slashdevslashnull
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 15
Merit: 0
|
 |
March 16, 2016, 04:40:35 PM |
|
I don't believe the amount of user engagement entailed in Jango NeuCoin tipping or Solitaire playing is worthy of being counted as the creation of a new "user".
Adapting from user acquisition speak, I'd consider them something closer to a "lead." Whether neucoin ultimately "converts" them remains to be seen. Maybe they are or maybe they aren't or maybe they will we don't know. Every coin has a consumer education problem. Neucoin will end up with a rather large freshman class. Most companies use the same strategy when reporting numbers. I've worked for several. Even behemoths like Facebook and Twitter report a significant segment of "zombie" users as actual users. |
|
|
|
|
tempus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1960
Merit: 1128
|
|
March 16, 2016, 06:43:28 PM |
|
NeuCoin will most likely prosper to some extent if only due to the "raising tide" effect as the Altcoin market gets more and more attention. I don't necessarily agree with those who claim it was a scam from the beginning. I think it was started with good intentions by some team members and hidden agendas for others. Only time will tell who is right and who is wrong.
The problem stays the same. Cutting the total supply seems like a huge change, but in fact it's not really a change. The reason is very simple: The market can't handle the supply that is on the market right now, which is already > 100% more than 6 months ago. I've always said that it's about the inflation rate of the market and while they claim that it would be 100% inflation per year, which is ridiculous high, for the market the inflations is even higher! Ethereum, just for example, has 20% per year which is already high. Factom has zero inflation but "Coin-consumption" (Factoids are burned if they are used to record data into Factom) until the full protocol gets traction and than it will be 10% per year. And the altcoin-market already gets more attention. The increase of volume is really noticeably, also on Bittrex. Volume last 24 hours: 2688 BTC. Some months ago there were a lot of days with not even 500 BTC. But that doesn't mean that all projects get more volume. Regarding Scam or no Scam: I've never said that it was a Scam right from the beginning. I also wouldn't say it was started with good intentions. I believe that it was planned with a lot greed in mind but without any professionalism, no knowledge about economics etc. My personal question always was and still is: Who was the "mastermind" of it? Who was able to make such a plan and convince so many others that it would be a good plan while it was so obvious that it's naive? It doesn't really matter, but I really would like to know how that was possible and if nobody was there to say "are you out of your mind???". And what I see as kind of scam is the attempt to get people into buying with all the hype-promises, And another problem if we speak about the question if it's a scam or not: I can imagine that professionals who have to make a decision (add it to an exchange or not, add it to a platform or not - just for example) don't see it as legit. If I would be the CEO of an exchange or whatever I would ask myself: Why should I implement it? To make the team behind rich? I would see it as risk for my own credibility. And under the line that's also the problem when it comes to investing. There is no scenario that ppl buy it who really think about it because of multiple reasons. |
|
|
|
|
tempus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1960
Merit: 1128
|
|
March 16, 2016, 07:36:42 PM |
|
You are applying "house rules" to a coin that isn't playing by them. I find this thread myopic.
120K registered users or unique users checking in per month? There is a big difference. Poloniex doesn't compare to something with volume like Jango.com. NEU growth is linked to Jango.com usage and growth. Do you have access to comscore? Compare Jango and Poloniex. You don't get fully accurate numbers but it is good for comparing the size of two sites. (Jango.com gets 10-20x as many unique visitors without counting mobile apps.)
The question is how you define "user". Let's say I buy some Neu and make an account on Jango and I tip some others there. Do I make them to "users"? I wouldn't agree with that. They just have an account with some Neucoins and most likely the majority won't care about it. And even if it's widely used on Jango... what would that mean? It's like a thump-up-button but without any real usecase that would give real value. If just 5 persons would try to collect as many coins on jango like they could and dump it on Bittrex the price would be at 1 sat. The only reason why that doesn't happen is because it has no value. And what we don't see is that hundreds of new users, or at least 10 of those claimed 8000 new users per day make an account on the official forum or tweet how great Neucoin is. What does that mean? 8000 new users every day but nobody cares? And why should they? You could tip every account on Jango and it wouldn't change anything. And the comparison with Poloniex is because that are real users! Just a little bit more than 100k but that's an economy. Jango is no economy and if the Coins on Jango would flow to Bittrex the price would crash even more.
