Quote from: The-C-Word on October 23, 2014, 02:32:00 PM

Quote from: TheGer on October 23, 2014, 11:29:27 AM

How does ROI enter into this if funds are gathered in staggered offerings or all at once. It doesn't. Hmm actually wait it just might. Let's examine a possibility.

500,000 shares offered initially to start development. All coins sell out as the lower risk of fraud make people feel it unlikely that smaller amount of funds will be stolen or sold without product development.

Development starts
Regular updates done
First operational product with most basic feature(s) working

Market Exchange price has increased do to investor confidence in development by 20%

Stage 2 fund raising - 1,000,000 shares sold at market value (or slightly less) of .0003

Development continues
Features added and tested successfully
Concerted ad campaign

Market Exchange price has increased 15% due to continued confidence and new investor influx.

Stage 3 fund raising - 2,000,000 shares sold at market value of .000345

Ect... until 10,000,000 are sold.

Not only does this method allow a larger investment base over time it generates more income as the price rises due to successful development. It also instills great confidence not only in initial investors but any future investors will see the road travelled so far and know their funds are going to a stable and established project. Doing it all in one shot will turn a lot of people off and will hurt investment funds as it was stated that once the ITO is over no new shares will ever be created. Trying to collect everything up front with no product will net you less funds than staggered fund raising.

You will sell less shares(likely at a lesser price as well)
You will not be able to offer shares again down the road(as per your plans)

____________

"the higher the risk the higher the possible roi or loss."

Quote from: hoertest on October 23, 2014, 10:55:12 AM

the higher the risk the higher the possible roi or loss. some are willing to take the risk some don't . i don't get the problem since nobody is forced to invest into the blocknet or anything else here. don't you guys get how investing works. check the variables and decide yes or no. whats all the bitching about. not only with blocknet. 50% of this forum are complaining about ito policies or wrong strategies like they should have any fucking say in it. just don't throw your money at it and walk. its that simple. If you think you can do it better. nobody is holding you back either.

Quote from: TheGer on October 23, 2014, 10:46:47 AM

I don't see that as any sort of compromise. They still have all the money up front and all we have is hope for a product. No contractual obligations... Nothing.

I'm sorry but I don't see any rational explanation for requiring all the money up front instead of staged investment phases. It instills faith in investors both that development will continue, and that no one is likely to run off with 2500 BTC on the community. It's not just 2500 BTC either. If something did happen and funds disappeared all or in part, then XC would likely completely collapse as a result costing XC investors of the coin itself everything. Not to mention all participating coins likely being crippled or dead as well. There is a lot more at stake than just the share funds here.

I think it is irrational that fundraising wouldn't be done in the most trustworthy and confidence building way possible, and I'm sorry but "pony up all the cash first" doesn't cut it on a scale of this value.

I and anyone can choose to invest or not, but before you argue as an apologist for their proposed fund raising plan think about the stakes not only for the raised funds but for all the coins involved and all the people who have money invested in them. Then think about the crypto community in general. There is enough at stake here that these devs can do a little extra work and wait a little extra time to rake in 10,000,000 shares worth of coins.

It boggles my mind that people wouldn't want their investment risk to be minimized in this way.

I like the idea, but any change to the ITO's structure at this stage would place the project in a precarious situation. Not only would the team need to re-inform all potential investors in a short amount of time, but the team's image would draw further criticism in terms of planning, organization, and legitimacy. It'd be one heck of a balancing act that may or may not pay off.

Umm, no. This thing has barely been announced 2 days there is nothing holding the devs back from restructuring it. A simple "after deliberating, and taking into account concerns of the community we have decided to restructure initial funding.... blah blah blah..."

Do you really think anyone is going to complain about a safer, more reasonable, and in my opinion more beneficial method of funding for both parties? Except people looking to troll no matter what ofcourse. As I suggested before perhaps a BCT poll would gather the feelings of the community on this matter.