audience of users. These users are people of a wide range of populations around the world, as well as of different ages and interests. It is difficult to imagine how elderly people will be surprised by incomprehensible symbols and figures, the poor to resent, parents to swear if their children do not click there, and ordinary users who use these programs for communication, resent some ICO and unnecessary cryptocurrency. In addition, the ICO system is technically difficult to implement. You need to make online integration, monitoring, identification, authentication, additional protection of personal and other data and so on. Developers and ordinary users are not ready for this yet.

[peter0425]

maybe they have not been interested and don't need it, they still feel enough with what they have achieved right now, if they knew how much they would benefit from ico or this technology, I think they would join this platform without thinking.

They are already established social media, we can even call them giants already so there's no need for them to conduct any ICO. As far as I know those who conduct it are project startup companies. And I don't think that they're fully supported crypto as well. Just look at how Telegram becomes, there are hundreds of thousand of bots operating and its possible that if those aforementioned social media joins crypto they will be overrun by bots and its going hard for them to stop.

[MyCryptoCap]

For these "social networks" there is no need to conduct ICO as the strategy of promotion in the market of their services is somewhat different and does not use the ICO opportunities.

[_cryptoniya_]

Because these operations do not seem to encourage them too much, they have not yet established an Internet infrastructure that would allow them to use such translations.

[lephuqui]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

I think they can not be due to a lot of problems:
_In law, they will receive many negative feedback or reduce their current sales if applied ico.
_There will be a lot of speculation that will result in large volumes of sales declining the value of the token
_Their current capital is too large and they do not want to risk their reputation

[orayorayan2]

they must have their own considerations, or lack of attractive promos for them to join in crypto, which is very regrettable they did not join here, fear is still a consideration for them, hopefully in the future there will be a solution to this

[arthotdog]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

r

Because they are popular enough to make an ico,and they don’t wanna risk their credibility just to be called as scammers since all or most of the ICO projects now are created to victimized people

And these social media sites are reliable in their own way and creating an ICO will only ruin the names they build for how long

[mrs_bitcoin]

Perhaps these companies do not see much interest in this, they have other priorities that are not related to ICO.

[farosa]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

Now the crypto market situation is very bad because of most people think like you. These thoughts result in scam projects and the stealing of many people's money. Instead, if there was the only project which belonged to 1 sector, and without greedy developer, the situation of the current crypto view was much better.

[sublime5447]

Each company has a different monetization system for each product, even many who dare to offer services for free but they’re not bankrupt because they already understand what monetization they are applying. Btw Line has its own coin, but not crypto.

[allanaire]

They do not need an ICO, because they have real and physical investments for the development of their additional new functions in case of their invention.

[patarfweefwee]

Maybe because the companies you already told don't need the money ICOs bring forward. But then again, i see crypto currency ads in these platforms. Maybe not as heavy as in telegram. I guess that telegram actually made itself known as a crypto currency friendly communication platform mlre that any other.

[10c]

This is a very famous social networks , they are already a long time a great profit , and risk in order to create your ICO it is not particularly necessary.

[Barcode_]

In my opinion, unless these well known companies mentioned in this thread are truly in need of huge amount of funds for them to develop a new technology or some sort of new products that would be useful to the consumers who will be using it, I don't really see any good reason for them to start an ICO project at this moment.

[BitcoinMyBlood]

Perhaps these companies do not see much interest in this, they have other priorities that are not related to ICO.

As companies that already have funding, what could they offer with an ICO? I mean you can't actually own a part of the company because most of them already has shareholders and even got acquired (looking at you whatsapp) hence there is no chance the "ICO" they do could be considered directly affected by money they make.

Plus there would be a ton of SEC problems they could face if they both make money from selling tokens and also have shareholders, they can't just gather up more funds from ICO without having legal trouble. Which means you either go IPO/angel road or you go ICO road, you can't achieve both and make ton of money.

[CRYPTOGANGSTERs]

The problem of big players is a large number of investors and presidents who can interfere in making risky but ambitious decisions. It is a pity that there are very few large companies in the world that act aggressively and innovatively. Hail-hail Elon Musk!

[@Mhaiang]

In my own perception, these companies need not to conduct anymore ICO because they are already in the spotlight and they're already established and successful. No need for them for publicity as people are already using them in their everyday lives.

[efxtrader]

I am believe big company will involve in cryptocurrency market in the future. Crypto is too tempting to ignore and crypto have big community. If they dont lauch their own ICO, i am believe they will make partnertship with crypto developers

[ajaymukund]

 I think because Telegram is an anonymous and very secure messaging system and very easy to join the chat channel. I think it belongs to the anonymity of the Crypto market so it is more collaborative with ICO projects.