The innovation is exactly the stuff you don't like, which means you overlook it as innovation. Nothing wrong with that, its a personal choice. You have to realize you are being highly altruistic in your requirements. Again, nothing wrong with, that but it lacks a little bit of pragmatism. What you are asking is very unlikely to occur without some monetary motivation (aka greed) Not sure if I understand what you mean with "The innovation is exactly the stuff you don't like, which means you overlook it as innovation.". Maybe you want to say that there is innovation but I don't recognize it as innovation? If yes, the question is where is the innovation? I mean, tipping and micro-transactions will definitely be a use case in crypto. But it won't be the way like Neucoin tries it. I believe it will be part of a project like Ethereum, maybe with a special Ethereum-micro-Coin but backed with the whole protocol. It needs an economy around it instead a monster-premine with a monster-inflation. And no, my thoughts are not about altruism. And of course, it needs financial intentions or at least it would be naive to believe it would go without that. But if greed is the only real intention without any further philosophy it won't work. And what I try to say with that is already proven. The fact that they have to switch to full PoS (which has even a more intensive centralizing-effect on the eco-system) and to destroy half of the total supply is the admission that it wasn't well thought through. How is it possible that we here could easily predict what would happen and make calculations about it while the team behind planned it for more than a year with totally naive assumptions? I don't think they are stupid. I believe what I've said: Blinded by greed. Not thinking in scenarios to find the best way for the project, just believing in what they hope what would make them rich quick. Ultimately the "decentralization" concern comes down to the PoS vs PoW argument. NEU will be centralized for a time. Neucoin is decentralizing its currency by paying them out to consumers as rewards. It is going to take a while but in reality is not any more BS than an average PoW model. (eth has an amazing PoW model, but I digress) There is a hidden PoW model in the neucoin approach. Instead of buying an expensive graphics card or ASIC and burning electricity to solve arbitrary problems, people frequent websites or create content. Its human-based PoW. They then have the option to grow their coins by staking or using a growth account that functions just like a common CD. We don't need to talk about PoW or PoS. I'm not convinced about PoS-Systems and that's also a concern regarding ETH, because they want to switch to a PoS-model (but it's also different). The real question is: Why this huge premine and why this high inflation rate? And they could destroy the whole premine but it wouldn't rescue Neucoin, just because of the high inflation. The market can't even handle the 200 Mio. Which of the two approaches do you think is the most inclusive of average consumers?
The problem in all eco-systems is that it all has a centralizing effect. But PoS even more/faster, while it has a lot more risks at the same time. I don't believe that any PoS-project will survive in longterm. Ethereum maybe, but it's a different design, not the usual PoS. They've taken steps to address some of the major concerns raised here. Decentralization will be accelerated and the number of coins will be greatly reduced. This coin is so young. Will you not have a different opinion many years from now when the coins have been distributed and are no longer centralized? It may not start trading well until that point, but I'd rather be staking a few coins in the meantime. I see no reason to be optimistic that this project will survive the next 12 months. The reason is very simple: They've raised money in the ICO = 4,012 BTC. About 78 BTC are left. https://blockchain.info/address/3MrNuksZ1VePU3dGiSQFiouWerJUJgDkfHI don't know what they did with the money but it doesn't look as if they would spend it for the development. But if they have such a monthly burning rate, how will they move on? There are just two scenarios: 1. They've used it for Neucoin, which would mean that it's way too expensive and than they won't be able to pay the next months. 2. They've used it for different purposes - not the project. Than it's..... hmm.... And who makes good work for free? Will they pay the Developers with Neucoin? And they have dump it on the market because they need money to pay their bills? In fact there is a third scenario: 3. They still have the money, just not on that address and they will be able to pay the next months. But: Where is the development? What are they doing? Sometimes I showed the github of Factom with their daily updates. They have to pay a big team of Devs, advertising, they have to travel and so on... I don't see anything like that in Neucoin. So, under the line that's just one reason why I'm sure that this project has no chance. The other is the economical-design. And there are a lot of projects with really innovative approaches and Neucoin is like a dinosaur in comparison. |
|
|
|
|
slashdevslashnull
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 15
Merit: 0
|
|
March 16, 2016, 10:14:31 PM |
|
The real question is: Why this huge premine and why this high inflation rate?
