In the best interest of investors, Bounties shouldn't be paid in Tokens

[passwordnow]

You're right because what's on the mind of the majority of bounty hunters is to dump the rewards in the form of their project's token. Everyone wants to take out their share as soon as possible and as soon as they've received it.
But on the side of these project developers, it's like a surplus to them and that's why they're paying through their tokens. It's like they're paying everyone out of thin air if ever their project becomes successful and if ever it's a failure, they've got nothing to lose but just a part of their supply.

I agree, they just get rid of project tokens that have no value in the short term. Some investors buy from bounty hunters for dirty cheap prices in order to dump on the market when an altcoin rally happens. Unfortunately, not all bounty hunters are patient enough to wait for the right time and then sell the bounty rewards at the highest possible market price. As a final result, bounty tokens are used to decrease the market value of project coins so it is somewhat lose-lose situation for both parties, IMO.

That's the usual thing to do because bounty hunters don't really expect a lot from these projects and they also want to take profit as much as possible. No matter how hard they try to keep it, they've got experiences that it's not a good thing to keep those tokens because they're bound to be dumped by the devs, early investors, and then bounty hunters. Even if they put a lock-in period for the bounty hunters, still, those tokens won't be going anywhere but to be dumped.

[o48o]

I don't know who needs to hear this but after years of being a bounty hunter and keeping a close eye on how bounties are conducted, it's safe to say most projects make the biggest mistake of paying bounty hunters using their native tokens, why do I say so, well bounty hunters don't share the long term foresight as the project to the point of being a hodler to grow with the company but rather see their bounty payment as a service and will sell the tokens for less to get whatever money they can because they owe nobody anything.Of course, for the project to pay using the tokens is cost cutting but if the project is truly slated for the future, paying using non-tokens is a good signal for a strong project.

Going forward in the best interest of investors and the project itself, hope to see "more" bounties being paid with established coins in this industry.

What do you guys think?

From the point of investor, yes. As a bounty hunter i know there are some projects that i actually would like to be paid with tokens their native tokens but i doubt that my fellow holders think alike. Most of them want to dump the tokens as soon as possible. This has been the case at least as long i've been in this game.

But i understand this from the point of a team, it costs them nothing to throw away tokens worth of $100M and gives free advertising.
Supply is what they want anyway. They can value their project worth 1B and give away "$100M worth" of tokens. Team doesn't need to care about the starting price anyway. They have their ico money.

[uneng]

Going forward in the best interest of investors and the project itself, hope to see "more" bounties being paid with established coins in this industry.

What do you guys think?

This would be the right approach by developers in order to decrease the number of scam projects on the industry and to encourage bounty hunters to continue working on such projects.

When developers pay hunters in native tokens, it's too easy for them, because they are paying out of thin air, instead of allocating a real sum of money on the project to pay the employees. There is no responsability on it. If the token prices something after all, good, and if not, it will be fine as well...

On the other hand, for bounty hunter it will be a big waste of time, so without any doubts campaigns should be paid in solid cryptocurrencies such as btc or stablecoins.

[Ozero]

It is much easier for the new altcoin project team to manipulate their unleased new tokens. When paying with bounty hunters, it is easier for them to do this with their own tokens. And at the same time, they risk almost nothing. Indeed, in the world of cryptocurrency, no team can be sure of the long-term price growth of their token. Previously, new project teams at least indicated the future approximate price of their new token, although they usually overestimated their value. At the same time, the pool payable for participation in bounty companies often amounted to hundreds of thousands of dollars. Now in bounty campaigns, the pool is indicated only in the number of tokens that will be paid to all participants in the bounty company, or their total amount is indicated in the range from five to ten thousand dollars. This is no longer the amount that the team of the new project should worry about.

[Mozzart]

I think that most of the participants always sell the tokens immediately received as soon as such an opportunity arises,because they want to make a profit here and now,and only a few who believe in the project, if it is really good,then they store the tokens as long as possible in order to get more profit later.

[|MINER|]

I think that most of the participants always sell the tokens immediately received as soon as such an opportunity arises,because they want to make a profit here and now,and only a few who believe in the project, if it is really good,then they store the tokens as long as possible in order to get more profit later.

I have some friends who have sold 12, 10, 16 dollar equivalent tokens for 800 dollars and more. But we also have to admit that nowadays such projects are one in a thousand or a hundred. Now most of the project are scamming and at the end of the day the holding tokens value were became zero.  So I could not see the bounty hunters as wrong that they are selling tokens as soon as they get them, as it is there payment for service. But even if it is less, but wise hunters sell by observing the strength or stand of the project before selling

[milewilda]

I think that most of the participants always sell the tokens immediately received as soon as such an opportunity arises,because they want to make a profit here and now,and only a few who believe in the project, if it is really good,then they store the tokens as long as possible in order to get more profit later.

