What to do with the Unsold Tokens?

[CanErik]

Hi,

I've been reading about the strategy ICOs use for unsold tokens in case they do not reach their hard cap.

As far as I understand, there are a few options to be used for this scenario.

1) Unsold tokens are burned - the most common option used by ICOs. If tokens are burnt, token holders share will increase, therefore its price.

2) Unsold tokens are not burned - founders keep them. It's not a good option at the eyes of the token holders. It can be used as a personal interest.

3) Unsold tokens are airdropped - A few ICOs (eg. FundFantasy) used this strategy. As far as they see it, the token price will be decreased but will be readjusted because people will use it.


I'm not aware of any more alternatives to those three. What are your thoughts? Would you use option 1 or go for the other two options? Would you come up with another possibility?


Thank you very much.

Hi;

I think "airdrop" is more sensible but "burn" is more profitable.

Kind regards

[Liberto]

Some of the times I even heard that bounty managers and team took those unsold tokens for themselves. I'm thinking that this is not the most right decisions for them, but they are leading so it is depending on them.

[visionE2]

I think some of projects are using circulation system, that is, adding unsold token into the circulation exchange gradually

[ismelda_ita]

Most ICO with unsold tokens will burn them. Maybe they do that to reduce the token supply or to keep the token price stability on the crypto market.

[kwabeedat]

Burning is the best option in my point of view. When you burn few tokens get into circulation, the demand is set at enticing prices, and then the coin gets value.

[rainezerr401]

I think some of projects are using circulation system, that is, adding unsold token into the circulation exchange gradually

Just keep your tokens because those coins that you earn will still grow depending on the project or how good is the platform running in the industry.

[strideynet]

I think it would be right to burn, otherwise it is a direct attack on the money of investors by inflation. looks like cheating.

[rainezerr401]

I think some of projects are using circulation system, that is, adding unsold token into the circulation exchange gradually

Just hold your coins and wait for the price to pump up, always remember that the market is volatile so your coins will still has the chance to grow its price if the project is really good.

[Dr.Osh]

I think some of projects are using circulation system, that is, adding unsold token into the circulation exchange gradually

Just hold your coins and wait for the price to pump up, always remember that the market is volatile so your coins will still has the chance to grow its price if the project is really good.

which I know, sometimes they burn it to keep the price of a coin, but sometimes they freeze, or store it, in case, and sometimes they distribute it to airdrop, or to investors, well, that's what I know about it.

[FlightyPouch]

I think some of projects are using circulation system, that is, adding unsold token into the circulation exchange gradually

Just hold your coins and wait for the price to pump up, always remember that the market is volatile so your coins will still has the chance to grow its price if the project is really good.

Even if you hold your coins, it will be bad if the developers decided not to burn the unsold tokens. The reason they are burning it is that to keep the price high and wanting to make their token in demand. And with lower supply circulating in the market, it has a high possibility of having a good price in the future but the problem is the bounty hunters selling off quickly the tokens in so low price.

[yurekaa]

In my opinion. better unsold token burned. so the number of tokens that have been circulated in the market can not be added again so that the number is limited. so it can increase the sale value of the token.

[chipzeru]

Most of ICO will burn the unsold token and i agree with this option. This will makes the price higher in the future as the number of token's circulation is limited

[Macai]

Hi,

I've been reading about the strategy ICOs use for unsold tokens in case they do not reach their hard cap.

As far as I understand, there are a few options to be used for this scenario.

1) Unsold tokens are burned - the most common option used by ICOs. If tokens are burnt, token holders share will increase, therefore its price.

2) Unsold tokens are not burned - founders keep them. It's not a good option at the eyes of the token holders. It can be used as a personal interest.

3) Unsold tokens are airdropped - A few ICOs (eg. FundFantasy) used this strategy. As far as they see it, the token price will be decreased but will be readjusted because people will use it.


I'm not aware of any more alternatives to those three. What are your thoughts? Would you use option 1 or go for the other two options? Would you come up with another possibility?


Thank you very much.

I don't have anything to add because i also agree of this three options. Most Ico do number 1 for the coins to increase in value.

[Netnox]

1) Unsold tokens are burned - the most common option used by ICOs. If tokens are burnt, token holders share will increase, therefore its price.

2) Unsold tokens are not burned - founders keep them. It's not a good option at the eyes of the token holders. It can be used as a personal interest.

3) Unsold tokens are airdropped - A few ICOs (eg. FundFantasy) used this strategy. As far as they see it, the token price will be decreased but will be readjusted because people will use it.

Options #2 and #3 are unethical as it is like cheating the investors who hard participated in the ICO. If there are unsold tokens, then they should be either burnt or distributed proportionally to everyone who had participated in the ICO.

[Farma]

1) Unsold tokens are burned - the most common option used by ICOs. If tokens are burnt, token holders share will increase, therefore its price.

2) Unsold tokens are not burned - founders keep them. It's not a good option at the eyes of the token holders. It can be used as a personal interest.

3) Unsold tokens are airdropped - A few ICOs (eg. FundFantasy) used this strategy. As far as they see it, the token price will be decreased but will be readjusted because people will use it.