I think to have coins to distribute to the new-to-crypto people. Yes, that means very high inflation. It is one way of getting participation from that group. Hopefully, for those of us holding neucoins, there will be more deals in the future. I don't look at what exists now as all there will every be. Jango in essence is a complete economy. neu gives users coins. users can tip performers if they like their music. performers can buy more plays on jango with those coins. users and performers can get coins out of jango to invest/stake or trade on bittrex for btc. I don't think what you say is invalid, but I don't expect them to accomplish everything at once. Very solid post all around. You make some great points. |
|
|
|
|
|
Gekko463
|
|
March 17, 2016, 03:50:06 AM
Last edit: March 17, 2016, 06:26:35 AM by Gekko463 |
|
The real question is: Why this huge premine and why this high inflation rate?
I think to have coins to distribute to the new-to-crypto people. Yes, that means very high inflation. It is one way of getting participation from that group. Hopefully, for those of us holding neucoins, there will be more deals in the future. I don't look at what exists now as all there will every be. Jango in essence is a complete economy. neu gives users coins. users can tip performers if they like their music. performers can buy more plays on jango with those coins. users and performers can get coins out of jango to invest/stake or trade on bittrex for btc. I don't think what you say is invalid, but I don't expect them to accomplish everything at once. Very solid post all around. You make some great points. "performers can buy more plays on jango with those coins". You mean "payola". Jango's entire business plan is Payola. An illegal practice. "Payola, in the music industry, is the illegal practice of payment or other inducement by record companies for the broadcast of recordings on commercial radio in which the song is presented as being part of the normal day's broadcast. Under U.S. law, 47 U.S.C. § 317, a radio station can play a specific song in exchange for money, but this must be disclosed on the air as being sponsored airtime, and that play of the song should not be counted as a "regular airplay"." Not suprising. Jango is Dan Kauffman. Neucoin, Dan Kauffman. All the money in the Seychells went to Dan Kauffman's pocket. Guys like you who defend criminal scum like Dan Kauffman deserve to lose the money you have and will continue to by being involved in this silly fraud. You keep talking about Neucoin. The joke is that Dan stole the 4000 BTC, and plebs are still talking about Neucoin as if it were something worthy of serious thought or consideration. Neucoin aspires to do NOTHING that Dogecoin didn't accomplish two years ago--without a scammy offshore pre-mine pre-sale. The stolen BTC is the scam. The Neucoin is nothing more than the shiny thing Dan used to distract brainsurgeons like James while picking his pockets clean. There were no fancy name investors. There was just a big shaggy dog story, and an anonymous bitcoin address in the Seychelles. A jingoistic marketing push and the only press coverage was bought and paid for because there is no innovation to write about. Dogecoin did it all first, and is still doing it viably. Jango is Dan. Neucoin is Dan. Anyone that gives Dan money for payola or shiny worthless internet trinkets that lose value at 100% per year deserves their loses. Dan controls everything. Nobody outside of the Daniverse is interested in Neucoin when there are perfectly suited alternatives like Dogecoin, cheaper, more widely and fairly distributed with liquid trading markets to be had at a tenth of the already depressed, yet artificially supported price of Neucoin. Dan stole the Seychelles money, dummies. Neucoin was the diversion. |
|
|
|
|
tempus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1960
Merit: 1128
|
|
March 17, 2016, 08:16:12 AM |
|
The real question is: Why this huge premine and why this high inflation rate?
