i dont know if all security issues will be solved, but the most important ones will be in a good way to be solved, which is what matters...

I think the market has to mature, we will never see another 2017. Maybe the volumes of money will be higher in the future but investors will be of higher quality, more professionalized. For this to happen it will take time.

Some solutions and legal frameworks will allow that, but the real-world market goes slower then cryptos, give it time and wait, as you say.

When are we going to see a real example of this technology?

I think tokenization policies have to be super clear from the beginning and written up in the chain right away. If not, it has to be legally binding governance in a decent country!

I do not believe in the burning process. I believe in the tokens being considered as shares, we don't see companies burning shares when they do IPOs, do we?

MIOTA has a market cap under 2Busd, and will most probably go lower sooner than later.

I feel pretty free with USD or EUR on my account and a mastercard to pay litterally anywhere for a small fee...

It is pretty hard to calculate the same for euros too. Countries mostly calculate what happens within their borders (GDP) but have a hard time calculating it globally. Only Us has a better idea since all US transactions go through US corresponding banks, but it is not the case for pounds or euros.

Please read my post (two over this one). It is not the case, there is confusion between Monetary Mass (or M0) and hard cash. M0 of the Pound Sterling is still much higher.

I may be wrong, but these guys just found a legal way and sound way of having real shares on blockchain?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4971382.0

If that's the case, it is actually great!


The problem of tokens was the lack of enforceablility of your tokens/rights in case it has shit hits the fan, but if they do it as they say, it will mean real accountability and share-holder rights, which means massive changes!! All community can win from that!

Makes me dream..

This is ridiculous and absolutely fake!

They play on the concept of "circulation" they count hard cash circulation which would be 0 for bitcoin.

Therefor they count hard cash for the usual currencies and Monetary Mass for bitcoin. The Monetary mass of many other currencies is MUCH bigger than all cryptos together, ie UK has close to 500Billion Pounds.. three times all bitcoins...

Bitcoin and other cryptos will only survive if they are used. Great projects are on the go, on in particular touched me, since it makes all the difference in the use of real-life crypto! They just released some good news too..

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4971382.0

Other news such as Lloyd's starting to insure exchanges makes the whole thing much more viable in terms of a financial point of view!

Market has to stay between 30 usd to 90 usd (30 usd is the cost of taking it and shipping it at the lowest ranges, 90 USD is the price a which most Canadian, shitty Siberian and off-shore platforms start producing again). Any time you go near to one of these values it is a fair bet you ll make some money.

You can be an accredited investor without money, just by showing (or stating) you have some qualified studies or financial experience in the domain. So... yeah, not about wealth only.

I did read your white paper, that's why I believe you are completely incompetent or are a scam.
Either nobody ever traded physical commodities in your team or you lie only to make your project look nice!

I ll simply analyze your "one pager" which is a 5 page long document starting by:
Page 1: An unexplained (even within your whitepaper) 30% cost reduction on an undisclosed guessed cost, followed by a super-broad an clearly unrealistic scope.
Page 2: A paid press released on Yahoo. (Only coverage you show is paid coverage, that s bad..).
Page 3: That's the great start:
- All your "present" part is set as a massively manipulative chunk of "fake news".
From the the fact that information is available everywhere for coffee growers as well as for roasters, mostly for free (else super professional services such as http://www.agrochart.com/en/ or https://www.agflow.com/) it exists for all globally exchanged commodities (chick peas and avocado oil included, or petrochemicals).

