is advertising for ICOs unethical?

[bigvito19]

I've noticed many ICOs have to spend a lot of money on promotions and advertising.

For example, let's say an ICO raises 10 million dollars but has to spend 9 million on promotion.

Therefore, they only really raised 1 million for the project.

Isn't this unethical?

If you're starting a company and looking for investors the traditional way via stock equity, you would never spend 9 million or even 5 million or even 2 million in order to raise 10 million from investors.

This begs the question, what ratio of promotion cost versus funds raised for ICOs is ethical?

And how do we know if an ICO is using an ethical ratio?

Who is going to spend 9 million on promotion if they only need 10 million to raise? You don't need to spend that much on promotion or advertising.

[salad daging]

Is there so much money needed for promotion? I don't think all projects spend 90% of the money they get just to do promotions because as we know some projects even large projects can succeed only by doing promotions on forums and other platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Reddit, Blogspot and Telegram
it does not require large funds but they can still be successful, the main reason is because this forum, this forum is a place for investors so that when someone can take advantage of this forum well he has done the right promotion

[Aniwura]

There are quite some good number of ICOs that only use their tokens are means of payment to those who advertised for them. Therefore, with that, it is more or less like not spending anything on it or at most, they pay out negligible amount of fund for such purpose. Another cost effective means some of them use is also through bounty campaigns.

[Wayrey2020]

How come you know about the particular amount spent for advertising, that can be. Promoting projects can be one of the best step to take to earn more money and people to know your business so nothing bad promoting, and those mediums used have no problem at times because he creates them to earn..

[Bitfling]

Is there so much money needed for promotion? I don't think all projects spend 90% of the money they get just to do promotions because as we know some projects even large projects can succeed only by doing promotions on forums and other platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Reddit, Blogspot and Telegram
it does not require large funds but they can still be successful, the main reason is because this forum, this forum is a place for investors so that when someone can take advantage of this forum well he has done the right promotion

Most project allocating token not more than 10% from their total supply. This forum used for new project to promote because crypto investor must be looking on this forum. I think thats why many new ICOs make bounty campaign to promote the project through this forum or social media because its more cheap and more effective

[Menawi12]

I've noticed many ICOs have to spend a lot of money on promotions and advertising.

For example, let's say an ICO raises 10 million dollars but has to spend 9 million on promotion.

Therefore, they only really raised 1 million for the project.

Isn't this unethical?

If you're starting a company and looking for investors the traditional way via stock equity, you would never spend 9 million or even 5 million or even 2 million in order to raise 10 million from investors.

This begs the question, what ratio of promotion cost versus funds raised for ICOs is ethical?

And how do we know if an ICO is using an ethical ratio?

I dont think ICOs have 90% marketing budget for the project. If the project are legit, mostly the budget not more than 10% and big portion for developing the project. I dont think advertising ICOs is unethical because it about to attracting more investor

[tins]

I've noticed many ICOs have to spend a lot of money on promotions and advertising.

For example, let's say an ICO raises 10 million dollars but has to spend 9 million on promotion.

Therefore, they only really raised 1 million for the project.

Isn't this unethical?

If you're starting a company and looking for investors the traditional way via stock equity, you would never spend 9 million or even 5 million or even 2 million in order to raise 10 million from investors.

This begs the question, what ratio of promotion cost versus funds raised for ICOs is ethical?

And how do we know if an ICO is using an ethical ratio?

I have not seen a real project pouring 90% of their money into advertising, all of which must pay at least 35% for product development and 10-15% for the team. So at least 50% of the money needed to maintain the project is needed, there are no projects that need a lot of money to advertise as you said.

[SirLancelot]

Yes I think this is unethical. You don't have to spend 9M$ for promotion. That is not practical. In my own opinion we don't have any expensive promotions because the best way to market ICO and other crypto is the success of the investors coming from crypto or ICO. When it happen we don't have to pay any advertisement.

ICO made more than $22 billion only in the US in 2018 and a big number of ICO had been scams which mean that people lost their money for a white paper which is simply pathetic. ICO is no longer the point of attraction for the potential investors who are looking from profits by investing in early tokens. They have started targeting IEOs. The only option open to ICO is to promote but I fear if promotion would do any good.

[Mcmich]

I've noticed many ICOs have to spend a lot of money on promotions and advertising.

For example, let's say an ICO raises 10 million dollars but has to spend 9 million on promotion.

Therefore, they only really raised 1 million for the project.

Isn't this unethical?

If you're starting a company and looking for investors the traditional way via stock equity, you would never spend 9 million or even 5 million or even 2 million in order to raise 10 million from investors.

This begs the question, what ratio of promotion cost versus funds raised for ICOs is ethical?

And how do we know if an ICO is using an ethical ratio?

In the first place, where would you gather an information concerning how much would the ICO spent on promotions? Because thinking about the matter, Projects aren't even responsible to fund the bounty hunters, in addition marketing transaction I guess would not going to price that high just to say, they've putted the right amount in marketing.

Talking of raising money for advertising and the ratio, the project pays for this advertisements only after the ICO fund has been raised. Most of them do not even pay these days.