I think to have coins to distribute to the new-to-crypto people. Yes, that means very high inflation. It is one way of getting participation from that group. Hopefully, for those of us holding neucoins, there will be more deals in the future. I don't look at what exists now as all there will every be. I understand the idea behind in general. The problem I see, and that's also the reason why I don't think that Neucoin is legit, is this: They've started with a total supply of 3 billion and they've sold 100 Mio to the public. That's just 3.3% of the total supply. They've made 4,012 BTC with that 100 Mio which means: 0.00004 per Neucoin which was about 0.018 Dollar at that time (end of April). That means, that they somehow believed, the total supply would be worth more than 50 Mio Dollar while just the three foundations were sitting on 2.4 billion = 43 Mio Dollar in Neucoin! The thing about this is: There are just to possibilities. 1. They really believed in the ICO-price which would mean that they believed, Neucoin would be worth more than 50 Mio Dollar 2. They did not believe that Neucoin is worth so much, but maybe "one day in the future"... which would mean, that everybody who bought into the ICO bought to a future price, while it was very unlikely that this future would ever come. To be more precise: If they really believed Neucoin would be worth 50 Mio and the three foundations should be worth > 40 Mio, that's a totally hubris. And if they did not believe that, it's kind of fraud to sell at those prices. It doesn't make any other sense. Plus: It never was just about the distribution of those Coins they hold. They also stake, and they stake that much each and every day that it's totally impossible to distribute it. I mean, since it went live the market had an inflation of more than just 100%! In not even 6 months! What the hell did they believe how it would be possible to get that much new money into the market just to hold the ICO-price? It's simply impossible. The staking of just 1 day would crash the market to nearly 0 Dollar per Neucoin. That's the reality and that was the reality for every day since launch. The whole concept is stupid, or it's fraud. I believe the truth is somewhere in the middle. A mix of greed and a totally lack of knowledge and hubris and ignorance of simplest economic laws. And if you think back to April, if you think about it that way, you would stay away from buying into the ICO. You would be totally sure that the price is way too high. And you would ask yourself if it's just naive to sell at those prices or if it's fraud. And I've said that months before the ICO. It was predictable. And that's the next problem: Those who thought about it did not buy! Only those who were unexperienced, who did not know enough about Crypto, who believed in the hype and promises around, bought into the ICO. And if a project needs the stupidity of the public to get traction... it's not worth a single satoshi. And I don't mean that disrespectful to those who bought into it. I've made some bad decisions in Crypto as well. In 2014 I bought into two stupid Scams and lost some money. I see that as education-money... you lose but you learn. And what I've learned is to focus on the facts, on how the team acts, how they communicate, if they are able to reply on tough questions in all aspects and so on. The Neucoin-Team never showed qualities besides some talent to blind some people. And what I still believe is: Everybody regrets this, also the team. I believe that nobody really made money with this because I'm sure that the ICO was mostly self-buying (nearly all of the 100 Mio Coins were in the top 100 in the early days after launch and before they came up with the official explorer).
Jango in essence is a complete economy. neu gives users coins. users can tip performers if they like their music. performers can buy more plays on jango with those coins. users and performers can get coins out of jango to invest/stake or trade on bittrex for btc. I don't think what you say is invalid, but I don't expect them to accomplish everything at once.
First: Of course, Jango can be part of an economy. For it's own it's not an economy. And the problem is: Think about what would happen if the Neucoins on Jango would leave it to Bittrex. With other words: The supply on Jango shouldn't leave Jango because otherwise it would hurt the price. If I would be a musician there and let's say everybody loves me and all the 200,000 "Users" send me some Neucoins I would crash the market. And I don't say that Jango is a bad idea. It's the same problem I've mention again and again: The supply doesn't fit in any way to reality. The price reflects that and it's still too high. Second: It's right not to expect that everything will be accomplished at once. But then again: Why start with a supply that would be worth over 50 Mio Dollar and monster-inflation and just 3.3% on the market while 97% sitting in the back, staking, and buying a project that is totally overvalued for years. It's as if you would give them a loan. You say: "Okay, I know it's not worth that much now but maybe in 2 or 3 years, so I hope you will deliver. Please take my money and make decisions I would agree with!". In fact that's what every Investor said who bought into the ICO. And if you take a look on the process since the ICO: Did they deliver? What I see is that they don't even really communicate! They don't do just the basic-work. They took the money and the biggest decisions they've made is to switch to full PoS (who is staking?) and to cut the total supply to increase the value (who wants to sell billions of Coins?). And if we think about the future: The problem stays the same. Everybody who thinks about buying this but not impulsive but doing some research and analysis will still see a monster-premine and a monster-inflation. He doesn't see much communication, more arrogance and ignorance. It's very likely that if the price should go up 30% they will sell into it, so it hasn't much chance to rise. It's also very likely that they will run out of money (maybe they are already out of money) so the risk is very high that they will abandon the project. And I believe: It's already abandoned. Not totally, but if I ask myself if there is a team constantly working on this every day... nope. I don't believe that. |
|
|
|
|
slashdevslashnull
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 15
Merit: 0
|
|
March 17, 2016, 12:34:11 PM |
|
"Payola, in the music industry, is the illegal practice of payment or other inducement by record companies for the broadcast of recordings on commercial radio in which the song is presented as being part of the normal day's broadcast. Under U.S. law, 47 U.S.C. § 317, a radio station can play a specific song in exchange for money, but this must be disclosed on the air as being sponsored airtime, and that play of the song should not be counted as a "regular airplay"."
