4 ms·

The scam was not so much with Brave, but how the BAT token was distributed. There were 184 investors in the BAT ICO -- is this a fair distribution for what is p

The scam was not so much with Brave, but how the BAT token was distributed. There were 184 investors in the BAT ICO -- is this a fair distribution for what is proposed to be the new attention economy? The scam is in the back end of how ICO's are run. Even if the project is legit, doesn't mean the token distribution was legit. $35m in 30 seconds?? More details: https://medium.com/the-bitcoin-podcast-blog/a-look-at-the-bat-token-distribution-bb3bcb92748f https://medium.com/the-bitcoin-podcast-blog/a-look-at-the-ba... https://www.reddit.com/r/BATProject/comments/6lnrf6/screencap_of_bat_token_distribution_postico/ https://www.reddit.com/r/BATProject/comments/6lnrf6/screenca...

Method-X 9y ago
How is that any different from issuing shares privately to VCs? It seems to me the only fundamental difference is with the technology. Things like voting and vesting can be done on a blockchain, so that's not a limitation. There isn't any rule that says a blockchains token distribution has to be "fair". Granted, a more "even" initial distribution makes sense for a currency, but it you're treating crypto tokens as shares in a company, those "rules" need not apply.
- CamelCaseName 9y ago
  The difference is in how much value must be added before VCs can sell their holdings onto the public. Many ICOs give deep discounts to "partners" who may not have even spent anything, but are just used as an endorsement and social proof. Within days those partners will be dumping on others. I suppose by definition VCs look very similar to ICO "partners", but the latter's due diligence will rest entirely on finding the greater fool, whereas the VC will seek to establish whether the team can actually deliver, product fit, etc. Thats said, I'm sure there are a handful of exceptions to both VCs and ICO partners.
BrendanEich 9y ago
> 184 Diffused to over 19,000 holders now: https://etherscan.io/token/BAT#balances https://etherscan.io/token/BAT#balances

Method-X 9y ago

How is that any different from issuing shares privately to VCs? It seems to me the only fundamental difference is with the technology. Things like voting and vesting can be done on a blockchain, so that's not a limitation. There isn't any rule that says a blockchains token distribution has to be "fair". Granted, a more "even" initial distribution makes sense for a currency, but it you're treating crypto tokens as shares in a company, those "rules" need not apply.

CamelCaseName 9y ago
The difference is in how much value must be added before VCs can sell their holdings onto the public. Many ICOs give deep discounts to "partners" who may not have even spent anything, but are just used as an endorsement and social proof. Within days those partners will be dumping on others. I suppose by definition VCs look very similar to ICO "partners", but the latter's due diligence will rest entirely on finding the greater fool, whereas the VC will seek to establish whether the team can actually deliver, product fit, etc. Thats said, I'm sure there are a handful of exceptions to both VCs and ICO partners.

BrendanEich 9y ago

> 184 Diffused to over 19,000 holders now: https://etherscan.io/token/BAT#balances https://etherscan.io/token/BAT#balances