Bitcoin Forum
September 22, 2018, 10:15:12 AM *
News: ♦♦ New info! Bitcoin Core users absolutely must upgrade to previously-announced 0.16.3 [Torrent]. All Bitcoin users should temporarily trust confirmations slightly less. More info.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  

Warning: Moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Watch out for Ponzi schemes. Do not invest more than you can afford to lose.

Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Should ICOs be considered a Security?  (Read 32 times)
Stedsm
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1428
Merit: 1039


View Profile
August 28, 2018, 12:41:39 PM
 #1

After the surge in Bitcoin's value early 2014, we saw an idea being popped up and went crazy for all those small-scale startups to start their projects with the help of crowdfunding - a way where people buy their tokens to support their project if they find it interesting. Unlike IPO (which is regulated by many Authorities before getting launched, and seeks investors only), ICOs are totally different as most of them were* not regulated and many startups used to be just ideas - fake ideas which never got fulfilled and people lose both their trust and money behind such a graceful innovation which could give some real ideas a boost if there is any BODY to find whether the intentions of these ICOs' devs and admins is to really deliver their promises to their potential customers. I saw many ICOs were shit and gained too much of investments, many even ran away and due to them, members here and at other social websites suffered for their time and efforts (many were bots so it's a 50-50 situation where many users try to fake it out by scamming the projects by fake-fully trying to show that they are helping the project by advertising for them). Many got nothing - neither tokens nor replies from the ICO people. So, my question here is - should such ICOs be given the label of "Securities" which would give them more of a credibility to invest in them? If yes, will there ever be a Regulatory Body to measure the assurance of delivery of the project and whether the project is anywhere going to deal with blockchain?

* - (used "were" because many came and gone as there were no regulations before, and in few countries - still no regulations are there for such crowdfunding)

Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1537611312
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1537611312

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1537611312
Reply with quote  #2

1537611312
Report to moderator
1537611312
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1537611312

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1537611312
Reply with quote  #2

1537611312
Report to moderator
1537611312
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1537611312

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1537611312
Reply with quote  #2

1537611312
Report to moderator
shivansps
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728
Merit: 501


The Premier Digital Asset Management Ecosystem


View Profile
August 30, 2018, 10:34:44 PM
 #2

After the surge in Bitcoin's value early 2014, we saw an idea being popped up and went crazy for all those small-scale startups to start their projects with the help of crowdfunding - a way where people buy their tokens to support their project if they find it interesting. Unlike IPO (which is regulated by many Authorities before getting launched, and seeks investors only), ICOs are totally different as most of them were* not regulated and many startups used to be just ideas - fake ideas which never got fulfilled and people lose both their trust and money behind such a graceful innovation which could give some real ideas a boost if there is any BODY to find whether the intentions of these ICOs' devs and admins is to really deliver their promises to their potential customers. I saw many ICOs were shit and gained too much of investments, many even ran away and due to them, members here and at other social websites suffered for their time and efforts (many were bots so it's a 50-50 situation where many users try to fake it out by scamming the projects by fake-fully trying to show that they are helping the project by advertising for them). Many got nothing - neither tokens nor replies from the ICO people. So, my question here is - should such ICOs be given the label of "Securities" which would give them more of a credibility to invest in them? If yes, will there ever be a Regulatory Body to measure the assurance of delivery of the project and whether the project is anywhere going to deal with blockchain?

* - (used "were" because many came and gone as there were no regulations before, and in few countries - still no regulations are there for such crowdfunding)

There a bunch of the ICOs and projects to be considered as security, many of them use some other words to describe their "security schemes" in their whitepaper, people thinking about how cool dividends are or profits from some services, etc. I love the projects that promise dividends from trading profits but later you realize that they don't gain profits in a bear market, they don't short the BTC and just hold their "investments", Lmao. Yeah, those exist. Using the buzzwords in their whitepapers making people think it's quite good to receive share profits or dividends, but there is no exchange currently trading securities and if it does, that you better be careful and manage your risk properly. However, I still believe that securities will become the most tokenized assets and most liquid in future.



▄▄           ▄▄▄▄▄▄             ▄▄▄▄▄▄           ▄▄         ▄▄        ▄▄             ▄▄▄▄▄▄            ▄▄                  ▄             ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ 
██        ▄██▀▀▀▀▀▀██        ▄██▀▀▀▀▀▀██▄        ███▄       ██        ██          ▄██▀▀▀▀▀▀██▄         ██                 ███            ██▀▀▀▀██▄
██       ██▀                ██▀        ▀██       █████▄     ██        ██         ██▀        ▀██        ██                ██ ██           ██     ██
██      ▐█▌                ▐█▌          ▐█▌      ██ ▀███▄   ██        ██        ▐█▌          ▐█▌       ██               ██   ██          ██▄▄▄▄█▀
██      ▐█▌                ▐█▌          ▐█▌      ██   ▀███▄ ██        ██        ▐█▌          ▐█▌       ██              ██     ██         ██▀▀▀▀██▄
██       ██▄                ██▄        ▄██       ██     ▀█████        ██         ██▄      ▄▄  █        ██             ██       ██        ██     ██
██        ▀██▄▄▄▄▄▄██        ▀██▄▄▄▄▄▄██▀        ██       ▀███        ██          ▀██▄▄▄▄▄ ██          ██▄▄▄▄▄▄      ██         ██       ██▄▄▄▄██▀
▀▀           ▀▀▀▀▀▀             ▀▀▀▀▀▀           ▀▀         ▀▀        ▀▀             ▀▀▀▀▀  ▀▀         ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀     ▀▀           ▀▀      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ 
           ▄▄███▄▄
     ▄▄███████████▄▄
 ▄▄███████████████████▄▄
███████████▌ ▐███████████
██▌ ▐███████ ███████▌ ▐██
███ ████▀▀██ ██▀▀████ ███
███ ██▀▄████ ████▄▀██ ███
███ ██ █████ █████ ██ ███
███ ██ █████ █████ ██ ███
███ ██ █████ █████ ██ ███
 ▀▀ ██ █████ █████ ██ ▀▀
     ▀ █████ █████ ▀
         ▀▀█ █▀▀
The Premier   ───────────────────
Digital Asset Management Ecosystem
────────   Powered by the ICNQ Token


▾  Medium
▾  Twitter
▾  LinkedIn
▾  Subscribe


.I C N Q   T O K E N.

The Token for Digital Asset Management
audaciousbeing
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742
Merit: 552

★ ChipMixer | Bitcoin mixing service ★


View Profile
September 04, 2018, 09:49:36 AM
 #3

- should such ICOs be given the label of "Securities" which would give them more of a credibility to invest in them? If yes, will there ever be a Regulatory Body to measure the assurance of delivery of the project and whether the project is anywhere going to deal with blockchain?

* - (used "were" because many came and gone as there were no regulations before, and in few countries - still no regulations are there for such crowdfunding)

No matter what ICO is being called, it will still be seen with suspicion until there is an acceptable regulatory body verifying the claim of those coming to the market to raise fund. The problem is about the people as we have seen several ICOs that in an unregulated environment have flourished and given people who trusted them a decent return on their investment.

With regulations, then there vouching of the team would have been settled, there would be an obligation to ensure that reports are given regularly on the application of funds generated from the market are applied for the purpose they are meant and there is an institution of a corporate governance board to ensure that the right thing is being done in the operations of the enterprise. It is when all of this are done that we can then start thinking of the right name to give it whether security of secure investment.

Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!