[maculeth]

I know, currently whatsapp has been bought by Facebook, and if Facebook still blocks crypto ads, then whatsapp will do the same. yes, so far only telegrams conduct ICO.

[Friskaadew]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

in my opinion they don't make ico themselves, but they are waiting for the right time or maybe they are developing their own ICO without us knowing. for example, from what I know that line is currently making ico them globally, and maybe another chat platform will follow the line where we know the line is not a small-scale chat platform

[CrazeCoinz]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

I think they can still support and build a good company without the help of ICO. This is also a good idea as they will manage their company without a controversy as most ICO has scam accusations.

[elasmar]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

Now the crypto market situation is very bad because of most people think like you. These thoughts result in scam projects and the stealing of many people's money. Instead, if there was the only project which belonged to 1 sector, and without greedy developer, the situation of the current crypto view was much better.

I totally agree. There is a huge number of scam projects that are creating a bad reputation for the ICO market. Genuine projects with great benefits for the development of cryptocurrency are not being supported because investors are losing trust fast. Worst thing is the majority of the so called experts have vested interest in promoting projects which they know very well have no business being involved in blockchain! 

[usorin]

Well the fair question is how come telegram, a well known social platform created their ico a few months ago. I guess it is a question of time till skype and all other platforms will have their own ICO.

[strideynet]

I think at the moment they are looking for other ways to implement cryptocurrencies in their products

[margaret22]

It looks like the dominance of Telegram is quite significant in the crypto market, and also have the feeling this message app is enough now. Crypto market is growing, but still just a small part of the International economy.

[conected]

I think at the moment they are looking for other ways to implement cryptocurrencies in their products

- I do not think so, they are trying to avoid crypto, instead of trying to apply crypto to their products because they are still developing very well, they do not need to be involved in crypto, crypto is not so popular with everyone in the world. In addition, people always know that ico is always very special and risky, they will not get too many benefits from this story, they will even have legal problems when crypto and ico remain products that government does not like and encourages people not to participate.

[greeklogos]

I heard that Viber is working on its on crypto which will be used for buying viber stuff. But I also didn't hear about the ICO from them. Just like you say it could bring high investments into the project. I do not know for their actual reasons, but maybe they simply afraid of punishment from the government, coz in some countries, where the head of this social network giants placed, ICOs forbidden.

[slocker]

I heard that Viber is working on its on crypto which will be used for buying viber stuff. But I also didn't hear about the ICO from them. Just like you say it could bring high investments into the project. I do not know for their actual reasons, but maybe they simply afraid of punishment from the government, coz in some countries, where the head of this social network giants placed, ICOs forbidden.

This isnt only one. Also i read more about Telegram coin that will be implement in telegram app. Hopefully many are waiting to see if this will be good if so think that we will see some major movement and improvement in ICO that will be social media funded. Dont think on Viber for this besides telegram many will wait to see if this telegram ICO will be success, if so many will start with ICO.

[Sarastiche]

I think they did not launch there ICO   because there is no need for it presently, Just like the stock market not all organization require to be on the stock to exist, overtime as the company grow, there migth be a need to launch an ICO, To be relevant in the economic community you must embrace the cryptocurrency space, this will take place over the years.

[lingwistiko]

Not now but maybe in the future they will conduct an ICO for a certain purpose but i think that's also an unlikely to happen just because they are already well-established. I remember Telegram is having an ICO but i don't know if it went very well or not.

[basyang]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

Well, I think Why Viber, whatsapp, skype, wechat, snapchat, IMO, line have not yet launched their ICO its because they are not yet interested to it many big companies just like them have a market strategy on how their market grows maybe as of now, they do not need the ICO project. Because their company is in stable market right now.

[Gastotade]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

Well, I think Why Viber, whatsapp, skype, wechat, snapchat, IMO, line have not yet launched their ICO its because they are not yet interested to it many big companies just like them have a market strategy on how their market grows maybe as of now, they do not need the ICO project. Because their company is in stable market right now.

Since they are already a established company and  have enough investors at their side, tgey might have no new plans to add features or project at tgis moment since they were satisfied on tgeir products.

[Piggy]

Mostly because the regulatory laws are not yet clear and don't want to get cought in it's cogs. Otherwise they could generate a lot of free money by creating their own currency, maybe it will happen in the future.