Options #2 and #3 are unethical as it is like cheating the investors who hard participated in the ICO. If there are unsold tokens, then they should be either burnt or distributed proportionally to everyone who had participated in the ICO.

I think each project has their own plan, and the most often done by many projects is burning unsold coins. it is done to keep the coin in balance with the funds earned. in addition, it is also possible to make the price more stable.

[turkandjaydee]

1) Unsold tokens are burned - the most common option used by ICOs. If tokens are burnt, token holders share will increase, therefore its price.

2) Unsold tokens are not burned - founders keep them. It's not a good option at the eyes of the token holders. It can be used as a personal interest.

3) Unsold tokens are airdropped - A few ICOs (eg. FundFantasy) used this strategy. As far as they see it, the token price will be decreased but will be readjusted because people will use it.

Options #2 and #3 are unethical as it is like cheating the investors who hard participated in the ICO. If there are unsold tokens, then they should be either burnt or distributed proportionally to everyone who had participated in the ICO.

I dont know what you actually mean with unsold tokens are airdropped but i think the best option that will very fair for all parties is redistribute the unsold tokens.
Redistribute the unsold tokens to the ICO participant based on token they have bought (like stakes).

[BartS]

Hi,

I've been reading about the strategy ICOs use for unsold tokens in case they do not reach their hard cap.

As far as I understand, there are a few options to be used for this scenario.

1) Unsold tokens are burned - the most common option used by ICOs. If tokens are burnt, token holders share will increase, therefore its price.

2) Unsold tokens are not burned - founders keep them. It's not a good option at the eyes of the token holders. It can be used as a personal interest.

3) Unsold tokens are airdropped - A few ICOs (eg. FundFantasy) used this strategy. As far as they see it, the token price will be decreased but will be readjusted because people will use it.


I'm not aware of any more alternatives to those three. What are your thoughts? Would you use option 1 or go for the other two options? Would you come up with another possibility?


Thank you very much.

In my opinion a better strategy is to redistribute the rest of the tokens in proportion to the amount invested in the project, if the icos instead of trying to set a fixed price for their tokens decided from the very beginning that they will distribute all the tokens independently of the amount of money they raised then they will not have any need to use any of the methods that you describe above, but there are very few icos that have followed the method of distribution that I describe.

[Kodok Bencot]

Hi,

I've been reading about the strategy ICOs use for unsold tokens in case they do not reach their hard cap.

As far as I understand, there are a few options to be used for this scenario.

1) Unsold tokens are burned - the most common option used by ICOs. If tokens are burnt, token holders share will increase, therefore its price.

2) Unsold tokens are not burned - founders keep them. It's not a good option at the eyes of the token holders. It can be used as a personal interest.

3) Unsold tokens are airdropped - A few ICOs (eg. FundFantasy) used this strategy. As far as they see it, the token price will be decreased but will be readjusted because people will use it.


I'm not aware of any more alternatives to those three. What are your thoughts? Would you use option 1 or go for the other two options? Would you come up with another possibility?


Thank you very much.

I think the best thing to unsold token is burning, with ideal stock it will keep investor confidence and of course this can make the price stable or even skyrocket.

[Paul Pogba]

Hi,

I've been reading about the strategy ICOs use for unsold tokens in case they do not reach their hard cap.

As far as I understand, there are a few options to be used for this scenario.

1) Unsold tokens are burned - the most common option used by ICOs. If tokens are burnt, token holders share will increase, therefore its price.

2) Unsold tokens are not burned - founders keep them. It's not a good option at the eyes of the token holders. It can be used as a personal interest.

3) Unsold tokens are airdropped - A few ICOs (eg. FundFantasy) used this strategy. As far as they see it, the token price will be decreased but will be readjusted because people will use it.


I'm not aware of any more alternatives to those three. What are your thoughts? Would you use option 1 or go for the other two options? Would you come up with another possibility?


Thank you very much.

In my opinion a better strategy is to redistribute the rest of the tokens in proportion to the amount invested in the project, if the icos instead of trying to set a fixed price for their tokens decided from the very beginning that they will distribute all the tokens independently of the amount of money they raised then they will not have any need to use any of the methods that you describe above, but there are very few icos that have followed the method of distribution that I describe.

I think it depends on the commitment of devs. from the beginning, but mostly devs. use the burned option to make the token amount not excessive and still valuable.

[pozmu]

Usual answer: it depends.

You have to take into consideration how much tokens were unsold, what percentage of ICO/ coin total supply (if all of the coins are on sale) are left.

Option 1 may look good from perspective of buyer, because as you mentioned, his share increases. However if a lot of coins weren't sold it also means that dev team didn't collect as much funds as they hoped for which may impact future of coin.

Option 2 looks like devs are paid twice, first during the ICO, then they got leftovers for themselves. But if a lot of coins weren't sold it may also motivate them to work harder so unsold tokens increase in value and in the end they can make more money than if 100% were sold during ICO. Unsold coins can be also used for marketing etc. Of course they can also dump them and run away.

Third option is interesting and if done properly can make coin more popular. But I think it should be more of faucet form, because if you airdrop a lot at once token price may decrease as you mentioned + buyers may feel cheated that other people are getting coins for free while they had to pay to get them.