Have you tried tipping on Jango? The second half of your quote explains why it isn't payola. The songs are not presented as being part of the normal day's broadcast. |
|
|
|
|
slashdevslashnull
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 15
Merit: 0
|
|
March 17, 2016, 12:46:51 PM |
|
First: Of course, Jango can be part of an economy. For it's own it's not an economy. And the problem is: Think about what would happen if the Neucoins on Jango would leave it to Bittrex. With other words: The supply on Jango shouldn't leave Jango because otherwise it would hurt the price. If I would be a musician there and let's say everybody loves me and all the 200,000 "Users" send me some Neucoins I would crash the market. And I don't say that Jango is a bad idea. It's the same problem I've mention again and again: The supply doesn't fit in any way to reality. The price reflects that and it's still too high.
Second: It's right not to expect that everything will be accomplished at once. But then again: Why start with a supply that would be worth over 50 Mio Dollar and monster-inflation and just 3.3% on the market while 97% sitting in the back, staking, and buying a project that is totally overvalued for years. It's as if you would give them a loan. You say: "Okay, I know it's not worth that much now but maybe in 2 or 3 years, so I hope you will deliver. Please take my money and make decisions I would agree with!". In fact that's what every Investor said who bought into the ICO. And if you take a look on the process since the ICO: Did they deliver? What I see is that they don't even really communicate! They don't do just the basic-work. They took the money and the biggest decisions they've made is to switch to full PoS (who is staking?) and to cut the total supply to increase the value (who wants to sell billions of Coins?).
You are right. If coins leave jango right now, most of them would get sold/traded. There will need to be other things to do with them. Best guess is the very high rewards on PoS mining for the early stages of the coin is meant to more than pay the early buyers and investors to cover inflation from dumping a lot of coins on the market via jango and solitaire. |
|
|
|
|
tempus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1960
Merit: 1128
|
|
March 17, 2016, 03:07:30 PM
Last edit: March 18, 2016, 09:11:26 AM by tempus |
|
First: Of course, Jango can be part of an economy. For it's own it's not an economy. And the problem is: Think about what would happen if the Neucoins on Jango would leave it to Bittrex. With other words: The supply on Jango shouldn't leave Jango because otherwise it would hurt the price. If I would be a musician there and let's say everybody loves me and all the 200,000 "Users" send me some Neucoins I would crash the market. And I don't say that Jango is a bad idea. It's the same problem I've mention again and again: The supply doesn't fit in any way to reality. The price reflects that and it's still too high.
Second: It's right not to expect that everything will be accomplished at once. But then again: Why start with a supply that would be worth over 50 Mio Dollar and monster-inflation and just 3.3% on the market while 97% sitting in the back, staking, and buying a project that is totally overvalued for years. It's as if you would give them a loan. You say: "Okay, I know it's not worth that much now but maybe in 2 or 3 years, so I hope you will deliver. Please take my money and make decisions I would agree with!". In fact that's what every Investor said who bought into the ICO. And if you take a look on the process since the ICO: Did they deliver? What I see is that they don't even really communicate! They don't do just the basic-work. They took the money and the biggest decisions they've made is to switch to full PoS (who is staking?) and to cut the total supply to increase the value (who wants to sell billions of Coins?).
