Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The first ICO unicorns are here

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 60 posts

Re: The first ICO unicorns are here

#21

Post by adventured »

brndnmtthws wrote: post #17
roywiggins wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Internet is a great technology but the dot com bubble still burst.

Indeed, and we will probably have another bubble or two. Or perhaps an infinite number, if society lasts forever. Does that mean we should shun and shame this new technology? Doing so would seem—to me at least—to be something that's really not in the spirit of HN.

> Does that mean we should shun and shame this new technology?

You're inventing a straw-man. It's not the technology that is being primarily shunned or shamed in this thread. It wasn't the technology being shamed during the most extreme quarters of the dotcom bubble either.

It's the extreme valuations, backed with no products at all, that is being ridiculed. Properly so.

Re: The first ICO unicorns are here

#22

Post by brndnmtthws »

HuginnMuninn wrote: post #19
brndnmtthws wrote: post #9

This is a bit off topic, but bear with me: so far, nearly every comment in this thread has contained some degree cynicism toward cryptocurrency-related funding. Why does HN have such a distaste for cryptocurrencies? Why can't we just have an intelligent conversation about this new technology? Why do we have all the negativity and downvotes for any remotely positive comments related to cryptocurrencies? This is super…

I have a distaste for exploiting the vulnerable, which is most certainly what's occurring here. ICO's offer people investment opportunities to people who for numerous reasons couldn't invest in anything before. That's a wonderful thing with educated investors prepared for the risk, but what some of these companies are pulling is modern day snake oil. I'm not just talking about shady types, plenty of respectable peopl…

You're assuming that everyone investing is an idiot. I doubt that's the case. Sure, some people might make poor decisions, but I think that's the minority. Most people are doing their research, and even if they aren't, they would learn quickly that you should never invest more than you're willing to lose.

As an aside, I wouldn't touch Filecoin (due to the VC taint), but Sia looks promising.

Re: The first ICO unicorns are here

#23

Post by Ologn »

brndnmtthws wrote: post #11
aqsheehy wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How positive are we meant to be about out right scams and Ponzi schemes?

By that logic, you can say the same thing about pretty much every single silicon valley startup.

Some startups will grow very large and become very valuable and will stay around for a long time.

No cryptocoins will be around for a long time. They are all going to crash to near worthlessness, including Bitcoin and Ethereum.

Also the idea of Webvan was not a bad one, they were just too early. People put too much money in too early to a good idea.

Cryptocoins are not an idea before its time or of its time. It is inherently a worthless thing. Just like quack medicine was worthless a century ago and is worthless now.

Re: The first ICO unicorns are here

#24

Post by will_brown »

brndnmtthws wrote: post #9

This is a bit off topic, but bear with me: so far, nearly every comment in this thread has contained some degree cynicism toward cryptocurrency-related funding. Why does HN have such a distaste for cryptocurrencies? Why can't we just have an intelligent conversation about this new technology? Why do we have all the negativity and downvotes for any remotely positive comments related to cryptocurrencies? This is super…

>and just complaining about it being a "bubble" doesn't add any value to the conversation.

Yeah but that is the kind of thing they said during the housing bubble and the dotcom bubble before that, then after those bubbles all the media and experts had the same talking point...no one saw this coming

What more do you want added to the conversation? Bold predictions, that will inevitably be true? That is a little hard to do and actually detracts from the known truth, still I'll bite. As many of the experts who missed the other bubbles are pointing toward charts suggesting a market correction/crash, many are pointing to crypto as a way to protect their money, my guess is barriers to crypto ownership will continue to lower allowing early investors to cash out a little but control supply to raise the price, and then when enough of the crypto market is distributed across uneducated investors...boom the remainder of early investors and investor money pulls out and all that value created by nothing more than belief disappears and reality appears. It costs nothing to start a new blockchain with a new cryptocurrency, there is no real value in Bitcoin or even Ethereum/Ether, the idea of smart contracts as a tool to replace lawyers and courts was just marketing effort to keep the good times rolling with no basis in reality.

Re: The first ICO unicorns are here

#25

Post by brndnmtthws »

adventured wrote: post #21
brndnmtthws wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, and we will probably have another bubble or two. Or perhaps an infinite number, if society lasts forever. Does that mean we should shun and shame this new technology? Doing so would seem—to me at least—to be something that's really not in the spirit of HN.

