I've noticed many ICOs have to spend a lot of money on promotions and advertising.
For example, let's say an ICO raises 10 million dollars but has to spend 9 million on promotion.
Therefore, they only really raised 1 million for the project.
Isn't this unethical?
If you're starting a company and looking for investors the traditional way via stock equity, you would never spend 9 million or even 5 million or even 2 million in order to raise 10 million from investors.
This begs the question, what ratio of promotion cost versus funds raised for ICOs is ethical?
And how do we know if an ICO is using an ethical ratio?
Do you think that they spent such money for advertising? I am not sure about that. Imagine that most of them do not have enough money for development, why then they would spend money for something that is not really necessary? If they have enough money, why they would need money, when they have enough, if you know what I mean. For example, let's say an ICO raises 10 million dollars but has to spend 9 million on promotion.
Therefore, they only really raised 1 million for the project.
Isn't this unethical?
If you're starting a company and looking for investors the traditional way via stock equity, you would never spend 9 million or even 5 million or even 2 million in order to raise 10 million from investors.
This begs the question, what ratio of promotion cost versus funds raised for ICOs is ethical?
And how do we know if an ICO is using an ethical ratio?
