Good ICOs should be protected from dump

[semobo]

Yes they need to protected from the investors for want to dump their tokens soon after it get listed but how to do that, listing the token on exchange after a while are going to stop those investors from participating on ICOs.

[1715068772]

1715068772

[1715068772]

1715068772

[1715068772]

1715068772

[1715068772]

1715068772

[1715068772]

1715068772

[1715068772]

1715068772

[ataki]

With all the measures we cannot protect ICOs from dump and we should not to do so. This is a free market and investors will decide what is their best interest. Of course projects should to do everything to convince their investors that they are doing everything in the best interest of the project.

[coinnumber]

After careful research, when you see a good ICO, you would know and there will be no doubt about it.
I have noticed that good ICOs also dump after listing, competing with crap ones that have no definite direction, but to cart away funds.
There are ways in which they can be protected and prevent unreasonable dump in price. Some of which are:

1. They should be managed by credible and trusted managers, managers that already have good reputation on the forum, else the trust might not be there.

2. KYC should be made mandatory for all bounty and airdrop participants in order to avoid multiple accounts. The kyc should be announced

3. Participants should be made to complete the remaining process of their registrations on the project's website, where IP can be detected. Multiple accounts can also be prevented this way.

4. Listing should be done on reliable and reputable exchange sites.

5. There should be regular and prompt communication with the community.

6. Projects should maintain and comply to their roadmaps and if there is amendment, the community should be made to know, with concrete reasons.

Additional suggestion:
7. An approach that will create the demand for tokens, which can as well prevent dump, is the lockup of certain percentage of the tokens.
Some percentage of the tokens belonging to; the team, advisors, investors, promoters and bounty participants.
The main tokens for the investors should be released, at least to compensate them for the money invested, but their bonuses should be locked for certain period of time. Which is followed by their gradual release.

These are just few among so many other solutions, but if this few are integrated into the system, i believe dump can be minimized if not totally eliminated.

Well your points are clear but I must say with those measures you can't protect any coin from dump. A project that's built to achieve great goals with good platform and token usage hardly get dumped as the investors are fully there to protect the image of that project for their own benefits ahead, but in a case where they have observe that the project has no future plan such as token usage then even investors has no option than to sell and go for the better once.

[Olayinka225]

There's no way a particular ICO could be protected from dumping, even if they only sold there token through only ICO, some people that doesn't have patient will still dump it below ICO price talkless of if they gave airdrop and some through bounty.

[Rostock]

There's no way a particular ICO could be protected from dumping, even if they only sold there token through only ICO, some people that doesn't have patient will still dump it below ICO price talkless of if they gave airdrop and some through bounty.

Well, in this sense, and not to allow to sell below cost. That is, the possibility of selling will be limited. I think that this is quite real, but it is important that the project itself does not overestimate its capabilities and does not sell tokens at exorbitant prices during the ICO.

[pelumi20]

Good or bad ICOs, the are both open to dump on the exchange, depending on the market conditions or ico  bonuses or bounties. But the good ones will surely find their way back up when they start to meet their roadmap milestones.

[PuertoLibre]

After careful research, when you see a good ICO, you would know and there will be no doubt about it.
I have noticed that good ICOs also dump after listing, competing with crap ones that have no definite direction, but to cart away funds.
There are ways in which they can be protected and prevent unreasonable dump in price. Some of which are:

1. They should be managed by credible and trusted managers, managers that already have good reputation on the forum, else the trust might not be there.

2. KYC should be made mandatory for all bounty and airdrop participants in order to avoid multiple accounts. The kyc should be announced

3. Participants should be made to complete the remaining process of their registrations on the project's website, where IP can be detected. Multiple accounts can also be prevented this way.

4. Listing should be done on reliable and reputable exchange sites.

5. There should be regular and prompt communication with the community.

6. Projects should maintain and comply to their roadmaps and if there is amendment, the community should be made to know, with concrete reasons.