> Does that mean we should shun and shame this new technology? You're inventing a straw-man. It's not the technology that is being primarily shunned or shamed in this thread. It wasn't the technology being shamed during the most extreme quarters of the dotcom bubble either. It's the extreme valuations, backed with no products at all, that is being ridiculed. Properly so.

Those valuations don't really mean that much. It's simply number_of_coins * price. Saying it's worth $1bn does not mean you can take all of those coins and turn them in for $1bn. If you owned a large portion of the coins and tried to liquidate them at that price, the price would quickly drop.

The ICO funding model is new technology.

Re: The first ICO unicorns are here

#26

Post by aqsheehy »

Ologn wrote: post #23
brndnmtthws wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By that logic, you can say the same thing about pretty much every single silicon valley startup.

Some startups will grow very large and become very valuable and will stay around for a long time. No cryptocoins will be around for a long time. They are all going to crash to near worthlessness, including Bitcoin and Ethereum. Also the idea of Webvan was not a bad one, they were just too early. People put too much money in too early to a good idea. Cryptocoins are not an idea before its time or of its time. It is in…

Bitcoin has value, you need it to buy drugs online.

Re: The first ICO unicorns are here

#27

Post by simonebrunozzi »

brndnmtthws wrote: post #14
Kalium wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of people find the technologies incredibly interesting and potentially extremely useful. Similarly, a lot of people find the uses to which those extremely interesting technologies are being put to be at best questionable and of marginal utility. Are blockchains cool? OH FUCK YES! Is people raising a lot of cash from suckers in a bubble-y market that threatens to rebound on all of us cool? Some might opine that…

Are you suggesting investors in other startups are not also speculators? Do you think every silicon valley startup is destined to succeed and be the next Google/Apple/FB? The tech is cool, and the new funding model is also fascinating. Never before has it been possible for everyone to participate in the early funding of startups. Sure, most will fail, but that's not different from the old model. The biggest differenc…

Big difference: when you invest in a startup, you get equity and certain rights. The founders can't screw you too easily.

With an ICO, you don't get any equity - you only get to use a service, maybe, in the future. Most ICOs are therefore only a speculation.

Re: The first ICO unicorns are here

#28

Post by hndamien »

brndnmtthws wrote: post #22
HuginnMuninn wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a distaste for exploiting the vulnerable, which is most certainly what's occurring here. ICO's offer people investment opportunities to people who for numerous reasons couldn't invest in anything before. That's a wonderful thing with educated investors prepared for the risk, but what some of these companies are pulling is modern day snake oil. I'm not just talking about shady types, plenty of respectable peopl…

You're assuming that everyone investing is an idiot. I doubt that's the case. Sure, some people might make poor decisions, but I think that's the minority. Most people are doing their research, and even if they aren't, they would learn quickly that you should never invest more than you're willing to lose. As an aside, I wouldn't touch Filecoin (due to the VC taint), but Sia looks promising.

They are also assuming everybody is losing. I'd be willing to bet that this value creation and investing accessibility has lifted more people than it has hurt.

Re: The first ICO unicorns are here

#29

Post by hndamien »

Ologn wrote: post #23
brndnmtthws wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By that logic, you can say the same thing about pretty much every single silicon valley startup.

Some startups will grow very large and become very valuable and will stay around for a long time. No cryptocoins will be around for a long time. They are all going to crash to near worthlessness, including Bitcoin and Ethereum. Also the idea of Webvan was not a bad one, they were just too early. People put too much money in too early to a good idea. Cryptocoins are not an idea before its time or of its time. It is in…

It is a bank, so I will keep buying.

Re: The first ICO unicorns are here

#30

Post by austenallred »

imron wrote: post #6
ruytlm wrote: post #2

> The OMG token sale, which raised $25 million, took place in July and initially one OMG token was worth around $0.27. Today, the value is at more than $11, giving a return of more than 40X to anyone who bought in at the ICO stage. > Another startling fact to note is that neither company has an actual product in the market right now. Although that is common with ICOs because investors buy into a product roadmap that…

A billion dollar buy-in on a product roadmap. I need to start thinking of a few product roadmaps.

It's not that simple. You also have to write a whitepaper.
Post reply on HN