You are right. If coins leave jango right now, most of them would get sold/traded. There will need to be other things to do with them. Best guess is the very high rewards on PoS mining for the early stages of the coin is meant to more than pay the early buyers and investors to cover inflation from dumping a lot of coins on the market via jango and solitaire. The strategy was this in my opinion: They wanted the price (near) to be stable. They believed/thought/hoped, that there would be increasing demand on the exchanges and they would meet that demand, sell into it but with price-stability in mind. Let's say if the price goes above the ICO they would sell a little and it would go back to ICO-price and so forth. That's not very interesting for Investors but they say: "Keep your coins off from the exchange, stake it, and you make 100% per year." So, the high reward has three reasons: 1. Kind of compensation that there wouldn't be much profit because of the price. 2. Incentive not to hold it on the exchange, to lower the risk that Investors would bring pressure on the price 3. They, as a "central-bank", could sell if there is demand. If you think about it as if it would be successful: There is a constant growing user-base, constant demand on exchanges and they just would have to meet that demand at 0.00005 for example. If there is more buy-pressure they sell more. If there isn't much they don't sell. In best case that would be pretty constant money over years. And they wouldn't even have to touch the billions they hold. They just would need the staking-reward. Let's say 5 Mio Neucoin everyday: At 0.00004 that would be 200 BTC! Every day! And they stake more every day! And if you think about a project like Ethereum, with it's 30k BTC - Volume per 24 hours: It could be (theoretically) possible. But: What would that be? A money-machine for the team, right? Of course, they would say: It's all for the project and they give a lot away for free, for promotion and sponsor jango-tipping etc., but they would make a lot of money. I mean, if you calculate it just with 500k per day it's still 20 BTC per day and 600 BTC per month = $250k at the current BTC-price. And again: They stake millions every day. If I remember it right it was about 7 Mio in the first time after launch. That's the reason why I call it a greed-project, because it wouldn't make any sense to have such a premine with such a staking-reward if they have no plan to distribute it. And besides the nice talking about paying Devs and for PR with Neucoin and so on, distribution happens on exchanges. With other words: In case of success they already made sure that they would become more than just rich out of it. And to cover that up, they call the foundations "non-profit-foundations" and so on. But again: They wouldn't have to touch the billions, just the staking reward would be enough. Just their private holdings would be enough. And what would it need to become successful? A hype. That's it. People have doubts about the premine, their intentions, the project in general? They show their faces and some "big names". They do all to impress the public, to seem professional, legit, big, skilled in what they do and so on. They pay for articles, they focus on the non-educated (in Crypto). They said "You missed Bitcoin in the early days? Now we are here! We will replicate that and you can be an early adopter!". That all makes some sense on first sight - if you trust them. And some bought into it not because they believed in it themselves, but they believed it would have potential to hype. So it could have been a good buy - to sell in short term right after the launch because it was obvious that they would make some noise, get some attention. But facts are facts and they've planned a best-case scenario which is naive and ignores all what we know about collective psychology and dynamics - regarding communication (this thread is one example) and the markets. They were not able to think about the complexity regarding the eco-system in combination with collective dynamics. They were never able to answer the real tough questions, like "why such a high marketcap right from the start? Where is room to grow with that?" Most likely they would have said something like "it's about the future, the premine is just potential to pay the future" and so on, but again: It's as if an Investor would give them a loan if he buys to that prices. And that's not smart. And: The biggest problem they had was that the price went down right after launch. Because if the price goes down nearly nobody will buy it. Everybody has in mind that they have to distribute, that it could be possible that they would sell into the buy-walls if there are buy-walls. So there are no buywalls. Just btw: Regarding their claim that there would be 8000 new users every day. I already said that I don't believe that because it's not visible on Bittrex, it's not visible on the official forum, it's not visible on google-trends-search, it's not visible here. Most revealing are maybe Twitter and Facebook. I mean, it would be easy just to click on follow or "like", right? But since the launch (end of september) it's just a plus of about 200 followers on Twitter. That's not even 2 new follower per day. If you look at Facebook: It should be easy to click on the like-button and with 8000 new users per day, which would be 240k per month I would expect some thousand likes per week. But they have only 1,505 likes since day one on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/neucoinTwo scenarios: 1. The number is simply a lie. There are not 8000 new users per day and most likely not even 100 new users per day. 2. There are new users because there are accounts with NEU-tips, but they don't care. 99,9999% are not interested. Both would say the same. |
|
|
|
|
darteous
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 58
Merit: 0
|
|
March 17, 2016, 10:49:23 PM |
|
The numbers are obviously exaggerated to some degree for the purpose of marketing. But they do say a lot. How many times did you hear about bitcoin before you actually decided to really read into it? Same with altcoins? Neucoin is reaching a much larger market than any other altcoin. As long the price doesn't drop like a rock they're going to slowly gain more and more seriously interested users. Neucoin reaches outside the crypto market like no other coin has been able to do besides bitcoin. We'll see over this year how they do with retention, but if they keep it up Neucoin will become one of few successful cryptos
|
|
|
|
|
tempus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1960
Merit: 1128
|
|
March 18, 2016, 01:25:36 AM |
|
The numbers are obviously exaggerated to some degree for the purpose of marketing. But they do say a lot.
