I consider every ICO to be a scam and that this sort of thing will become par for the course, with basically every speculator in the space losing money - except those who manage to trick main street investors to cash them out.
However, this is weird: “Within hours they refunded me ethereum with a dollar amount equal to what I had contributed in early September, but since the coin has more than tripled in value since then, they kept the rest of my contribution, essentially stealing quite a lot of money from me.”
Yeah, that's bullshit. They owe you your money back, they don't owe you the gains that you would have gotten if you had speculated in Ethereum instead.
If you went to a Seed fund and tried to pitch them your idea (whitepaper) with no working prototype 99 out of 100 times you wouldn't get any funding. After you have your MVP then they will start asking you for traction. Again 98 out of 100 times not getting any funding.
Here you can raise a tremendous amount of capital, given that the majority of seed rounds are $500k-$3MM, and with an ICO entities are raising tens of millions of dollars to build something that again has no actual working mvp to show usage.
Doesn't really seem like a sound investment ;)
Tokens have already been in use for a long time with chat sites, I suppose if one of them decided to re-create their tokens on the blockchain and offer an ICO they could make more money during this period than actually operating their service.
At least that would have some basis in reality in that there is an existing site that is generating revenue, profit, and visitors.
Is this even remotely surprising to anybody?
All these ICOs are pump and dump schemes at best. This guy just seems to have ditched the formalities and simply stolen the money.
The real tragedy here is that an instant, anonymous, feeless, global cryptocurrency would form the absolute ideal medium of exchange between online sex workers and their patrons. Sites such as ManyVids, et al. probably see on order of $100K per week in transactions. Although the cryptocurrency community may balk at the association. The benefits of decentralization in this particular milleu are self-evident. Its possible it may even become the driver of significant transaction volume growth!
This is why we are not launching our ICO until after we have a working service. We are raising some money in a pre-ICO (Series A) but given the scams, we felt it was best to deliver before going public.
Of course, we are not a typical ICO. We are selling an unregulated security: equity in our company and we will pay dividends. We are only going this route because we are an extrajurisdictional company and traditional fundraising is incredibly difficult for such a setup.
Can we put the FMtokens cryptocurrency name in the title? This may scare people who invested in other adult entertainment coins such as SpankChain (https://spankchain.com/)
The number of ICOs I see being advertised all around the internet, all with the familiar marketing gimmicks ("coin for marijuana! celebrity founder!") makes me doubt pretty much every ICO.
I'm yet to see a single real-world use case for crypto. Pretty much everything is hinged on the "promise" of crypto.
BTC itself seems to have zero momentum in actually implementing it for payments. All the stories I see about it are about its price as an asset.
When I saw the headline, I thought it was satire.
It happens at a disturbing rate these days. Is it just me growing old(er), or is the world really becoming more and more unreal?
Color me shocked (not that shocked).
On its face . . . just the idea . . . how could anyone look at that one, out of all of the ICOs out there, and not think twice before sending in their money?
I'm not surprised. Two out of five of the top coins by market capitalization right now are fake crypto-currencies. Cardano literally doesn't exist at all yet and is a white paper and Ripple to be considered a crypto-currency requires a serious stretch of the imagination. Neither are mineable. Also we are approaching $2 trillion USDT floating around.
I see an analogy with prostitution: prostitutes get away with a lot of cheating, because their customers are embarrassed to report anything (except perhaps in countries where it's fully legal).
Therefore, a good rule of thumb is: the more embarrassing a service is, the more cheaters it will support.
While economics teaches us that past performance is not an indicator of future performance it concurrently teaches us that history is the only clue we have as to the future so, what follows is a fictional rewrite of a not so distant history; Maybe it's canals, not tulips...
"For each cryptocoin, a unique software protocol and accompanying network was necessary to enable its implementation, and as people saw the high incomes achieved from sales to fiat currency, mining and transaction fees, coin proposals came to be put forward by investors interested in profiting from coins, at least as much as by developers seeking to facilitate egalitarian movement of financial value and flexible independent storage of wealth.
In a further development, there was often out-and-out speculation, in which people would try to buy coins in a newly created coin simply to sell them on for an immediate profit, regardless of whether the network was ever profitable, or even built. During this period of "coin mania", huge sums were invested in coin infrastructure, and although many schemes came to nothing, the coin system rapidly expanded to nearly 4,000 coins in everyday circulation."
Inspired by the original;
For each canal, an Act of Parliament was necessary to authorise construction, and as people saw the high incomes achieved from canal tolls, canal proposals came to be put forward by investors interested in profiting from dividends, at least as much as by people whose businesses would profit from cheaper transport of raw materials and finished goods.
In a further development, there was often out-and-out speculation, in which people would try to buy shares in a newly floated company simply to sell them on for an immediate profit, regardless of whether the canal was ever profitable, or even built. During this period of "canal mania", huge sums were invested in canal building, and although many schemes came to nothing, the canal system rapidly expanded to nearly 4,000 miles (over 6,400 kilometres) in length.
The rampant scam ICOs, nonsensical coins, and other funny business surrounding the cryptocurrency scene is practically begging for regulators to barge in.
Can't there be an ethereum contract that refunds everyone their money after 12 months if they don't receive the token?
that's what risk/reward ratio means. no scams = 2%. high scam potential means 20000%. every investor (should) knows that
Nobody saw that cumming! >_<
the people who were dumb enough to give him $25 million deserved to be scammed
Wonder what he's doing with the money...