Bounty hunters killed ICO?

[Rikotin]

Prize hunters don't kill ico, but scamers who kill ico because they abuse the project as a crypto scheme to get rich. they need to remember that without the prize hunters, the project will not be known by the project investors, but instead they instead consider that the prize hunters are causing ico's reputation to be destroyed.

[Mysteryla]

Rather, the main reason of failure is the lack of business expertise.

Thanks. That is more reason most of them have become craps. The foresight may be there at the beginning, but after such mistake might have occurred, they become lost, not knowing what to do to correct it.
ICOs, IEOs or whatever form or name the fundraising project is called, it ought to be handled by expertise which is one of the major factors that should be considered.

[desticy]

This happens only with those projects that have a small capitalization from the very start. Investors, first of all, began to invest less in ICO due to the huge amount of scam.

[FelippeHeinz]

No, the price of the token is tied solely to its usefulness and market relevance. Many successful projects have had bounty and airdrops campaigns.

[jozymens7]

In a way, I will say it is totally false because bounty hunters do not have many tokens compared to private investors who hold plenty coins bought at a very cheap price. Most bounty hunters are serious holders because they read the  project and put their trust in it.
And even considering the rate that each hunters holds and when you think deeply, they do not sell on the same day so the dumping effect is caused by those who hold many coins not the peanuts that bounty hunters hold.

[muksal]

1) a project collected funds,
2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
4) Investors bought token on ICO see this crap and less people invest in ICOs.

True or False?

That is very wrong and I do not agree with you ... the bounty hunter never be able to kill ICO, because the allocation of coins given to the bounty campaign is only 1-3% of the 100% of coins launched..It makes no sense if only 1-3% can kill altcoin prices in various markets ... so don't blame the bounty hunters who have made Altcoin price dumps on the market ... because of the thousands of bounty campaign participants they only hold 1 -3% of the altcoin and the rest is held by investors, advisors and teams with a percentage of 97-99% altcoin launched to various markets. so think wisely so that it doesn't make many bounty hunters feel offended

[terrorJR]

1) a project collected funds,
2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
4) Investors bought token on ICO see this crap and less people invest in ICOs.

True or False?

That is very wrong and I do not agree with you ... the bounty hunter never be able to kill ICO, because the allocation of coins given to the bounty campaign is only 1-3% of the 100% of coins launched..It makes no sense if only 1-3% can kill altcoin prices in various markets ... so don't blame the bounty hunters who have made Altcoin price dumps on the market ... because of the thousands of bounty campaign participants they only hold 1 -3% of the altcoin and the rest is held by investors, advisors and teams with a percentage of 97-99% altcoin launched to various markets. so think wisely so that it doesn't make many bounty hunters feel offended

The provisions are not the hunters who damage the price on the exchange, but the team itself can not overcome it, maybe the price is damaged in the market because when the sale does not run out and the rest of the team can sell in the market, except for the burnt tokens that are not sold.

[Dr.Osh]

the most important thing here is the allocation given to the bounty hunter is the decision of the development team. so, they need to do calculations regarding this. if they feel that it can kill their project, they should have given a small allocation from the start. In this case, Bounty Hunter is not entirely wrong, because they also do what they need to do to help the project.

when the ICO is finished, that's when the team's strategy needs to be done either to develop the products they make or try to maintain prices. whether a project dies or not is not determined by the bounty hunter, but what determines it is the team of the project.

[GGmith]

not all prize hunters kill ICO, the question is the initial investor who receives the token first. Prize hunters receive tokens at the end of the project and not all prize hunters will sell tokens that they have received at the end of the campaign, some of them prefer to save them.

[voiceferate]

not all prize hunters kill ICO, the question is the initial investor who receives the token first. Prize hunters receive tokens at the end of the project and not all prize hunters will sell tokens that they have received at the end of the campaign, some of them prefer to save them.

I fully agree with you, I believe that with a properly planned and conducted bounty the project will only benefit. However, with the wrong approach, negative effects can also occur

[jatin729]

There are two cases and having different consequences .