So, unreal numbers say a lot? How is that possible?
How many times did you hear about bitcoin before you actually decided to really read into it? Same with altcoins? Neucoin is reaching a much larger market than any other altcoin. As long the price doesn't drop like a rock they're going to slowly gain more and more seriously interested users. Neucoin reaches outside the crypto market like no other coin has been able to do besides bitcoin. We'll see over this year how they do with retention, but if they keep it up Neucoin will become one of few successful cryptos
I doubt that, because there are no solutions for initial problems like the economical-design. Coin-destruction can be hardly called an elegant solution. And there is no real sign that Neucoin really grows. I mean, you say the numbers are exaggerated for the purpose of marketing and there is no way to find out the real numbers. But it's easy to figure out if there is user-growth or not in general. If the number of followers doesn't increase, if the number of FB-likes stays the same and at a low level, if the google-searches even decrease... where should the user-growth be? Take a look here, an interesting comparison:  Factom and Neucoin started (nearly) at the same time. Both had an ICO and while Neucoin claim they would have captured > 4000 BTC, Factom captured just 2.278 BTC. The first time Neucoin had more searches than Factom and Factom doesn't have 8000 new users per day. But obviously the google-trend shows an explosion, while Neucoin decreases. And that shouldn't be possible if there is any real user-growth. It's that simple. And if you compare it with other projects, projects without money-backing and "big names"... you'll see: A lot of those projects have more user-interaction, more followers, more community-communication, higher volume, and so on. And I know that it's seen as FUD if I write those things, but besides the obvious problems with the tech and the design and the lack of communication, it's quiet hard to believe anything what comes from the team, if independent/objective informations are that much in conflict with team-infos. All together adds up to the biggest problem: Credibility. |
|
|
|
|
klarki
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3276
Merit: 3708
Top Crypto Casino
|
|
March 19, 2016, 08:58:45 PM |
|
Passed in studies in beta testing, to attract partners. But, unfortunately, I lost access to their coin support said that the restore is not possible.
What news have a coin?
|
|
|
|
|
wahyu5
|
|
March 19, 2016, 09:31:14 PM |
|
Neucoin have projects that were very nice , innovation and education.
But this time I did not understand the system of Jango , I can not tipping to the artist because my balance is not increased after listening to the radio
|
|
|
|
|
Milfis
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
March 23, 2016, 06:02:42 AM |
|
I really wish these forums posts had the a like button! Although as you can see I am not an avid forum poster!
I have been in neu since the start and whilst I agree the marketing has been pretty lousy and they have been very slow to get things off the ground like the referral program for example, I do see some success coming for this coin. The core fundamentals and backing are all good. its just a shame the great hype they paraded in front of us all was not helpful given they clearly were not ready to launch when they did. the education quiz, games etc etc in my opinion should have been ready for the launch so that the already engaged that bought into the neu became its greatest advocates.
I think they made the right decision recently to change the investment plans as in the real world it was way over the top, so leveling down makes it a more realistic investment. Neucoin is growing slowly, very slowly but that doesn't make it a scam either. Those devs just have vc's to answer too and clearly they have made some mistakes but I am sticking with it and hope to be offering it as a payment solution soon.
