The problem: abandon the listing because of the bear market.

[giletto]

This is a very correct operation. When the market is in a downturn, excellent projects need to be avoided. Otherwise, blind listings and blind investments are not good for profits. Any project will only get better if the cryptocurrency market rises.

Good projects usually use this way to avoid dumping, I see a lot of ICOs have hit the hardcap over time but they have not listed at the exchanges because they are afraid of the price of the token falling down. That is great for investors

[LickKing]

The bear market has become dangerous for investors. Only a few people can make money in a bear market. The ICO development team is also delaying time to market. It is important to know that the ICO development team must be accountable to investors and that these projects will receive more support. Every ICO development team wants to lose money on coins. But not all coins that are delayed in listing are excellent, and they may still have fraud.

[gefander]

People you noticed, that in the last time we experiencing problems with some projects. Who break their promises...

some bounty campaigns also state the reason why they are closing the market is because of the current market situation that is too low. Though, some pays the bounty hunters, many projects just leave nothing for them. I think it is a more sensible for of scam so we should be aware of it.

Yes, that's right, some projects do not understand and do not though - expose themselves as scammers. They have their own ideology, their own expectations-I can understand it, but can everyone else understand? They are constantly writing that tomorrow is tomorrow,but in fact, for 9 months it will not come tomorrow.

[peter0425]

I believe OP here talking about the successful ICO that refuses to pay the bounties and keep coming up with reason after another, not the failed ICO.
So about the projects that refuse to pay bounties and keep delays without really any good reason, I think they should get some kind of penalties.
And for the exchange part, I believe you are talking about some projects that refused to get listed, and I think it is totally up to them unless it is stated clearly in the roadmap when they will be listed.

And who will give them penalties? We all know that the market is free and decentralized, no custodian or central authority to handle those disputes. I'm sure that everyone knows that ICO is a gamble, you invest and then you don't know when your getting the profits. If you're not willing to take that risk then its better not to join at all, same with bounty hunters. It going to be difficult to us because we don't have total of the decision of the project themselves, roadmaps might be there but I'm sure majority don't follow it because of some unexpected event.

[adrianto1995]

Hmm, I think they are not really abandoned the listing, they just pending the listing to exchange to keep the price of token stable. If they listing the token too fast (especially at this bearish trend like now), I'm sure their token price will be dumped and make their investor disappointed...

They better develop the working product first, so their token will have utility...

[Olalomi]

ICOs ought to have prepare outrightly before the sale of their tokens irrespective of how the market is going to span out either bullish or bearish when the market is bearish there are many excuses tendered by the ICOs which negates the trust given to them by investors and excuses of not reaching soft cap will be the order of the day

[deep4u]

As per my knowledge listing in exchange doesn't effect the price of the coins and solely depends on the project potential and a strong team vision and how much community is willing to buy them and keep it holding for long term. Most of the time team give excuses for market conditions and delays listing and they loose their trust. Just my 2 cents.

[kiemnhieutien]

It's a damn lie of such projects. Bear market takes no effect to token distribution and exchange listing. Token distribution can be done smoothly at at anytime if there is no network congestion. In bear or bull market, centralized exchanges always accept listing application.

[sirengutou]

I also encountered the same situation. I completed a three-month bounty event. Although he has announced that he will land on the exchange, due to fear of a bear market, it will be postponed until next year!

[Tylev]

I think that the ICO team in any case should pay the tokens to bounty hunters. But to transfer or not to the exchange of new tokens during a bear market, there is an ambiguous problem. I, in principle, admit the possibility of listing delays in a bear market, in order to avoid a fall in the price of the token. Perhaps this should be decided by an investor vote in each particular case.

[anafiene]

I think if developers don't leave the list but still try to find loopholes so that they can be registered according to the quality of the exchange, so waiting for something for good is good, rather than hurrying but having a list that is not as expected.

[Ghebung Masam]

indeed there are many investors who are disappointed by the decisions of developers and sometimes not in accordance with the plans they make in the roadmap. for now I prefer completed projects or old altcoins, the first reason is because they already have the product or platform and the second reason they have been listed in various exchanges, if there are good and available investment options, so why do we choose other altcoins that are uncertain with an unclear future?

[Levious]

This approach is usually dangerous, but since the developer team has ended the ICO. Their funds are in place, and this may be a strategy for the developer team. Good coins will definitely be better, bad coins will disappear, and the cryptocurrency market is very cruel.

[gefander]

I think that the ICO team in any case should pay the tokens to bounty hunters. But to transfer or not to the exchange of new tokens during a bear market, there is an ambiguous problem. I, in principle, admit the possibility of listing delays in a bear market, in order to avoid a fall in the price of the token. Perhaps this should be decided by an investor vote in each particular case.

In General, I do not quite understand why there are so many people who write about bounty tokens. I didn't bring up bounty here. I outlined two positions - the rejection of the listing and the distribution of tokens. And Yes, in response to your proposal to vote, among investors. I assure you that voting as usual is a tool for solving problems of the team, they make the results of the vote for themselves. I have now had one project that they said they would do the vote and return money to investors - 60% of the amount. And according to the results of voting returned 60% of the invested. What nonsense. Who needs 60%? This is fraud! I'll never agree to that! Let them keep their promises!