Quote from: panorama on October 20, 2017, 11:55:10 AM

Quote from: fahmp7 on October 20, 2017, 06:51:21 AM

Quote from: panorama on October 19, 2017, 05:09:22 PM

You're right, but wouldn't it be ~80% of 51% (or ~40%)?
I'm referencing the whitepaper from my phone, so it's not easy to double check.

No, the remaining 49% are tokens, that were not for sale. 20% went to the team (they cannot sell it for a year), and 29% was meant to be a backup for future projects, however they can sell it right away if they havent got enough money to buy a property.

Hmm...I'll have to go back and run through the numbers. Either way, it doesn't change the fact that ICO participants end up getting screwed.

I also heard that very little of the money set aside for acquisitions has been converted to fiat. They are using investor funds to speculate on the price of ETH.

While this could end up benefiting token holders, they are taking on additional risk that investors did not specifically sign up for. It should be concerning that they are making non-real estate bets, even if it ends up being profitable. I imagine anyone here is capable of making their own crypto bets however they see fit and they don't need real estate "experts" to be doing this for them.

they are doing what they said one month ago already. they exchanged 3% of their ethers are hodling others and waiting for better price to sell them.

the market price is now not representative for the value of the token, because of very tiny revenue. its better not pushing any ico coin early on any exchanges, if you are not having a big community working with and on your product/token.

therefor pushing the token on bittrex is not so wise. first the product then the trading. bittrex is doing this strategy since ever and communicating that to any team, who want to push their token on big exchanges.