[UniversityCoin]

You read how many big giants such as Coca Cola, Starbucks, Proctor And Gamble and others spend money on advertising. Although they are all well-known trademarks worldwide. Advertising helps you to sell your product and the one who spends a lot of money on advertising increases his chance for a good sale of his product.

[ataki]

I have not seen such an ICO with 90%  promotion allocation. The normal allocation for promotions is 10-20 % It really depends on the product and the project itself how much promotion it needs.

[allohha]

I have not seen such an ICO with 90%  promotion allocation. The normal allocation for promotions is 10-20 % It really depends on the product and the project itself how much promotion it needs.

It seems to me that you haven’t looked into the Bounty companies for a long time.  I have not seen ml total pool of bounty companies above 2 or 3%.  Perhaps we are talking about different numbers, but nevertheless, few funds are allocated for advertising in cryptocurrency .

[redsun114]

Any project that intend using that huge ratio for advert will probably be a scam project which at the end of the day might not even pay the advertisers since most of them always want to pay using token which might not get listed in any exchange in years. Most of the time project dev but high percentage for advertisements just to catch hunters but might not pay the actual amount after the work is completed

Well pointed. There are companies who have not spent a single dollar on advertisement and have had great demand for their products. I think that it is unethical because if a project in crypto is great enough, it will attract the users without advertisement. Initial exchange offering does not spend millions on advertisement because people on their platform know it is worth investing in IEO.

[Eadefemi]

Advertising is a way of getting out projects to the community. I don't see it that bad. The bad thing is the fact these projects put in more in advertising than actually putting in more to develop the project. Most of them do not even pay for the so called advertisement when it comes to bounty hunting.

[Xardasim]

Projects should determine the pre-allocated amount according to their pockets. The amount written in the bounty is often not distributed as it is. Most of times the specified reward is reduced.

[steveabrahams]

I don't think the amount for promotion is big like that. Advertising for ICOs is not that big imo, for twitter, facebook and in this forum, you only need to hire a bounty manager to manage it and maybe it takes 5k-10k usd. For ads on google and social media, maybe a bit bigger. Promotion is not really cost big like what you said.

[axel2078]

I do not believe they spend such amount on promotions, rather they allocate a percentage of their total supply to promotional activities, and this is only done when they are successful with the public sale. And most times, the allocation for the promotional activities might be reduced depending on what was raised during the public sale.

[bitgolden]

I've noticed many ICOs have to spend a lot of money on promotions and advertising.

For example, let's say an ICO raises 10 million dollars but has to spend 9 million on promotion.

Therefore, they only really raised 1 million for the project.

Isn't this unethical?

If you're starting a company and looking for investors the traditional way via stock equity, you would never spend 9 million or even 5 million or even 2 million in order to raise 10 million from investors.

This begs the question, what ratio of promotion cost versus funds raised for ICOs is ethical?

And how do we know if an ICO is using an ethical ratio?

In the first place, where would you gather an information concerning how much would the ICO spent on promotions? Because thinking about the matter, Projects aren't even responsible to fund the bounty hunters, in addition marketing transaction I guess would not going to price that high just to say, they've putted the right amount in marketing.

Talking of raising money for advertising and the ratio, the project pays for this advertisements only after the ICO fund has been raised. Most of them do not even pay these days.

I can see that it seems these same scammers are gradually trying to inflate ICO platforms too but I am sure that IEO will have more control than ICO, since there is a body who has volunteered to research them and properly verify if they are genuine or not.

One of the strategies I am sure people like Binance will be using is to verify the authenticity of the developers through their KYC, so that when they mess up, they can be reported to the authority. So to always be on a safe side, we must only follow IEO from TOP exchanges like Binance, Binance will never by any means allow every bad project.

[jjjfff]

I've noticed many ICOs have to spend a lot of money on promotions and advertising.

For example, let's say an ICO raises 10 million dollars but has to spend 9 million on promotion.

Therefore, they only really raised 1 million for the project.

Isn't this unethical?

If you're starting a company and looking for investors the traditional way via stock equity, you would never spend 9 million or even 5 million or even 2 million in order to raise 10 million from investors.

This begs the question, what ratio of promotion cost versus funds raised for ICOs is ethical?

And how do we know if an ICO is using an ethical ratio?

Not necessarily.  The ICO phase is the crowdfunding phase - it's where you draw the crowd in.

So it's mostly a marketing phase where you don't have a product yet to show.

The guys behind the ICO are mostly marketers, community managers and designers who build the prototypes and do the crowd communication.

So no, actually advertising is not unethical, it's THE main purpose of an ICO.

Obviously the ICO must have a product/service offering, otherwise it's a scam. It can't just be marketing, but marketing is a big part of it.

[guoyu78]

How come you know about the particular amount spent for advertising, that can be. Promoting projects can be one of the best step to take to earn more money and people to know your business so nothing bad promoting, and those mediums used have no problem at times because he creates them to earn..

Perhaps, the discussion built up due to the resulting drawbacks of ICOs projects that is why people are considering the promotions of it as promotion of wrong thing. But this is not fair for the ICO projects because due the scammers activities cannot put the blame on all ICOs projects because all of them are not offering by scammers’ developers that is why we have to find out good one. Else, follow new IEOs and get start with it.