Bounty hunters killed ICO?

[Wawa2013]

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.

Yes it's true buddy, ico died not because a bounty hunter or investor, but a deceptive developer, which damaged the reputation of ico who really wanted to develop his project well.  So Ico is good to be affected. So it's normal that ico project died because developer is cheats and doesn't run the project properly

[shoreno]

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.

Yes it's true buddy, ico died not because a bounty hunter or investor, but a deceptive developer, which damaged the reputation of ico who really wanted to develop his project well.  So Ico is good to be affected. So it's normal that ico project died because developer is cheats and doesn't run the project properly

owner of the ico is the main root of thier failures but investors and bounty hunters are the secondary reasons on why they fail more evenly .

i know good ico's on the past but no matter how good they are there are still times that their coin goes down . who do you think are responsible for that ?  

price is based on demand and owners cant just manipulate thier own creation . they need investors and bounty hunters to drive demand but both can also drive the price sideways

[boranes]

owner of the ico is the main root of thier failures but investors and bounty hunters are the secondary reasons on why they fail more evenly .

i know good ico's on the past but no matter how good they are there are still times that their coin goes down . who do you think are responsible for that ?  

price is based on demand and owners cant just manipulate thier own creation . they need investors and bounty hunters to drive demand but both can also drive the price sideways

I don't see how bounty hunters can be reason why project fail. Project do crowdfunding, they collect money and reach soft cap or hard cap and they have enough money to accomplish their goal. Bounty hunters can shake market at early days, later it depends on developers. If they succeed, token price will go up because there will be new investors, but if they fail no one can say bounty hunters are one of reasons.

[3DBrushes]

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.

Exactly.
Even those 2 - 3% of users won't dump all of their tokens at once. Team is responsible for all this. As they hold most of tokens in various names like marketing, project development, system reserve etc.

[Lauren Smith]

You can't blame the bounty hunters. For the token to go down because of bounty hunters there will need to be multiple times more hunters tokens then investors tokens.
If they sell 100k tokens how many do you think hunters have? Even if they have 100k as well that is 50% loss and I guess you are talking about tokens that completely tank?

[envatoleaks]

Getting something without paying for it always allows you to sell with zero loss. The sooner you sell, the higher your profit, cause money today worth more than money tomorrow.It's just a point of view.

[Rodeo02]

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.

Exactly.
Even those 2 - 3% of users won't dump all of their tokens at once. Team is responsible for all this. As they hold most of tokens in various names like marketing, project development, system reserve etc.

If they do thier job the dump will not gonna happen why not set a buy support after listed it in exhange then use some of the money raised for marketing.

The problem is that they do not want to lose money from the raised fund because they are greedy and they want it all for them.

[pealr12]

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?

false!! Do you think a small amount of bounty will drive the price of a token to dropped? I dont think so, investors and the tokens of team should be the reason why a project dies.

[rmhuntley]

Getting something without paying for it always allows you to sell with zero loss. The sooner you sell, the higher your profit, cause money today worth more than money tomorrow.It's just a point of view.

That may be true, but we must realize that the majority of token holders are teams and investors are not bounty hunters. Bounty Hunter only holds 1-2% of the total allocation. The amount will be divided equally among all participants according to the work done. So if the bounty hunter is used as the reason why ICO is dead, in my opinion it is the wrong thing. Selling quickly after distribution is a natural thing to get high prices, but there are still plenty of hired hunters who will hold token for a long time.

[d3nz]

I don't think bounty hunters killed the ICO since they are the one also promoting the project and less reward thry are getting than the investors. And the only problem is when a bounty hunters created a lot of dummy account and that's the statt of a major dump if the prpject manager cannot control it.

But when an ico required KYC then that's the time only less people will join even the bounty hunters since they don't want to provide their informatiin and only stay anonymous.

[miningguru]

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.

Yes it's true buddy, ico died not because a bounty hunter or investor, but a deceptive developer, which damaged the reputation of ico who really wanted to develop his project well.  So Ico is good to be affected. So it's normal that ico project died because developer is cheats and doesn't run the project properly

Exactly, bounty hunters will not have any control on their funds raised by the company and their developments. The company itself allocates some percentages to the bounty hunters, which most of the bounty hunters will hold the coins because they believe the company, but at last, the company will scam the investors without any developments.

[anume123]

At the last past years ico is not good also based on their rules because of them they are also killed for their project if the reward is bitcoin or eth it is good but based on tokens they are giving is not good also.

[DU18]

In my opinion not a bounty hunter who killed ico, but the developer of ico who killed ico itself, now  are many fact is that ico is indeed a fraud that makes investors start to fear investing in ico, we can see before the rise of ico fraud in early 2018, many of the ico projects are developing quite rapidly even their tokens are rising high when their tokens are being listed in the market, and this certainly proves when the project developers were developing their projects correctly.

[Drai]

I think know this is completely false, most times the tokens dumped on an exchange when bounty hunters rec I've their token even exceeds the amount of tokens allocated to the bounty campaign, sometimes the team members use the bounty hunters to disguise their dumping because it is always more convenient to blame bounty hunters who majority of them receive $10 or less for their services.