[setialovers]

Cos they are legit companies and also they don't use blockchain

Blockchain technology is secure technology and i am believe big company will use this technology. That company must be implemented blockchain technology to give better service to their user. I think the will launch their ICOs if cryptomarket growing bigger than now

[junglist.massive]

From several news pages that I read said Line decided to go into crypto, they called it LINK Coin. They are very confident that they won’t hold an ICO (but there is still an 'airdrop') because the level of demand for crypto in Japan is quite high and Line is a big company, almost everyone knows, especially young people.

[nwanne]

These company you mentioned are already an established companies and they are worth billions of dollar and they can fund any project they want to do, so there is no need to conduct an ICO.

[slocker]

This is little delicate question. First all of those dont share information personal ones. With this is mind they dont have any intent to use any type of any blockchain for sponsorship in any way. From this I dont believe they will ever do or possible do it.

[fiulpro]

They are already very successful to actually go and get something else added in their accounts ..they are already well paid and therefore I think they are just staying away from wasting unnecessary money .

If it doesn't go well then it could be bad for their own economy.

[shoreno]

They are already very successful to actually go

succesful just in the begining ?  no there is no such thing like that. all business or companies are all started small and unpopular but these companies listed on the op are blessed and lucky to stand out among many competitors . now they have the funds to start any additions without needing the help of ico.

they are just staying away from wasting unnecessary money .

you mean setting up an ico ? you are the ones that beg for money and your not the ones that waste money.  .

[bitcoinposts]

crypto market already have existing customer base in telegram which helped telegram to come up with own coin where as other messaging markets dont have such market base

[pixie85]

They probably don't want to touch this area because of regulatory uncertainty and possibility of being double checked by the SEC. The risk is still very high when you're a big company trying to enter crypto space.

A failure of an ICO/IPO could deter people from using their normal services. A failure works like bad PR and crypto space is unstable. You can't be sure what will happen tomorrow.

[DAVETUN]

Vber, whatsapp,skype are all social media platform, with an existing customer, and a service product with value, It is not all project/ Idea that  need to conduct ICO,  If there is a need for blockchain/ cryptocurrency development service that can be source for in the near future.

[reality18]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

These social media platforms have large influence and running a cryptocurrency integrated platform would have been a major boost to their internal and external financial transactions yet the opposite is seen now. I believe every business or company has its goals and set objectives which drives the company activities and decision making, hence these social media platform will have to revise most of these things in order to integrate such technology into their systems.

[Polar91]

Vber, whatsapp,skype are all social media platform, with an existing customer, and a service product with value, It is not all project/ Idea that  need to conduct ICO,  If there is a need for blockchain/ cryptocurrency development service that can be source for in the near future.

Facebook is a social media platform too but they are considering the initial coin offering for bigger funds. It's indeed helpful as what we have seen to the succession of the Telegram in which they raised more than a billion dollar.  Perhaps the mentioned social media platforms are also considering it but as of now they aren't ready yet.

[darewaller]

Why would they conduct an ICO if they already have the means and the audience? I think this doesn’t make much sense. It is much easier to create a new product that will be useful for users of this platforms.
It is enough for such projects to create a currency within their platforms so that users would gladly buy it. The question here is the advisability of creating such a currency.
As I said, ICO makes sense for new projects that need primary capitalization for their own implementation.

The OP ought to have even know this before asking this question, except he does not know how big the company he mentioned are, when Facebook wanted to make their intent of creating Libra coin known, it started form the fund raising they did and nobody knew about it except few people who had gotten the hint that they did so internally and till date, I learnt they generated lots of billions of dollars without the input of external people, so I wonder why a company that succeeded in doing that and already have the large user database to make their project successful would conduct ICO again.

ICO mainly are for some of these startup companies who are unknown and do not have much money to establish their project, while all these companies are very big companies to even buy the whole of the cryptocurrency market off.

[Arsenyo]

I think it's all about the big risk of spoiling the reputation, now investors are investing less and less in ICO projects because every second one turns out to be a scam. That is, there is a high probability of failure.

[meliodas]

These big companies doesn't conduct an ICO because some of them launched before the hype of the cryptocurrrencies and some of them see that it is not really a necessary to always go with ICO because they can conduct a private investing opportunities for those investors who really are interested in investing in technology and instead of doing ICO, they will just do IPO once they are successful.

[cutesgirl]

Many social media looks do not support with ICOs project because they want to keep their member away from ICO have not the warranty with ICO get profit after listing on exchange market, they want to keep their member stop lost assets or money with investing in ICOs project but when ICO have higher price after listing is why not.

