Bounty hunters killed ICO?

[Annexia]

This is absolutely false. Most ICOs don't even pay Bounty Hunters before their listing. They prefer to pay hunters months, even year after listing putting the investors into consideration. How then is it possible for BH to dump price.

[xmonkeyx]

Bounty hunters are not ICO killers. Bounty hunters are often killed by ICO. I disagree with you about this.
Bounty hunters play an important role in the success of ICO projects, so it is very unlikely that ICOs will be killed by bounty hunters. Thanks.

[Tylev]

It is foolish to blame bounty hunters for ICO team failures. Most likely, these ICO teams slowly and gradually beat off any desire to participate in ICO bounty campaigns as bounty hunters. In fact, we are engaged in advertising the ICO project and for our work we get their tokens, which are even very difficult to call money, because they often do not get that way.

Recently, however, so many additional responsibilities have been imposed on us that it is time to enroll bounty hunters on the team. In addition, recently in some telegrams it has been expressly stated that they deliberately change the conditions for payment of earned tokens and if someone does not follow their correspondence for several weeks and does not fulfill the new conditions, then he will lose the right to earn tokens.

 In conditions when the payment is delayed for many months, we are forced to participate in other projects and the overt intention of ICO teams to deceive us creates additional conflict situations that do not benefit this type of activity.

[Christinebeauty]

I believe the core mandate of every bounty program is to promote a particular project and attract investors into it. How can these same people be enemies of the project. Most bounty hunters are also investors so if your project or tokens are worth holding, no hunter will dump them. They should focus on their project development and stop blaming hunters

[abi1988]

Bounty hunters are not ICO killers. Bounty hunters are often killed by ICO. I disagree with you about this.
Bounty hunters play an important role in the success of ICO projects, so it is very unlikely that ICOs will be killed by bounty hunters. Thanks.

Right, because what we often see is that the hunters are always victims of the ICO, one of which is when the ICO project does not pay the hunters, if this happens, then the hunters are automatically harmed, and in this case those killed are the ico hunter.

[asyakashi]

Personally, my opinion is that it wasn't the bounty hunters who killed ICO, but a lot of crooks in these ICO projects.

I agree with you, why is the bounty hunter always a suspect for falling ICO prices. Bounty Hunter helps promote tokens and they are not the cause of death of ICO.
this is wrong and not objective assessment.

I have seen strong arguments which pointed towards the bounty hunters in this kind of discussions. The bounty rewards are dumped by the bounty hunters after the getting listed on any exchange. There is nothing wrong to sell the tokens that received to your wallet by airdrop or the bounty campaign. The cause of the down price is usually linked to the dumped tokens by the bounty hunters. They usually only care to get their BTC with dumping as fast as possible on the first available market orders.

not all bounty hunters throw away their tokens when the market opens. sometimes they also wait for the right price to sell, they read the roadmap and wait for good announcements from the project community.
I'm saying a small part of them.

[Miklight88]

I never see any way that bounty hunters used to kill ico or any new project that is coming up , as regard the allocation to bounty hunters which many thought is the reason for the dump in price but to me , it is a capital no , as many project are after money and go to a very high risk by giving out bonus to private investor with like 500% gain and you expect such people not to dump it even if its 100% gain why bounty only get 1-3% ,will that affect the price?.

[fosco333]

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 mostly not true. It is true that if the bounty allocation too high, it can damage the price of the token later.
But usually the bounty allocation nowadays is very small if you compare with bounties in the past.
The dev who own the token or private investors without lock period could contribute the dump.

[llecrf]

The allocation of tokens from each bounty is different and if the price of the token goes down it will not affect the new ico project, because I have joined and bought altcoin at ICO but project developers sometimes do not carry out their plans due to market situation and some negative information on crypto that makes prices other tokens and altcoin down

[mamahdedeh]

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 mostly not true. It is true that if the bounty allocation too high, it can damage the price of the token later.
But usually the bounty allocation nowadays is very small if you compare with bounties in the past.
The dev who own the token or private investors without lock period could contribute the dump.

campaign prizes have always had a small percentage of earned token sales. if it's because of the bounty hunter, the team should be able to anticipate it, because there were many ICO projects in the past, so there is a lot of experience that can be used as a lesson. I think if the bounty hunter kills ICO, it means that the strength is very big of the bounty hunter on a project

[Layers318]

Bounty hunters are not to blame when it comes to the down trend of ICOs. ICO killed itself because of its loose structures and methods of executing its sales. Due to the loose structures in ICOs, scam projects could easily penetrate because there were no checks on teams and projects. IEO took over because it restructured the method of token sales by hosting them on exchange platform. With the top exchanges, before an IEO is hosted, checks are made on the project to ascertain its authenticity.

