Bounty hunters killed ICO?

[hulla]

First of all, you have to keep in mind that bounty pool is only 1-2% from total supply. Now answer, how 1-2% of liquids can dump the price?

Thus is what I have been wondering about because that percentage will not lead to dumping of the tokens or coins, I onces told my friends that, haven such percentage like the one above can't perform the job of dumping. I think the project team actually have some secret they are operating with, which can be trance to the dumping. Possibly most of these projects operate underground in respect to how tokens are been dump.

The 1-2% of all total supply coin or token is not enough to cause the dump in the price of a project but I don't think the project team have some sort of secret they operate which trance the dump in price because some project owners actually believed in the project concept and skills which are not enough to make a project survive in the crypto market. What I mean is that they also need some advice and direction from a crypto enthusiast which understand perfectly what the crypto sphere want and how to target the audience.

[ghermghuda]

hahaha....i think you should do your maths and research well. Bounty hunters were thousands yeah, but they had something small which couldn't even "move" a healthy market.
Moreover, many projects that died never paid hunters, delayed payments, reduced payments, locked up payments, etc etc and yet still they died.
We were in a bubble and it busted...don't blame bounty hunters hehee

[TrevorS]

How can ICO kill bounty hunters who receive only 1% at the best 2% of the total bullet. How can 2% affect the price of a good project that has good volumes on the exchange?
ICO killed the scam and not the bounty hunters.

[Mrsparks]

This analysis is not completely true..Sometimes the absence of proper development plan cause this dump in price..Some of this developers are clueless, distribute their coins at the worse possible time and facilitate the dump as an escuse to dump their own bags om investors..Bounty distribition should be systematic and done when the token has masskve liquidity...Not before.

[Sozialtourist]

Maybe the projects from 2017 should have used their funds wisely and actually develop something for the shitload of money they received. Most of the projects from the ICO-hype didn't deliver what they promised, a lot even ran out of funds or are now facing liquidity issues in this bear market. It's no wonder people don't wanna waste their money on false promises anymore. You can't blame bounty hunters for that.

[sempak]

In my opinion it will not be a loss because if we look at this time it is precisely the ico that is advantageous for the promotion of their projects in order to reach the cryptocurrency community and also information faster than using advertisements that are not necessarily successful in being able to get investors,on the other hand the participants also benefit from this work in the form of rewards.

[cryptonewbie]

To be honest, bounty hunters do play a big role in the death of ICOs.

However, that was mainly because the project owners do not pay hunters in bitcoin or ethereum. They pay in the projects native tokens which make hunters dump them in order to get their payments for services rendered. Also, payment of bounty hunters is done poorly sometimes. They pay hunters before project listing and so hunters dump price. Investors see this and avoid ICO

[jagaban]

Bounty hunters got no chill. They sell their tokens at ridiculous price just because they want to get paid for their efforts on the project. Investors then realize their losses and so avoid anything ico from then on

ICO projects did mistakes with hunters. They should have arranged payments at several months after listing on exchange at installments. But investors will still end up dumping the price anyway.

Look at Coti for example. Listed a couple of months ago. Hunters won't be paid till December 2019 or January 2020 yet investors have dumped the token price badly. Hunters will be left with peanuts at the end of the day

[Bekuciwu9]

99% from all respondents here are bounty guys (according to signatures) 

You did mention bounty hunters in your title, so therefore they responded.

If you name your topic " Greedy teams and private investors killed ICO market" i am sure different kind of people would respond.And that would actually be the truth, THEY over saturated and consequently killed the ICO market with their crap projects.

[moynul2050]

How can ICO kill bounty hunters who receive only 1% at the best 2% of the total bullet. How can 2% affect the price of a good project that has good volumes on the exchange?
ICO killed the scam and not the bounty hunters.

yes, the scammer is the one to blame, not the bounty hunter, or even the DEV who dumps tokens that are not sold and they don't burn.
it is they who actually killed ICO.

[Aldrinx00]

I don't think bounty hunters are the main reason that ICOS are not being used by people as a form of investment right now, there are lots of fake and scam ICOS which people worldwide already know so they already lose trust with ICO and now participating on IEOS.

[mirakal]

How can ICO kill bounty hunters who receive only 1% at the best 2% of the total bullet. How can 2% affect the price of a good project that has good volumes on the exchange?
ICO killed the scam and not the bounty hunters.

yes, the scammer is the one to blame, not the bounty hunter, or even the DEV who dumps tokens that are not sold and they don't burn.
it is they who actually killed ICO.

Exactly it's the DEVS who should be blamed here, it's their business so they should manage it properly for them to succeed.
Bounty hunters are just workers who are paid a fix small amount from the money they raise and it will only cause a dump if they are stupid enough to allow it, I mean they can't stop the bounty hunters from selling but they should at least build some volume to avoid dump, a buy back for example but actually that is not necessary if they will make an effort to get the project listed in big exchange.