[ice098]

Maybe because ico/cryptocurrency is not yet legal in the whole world, that's why they are not yet confident to conduct that activity, also they are afraid that the government will sue them because of it not yet legal, they are just only taking care of their reputation, but I think they already know this one and will take action sooner or later, im sure they already have a plan with this now.

[yulchatar]

Perhaps they think about it and plan in the future. But it seems to me that all these companies don't need additional financing in the form of ICO, since they are already have quite high popularity among users.

[coiningz]

Are you sure that they really need ICO?

[ReiMomo]

Well, I think it's because they find Cryptocurrency illegal or let say not fully legal the reason why they didn't conduct ICO. I think they already know what crypto is and they also know that they can earn big money but still, they don't launch their crypto platform so that is my own point of view. Or probably who knows these social media will launch soon like what happened on Facebook that recently successfully launched their payment processor platform.

[eaLiTy]

I think it's all about the big risk of spoiling the reputation, now investors are investing less and less in ICO projects because every second one turns out to be a scam. That is, there is a high probability of failure.

ICO is meant for legit companies to raise money for their development and to give a token of the share so that the profit will be shared in the future, that is the real concept of the token market and there is nothing wrong in legit companies raising money with ICO, the problem comes when people who wanted to make a quick buck starts these fake projects and then do nothing and then disappears and we had many in the market.
If legit companies are interested to raise money through ICO i am happy to invest in them.

[imstillthebest]

I think it's all about the big risk of spoiling the reputation, now investors are investing less and less in ICO projects because every second one turns out to be a scam. That is, there is a high probability of failure.

ICO is meant for legit companies to raise money for their development and to give a token of the share so that the profit will be shared in the future, that is the real concept of the token market and there is nothing wrong in legit companies raising money with ICO, the problem comes when people who wanted to make a quick buck starts these fake projects and then do nothing and then disappears and we had many in the market.
If legit companies are interested to raise money through ICO i am happy to invest in them.

ico is for all . legit or not so legit can conduct an ico . didnt you notice that there are many failed ico's before ? and some of them have failed because they arent legit and no one will trust them . speaking of legitness , the subject of the op are purely legit companies   .  id happy to see them having thier own ico's because i have a feeling that you and many people will going to invest on them  . not only investors but bounty hunters like me are going to get happy if they will also issue a bounty and airdrops ,  and i wont hesitate or doubt to join them  .

[ropyu1978]

people will surely welcome it enthusiastically and might scramble to get involved in the ICO if it holds a large company like that
they shouldn't hesitate to take that step because already trusted and many believe will be a great success

[HarmonyA]

Maybe they don't need it yet. Also, there are other methods of funding projects apart from ICO. They also want their reputations to be upheld positively. Their customer base is huge and they could also make more money by updating their app by increasing the size of app for download, so ICO seem unnecessary for them.

[Ayiranorea]

Maybe they don't need it yet. Also, there are other methods of funding projects apart from ICO. They also want their reputations to be upheld positively. Their customer base is huge and they could also make more money by updating their app by increasing the size of app for download, so ICO seem unnecessary for them.

ICO is a funding process which is done to raise funds for the further development of the project. All the applications mentioned here has got a big fund reserve and it is making a big revenue through its user network. Further what these networks can do is create tokens that has realtime usage similar to libra. I don't know to what extent this happens.

[7788bitcoin]

These big companies doesn't conduct an ICO because some of them launched before the hype of the cryptocurrrencies and some of them see that it is not really a necessary to always go with ICO because they can conduct a private investing opportunities for those investors who really are interested in investing in technology and instead of doing ICO, they will just do IPO once they are successful.

These are established companies and ICO is meant to help new aspiring companies to develop products and services in the crypto sector and if these companies are coming up with a product that will help the crypto space they will raise the money from the market iteself and for that i do not think that they will start an IPO and then the main problem is that crypto is not regulated in majority of the countries and hence they will not raise using ICO as they might get into legal issues.

[tbterryboy]

Why exactly do you think that these companies need a crypto platform or to run an ICO? Okay, let's take WhatsApp off the list because Facebook's Libra. But if you should check these companies you have mentioned you will see that they are all big companies and there is really no need for them to run an ICO. These companies have been around for a very long time and there is no need for it and they don't even have a cryptocurrency and having is not a must and doesn't even determine success.

We already have lots of ICOs and it's meant for new companies in the cryptocurrency platform and there are still some platforms that run ICOs but still end up not achieving anything.

[carlzec]

Blockchain proposes a new world. But it doesn't have to be all about blockchain. We don't need to include something popular in everything. Facebook is working on this issue. Libra can lead the way. But not all social media have to be involved.

