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

[GEMIN_M4]

This is right and wrong, sometimes bounty hunters make more than the actual price of the token they got paid with, value increase and the 50$ they made can turn to 500$ or even more, since we are promoting a altcoins, there is no need to be paid in stable coins or Bitcoin, if you don't want this then all you need to do is stop promoting altcoins, because 99% of altcoins pays bounty hunters with their native tokens.

[abel1337]

This is right and wrong, sometimes bounty hunters make more than the actual price of the token they got paid with, value increase and the 50$ they made can turn to 500$ or even more, since we are promoting a altcoins, there is no need to be paid in stable coins or Bitcoin, if you don't want this then all you need to do is stop promoting altcoins, because 99% of altcoins pays bounty hunters with their native tokens.

Well, According to those bounty hunters this rarely happens and most of the projects aren't strong enough to be a 10x upon their launch. I personally haven't joined any bounty campaigns for years now because most altcoins that are being paid on these campaigns are usually becoming worthless. Those project who doesn't have enough support from their investors and the community can easily go bottom upon their launch given that the liquidity of the token can easily get drained by the bounty hunters who are selling it on a rush being scared that they will not get rewarded from the time and efforts they have made. I believe that not all tokens survive that given that the selling pressure of those bounty hunters and some investors is just so much for them to handle.

[abralzain17]

if you think about the price that continues to decline after distributing the prizes received by hunters and continuing to sell them in a short time then it's okay for hunters not to receive prizes in the form of tokens. but if the project has a strong foundation i think the token price of the project will improve again with time. I don't think the bounty hunters get is not going to make the market worse for a long time to come

[Cadaver20]

There are many arguments on both sides that native token payments will be given to bounty hunters or some other stablecoin payments will be given. Most people cite bounty hunters as the cause of token dumping. But I don't accept it. Because only a small amount of the total supply of any token has a bounty budget. I often see that the day before the distribution of a token, the price of that token is dumped, that is, before the bounty token enters the market.
Bounty hunters don't mind paying in any other coin because they only want their payment be it tokens or coins.

[daenarys_stormborn]

I don't agree if bounty hunters are paid using bitcoin or other altcoins besides their native token, project developers decide to pay bounty hunters using their native token, they must have certain reasons, one of which is that project developers and teams don't have enough funds to pay bounty hunters , so they pay bounty hunters using their native token after the campaign is finished, if it's not like that then the project being worked on will not run and end up being abandoned due to lack of funds for marketing campaigns

[mdzahed134]

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?

I participated in projects that changed the rules when they apparently understood that it would be better for them to pay out not with their own tokens. And they paid for the bounty in stablecoins and the reward was worthy for me personally. But if they paid in their tokens, it would be 5 times the minimum

First of all, it’s not easy to pay stable coins for every project owners, because they have no enough funds to pay for hunters, another thing is they don’t want to pay from their own pocket if they can use their native token in advertisement, so why they will pay stable coin in the promotional campaign.

[SquallLeonhart]

I participated in projects that changed the rules when they apparently understood that it would be better for them to pay out not with their own tokens. And they paid for the bounty in stablecoins and the reward was worthy for me personally. But if they paid in their tokens, it would be 5 times the minimum

First of all, it’s not easy to pay stable coins for every project owners, because they have no enough funds to pay for hunters, another thing is they don’t want to pay from their own pocket if they can use their native token in advertisement, so why they will pay stable coin in the promotional campaign.

If they do not have enough funds to provide stablecoins to bounty hunters, they should not start any new project at all, how about that? Why do people think that everyone should be able to start a new project, do we have everyone starting any business they want? Can you start a bank?

Obviously this is not that big, but you need like at max 20k dollars to start a proper project with everything, obviously if you have the developer and designer in house, the rest would cost at most 20k for it, you can do marketing and apply the right places. You can spend as much as millions, but need a minimum 20k and you have a decent one. Under that? You are creating a rug pull, even if you do not steal, you will fail. For everyone 1 successful project that started with less than 20k, there are a million failed ones.

[Jocuserious]

Do you know! A good project should pay bounty hunter tokens. because they spend a lot of trouble and time to complete the work of social promoting. Tokens can be distributed in many ways, which will not harm the project as a whole. In fact, the number of good projects has decreased and the number of bounty hunters has also decreased. This is one of the main reasons that most projects are fraudulent

[sulendra12]

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?

Most of the projects are greedy, they don't even care about the performance and how well the project can survive in the market, they just think about the money and once they reach the goal, they will just dump everything and run away. That's away most of the new bounty campaigns out there pays with their tokens, as they can't distribute 1 penny to the promoters because of how greedy they are.

But I can see the good thing to be paid with something else such as USDT or Bitcoin for example. So they don't dump the tokens to the ground like to what happened in most newly released projects in exchanges. It's up to them to choose between that, but still it doesn't mean that the projects that pay with USDT will "survive" in the market. But at least they try.

[QueenVera]

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.

