5 ms·
To who? ICO schemes have been using the cover of anonymity and obfuscation of ownership flows due to sock puppet and Dutch bidding since they began on bitcointa
by tCfD 8y ago
To who? ICO schemes have been using the cover of anonymity and obfuscation of ownership flows due to sock puppet and Dutch bidding since they began on bitcointalk years ago.
There is no way to tell in this or any other ICO which uses wallet addresses whose ownership id hidden behind layers of anonymity (in other words, all of them), how much of that 'sale' was merely the same old ethereum token market makers, hedge funds or even regular oldpump-n-dump groups moving quantities of token from one pocket to the other.
It's absolutely in their interest, and within the capacity of their not inconsiderable leverage, to generate breathless speculator excitement around all of the wildly extrapolated dollar figures that come from the combined effect of the bubble and the order (or two or three) of magnitude which some of the biggesr players in this market can bring to bear on these extremely close-held assets.
- starshadowx2 8y agoSEC filings say 81 investors for the first 850m and 94 for the second. Does it matter who it's sold to though? In the context of the parent question it doesn't, it was only a question of whether it was sold at all.
- tCfD 8y agoThe SEC forms do not say anything to discharge, invalidate or answer the question of whether these funds were moved from one group of anonymous parties largely back to that same group in order to generate a bunch of transaction churn on the eth blockchain with whivh they can attach bubble-inflated dollar amounts to. How is the SEC going to know that, for example, the 80 individuals identified in one filing didn't move 850 Million worth of etherium to the 90 in the other filing, and vice versa? There is no direct association between individuals and addresses on blockchains. This is the problem with ICO evaluations constantly being tossed around and irresponsibly promoted by careless or indifferent finance and tech journalists. tossed around. It's gas, vapor, the same money being search related over and over again to convince mom and pop speculator that there's a stability of large numbers in these things. Can you make money on it? Yes, I have, and so have lots of people. That doesn't mean it's something that should be endorsed or suggested is legitimate to an unsuspecting public.
- tCfD 8y ago* ot: the HN android app could use a preview/quick-edit function :/
- starshadowx2 8y agoThis could all be right and still has no bearing on whether Telegram made $1.7b on the presale or not unless it was Telegram buying the tokens (Funny enough Pavel Durov has an estimated net worth of $1.7b).
- SI_Rob 8y agoCurious - source for the estimated figure?
- starshadowx2 8y agoForbes - http://www.forbes.ru/milliardery/357335-tektonicheskaya-platforma-forbes-priznal-pavla-durova-dollarovym-milliarderom http://www.forbes.ru/milliardery/357335-tektonicheskaya-plat...
- SI_Rob 8y agoThis the first cryptocurrency-related thread I've seen on this site in which overtly skeptical comments like the one above and a few others (including luka-birsa) are the ones getting swamped with downvotes. Is it this particular token that is special or are attitudes shifting in general?