[dimox]

Line is planning to launch it's own global crypto exchange so it's up to them if they'll add an ICO for it.

https://www.ccn.com/messaging-giant-line-announces-new-global-crypto-exchange-excludes-u-s-japan/

yeah, and i heard it.
so, for what they create coin? if in all of country give green lamp for crpytocurrent, i think they will do it. they can attract user if they use crypto, but it doesnt mean they will pull up their coin. its hard to stay or survive in here now

[yulionoo]

I think because they don't need a blockchain and also they don't need money. they already have the big advantage of using apps all over the world. and they have also become the most popular applications without using the ICO platform. so if there are no goals and benefits that can be achieved for what they are making an ICO project. it is better to continue developing applications so that application users are more comfortable using the application.

[culuuton]

I think because they don't need a blockchain and also they don't need money. they already have the big advantage of using apps all over the world. and they have also become the most popular applications without using the ICO platform. so if there are no goals and benefits that can be achieved for what they are making an ICO project. it is better to continue developing applications so that application users are more comfortable using the application.

I think no one doesn't want more money. They haven't done it now but the future is possible, they can develop online shopping platforms and integrate it into.

[CarnagexD]

I think because they don't need a blockchain and also they don't need money. they already have the big advantage of using apps all over the world. and they have also become the most popular applications without using the ICO platform. so if there are no goals and benefits that can be achieved for what they are making an ICO project. it is better to continue developing applications so that application users are more comfortable using the application.

Correct. The very reason why these projects/companies (Viber,skype etc.) did not conduct an ICO because they don't need a funding anymore since they already got an investors behind their back to fund the project. Also, they have nothing to do with cryptocurrency or blockchain or any payment settlements needed such as digital. But I hope these projects can come up of an idea with blockchain in it or something of their own coin giving much feature to their applications.

[sarnic]

These companies are worth a lot, they don't need something like their own coin, there is no point. Also the thing I don't understand is that why people want everything connected with cryptocurrencies, apps, programs etc.

[awik p]

I think because they don't need a blockchain and also they don't need money. they already have the big advantage of using apps all over the world. and they have also become the most popular applications without using the ICO platform. so if there are no goals and benefits that can be achieved for what they are making an ICO project. it is better to continue developing applications so that application users are more comfortable using the application.

Correct. The very reason why these projects/companies (Viber,skype etc.) did not conduct an ICO because they don't need a funding anymore since they already got an investors behind their back to fund the project. Also, they have nothing to do with cryptocurrency or blockchain or any payment settlements needed such as digital. But I hope these projects can come up of an idea with blockchain in it or something of their own coin giving much feature to their applications.

they are a strong company, and have no financial difficulties to develop their projects. moreover they already have a large community, so that their shares are only for themselves, with many users who need their coins, of course, this is an advantage for the project

[BitBite5]

And why would they? Not everyone is interested in ICO. Also, maybe they have estimated that this might be too risky for them or not enough profitable or just don't have the interest to get involved in crypto.

[Harriti]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

because Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line already have angel investors and their capital is large enough to establish and decide for themselves the fate of the business. This is one of the trustworthy businesses, they do not sell tokens to get money from investors, they use their own capital and strength to raise the business.
And for projects that need to raise capital, whales will often control the price of the coin. Matic, for example, had a strong dump and dropped more than 80% in just two hours and this was because they sold too many coins. leading to the whales having the right to manipulate.

[desticy]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

because Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line already have angel investors and their capital is large enough to establish and decide for themselves the fate of the business. This is one of the trustworthy businesses, they do not sell tokens to get money from investors, they use their own capital and strength to raise the business.
And for projects that need to raise capital, whales will often control the price of the coin. Matic, for example, had a strong dump and dropped more than 80% in just two hours and this was because they sold too many coins. leading to the whales having the right to manipulate.

All right. The giants you listed already have their sources of funding. What is the point of them to carry out an additional fundraising within the framework of ICO?
It would look strange, because companies already have their shares on the stock market, the introduction of tokens only shakes the situation with the stock price of each individual company.

[luckyflop]

Why do they have to do these things when they are the top and most powerful companies in the world? They have joined the stock market and I think it is enough for their growth to be stable. For companies that are under budget or lack of development capital, they will surely look to the cryptocurrency market to raise IEO or ICO capital to continue growing their companies, I have seen many such companies in 2019

[Palider]

And why would they? Not everyone is interested in ICO. Also, maybe they have estimated that this might be too risky for them or not enough profitable or just don't have the interest to get involved in crypto.