[Koobtcgal]

I choose false. Bounty hunters always hold a fraction of the majority of coins that we see on the market. They have a little influence on the price of a token. Considering what you said, what if there are a 100,000 bounty hunters each with 200 tokens of a coin with a circulation supply of over 1 billion, do you expect these bounty hunter to cause a drop in the price compared to pre-sale and early birds participants who who as high as 200% bonus?
If a coin drops in price, I think it isn't from bounty hunters and if they may be part, their impact isn't as huge as other factors that aren't usually mentioned.

[masterrex]

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?

This is a nonsense thread why did you accusing Bounty hunters that killed the ICO were is the sense and logical evidences to support your accusation, Its a false accusation you know why!
1. ICO still existing at these moment.
2. Most of the time bounty allocation was just base on the sold tokens! and not just what you portrayed like its a super big allocation!
3. Earned bounty tokens are payments from the promotion of the ICO so whats your point while you are using "Free tokens"
4. I'm also participated in some ICO's and Ive been scammed 4 times already, and because of that after the ICO and the token was listed im quickly sell my token in ICO price im not bothering the price anymore because i have earned bonuses during the early part of the ICO you know why because i know how the market works these is not 2016-2017 already the crypto-space has change a lot.

The real causes why the most ICO's was not that succesfull comparing before thats because of the scams and other fraudulent acts and Bounty hunters has nothing to do with this!

[Pelana vreo]

How can ICO kill bounty hunters who receive only 1% at the best 2% of the total bullet. How can 2% affect the price of a good project that has good volumes on the exchange?
ICO killed the scam and not the bounty hunters.

I agree with you, there are many bounty hunters who have enough money to participate in ICO and become Investors, the developers need a lot of time to keep prices stable from the products they have and I see a lot of scams like big pumps when tokens are registered on the exchange then the developers don't run the Road Map that we expect.

Many ICOs have almost the same ideas, then investors will sell their tokens if the product of a new project running ICO does not have a good future because there is no update on the information of the project they are building.

[Weng simok]

There is no way that bounty hunters can kill ICO, because many ICO projects allocate very small funds to bounty hunters, and it is also impossible to blame investors for this, because investors are financier in a project, but in this case at least the team requires the right steps so that their tokens do not die when they are released on the market and in my opinion, it is better to supply fewer tokens and give fewer bonuses so that the price of tokens on the market will be more stable.

[chocopapaya]

False.
I think you are overestimating the influence bounty hunters have.
First off, take a look at the percentage allocated to bounty hunters.
In a typical ICO, it is only like 1% to 2% of the coins available.
Some ICOs will go as high as 5%, but that is still a tiny fraction of the overall supply.
It just isn't enough to totally crash a project even if every bounty hunter completely dumps their coin.
(and not all bounty hunters do).

The biggest factor in an ICO getting killed is one that people seem to overlook:
It was a crappy business to begin with.
People like to blame bounty hunters, market situations, scammy practices when really, the business had no hope to begin with because it was just a bad startup.

[motun01]

In the event that they need to make the project remain fruitful they have to secured the tokens couple of month just to ensure that the price is as yet stable when the dumpers came up.
The greater part of the faults should not lie with the bounty hunters since when the circulation is complete the hunters only have a small portion of the total allocation of tokens.
Projects need to adopt better marketing and strategical means to keep the projects afloat

[EmmaBen]

This is completely false. Even without bounty hunters and bounties, projects have gone on to fail woefully. A poorly developed or marketed project will fail and there is nothing anyone can do about it. Most projects have in the past employed several strategies against bounty hunters such as locking their rewards or tokens, yet they have mostly gone to fail exponentially with several dwindling prices and value in the open market. Bounty hunters aren't responsible but the projects developers surely have the blame.

[tondenga2122]

False.
I think you are overestimating the influence bounty hunters have.
First off, take a look at the percentage allocated to bounty hunters.
In a typical ICO, it is only like 1% to 2% of the coins available.
Some ICOs will go as high as 5%, but that is still a tiny fraction of the overall supply.
It just isn't enough to totally crash a project even if every bounty hunter completely dumps their coin.
(and not all bounty hunters do).

The biggest factor in an ICO getting killed is one that people seem to overlook:
It was a crappy business to begin with.
People like to blame bounty hunters, market situations, scammy practices when really, the business had no hope to begin with because it was just a bad startup.

But that's because of hunters selling their coins instantly when it releases on the market. That's why makes the prices instantly dump. They don't care about the price actually and will sell whenever it's already released on exchange. This is a typical bounty hunter that we see, they always say "when distri sir? when exchange?" Like they don't care about the project anymore.