Also you forget to say that a company which buys a Panamax-sized ship of Corn and makes it travel accross the ocean to China will probably have profits close to 1usd per Ton as an average... which makes your price-curve not only wrong but also giving false impressions.
MIFIDII does not involve trading companies only companies who deal directly with finance on someone's else account or risk. Trading companies trade with their equity at risl.
Last but not least the barrier to trade is extremely low since there is virtually no need to have cash to trade.
Other things are also false, but not worth to argument again your "feeling" on what is wrong.

your "future":

The link between using blockchain and "automatically executed" trading is never explained, anywhere (which makes sense since it hardly makes sense).
"No single point of failure"? What? I mean, it is a funny joke to believe that but why do you even try to say such a thing? You will eliminate the counterparty risks, legal risks, financial risks, executions risks of trading by implementing a blockchain? I am not sure you understand that a blockchain is not a magic wand...
"Connects all market participants", That's interesting because all major companies agreed on one thing for now: "We will not accept and proprietary solution..." such as tiqpit!

your "benefits":
Flattened price curve: please prove the point, the pricing being rational on the commodities, a useless intermediary would already disappear on its own. While I agree there is some domains to be streamlined, i don't see in your presentation or your whitepaper how or which issue you would actually optimize.
Instant real-time settlements: In derivatives? It already exists. In physical trades? where the documents are checked (which you will have to do no matter how) it already exists (LC discounting at negotiating bank). Instant Checking oracle for documents? Not feasable at the moment and there is about 30 other projects on that, some with the ICC backing. So, what are you bringing here?
30% or less administration costs per contract? Perfect not explained, anywhere.
Easy on-boarding? Already exists for derivatives, external and competent services exist for physical trading companies.
Lower entry-barrier? It costs 0 to open an account to trade derivatives... and 0 to sign a contract in physical trading.
Niche products? ah... how will you make a difference again?
Utmost Privacy and security? Please try to quantify the actual risk you would cut, then the one you would add... then please show it to make people laugh.

tiqpit expects to grab 5 to 10% of the forecasted amount of business generated over blockchain by 2022.. no comments.
Total revenue in 2022: 4.5Million Eur...
So you plan to change the commodities world (good luck) and then take 10% of the blockchain market (good luck) and then make 4,5Meur revenue...

Your financials make no sense for anything with a brain, not any line:

line1 "unexplained revenue diminution 2020"
line2 "Cost of goods sold" I though you were providing service not selling goods... bu who knows anymore?
line3 Gross margin of 3,830eur?
line4 That's when I thought you may actually have been calculating on in Millions of euros but then... operating expenses of 3Billion Eur would be too funny to read.
line5 A randomly generated number


This WP and presentations are jokes... And I do not see why would somebody wanna do such an ICO with no substance other than by naivety or worse...

What a bullshit ICO, i am impressed some people believe any of it..

Actually, it is hard to guess if the people behind are completely incompetent or just intend to scam..

I do not understand the logic to use the value on a wallet instead of Processing power. The PoW will then be pretty much void of sense, in my opinion and many hacking methods can arise from that..

@pearlsome

Hi, thanks for answering.

Actually, I do not see your point. It might be because I didn't explain me well:

The goal of a Dutch action is not to "borrow" or even less to give back Eth, but simply to determine the valuation of the token depending on the total coin market cap at the moment of closing it. Said in other words and with an example

ICO Bananas decides to emit the bananico:

Intead if saying Bananico is worth 0.001 ETH and it will be 1Million bananicos, they say:

- We will take our total amount of Bananicos, ie 1Million. You invest normally and then at the end of the ICO we take the full supply of bananicos and divide it Pro-Rata, so if the total invested was 200eth, you will receive 1/200*1M bananicos per ETH invested. If it was a killing and they raised 2000 eth, you will receive 1/2000*1M bananicos per ETH invested. The "equity" value will be the same!

Thanks for the answers.

I understand the technicality is a problem for some users, but if i don't ask here where can i ask?

@Angelia46 Thanks, ultimately the pro-rata of the project you own is the same, and the total investment is the same too. It is a question of predictability. Anyway, thanks)

@Gab20 Yes and no) I am not launching an ICO but advising (mostly hard financials) for different topics two different ICOs. This being said the topic has arisen in independently in both projects and made me think: what do people actually like? Since, following Ricardo's theory, all are finally the same for the coin creators, the choice has to liaise in the preference of the investors. Why?

Nobody has any comment? I would be happy to know what people think!

Thanks, though more than the earning, I would like some depth.