They don't need to launch ICO because they already famous and what the use of coins they will create?  Viber,  Whats and all @op mention dont need this. Because they are already reputable

[ubercool]

I don't think everyone is interested in crypto, especially when the applications run by public listed big corporates. Facebook is trying to bring Libra but I don't think governments will let them do this.

[karanggatak]

they are all big companies that already have millions of users and are well known all over the world. and they also already have large funds to be able to continue to develop their applications. so I think that the company does not need to make ICO poryek to be able to raise funds or become famous. Because they already have their own funding sources and also have many users throughout the world.

[luckyflop]

they are all big companies that already have millions of users and are well known all over the world. and they also already have large funds to be able to continue to develop their applications. so I think that the company does not need to make ICO poryek to be able to raise funds or become famous. Because they already have their own funding sources and also have many users throughout the world.

I agree with you, and even that thousands of financial companies want to invest in their projects so they will never run out of money to develop. ICO or IEO are only for poor projects and there are no sponsors, as a result I have yet to see any successful ICO or IEO projects so far

[henrybek3]

This will happen soon. Now my expectation is this. Facebook has already dominated these companies, but not indirectly. When Libra comes out, all digital platforms or social media programs will use it. This is my opinion.

[Gheka]

they are all big companies that already have millions of users and are well known all over the world. and they also already have large funds to be able to continue to develop their applications. so I think that the company does not need to make ICO poryek to be able to raise funds or become famous. Because they already have their own funding sources and also have many users throughout the world.

Indeed, they are big companies and grow very early, their level of attraction to the community is too good, and of course, they also do not lack investors, supports and sponsors, ICO is not necessary when they have skipped the stage of capital mobilization, what they need to do is develop according to global trends. In addition, the trend of large companies in the world is to conduct legalization on the stock exchanges, stocks will help the value of that company soar, they don't need an ICO when it doesn't help increase their value

[Jocuserious]

No needed and telegram is enough because real project never want scam so their want market run with more customers. Basically if their have good activity in telegram Facebook and Twitter Ann thread then everyone customers will take support easly.

[kotik085]

Such huge companies do not need to make a fuss, they are known even without advertising and PR. Maybe in the future, they will create, like TON and Libra.

[luppecuppe]

If these big firms produce a subcoin, they become stronger than the state. The armies of states protect the borders. But the main thing is to quit the money. Material power is very important for the existence of states. Social media companies may soon enter this sector. Watch out for coins with fake names.

[sana54210]

WhatsApp is owned by Facebook and Facebook already have plans to release their coin (Libra) in 2020, which we don’t know for sure if it’s going to be a success. However, I don’t think they are going to do ICO for it, that’s meant for startups, this is an already established brand with lots of users and they are well known around the world.

If Libra should be released today, a lot of people are quickly going to adopt and start making use of it. If not for the difficulties they had, PayPal would have still been a part of the association by now and imagine the kind of weight they would have pulled by now.

[TastyChillySauce00]

Such huge companies do not need to make a fuss, they are known even without advertising and PR. Maybe in the future, they will create, like TON and Libra.

But first of all they need to go through strict regulation and being approved even before thinking of conducting an ICO and making fuss like is the same as taking risk of making wrong business movement which could put their business in danger. If they are about to release a coin, it'll only have the utilization of being a local currency and nothing more. overall it's just doesn't benefit them enough.

[Webetcoins]

Such huge companies do not need to make a fuss, they are known even without advertising and PR. Maybe in the future, they will create, like TON and Libra.

But first of all they need to go through strict regulation and being approved even before thinking of conducting an ICO and making fuss like is the same as taking risk of making wrong business movement which could put their business in danger. If they are about to release a coin, it'll only have the utilization of being a local currency and nothing more. overall it's just doesn't benefit them enough.

They will obviously need to invest a lot in order to make their coin capable of competing with other coins. Moreover as you said, the coin will not ever reach the level of international transactions since bitcoin is already doing that job efficiently. This is happening on daily basis that so many new projects are launched but because of lack of developments and updates, they die. Well these social apps can earn from offering marketing services to new ICOs.

[carlzec]

Soon Whatsapp can become a wallet. But there is a very serious problem. Whatsaap can be traced from Wifii networks. So imagine a cell phone connected to wifii. This is a very serious security problem. I think people might not get used to this technology right away.

[Aying]

No needed and telegram is enough because real project never want scam so their want market run with more customers. Basically if their have good activity in telegram Facebook and Twitter Ann thread then everyone customers will take support easly.

