Quote from: burner2014 on October 21, 2014, 10:27:47 AM

Quote from: 00Smurf on October 21, 2014, 09:50:42 AM

Quote from: Anonymous on October 21, 2014, 08:14:21 AM

Quote from: TheGer on October 21, 2014, 07:54:24 AM

I am a supporter of this initiative, but here's the elephant in the room.

I'm sure that I speak for most people when I say that for 2500 BTC worth of shares we would all like to see something running. A working prototype or some sort of demonstrable technology showcasing what we can expect of a final product.

If I was buying shares in a flying car, I would like to at least see something that could float in the air as a proof of concept.

You must be new here. See: Ethereum. They literally have in their terms that the software itself may never even come to fruition, and that's part of the risk of participating in their IPO. And yet it was wildly successful.

I agree completely, but this is crypto, man. I highly doubt they'll make the 2500 from crowdfunding. What is more likely, is they have a couple people with significant bankrolls who can afford to buy out a significant share of the IPO. It's basically another way to hide a premine, they pay themselves some BTC for a significant portion of their own shares. Zero risk for them, big hype about zomg super successful IPO, etc.

The logic behind this multi-coin association is completely flawed without a technological proof-of-concept, as you said - until then it's just another token used to benefit the insiders while diminishing value of its constituent partners (the other coins). They talk a good talk, and they *will* have a successful IPO sale - the question is can you believe any of it, and the answer, as we've seen time and again in crypto - is no. Investing in the IPO is not an investment in this product, rather it's a bet that the insiders of this conglomerate have the competency and intent to use their large bankrolls and obfuscated token marketshare to pump the price up to the x4 goal they claim will be inherently built into the design of this network. If they're savvy whales, that'd be pretty easy to do. Then they'll use that to sucker a new phase of buyers expecting the next rise, and so begins the tears for the not-so-savvy participants.

So, my point is - we won't get proof-of-concept or a demo. They don't need to give it. If they're not idiots they've *definitely* got the resources between these coin teams to self-buy and pump their own fresh IPO. Just like every other one, it's gonna be a big cash in for the insiders, a solid profit for intelligent traders, and a long line of bagholders wondering when the next update is.

Well they may show something, flashy. But now you see why Shadow chose not to be a part of this project, and why the shadow team voted the way it did.

Why do you even need tokens or ipo. If you want a real decentralized exchange you use something like bit/black halo that allows direct cross-chain trading without using a token that has to be bought first.

Common Smurf... now you really talk bad about Blocknet after that big discussion in Shadows IRC? That was not that easy that answer to not participate for ShadowCash and it was really not that BLACK and White. There are Pro's and Con's of Blocknet and ShadowCash can succeed without it but it could had also be beneficial for ShadowCash.

IPO is not that bad deal because without money you don't have ressources for IT and Marketing / PR.

Disclaimer: I am invested in Shadowcash for quite a time now..

I'm not talking bad, i was merely commenting on others points that they brought up while injecting my own point of view that i don't think tokens are needed in order to do currency conversions, which both supernet and blocknet use. Bit/Black halo has already shown that crosschain trading can be done without the need for a token. This is merely my opinion as a person.

If you deem my comments as "talking bad" about blocknet then im sorry your taking it that way. Besides no one ever said the answer was easy to not participate, but in the end the whole team voted unanimously not to be a part of it.

Do i as a person happen to agree with this statement that cryptolemaik posted:

"What is more likely, is they have a couple people with significant bankrolls who can afford to buy out a significant share of the IPO. It's basically another way to hide a premine, they pay themselves some BTC for a significant portion of their own shares. Zero risk for them, big hype about zomg super successful IPO, etc."

I believe his statement has some merit, and it will remain to be seen what the actual intentions are. The proof will be on release, until then all we can do is speculate and form opinions based upon what has happened in the past etc.