Bounty hunters or presalers arent really that different which its true that most of them would really be dumping out the coins that they've been holding for profits which its not really that shocking anymore
this is why the earlier of selling the better considering that base or listing price would really be higher on the price that they had able to get in.For those bounty hunters then it is really just right that they would
be selling it right away before it would go its price to the ground unless if the said project did really make some huge hype and the price pumped then it would really be a beneficial
thing for them considering on how much money they could make on just spreading up the word or simply those bounty things.

[Desmong]

For me if don't like when bounty is been paid in the local token e are promoting. This project may not survive the sun light so sometimes promoting some of these project can be very annoying when we don't get paid. Some projects are very genuine while some will stress us and take our time.

[Dr.Osh]

I think that most of the participants always sell the tokens immediately received as soon as such an opportunity arises,because they want to make a profit here and now,and only a few who believe in the project, if it is really good,then they store the tokens as long as possible in order to get more profit later.

I have some friends who have sold 12, 10, 16 dollar equivalent tokens for 800 dollars and more. But we also have to admit that nowadays such projects are one in a thousand or a hundred. Now most of the project are scamming and at the end of the day the holding tokens value were became zero.  So I could not see the bounty hunters as wrong that they are selling tokens as soon as they get them, as it is there payment for service. But even if it is less, but wise hunters sell by observing the strength or stand of the project before selling

I think this is the correct opinion. there's nothing wrong with bounty hunters immediately selling the tokens they get, and this should be taken into account by Devs before making the decision to advertise their project through bounties and pay using the tokens they create. because of that, many devs are paying using stablecoins. it's just that, if I've noticed, most of the newly developed projects will pay bounty hunters with their tokens, not with a stable of coins. it aims to increase the number of users. however, a side effect of that was mass selling. Therefore, devs must really consider the behavior of bounty hunters.
In addition, not all bounty hunters will sell the tokens they get. they will definitely make observations and research whether the token is worth holding or not. so, the choice is with the dev. Both types of payment have their advantages and disadvantages.

[Strongkored]

I don't know who needs to hear this

What is certain is the developer of the project, or it could be a potential investor who advises the developer because they have an interest, so that the price of the token will not decrease in the future due to massive sales from bounty hunters.

What do you guys think?

What is also a concern if you want to pay bounty participants with coins other than their coins is that they already to have capital first and put the money in an escrowed, not waiting for the results of the token sale because if wait for the token sale, the bounty participants can get nothing because the token sale failed.

[xSkylarx]

It was a great idea if the goal of the owner is to keep his token success because mostly the dump happens when the bounty hunters received their token and all of them start selling and they don't care of what will happen to the project. Though the problem really is the cost paying on it like others dont have really enough budget to pay those bounty hunters that is why they are going to pay then via their own token. I seen couple of bounties before that pays in USDT but still bounties is really paid by their own tokens

[ivankoh]

Going forward in the best interest of investors and the project itself, hope to see "more" bounties being paid with established coins in this industry.

What do you guys think?

If the majority of serious, honest and quality projects are paid in bitcoin/eth or stablecoin.  I completely agree and welcome.  But it seems from my observation that most of the projects do not raise the available capital before running the bounty project, that will be difficult for them in that option.  There are also some bounty projects that choose to combine the two to pay bounty participants with 50% tokens + 50% stablecoins, it seems to strike a balance for both participants and investors.  But there are really few such projects.  Investors want to ensure return on their investment while bounty work participants really don't want to waste time and have no value.  Perhaps, only when the project starts raising capital first (presale) and then launches the bounty campaign will this possibility be guaranteed.

[cafee_orange]

I don't know who needs to hear this but after years of being a bounty hunter and keeping a close eye on how bounties are conducted, it's safe to say most projects make the biggest mistake of paying bounty hunters using their native tokens, why do I say so, well bounty hunters don't share the long term foresight as the project to the point of being a hodler to grow with the company but rather see their bounty payment as a service and will sell the tokens for less to get whatever money they can because they owe nobody anything.Of course, for the project to pay using the tokens is cost cutting but if the project is truly slated for the future, paying using non-tokens is a good signal for a strong project.

Going forward in the best interest of investors and the project itself, hope to see "more" bounties being paid with established coins in this industry.

What do you guys think?

It seems that the advice you convey has a bright side to maintaining the stability of the value or price of a token, because I have noticed that usually each token has been obtained by a bounty participant, so the price of the token will fall freely in the market because the sales are greater. I think your advice is very good in this regard

[jacafbiz]

I don't know who needs to hear this but after years of being a bounty hunter and keeping a close eye on how bounties are conducted, it's safe to say most projects make the biggest mistake of paying bounty hunters using their native tokens, why do I say so, well bounty hunters don't share the long term foresight as the project to the point of being a hodler to grow with the company but rather see their bounty payment as a service and will sell the tokens for less to get whatever money they can because they owe nobody anything.Of course, for the project to pay using the tokens is cost cutting but if the project is truly slated for the future, paying using non-tokens is a good signal for a strong project.

Going forward in the best interest of investors and the project itself, hope to see "more" bounties being paid with established coins in this industry.

What do you guys think?