Indeed. also, they already popular so there are no reason they conduct ICO or IEO. their coin will also useful than other new comer crypto projects, people will have interest and invest without doubt that the project they invested will going to scam. it's right also that social media platforms is enough to spread their coins. in future people will easily support it without that marketing ICO strategy.

[Chrystora123]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

This topic has long been made but I just saw.

IMO.. which led to large applications as you have said (WA, Snapchat, IMO and others) to date have not issued their own cryptocurrency is because of legal issues.  These big companies are very obedient to the rules issued by the United States government, but in the future, if the US government no longer bans cryptocurrencies, I am very sure they will issue the cryptocurrencies of their own products.

[meliodas]

No needed and telegram is enough because real project never want scam so their want market run with more customers. Basically if their have good activity in telegram Facebook and Twitter Ann thread then everyone customers will take support easly.

Indeed. also, they already popular so there are no reason they conduct ICO or IEO. their coin will also useful than other new comer crypto projects, people will have interest and invest without doubt that the project they invested will going to scam. it's right also that social media platforms is enough to spread their coins. in future people will easily support it without that marketing ICO strategy.

It is unnecessary for those companies to make their own coin because it will be redundant for the use of other currencies like dollar and bitcoin. We already have coins that can be used as a payment in different platforms even in social media. They should put their attention in innovation and making people's lives easier rather than creating their own coin.

[GideonGono]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

I think because they are already popular and they don't need to use some fund for that because they have the sure and they have their own strategy to market their apps. As I see, upcoming project will be on ICO to promote it also to have a potential investor who believe on their project.

[diazepam666]

Please go and check the share partners and decision makers of this companies. They are the giants in centralised market and most probably they will not come inside the group industry due to they were not aware of the technology or no plan to come over the decentralized marketplace.

[Aricoin]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

Viber in talks about launching Rakuten - delayed due to regulation.
WhatsApp 'from' Facebook, so that falls under Libra - delayed due to regulation.
Microsoft owns Skype and they are developing a lot of blockchain tech
Line have launched a cryptocurrency - delayed due to regulation.

Essentially, in every case they are interested but are being set back by regulatory issues.
Microsoft has the smartest approach, build for other people and develop in-house tech so there is no financial regulation to deal with (yet, until rules are set).
They are all huge companies so can't take shortcuts to bring cryptocurrency to the general public.

Aricoin on the other hand has much more flexibility in bringing cryptocurrency to the people as it allows you to pay anyone with a social profile URL. Instantly opening a payment channel to billions - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=909186.0

[travwill]

Why would they conduct an ICO if they already have the means and the audience?
I think this doesn’t make much sense. It is much easier to create a new product that will be useful for users of this platforms.
It is enough for such projects to create a currency within their platforms so that users would gladly buy it.
The question here is the advisability of creating such a currency. As I said, ICO makes sense for new projects that need primary capitalization for their own implementation.

[tinyblue]

The idea of every freaking company creating their own crypto is disgusting and would kind of lead to a bubble and over saturation. They don't need their own coin.

[atjiat]

It seems to me that the main problem for using your own cryptocurrency, as well as for its creation by the mentioned social networks and messengers, is difficult due to the lack of legalization of cryptocurrency.  Since these resources operate legally, in order to use cryptocurrency, these resources must have real government approval.

[iv4n]

It seems to me that the main problem for using your own cryptocurrency, as well as for its creation by the mentioned social networks and messengers, is difficult due to the lack of legalization of cryptocurrency.  Since these resources operate legally, in order to use cryptocurrency, these resources must have real government approval.

To say it like this, every business is subject to various state and local laws and regulations related to employment, intellectual property, insurance, and many other matters. To not go further, we can but there's no point, companies need to operate by these laws and regulations, they can't change the way they work  to crypto and to not broke a law, simple as that.
In my opinion system is broken a long time ago, and we need to change systems. Crypto is regulated by some other laws, and instead pushing for legislation of crypto, and more regulations of crypto, we need to work for crypto to take over current system!

[USBitcoinServices.Com]

Those companies will join or buy an existing blockchain project and use them or they might join forces and create their own blockchain.

Once the crypto boom gets here they will hurry to act! it seems that many of them are busy doing their centralized business yet, stealing from weak-minded people!

[Twentyonepaylots]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

I think because they are already popular and they don't need to use some fund for that because they have the sure and they have their own strategy to market their apps. As I see, upcoming project will be on ICO to promote it also to have a potential investor who believe on their project.

This will cause a negative feedback on their end to add up. We all know people don't like no ads on their stuff. And offering cryptocurrency based on their favorite apps will make the user feel like the people behind this is trying to rip them off of money. Aside from that, cryptocurrencies are no get rich schemes, they wouldn't want to take the risk of getting a separate department on their team that will handle the crypto business.

