Quote from: seriosman on December 05, 2017, 07:23:56 AM

Quote from: ionbefore on December 05, 2017, 07:22:14 AM

Quote from: angercoin on December 05, 2017, 07:20:06 AM

Quote from: seriosman on December 05, 2017, 07:15:40 AM

Quote from: Gabrola on December 05, 2017, 07:13:13 AM

I hardly found your distribution diagram of the collected funds. 30% of them go to maintain liquidity, but eventually this pool will decrease, right?

Of course, I do not see much point in reducing the pool of liquidity. This gives developers more tools to control the value of tokens, and therefore reduces the risks for all investors Tokenza.

Yes, many can say that if you reduce the liquidity pool, you can send these funds to more useful industries, but they forget that if there is a token deficiency in the market, the number of users will not grow.

But if there are few tokens on the market, their value will grow dramatically, so I think that investors will be happy with this option.

At first, of course, the value will grow, but an ordinary user who does not take part in the ICO will become much more difficult to become a participant in the platform, and this, in turn, will reduce the effectiveness of marketing.

Yes, I agree, I read several interviews of developers in which they are available to explain why the funds were distributed exactly this way, and not otherwise, so the pool of liquidity is more than justified.