This is not the first time someone will make an argument like this against projects paying bounty tokens in their native tokens, there are reasons teams decide on this, budget, loyalty etc. but this is not peculiar to bounty projects alone, people will dump, VCs do dump, what will you say about Airdrops, look at the recent Blur token airdrop, most of the people including VCs dumped their tokens immediately on the market. What I notice is that people tend to bring this up in the bear market when there is no or little liquidity but forget this in the bull market when investors' appetitive for risk are huge. However, what makes you think some bounty hunters don't invest in the projects they carried its signature or promotes

[soramon]

I dont know bro most of the time the bounty campaign rarely pay us. But to answer your question is yes i agree bounties shouldnot be paid in their own tokens. Some of bounty hunters will sell their bounty token as soon as possible because they really need some cash. I think it can effect the price of the token it self. The reward like stablecoin is really good choice. Because the hunter can measure the reward that they can get and the project it self can make a budget for campaign.

[Bollexz1]

@OP - you're correct, but this lot of projects don't mostly have the money to use to buy stable coins and share with the hunters for their participation in promoting their project, and sometimes some prefer to pay in their native token all in the sense of increasing hodlers. But it could have been better if they reserve capital for the buy-back mechanism, instead of letting this hunter engage in the massive dumps.

[Mpamaegbu]

OP, your perspective has been canvassed in the past and it raised divergent views with some bounty hunters surprisely defending the position of projects to pay with their own tokens. My take on this is that most of these projects coming to the industry aren't financially buoyant and as such would depend on their own tokens to pay hunters. The sad thing about this is that there are some projects that also come to the industry with the sole intention of scamming hunters. These ones have no intention of paying at all. In the true sense of it these projects don't have any token to distribute. They run bounties with the aim of trapping investors and then disappear once the bounty is over. So, they scam both hunters and investors.

For me, I believe it will be better to make it a rule that the least that should be accepted for bounty reward should be tokens already listed and traded on the market if these new projects can't pay with stable coins.

[lixer]

It was a great idea if the goal of the owner is to keep his token success because mostly the dump happens when the bounty hunters received their token and all of them start selling and they don't care of what will happen to the project. Though the problem really is the cost paying on it like others dont have really enough budget to pay those bounty hunters that is why they are going to pay then via their own token. I seen couple of bounties before that pays in USDT but still bounties is really paid by their own tokens

I don't think all BH are selling their coins once the bounty is over. Some of them are also like us who knows how to hold a coin in order to maximize their profits however if they think that the bounty is a scam or weak to last longer, there is no point of holding the tokens.

Dumping is part on how this market works so a project owner should not be worried about that. Even if they don't conduct a bounty campaign, there is still a possibility that some investors will dump coins for the same reason I said above or if they need an emergency money. A good project will always find its way to recover so they must not worry if they knew that they have created one.

[Natalim]

It was a great idea if the goal of the owner is to keep his token success because mostly the dump happens when the bounty hunters received their token and all of them start selling and they don't care of what will happen to the project. Though the problem really is the cost paying on it like others dont have really enough budget to pay those bounty hunters that is why they are going to pay then via their own token. I seen couple of bounties before that pays in USDT but still bounties is really paid by their own tokens

As I've experienced before, an abrupt dump really happens when they release their reward to the participants. It was a sad thing to see that even though the project looks promising at the start but these hunters care nothing and never think about what will happen to the project if they all sell their coins at cheap prices. Some bounties had paid their participants in batches avoiding instant drop of process and actually, it helps a little bit. I guess the design isn't really good but paying them in their native tokens is not the best option as this only degrades the value of their project when seeing it dumps to the worse level where no one is even buying.

[Oilacris]

It was a great idea if the goal of the owner is to keep his token success because mostly the dump happens when the bounty hunters received their token and all of them start selling and they don't care of what will happen to the project. Though the problem really is the cost paying on it like others dont have really enough budget to pay those bounty hunters that is why they are going to pay then via their own token. I seen couple of bounties before that pays in USDT but still bounties is really paid by their own tokens

I don't think all BH are selling their coins once the bounty is over. Some of them are also like us who knows how to hold a coin in order to maximize their profits however if they think that the bounty is a scam or weak to last longer, there is no point of holding the tokens.

Dumping is part on how this market works so a project owner should not be worried about that. Even if they don't conduct a bounty campaign, there is still a possibility that some investors will dump coins for the same reason I said above or if they need an emergency money. A good project will always find its way to recover so they must not worry if they knew that they have created one.

This is actually depending on someones interest and plans into their coins.Once im a bounty hunter which it is really that there are really times which i've been holding my coins that i do received

but that would really be that depending if the project is really that having the potential but i do believe that most bounty hunters would really be selling out their coins once they do
get a hold of it which as long it would be traded up mainly first on DEX and as long it would really be having that value and this is where BH's would be securing out on what they had earned which it isnt really that something new.

Paid on tokens? Most of projects would really be doing that and its just that rare to find or see that companies paying up with fiat or known established coins
specially when they are still on ICO or presale or whatsoever.