[Kimonoe]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

I think because they are already popular and they don't need to use some fund for that because they have the sure and they have their own strategy to market their apps. As I see, upcoming project will be on ICO to promote it also to have a potential investor who believe on their project.

This will cause a negative feedback on their end to add up. We all know people don't like no ads on their stuff. And offering cryptocurrency based on their favorite apps will make the user feel like the people behind this is trying to rip them off of money. Aside from that, cryptocurrencies are no get rich schemes, they wouldn't want to take the risk of getting a separate department on their team that will handle the crypto business.

the application is deliberately not making ICO, of course there are separate considerations. if advertising is used too often, it will certainly make customers uncomfortable, so it will have an impact on their business. maybe this thing is separated between the product and its stock, so it can work well

[johnwest]

They dont understand the advantages of the crypto, also why will you implement a whole new technology if you are getting the investment in conventional way.?
Small organizations may do it but why are we expecting applications like Whatsapp and WeChat or SnapChat will do this..? They are already an established entity, they feel the governments will start tagging them if they use crypto and get investments like ICO's.

[olumyd]

What do you think why Viber, WhatsApp, skype, WeChat, Snapchat, IMO, Line have not yet launched their crypto platform?
But Kik and Telegram did it.
After all, companies can get 2 huge pluses:
1) to collect a large amount of money for ICO
2) add hype to marketing and popularity among users.

share your opinion

For the most obvious reason - regulatory uncertainty. And besides, there is a one size fits all for companies to grow, whether financially or in user counts. But I think it's a bad idea for them to go adopt an ICO, look at the level of scrutiny telegram is going through right now. This may in fact make the others completely wary of the crypto or digital asset space for now.

[frank0ly]

Because not all social networks and instant messengers have the ability to work with the cryptosphere. In addition, everyone has their own plans and vision for the future of their company and application. That would be nice, because the more cryptocurrency ads, the better. But I mean that if they do not do this, then there are reasons for this. Because large companies will never miss the chance to earn more money.

[thesmallgod]

I am sure you know most of these social platform you listed are own by individual and group of people that have clear understanding of the potentials the projects have in making life comfortable for users and if they have not seen any reason why they should introduce a coin as a payment processor, I do not think they will. For instance, the Libra coin which has been widely speculated last year have not been into the market up till date. This might be because Facebook have seen reason why they should not proceed with the coin especially when there were rumour that some giant Facebook affiliates are not backing Libra

[FanatMonet]

Most likely, these campaigns are simply not interested in this. And personally, I don’t see any urgent need for them in this. All of these messengers are self-sufficient and do not need to quickly raise funds through IPO / ICO, this is needed more by companies that are just starting.

[TrevorS]

The reason is not only in the existing popularity. Think for yourself, these projects are aimed at making a profit, maximizing profits is their most important goal.
Obviously, an additional fundraiser will bring even more profit to these companies. I am sure they would do it with pleasure if they could.
But holding such adventures can badly affect the company's attitude on the part of people and also attract the attention of regulators who can fine or prohibit fundraising,
which will lead to a fall in the shares of these companies, which they simply cannot allow.

[FanatMonet]

The reason is not only in the existing popularity. Think for yourself, these projects are aimed at making a profit, maximizing profits is their most important goal.
Obviously, an additional fundraiser will bring even more profit to these companies. I am sure they would do it with pleasure if they could.
But holding such adventures can badly affect the company's attitude on the part of people and also attract the attention of regulators who can fine or prohibit fundraising,
which will lead to a fall in the shares of these companies, which they simply cannot allow.

For example, if you take WhatsApp, then it belongs to Facebook, and as far as I know, Mark wants to add some kind of coin to Facebook, and I think that after that he will be able to add it to WhatsApp. Therefore, there is absolutely no need for an ICO for WhatsApp.

[Arkann]

The reason is not only in the existing popularity. Think for yourself, these projects are aimed at making a profit, maximizing profits is their most important goal.
Obviously, an additional fundraiser will bring even more profit to these companies. I am sure they would do it with pleasure if they could.
But holding such adventures can badly affect the company's attitude on the part of people and also attract the attention of regulators who can fine or prohibit fundraising,
which will lead to a fall in the shares of these companies, which they simply cannot allow.

I can’t understand what tokenization can give to such popular instant messengers?  At least for today they work well using other currencies to provide services to users.  Nevertheless, they can implement the use of rating cryptocurrencies and do not necessarily have their own.