i wouldn't trust any ICO doing this that has to rely on BTT forums for crowdfunding their platform.
My Consensus: A worthless ICO, may bring you a return on an exchange if you short-sell quickly, but do not hold long term. Ask yourself this single question before investing, would you use Buying.com to purchase?
Regarding this, BTT forums are just a small part of the whole campaign. It's the biggest and most active crypto forum so everything that belongs to crypto, should be here as well in my opinion.
Sure, if that was the most important piece of info in my post.
This type of project needs venture funding, not public funding. You've ultimately diminished any prospects of this platform's vision coming to fruition by using Bitcointalk, and having that association with your project. As i said before, shortsightedness and greed.
Crypto is a gimmick to acquire funding quickly, with no loss of equity and minimal risk to credit. Projects like this, seeking to enter fundamental spaces in the real-world, will always fail in the current climate and time.
Actually, I had forwarded your message to the team to get a proper answer from them, which I have.
Thank you for your insightful post. Let us try and address the points raised.
1. On venture funding - yes we are pursuing that angle and you are right, we too believe institutional funding is important for our project. BitCoinTalk is simply being the vehicle to introduce this project to the crypto community at large, and one of several avenues to increase awareness of our platform.
2. In terms of acquisition costs and business model - the team behind this business has built 33 successful e-Commerce businesses with 9 digit exits multiple times so we don't come from a place of ignorance or shortsightedness, rather experience and a long term vision and plan. Many businesses use methods to entice customers to try their service e.g. NetFlix - 1st month free, etc. So, our enticement is the same vein. We have other benefits built into the system to help customer retention beyond the acquisition phase for long term engagement.
3. In terms of grammar, we welcome your critique and if there are areas where it could be improved, kindly contact our team and we are more than happy to address it. However, do note that your very first sentence in your critique has a grammatical error, "ICOs", not "ICO's" - the latter is a possessive. So, prior to criticizing others kindly check your own grammar. Like i said, we are open to input and will refine the paper if need be.
Thank you again for your feedback.