Additional suggestion:
7. An approach that will create the demand for tokens, which can as well prevent dump, is the lockup of certain percentage of the tokens.
Some percentage of the tokens belonging to; the team, advisors, investors, promoters and bounty participants.
The main tokens for the investors should be released, at least to compensate them for the money invested, but their bonuses should be locked for certain period of time. Which is followed by their gradual release.

These are just few among so many other solutions, but if this few are integrated into the system, i believe dump can be minimized if not totally eliminated.

Well your points are clear but I must say with those measures you can't protect any coin from dump. A project that's built to achieve great goals with good platform and token usage hardly get dumped as the investors are fully there to protect the image of that project for their own benefits ahead, but in a case where they have observe that the project has no future plan such as token usage then even investors has no option than to sell and go for the better once.

Quality always doesn't mean it will get reflect on price. Sometimes dumped amounts are sold tokens with big bonuses like allocated tokes for private investors. Big boys dumps it and they buy same amount later for cheap price. Cycle turns and price finds its real value but bounty hunters are eagerly waiting for this moments in order to dump their coins. This is bad side of anonymity in exchanges and bearish market conditions can force real investors to sell in order to protect themselves from worse.

[owlman]

After careful research, when you see a good ICO, you would know and there will be no doubt about it.
I have noticed that good ICOs also dump after listing, competing with crap ones that have no definite direction, but to cart away funds.
There are ways in which they can be protected and prevent unreasonable dump in price. Some of which are:

1. They should be managed by credible and trusted managers, managers that already have good reputation on the forum, else the trust might not be there.

2. KYC should be made mandatory for all bounty and airdrop participants in order to avoid multiple accounts. The kyc should be announced

3. Participants should be made to complete the remaining process of their registrations on the project's website, where IP can be detected. Multiple accounts can also be prevented this way.

4. Listing should be done on reliable and reputable exchange sites.

5. There should be regular and prompt communication with the community.

6. Projects should maintain and comply to their roadmaps and if there is amendment, the community should be made to know, with concrete reasons.

Additional suggestion:
7. An approach that will create the demand for tokens, which can as well prevent dump, is the lockup of certain percentage of the tokens.
Some percentage of the tokens belonging to; the team, advisors, investors, promoters and bounty participants.
The main tokens for the investors should be released, at least to compensate them for the money invested, but their bonuses should be locked for certain period of time. Which is followed by their gradual release.

These are just few among so many other solutions, but if this few are integrated into the system, i believe dump can be minimized if not totally eliminated.

Sorry ... You want to say that project developers do not know what you wrote here There are many factors that influence the price of tokens, and in current conditions, it is very difficult to ensure that the price of the token grows after how it will appear on the exchange, even taking into account the factors listed above

[baigreen]

First of all, investors dump their Tokins for any money that they destroy the market. Projects should go to good exchange points. Projects must provide the necessary information to investors and not disappear after the distribution of coins.

Yes, it already seems to me that ICO no longer makes a profit. Of course, except the organizers.

[Denreal]

Those are good suggestions to start with ams there are also other ways employed by some projects. Although, they would have been more effective, had it been investors are not having the mindset that come what may, no matter how good a coin is, it will still dump.
So with this mindset, they too will start selling their coins below the targeted price.
Trusting the system is of great importance.

[Cryptrx]

This doesn't sound logical to me, in a free market, you can't determine to price of commodities. The price is influenced by market forces, demand and supply. So I don't see how an ICO can be protected from dump if a coin holder wish to sell his or her coin for little or nothing which is entirely his or her right.

[Rapidgator]

Okay, so let's say there is a good project and many people know about that but the situation on the whole market is bad and even people who know this project and believe in it, how can you avoid the whole market sentiment to not push the price to lower levels?

[qtronix]

Do not forget that now is not a good time for ICO. It is almost impossible to issue your coin on the exchange so that it does not fall in price. Now many people say that ICO is dead, but I think it's just bad times. When they are over, the projects will again be able to raise good funds for development and investors will also be able to get a good profit from these tokens.