[b1boy]

On the off chance that bounty hunters typically get 1%out of entire token course, some portion of them chooses to hold, at that point by what means can the rest figure out how to drop cost? Extraordinarily when every one of them dont sell their bounty tokens simultaneously.

[iv4n]

Bounty hunters are not to blame when it comes to the down trend of ICOs. ICO killed itself because of its loose structures and methods of executing its sales. Due to the loose structures in ICOs, scam projects could easily penetrate because there were no checks on teams and projects. IEO took over because it restructured the method of token sales by hosting them on exchange platform. With the top exchanges, before an IEO is hosted, checks are made on the project to ascertain its authenticity.

Team behind the project is to blame, that`s for sure. Bounty hunters get just small part of the tokens, they can affect the ICO, but in so small scale. Team that has the most of the tokens, private sales they organize with huge bonuses for big early investor, it`s normal to believe that they are behind everything.
Bad structure, bad plan and realization leads to death of ICO, and any other startup. IEO is taking over cause exchanges are vouching for startups, but I don`t believe in their words, I like to check project by myself before I make any move.

[suvo05]

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?

Bounty hunters get only 2-5% of the total token allocation. And not all of them instantly sell all their bounty as soon as they get token but contrarily some of them hold the coin longer than the usual investor. As a normal investor invest money they have a limit which they can't afford to lose but some bounty hunters can afford to hold it for longer. So it's a complete false alligation.  

[kennen1113]

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?

Bounty hunters get only 2-5% of the total token allocation. And not all of them instantly sell all their bounty as soon as they get token but contrarily some of them hold the coin longer than the usual investor. As a normal investor invest money they have a limit which they can't afford to lose but some bounty hunters can afford to hold it for longer. So it's a complete false alligation.  

Exactly, no need to talk about the stories of the past, right now, we can clearly see that the dead ICO is not due to bounty hunters, the death comes from investors and developers who are only planning to make money quickly, not building products. Projects are born every day but have little value and improvement compared to old projects, bounty hunters also do not have to receive rewards immediately, most projects right now have very late distribution of rewards, projects are listed until dump, bounty hunters are irrelevant when the reward needs a few more months to go into the wallet

[zenhu]

Yeah, that's true fact about the ICO that have lot of bounty hunter to promote it. They just think about their token must be sent into their wallet without give impact for selling. Spreading fud and give negative comments in telegram global group to make the ICO will be trash for investor.
I think this problem can be solve if the team distribute token for bounty hunter payment each month to decrease chance to get dump by hunter.

[yangongear]

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, I think. If you compare the Bounty Budget allocation to the ICO's total hardcap or softcap or percentage of raised fund, it's actually a small budget, usually less than 2%. And the project can be distribute follow a vetting schedule or paid all of that, but if they have money, the purchase of the entire bounty tokens which will not affect the token price. Those projects failed, they failed at the beginning, rather than having to wait until BH dump their tokens.

[Dr.Osh]

Yeah, that's true fact about the ICO that have lot of bounty hunter to promote it. They just think about their token must be sent into their wallet without give impact for selling. Spreading fud and give negative comments in telegram global group to make the ICO will be trash for investor.
I think this problem can be solve if the team distribute token for bounty hunter payment each month to decrease chance to get dump by hunter.

it can also be avoided when his team pays bitcoin, ETH, or coins that are popular with bounty hunters. however, the coins they hold are sometimes below 10%. Well, in this case, not all bounty hunter mistakes. I think when the team has a good strategy for avoiding dumps, the best way is to pay them another coin.

[herurist]

Yeah, that's true fact about the ICO that have lot of bounty hunter to promote it. They just think about their token must be sent into their wallet without give impact for selling. Spreading fud and give negative comments in telegram global group to make the ICO will be trash for investor.
I think this problem can be solve if the team distribute token for bounty hunter payment each month to decrease chance to get dump by hunter.

it can also be avoided when his team pays bitcoin, ETH, or coins that are popular with bounty hunters. however, the coins they hold are sometimes below 10%. Well, in this case, not all bounty hunter mistakes. I think when the team has a good strategy for avoiding dumps, the best way is to pay them another coin.

And the team must also be ready to have funds if they want to launch a bounty to promote it, if the payment is to use the same token, it makes the tokens cheap because the hunters now get tokens from the results directly sold.

[trauchot]

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?

I would not say that bounty hunters are always to blame for the price drop of any token, of course, sometimes bounty hunters kill the price and after that the price either stays in the same place forever or then starts to rise after some time, but I also constantly saw and I constantly see how investors who buy tokens for incredible bonuses kill the price of the token they bought, so do not forget that the creators of any project also constantly sell their tokens at an early stage due to various reasons.