I think if you read to much in the forums it can turn your mind into seeing bad in everything, i realise we have a far bit of scamming to contend with in altworld and that people have had there fingers burnt but complaining about not getting 1600% interest payment in 5 years is just so "yawn yawn" If you didnt get in earlier enough then its just tough luck. if a business plan and roadmaps have to be amended slightly to keep things on course then so be it. Anyone who has run a business or with an ounce of common sense should know that things change in real life, nothing stays the same. you either have to evolve with the world or potential lose everything you have built to date. you apply the same to many things in life and that includes your investments just deal with it ffs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RJF19
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 420
Merit: 250
AKA RJF - Since '14 - On line since '84
|
|
March 27, 2016, 12:21:22 PM
Last edit: March 27, 2016, 04:56:41 PM by RJF19 |
|
Good old hard word, customer relations and ingenuity. Oh, and honesty, lets not forget that... |
Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try just one more time. Thomas A. Edison
|
|
|
|
rizzlarolla
|
|
March 31, 2016, 03:39:26 PM
Last edit: March 31, 2016, 08:06:33 PM by rizzlarolla |
|
188 BTC, or less than 5% of the original 4000 some odd BTC raised in the ICO remain in the "MrNukes" wallet: https://blockchain.info/address/3MrNuksZ1VePU3dGiSQFiouWerJUJgDkfHScam almost complete. Stop looking at the NoKoins. The BTC in the Seychelles is always where the scam was. 95% of startup capital gone in 4 months. Quite a "burn rate". Or just a nice windfall for the scammers who perpetrated this. BTC WALLET Total recieved => 4012 btc $1,644,920 New transaction out => 20 btc. $8,200 Total spent => 4002 btc $1,636,720 --------------- --------------- New balance => 10 btc. $4,100 --------------- -------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- BITTREX Buy order at 1 satoshi => 7 btc 680,000,000 neu Buy order at 2 satoshi => 4 btc 200,000,000 neu Other buy orders => 4 btc 650,000 neu * ----------- -------------------- Total buy orders => 15 btc 880,650,000 neu ------------------------------------------------------------------ * Darteous alone has more than 650,000 neu? ----------------------------------------------------------------- Edit, (4hours) price plunged 10%. oop's, wasn't me.  (back to pre burn price. that went well. keep burning) |
|
|
|
|
|
Gekko463
|
|
April 01, 2016, 09:57:55 AM |
|
$4000. Project broke. Scam over. Money laundered. Nothing more to see here. That was quick.
|
|
|
|
|
RealMalatesta
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2338
Merit: 1124
|
|
April 01, 2016, 11:36:39 AM |
|
Frankly: I'm wondering if anybody already has filed a lawsuit. If not, the scam would even be bigger, for it could mean that the scammers behind Neucoin also staged a big part of the sale...
|
|
|
|
|
tempus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1960
Merit: 1128
|
|
April 09, 2016, 04:24:00 AM
Last edit: April 09, 2016, 04:41:26 AM by tempus |
|
This thread really shows that the Neu-team gives a shit about their Investors. Opened on Feb 10: ******************** Two Factor Authentification (2FA) removed from MyNeuCoin
About a month ago, the Two Factor Authentification (2FA) feature was removed from MyNeuCoin.
We did however keep the feature going for those users who had already set it up before the change.
(...)******************** First reaction: "That ist a HUGE step backwards, imho." ******************** Second reaction (Heunland) on Feb 12: "To simplify, as of today 2FA was removed also from those accounts. This means that there is no longer any 2FA functionality on MyNeuCoin and all users can log in using just an email address and a password."
For the benefit of other users who had the 2FA activated before and may now be locked out of their accounts like me, I can confirm that the above statement is not entirely true. At least in my case, after completing login with username and password, I am still being shown the screen prompting for the 2FA code. I have been in contact with tech support about this and the issue has not been resolved as of today.
I agree with @joen above, removing the 2FA is a huge step backward. Reinstating it would immediately solve my problem but I suppose that is not considered a viable option here.******************** Third reaction (again Heunland) today: @acorn I hate to keep harping on this but two months since my last comment and several emails to support without answer, and I am still unable to access myneucoin. No help whatsoever from tech support team. All they can tell me is that supposedly they are working on it and noone else has this problem, which of course does not help me recuperate access to my account. I am being asked to enter an OTP token which I cannot provide. I suppose I should just assume I have lost the money I invested in this project.http://forum.neucoin.org/t/two-factor-authentification-2fa-removed-from-myneucoin/2470/3My guess is: There is near to or even zero development. They have the ICO-money, the price is down, the project has failed. They won't ever admit that and they will keep on with some posts about the imaginary user-growth (btw., quote Darteous: "The numbers are obviously exaggerated to some degree for the purpose of marketing.") but they do nothing else. They don't even communicate or react on questions. Even that's too much work! I really feel sorry for those who believed in this but maybe it's time to open the eyes. And I can exactly say what I would do if I would have invested: I would try to form a group out of ppl who are as pissed as I would be and start to make pressure, asking the hard questions. And sure, I know out of own experience that there is always the fear to damage the price with critics, but who still believes that it was FUD that damaged this project should ask: Why don't they have answers, why didn't they react on all the concerns, why didn't they defend their project, why does it seem as if they do !nothing!? Compare it to other projects with legit and hard working and communicative Teams - very often without any ICO-money. I would whip them into shape... |
|
|
|
|
|
