Bounty hunters killed ICO?

[dtb.agency]

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?

[1714055079]

1714055079

[1714055079]

1714055079

[1714055079]

1714055079

[1714055079]

1714055079

[1714055079]

1714055079

[avikz]

Yes, some ICOs made such mistake where they have distributed tokens to bounty hunters at a very early stage which eventually directed them to a massive failure. However, ICO owners learned from such mistakes pretty soon and adopted an approach to distribute at a later stage. So bounty hunters are not the sole reason for the failure of an ICO project.

Rather, the main reason of failure is the lack of business expertise. Majoriy of the successful ICO failed at sustaining their business because of the lack of expertise! It has no relation with bounty hunters.

If I ask you to give example of some ICOs with a very successful post-ICO business implementation, can you show me at least 5??

[lvsca]

your argument is true, but bounty hunters didn't kill ICO.
let's see how much allocation for bounty, usually its not above 10% of total token issued, so this is not the problem.
driving price of coin is hard, sometimes investor dump their token after ICO at market price and make a coin price down. if only token from bounty hunters, pumping will be easy. thats my opinion

[Barracuda]

your argument is true, but bounty hunters didn't kill ICO.
let's see how much allocation for bounty, usually its not above 10% of total token issued, so this is not the problem.
driving price of coin is hard, sometimes investor dump their token after ICO at market price and make a coin price down. if only token from bounty hunters, pumping will be easy. thats my opinion

Most allocations for bounties are below 5%.
And the reason why many investors throw away their tokens is because they get a big bonus when buying (investing). This should be thought by the project, why investors often throw away.

And another thing that kills ICO is because many ICOs are scams. What makes investors no longer trust ICO, that's why
ICO dies slowly.

[qomariah95]

I don't think bounty hunters kill ICO, it's just that many projects are successful in sales but fail in development. Initially investors who want to get profits actually get losses.

2) Funds allocation (among advisors, bla bla bla and bounty hunters)

The exact allocation for each project is different and the least is the allocation for the bounty.

3) Considering there are thousands of BH, the price of a token dropped dramatically

For the price of the token down dramatically, certainly not the bounty hunter to blame. Because the allocation is small, how to reduce the price of the token.

[electronicash]

or it could be the other way around. there is no law that says team can't trade their own coin. teams has all the right to sell their own tokens, no one can stop them from dumping their own holding which probably more than 10% of the total circulation. we all know how it could end up when all this takes place, all those who holds the token will panic and dumps.

[tsaroz]

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 would be an absurd reasoning. The coins distributed to the bounty hunters would be equal or less than 5% of total tokens sold. Generally 1 or 2%. This too excludes the distributed coins for advisers and team members. This holding of 2.5 to 0.5% won't have any huge impact on the price or for a project to be a success or failure.

[Little_king]

A story that doesn't say its true colour, any project can decide not to give bounty anything but nomproject has dome so and the team has a very optimistic power to select the percentage for the hunters which I see as just 1-2% of the token and you telling me that killed project or what ?

Get your findings well before you make a post , well I can se you are newbie and may not know much on how things runs on an new project.

[sheba]

Does ICO really is dead? I don't think so, this IEO is just for hype and still they have the same goal to begin with, to collect funds. Though IEO is much safer as some thoughts there are still that unsuccessful to it.

[kindbtc]

You cannot simply blame bounty hunterd for dumping, i do agree it is a factor but there are other factors also like loss of interest or faith from investors, slow or weak market situation, cheap tokens sold during private or presale, such investors can sell below ico price but still make huge profit similarly low volume exchange and low liquidity is also a factor for price crash.

[pishite]

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?

ICO killed the greed of its developers, as projects in 2017 did for everything, but in fact did not plan to implement them. But then they beautifully said that it was all because of the bounty hunters who helped promote the project by attracting new investors. Instead of continuing to develop projects, they declared themselves bankrupt and closed projects, not one investor received the money back.

[boltz]

Not at all. If you count that one 10% of the ICO's who failed because they distributed too many tokens to hunters , yes but the rest of them failed because investors are refusing nowadays to invest in any type of project. Also the management of the ICO's is so poor , I mean someone put their C.V. in ratings websites and they pick them without testing their knowledge for blockchain and cryptos...

[odukoyaewatomi27]

You cannot blame bounty hunters for the failure of ICOs or a project because, they are not responsible for the bad market conditions and also the projects themselves give ridiculous bonuses at ICOs.

[kramat]

Not at all. If you count that one 10% of the ICO's who failed because they distributed too many tokens to hunters , yes but the rest of them failed because investors are refusing nowadays to invest in any type of project. Also the management of the ICO's is so poor , I mean someone put their C.V. in ratings websites and they pick them without testing their knowledge for blockchain and cryptos...

So are you saying that ICO failed because there were too many allocations for the bounty? but in my opinion no, it's because there are too many bonuses to investors so other investors don't want to invest, other than that their products that are too excessive can make ico fail

[TopTort777]

If bounty hunters usually get 5-10% out of whole token circulation, part of them decides to hold, then how can the rest manage to drop price? Specially when all of them dont sell their bounty tokens at the same time.

[Mianae]

The answer is false. Let's do the calculations. How many tokens gets allocated to hunter? Is that enough to drop a project price? What killed ICOs is the bear market and investors realization of what a mistake ICOs were coupled with the scamming events faced by investors.

[dtb.agency]

We all know math, but you all know that it is easier to drop the price (for token) rather than rise it. Even a small number of BH are able to drop the price, because look at the countries of origin - South Asia, Africa mostly. They considered these tokens as a top source of income. And so it was till the begining of 2018. But all that is just my IMHO.

[muslol67]

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 project that distributes the most bounty awards is 5%. If it was the Bounty Hunters who brought the end of the ICO with 5%, these men would shake the world.
My answer is false. Bounty price can not affect that much.

[sl8]

ICOs has a loooot of "free money", such as bounty guys. I would cautiously agree with the author. Probably with 65% 

[#Darren]

Some bounty hunters are dumping the price and they have their reasons for doing that. Why not to do a buyback before a token is listed on any exchange. This decision would solve any problems and would avoid such a dump that happens every single time.