Paying using their own tokens increase the popularity of the tokens as more wallets holds the tokens so will the interest of investors grow thinking those wallets all bought the tokens and that's why airdrops were introduced. It's a form of marketing that make people talk about the project and people could pick interest and invest in the project.
Also to cut cost and you don't have to worry because before the project launched, they have already kept aside tokens meant for promotion and the bounty tokens are part of those allocation. Airdrop and bounties need to be in the project tokens for better marketing.
If the project have stablecoin for promotion then they should just go to popular sites that their ads will be seen by many and they'll be guaranteed of having a successful campaign as bounties aren't guaranteed to be successful.

[gurunanakji777]

I concur with your observation that most bounty hunters tend to sell their coins as soon as they are listed, and only a small proportion of about 10-15% hold onto them with the hope of a higher return in the future. Therefore, it would be advantageous for the project to consider paying out alternative coins such as USDT, BNB, BUSD, and the like.

[gurunanakji777]

I also believe that if rewards are given in stable currency, it would be much better for the project. Many bounty hunters sell their coins as soon as they are listed, which has a significant impact on the price and delays its stability. Investors also have to wait because they don't want to sell at a loss. Some hunters are desperate to sell regardless of the price they get. However, I am aware that in order to pay in stable currency, the developer will have to pay from their own pocket, while they raise funds through an ICO and use those funds for development, which is why they prefer to pay in native tokens to avoid additional burdens.

[nyashenka]

It is the most chippest way to pay bounty in tokens. For founders it is not necessary to have fiat for promotion, Just create tokens and pay in them. All risks have the participants in bounty because tokens can become very chip or just have a 0 price.

[bussybuddy]

The problem is how many projects are really successful with the ideas they create, and most of the bounty projects that I see appearing here are poor quality products, there are things that just want to create Take advantage of the interaction. Even when some projects achieve great success, they set easy rules for hunters such as the issue of vesting is constantly changing, almost everyone wants to benefit themselves, including the project and hunter side. However, it must also be said about the issue of paying rewards in stable coins and leading cryptocurrencies such as btc, eth, bnb, ... but few projects do so because only when the project has available capital, and Most of the projects here need to raise capital and need people to share their goals, so failure or success are both common results, so the problem is that we are responsible for our own decisions. when participating in bonus programs and not necessarily demanding benefits with new projects.

[Rampagoe004]

If they pay with tokens that are stable on the market or pay with non-tokens such as dollars, then what about their project? And where do they get enough money to pay the bounty hunters? Logically, if you pay $200,000 but using your tokens, of course you can allocate your tokens in the amount of two hundred thousand dollars. But bounty projects pay $100,000 in dollars, of course they have to find investors who have that many dollars.
Which of these two options is advantageous for the project developer?

[TastyChillySauce00]

It is the most chippest way to pay bounty in tokens. For founders it is not necessary to have fiat for promotion, Just create tokens and pay in them. All risks have the participants in bounty because tokens can become very chip or just have a 0 price.

That means when the token worth penny and the hunters will receive nothing. It's quite better in focusing to escrow the funds rather than try to believe in the team to distributing the reward.

The better thing to focus into the how developer will able to at least escrowing the token or funds to the trusted manager.

[nicolas222]

I fully agree given the total uncertainty of the markets and the impossibility of knowing in advance whether a project will be successful or not it would be better for bounty hunters to be paid in stable coins or eth/bnb

[Lamkuthang]

Not necessarily. At first glance, yes, it sounds like a good alternative and if I notice, not all of them perform well post participant bounty payments, for example, the team changed the payment option for bounty hunters in a project campaign with USDT or BUSD.

I think what makes the project big and advanced is having a big concept, long term and having strong partners and strong funds and always maintaining the value of the coin when it crashes with a buyback pattern when the price is corrected. Even without vigorous promotion, it can grow and develop and unexpectedly listing on well-known platforms.

[irsykes]

It is the most chippest way to pay bounty in tokens. For founders it is not necessary to have fiat for promotion, Just create tokens and pay in them. All risks have the participants in bounty because tokens can become very chip or just have a 0 price.

That means when the token worth penny and the hunters will receive nothing. It's quite better in focusing to escrow the funds rather than try to believe in the team to distributing the reward.

The better thing to focus into the how developer will able to at least escrowing the token or funds to the trusted manager.

hope that there will be changes or implementation of regulations even though it is far from expectations with definite payments such as stable, BTC or others that have value. it will be better and increase the quality of the project. so many times there are many obscure bounty projects that have little big potential.

[cheezcarls]

Most likely getting paid in stablecoins for completing a bounty seems to be impossible. If yes, most likely they will only have a very few stables to allocate to the qualified hunters.

I still remember about a bounty campaign by BMY.Guide where we are paid in BTC, but I am a little too late in completing all of the weeks. Maybe I’ve joined somewhere in the middle of that period.

As for GOLD stablecoin as they have their own token, they have been consistent for a few years in paying bounty hunters that can be exchanged to either BTC to ETH until my signature campaign contract ended with them.

I also remember those golden days in 2017 where bounties are giving us insane amounts of money especially in signature campaigns. That was the turning point for me when I was still broke. It really changed my life and made me who I am today.