[pcfli]

With all the measures we cannot protect ICOs from dump and we should not to do so. This is a free market and investors will decide what is their best interest. Of course projects should to do everything to convince their investors that they are doing everything in the best interest of the project.

There are no proper short ways to measure the usability scale of ICOs. Strong teams can deliver the promises but sometimes strong background can not resist to market trend. Price discovery is main tool to convince new investors.

[dumplingsandsushi]

Well, it's obvious that you have no idea about market economics, supply and demand, or even how to interpret basic market data.
While I applaud you attempt to find solutions, you have some very basic things off.

first, most of your conclusions are coming from what you see as bounty hunters or multiple accounts being responsible for dumps.
This just isn't the issue at all.
Any ICO will typically only allot 1 to 5% of the ENTIRE minted or available tokens to bounty hunters.
simple mathematics is that that percentage is not nearly high enough to cause catastrophic dumps like you predict.
And even if hunters cheat and use multiple accounts, it doesn't change the max alloted to bounty hunters.

There are much more simple reasons (and, of course, more complicated ones as well).
Prices dump after an ICO simply because they charged too much during the ICO.
Any ICO that charges more than 5 cents per token is ripping you off, yet somehow we have ICOs charging up to a dollar. Of course it will crash.

[Pontorez]

After careful research, when you see a good ICO, you would know and there will be no doubt about it.
I have noticed that good ICOs also dump after listing, competing with crap ones that have no definite direction, but to cart away funds.
There are ways in which they can be protected and prevent unreasonable dump in price. Some of which are:

1. They should be managed by credible and trusted managers, managers that already have good reputation on the forum, else the trust might not be there.

2. KYC should be made mandatory for all bounty and airdrop participants in order to avoid multiple accounts. The kyc should be announced

3. Participants should be made to complete the remaining process of their registrations on the project's website, where IP can be detected. Multiple accounts can also be prevented this way.

4. Listing should be done on reliable and reputable exchange sites.

5. There should be regular and prompt communication with the community.

6. Projects should maintain and comply to their roadmaps and if there is amendment, the community should be made to know, with concrete reasons.

Additional suggestion:
7. An approach that will create the demand for tokens, which can as well prevent dump, is the lockup of certain percentage of the tokens.
Some percentage of the tokens belonging to; the team, advisors, investors, promoters and bounty participants.
The main tokens for the investors should be released, at least to compensate them for the money invested, but their bonuses should be locked for certain period of time. Which is followed by their gradual release.

These are just few among so many other solutions, but if this few are integrated into the system, i believe dump can be minimized if not totally eliminated.

Of course, all good ICO projects are entitled to adequate support. But it seems to me that all these rules become overkill. The main condition is the stabilization of the market and the rise in prices of good coins. Then we can get the necessary support for the development of promising ICOs.

[martabaktelor]

Market conditions make all ICO collapse. And to protect ICO coins, I think this is very difficult because of unfavorable market conditions. So that everyone, when they get a token, would want to immediately sell coins.

[Gatsby club]

I strongly disagree with the author of the topic regarding the fact that KYC should be a prerequisite for all participants in the bounty. As you know, bounty-hunters do not like to go through this procedure, and the mandatory introduction of this condition can lead to the fact that the number of bounty-hunters will not be sufficient for the quality promotion of the project.

[UAE Seasider]

Unfortunately at the moment with ICOs it is a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water. The market has little regards for what people have perceived as quality ICOs and in fact the only way to remain immune to the market rout was to postpone listing until conditions have improved.

[manismanja]

Unfortunately at the moment with ICOs it is a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water. The market has little regards for what people have perceived as quality ICOs and in fact the only way to remain immune to the market rout was to postpone listing until conditions have improved.

now there are indeed many ICOs that have failed, so that last year until now it was not the right time and waited until conditions improved.
the market is really bad but can't give up because I'm sure the future will improve and ICO can be better, many projects are successful, optimistic and always enthusiastic.