1. If Bounty got hijacked by few people (Now a days we a marketing consultancy firm observed that most of bounties hijacked by Vietnamese, Philippines multi account holders)  than definitely amount of tokens they will earn will be dumped in future.

2. Bounties are for all around world people except some countries where it is illegal, Marketing campaign run for creating awareness all around the world except two three countries. If people from different part of world join bounty than it will really be good for project and it will worth it.

[Nasonn]

Bounty hunters are not responsible and shouldn't be blamed for what happened to ICOs most ICOs failed to keep their ICO promises especially that of exchange listing. All this made investors angry and they sold because most projects pay bounty hunters months after they're listed some have a lockup of months as well

[X-avier]

1) a project collected funds,
2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
4) Investors bought token on ICO see this crap and less people invest in ICOs.

True or False?

No, personally, I don’t think so! What does bounty hunters have to do with it? These people help the project to develop and attract attention to their project, their remuneration for the work done rarely exceed 5% of the total number of coins, and how can you kill a project by selling only 5% ??

[Btc_1856]

How can bounty hunters kill the ICO's can anybody explain because company raising money and they need to develop the product? Companies will allocate a very low percentage to the bounty people and it will not damage the entire project and people are spreading negative about the bounty hunters.

[juanda]

1) a project collected funds,
2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
4) Investors bought token on ICO see this crap and less people invest in ICOs.

True or False?

don't blame the bounty hunter who killed the ICO ... because investors can also do it to make the coin price go down in the market ... many bountie hunters receive coins after a few months the coins have been listed on the market ... so don't blame the bountie hunters ... because the bounty hunters has made a lot of time just to promote altcoin which is ultimately worthless in the market after investors make the price drop dramatically ..

[nairb131]

The answer is false.
Bounty hunters reserve from the total supply is usually 2% to 5% which by value is just an integral part of the funds.
Ico reserves is usually 40% - 65% which is big enough to crash any business.
You can understand who killed ICO from the analysis above.

[janggernaut]

The answer is false.
Bounty hunters reserve from the total supply is usually 2% to 5% which by value is just an integral part of the funds.
Ico reserves is usually 40% - 65% which is big enough to crash any business.
You can understand who killed ICO from the analysis above.

You mean it's investor fault? AFAIK all of investors only can invest max around 1 btc during ICO. Its mean each of investor only get small portion of Total supply of that token once it entered market. Do you think most of investor dump their token at same time asap it entered market? There is always a chance like that

[voltesbit777]

1) a project collected funds,
2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
4) Investors bought token on ICO see this crap and less people invest in ICOs.

True or False?

The ICO collects funds so that they can carry out their great goals that you can often read on the whitepaper or Road map. But the opposite is true when the project is completed, which is sad. So many lost investors, the losers are still listed on the exchange, but it is not bounty hunters who destroy icons but scammers who use the ico to victimize and raise funds for investors.

[Anonymous100]

1) a project collected funds,
2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
4) Investors bought token on ICO see this crap and less people invest in ICOs.

True or False?

From your question alone is wrong, and of course the reasons you give are also wrong. Your question is: Bounty hunters killed ICO?
What's the deal with the ICO dying with prize hunters? Of course ICOs die because ICO developers often commit fraud, they don't manage ICO properly, so investors are no longer interested in ICOs.

[bassbity]

1) a project collected funds,
2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)
3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically
4) Investors bought token on ICO see this crap and less people invest in ICOs.

True or False?

From your question alone is wrong, and of course the reasons you give are also wrong. Your question is: Bounty hunters killed ICO?
What's the deal with the ICO dying with prize hunters? Of course ICOs die because ICO developers often commit fraud, they don't manage ICO properly, so investors are no longer interested in ICOs.

True, you say the ICO died not because of the prize hunters, but the team that often carried off investors' funds was rife. 2018 many teams were unprofessional, even investors were willing to invest again in ICO, bounty hunters were also not the cause of falling prices because developers were not serious in handling projects.