Do you think 40% bonus is too much for early Investors?

[CoinAngel]

It's a huge bonus saying your token is worth sh*t. You can't give big discounts for something that has great value, can you?

[1715037776]

1715037776

[1715037776]

1715037776

[1715037776]

1715037776

[1715037776]

1715037776

[Banrkim]

It's a huge bonus saying your token is worth sh*t. You can't give big discounts for something that has great value, can you?

I've seen different cases. Humaniq (5.1kk) was giving up to 55% bonus in March-April 2017 while Propy (13.5kk) gave ~3-5% few months later.

[sukoyomi]

40% is too much for early investors, even Vitalik agress that an egalitarian society for cryptocurrency is ideal. Rewarding early invwsotrs with such huge binuses will result in them having more tokwns to dump when the project goes on an exchange.

It's really true, this is the reason the price of a project's coin is very low when it is listed in the exchange. While they do not have a solution to deal with this, such as buying back might help, but it was never planned at all. The project is so focused on ICO sales.

[cryptoknightt]

I think the bonus is very much and it's not good if the initial investor gets that much bonus because it will only make other investors become jealous, even the price of the coin or token will destroy the price because the initial investor will certainly sell his assets quickly.

[pamsugas]

40% bonus is indeed too big, but if they are a good product the price is certainly not far from the initial price. sometimes a lot of projects that only make a big bonus but the product does not work so that prices will continue to plummet.

[Zemomtum]

This is what kill most reputable projects. Some are even up to 70%, so what will be investor be looking for again when such project is listed? That is the main reason behing dumping token immediately it get listed nomatter how legit the competence of your team members look.

[Kwansimaa]

Until project managers come to their or realization about what is mainly killing their projects, they will keep giving this early 40% bonus to investors and these investors will also keep dumping and dumping and they later blame bounty hunters for dumping. This is to me is a bad idea for giving early investors 40% bonus.

[spydee1522]

The fall and crash of many tokens out there started from this end. why would a project with a strong team backed by a board of advisors decide to give 40% bonus to early investors, again why?. These investors gets this bonus and right after listing, they go and dump because they have got nothing to lose since they had these tokens for free. Its time project managers and their boards sit and reconsider such mistakes and amend it where necessary.

[irixo10]

In some cases where a token price crashes soon after listing on the Exchange, the blames has over time been attributed to the bounty hunters and sometimes to early investors that received certain bonuses.

Do you think 40% bonus for early investors is too much and capable of crashing token price?

40% that's more like saying 50% and I think it's too much and might be the perfect explanation why the price always dumps on getting to exchange. However, I think there are projects which always takes extra measures to ensure dump is curtailed by locking up the bonuses. But whichever way, it's too much and should be looked into.

[Starfranko]

40%percent in all honesty is a lot and I think it is too much

[tanjiran]

Many say that 40% is too big, and that could be a chance of a dump at the beginning of the listing period. Especially after the market is saturated and it's hard to get profits. See? investors at the beginning of the period can also be dumpers, not just bounty hunters. Well, 40% bonus might be interesting enough to bring in investors, but if it's not accompanied by other good marketing strategies then it can backfire.

[Pet240]

Many say that 40% is too big, and that could be a chance of a dump at the beginning of the listing period. Especially after the market is saturated and it's hard to get profits. See? investors at the beginning of the period can also be dumpers, not just bounty hunters. Well, 40% bonus might be interesting enough to bring in investors, but if it's not accompanied by other good marketing strategies then it can backfire.

There are many ways in which investors can be attracted and not just by the bonus, because if a coin has a very attractive volume, it can also dump, which then makes it useless.
A coin bought with no volume, but performs excellently well on exchange without any issue is much better. So project teams should work more on their products.

[Jpt]

Yes I do think giving high amount of bonus during pre sale or ICO will help dump token price after hitting exchanges. So curtailing bonus amount will become a good idea to reduce price dump. Generally bounty hunters are blamed for price dump. But high amount of bonus is responsible for it.

[Layers318]

In some cases where a token price crashes soon after listing on the Exchange, the blames has over time been attributed to the bounty hunters and sometimes to early investors that received certain bonuses.

Do you think 40% bonus for early investors is too much and capable of crashing token price?

Of course, the offering of high and unrealistic discounts or bonuses play a part in the collapse of a coin after listing. However, the core factor which contributes largely to the crush of a coin comes from the expertise of the team and the product of the project. If the team lacks expertise in crypto and its market analysis, the coin is likely to fall. Product with no or low demand level has a short span on the market.

[shadowdio]

Of course, that is too much 40% bonus for investors, surely the price will dump when they get listed. Not only bounty hunters to blamed the dump price of a coin, the investors also with big bonus.

[ivaf]

A 40% bonus for early investors is a lot. It is such marketing actions of the project team that mainly lead to a dump of the price of an asset after it is listed. And the baseless accusations of bounty hunters begin, which collectively own only 2-3% of the asset.
I believe that the bonus for early investors should not exceed 10%.

[xenomorphe1]

I don't think it is a too big bonus for the early investors. As they are taking the risk to lose all their money if the ICO fail. And most ICO propose this kind of bonus. But it certainly doesn't help the price to be maintain at the ICO price.

[Ozero]

I think the bonus is very much and it's not good if the initial investor gets that much bonus because it will only make other investors become jealous, even the price of the coin or token will destroy the price because the initial investor will certainly sell his assets quickly.

I believe that it is big bonuses to early investors that are largely the reason for the rapid depreciation of a new token when it is listed. To prevent this from happening, a completely different approach is needed here. ICO project teams now actually stimulate the purchase and then the quick sale of their tokens. And you need to stimulate interest in their retention. I think that this can provide a passive income in the project. Only a few good projects can rely on the growing interest in their token for other reasons.

[CoinThinker]

Too big for the rules. So I would not appreciate such a project. Bounty should only account for 0.5-2% of the total token. That is the most reasonable allocation

[Bossfidelity]

I think giving investors such a high amount of bonus would affect the value of the tokens in the long run, when listed. The investors would be willing to dump the amount received as bonus to cushion the amount spent during the tokensales and may be willing to sell at any price. If the project has a solid use case and is able to reduce the amount of tokens in circulation, that would be great.