Why not an ICO
Once there was a wise man (or a group of people), called Satoshi Nakamoto. He/they invented a blockchain, a decentralized public ledger for all transactions on the network, as an effort to fight the recklessness of financial regulators, institutions and greedy bankers. Everything else is history.
It would be very interesting to hear his/their opinion on today’s situation with the crypto currency world as a result of his/their invention. Did he/they expect such an outcome? Would he/they do it again if he/they knew what it would lead to.
As always in the history of great and honest ideas, this one too, brought many uninvited on-board. Although welcomed by the masses, it was abused by many. The worst of them were scammers and regulators: the former stole something that should not have been stolen, and the latter tried to regulate something that should not have been regulated.
ICO (Initial Coin Offering) is one of the great things that happened as a direct consequence of Satoshi’s ingenious invention. ICO became a shortcut for many young, smart people to fund their startups and ideas. Instead of going through painful processes of fund-raising and going from door to door, begging to be listened to, leaving all the profit to the so-called angels and investors, suddenly there was a tool allowing them to voice their ideas to the crowd.
However, this brilliant tool attracted all kinds of villains, who sprung up like mushrooms after the rain. Suddenly, the internet was full of experts issuing manuals for successful ICOs. Regulators introduced procedures and started categorizing tokens and coins: crypto-exchanges started KYC (Know Your Customer) and AML (Anti-Money Laundering) procedures: lawyers, bankers, and auditors all jumped in. Topping everything off — thieves and scammers. ICO became an expensive and regulated game. Some countries brought in regulations for crypto currencies and ICOs, associations were established with many ‘how to’s’ and ‘how not to’s’ as well as plenty of regulatory advice. One crypto association’s bankers even announced on their website’s front page that they do not work with fin-tech and crypto currency companies.
According to the experts, in order to conduct a successful ICO one would need a minimum of 100K US$. Marketing, legal, public relations, customer support, ad campaign, etc.: an inexhaustible list of accounts you have to feed before you even think of starting, and this does not even include the coding and an MVP (Minimum Viable Product). So, you have an idea, you gather the team, announce an ICO launch, create a video, engage in marketing, write a white paper, produce a few mockups of a future product and you are ready to give a lot of promises. Where on earth would two talented kids, with great ideas, coding knowledge and dreams of success find $100K? Maybe all they need is a garage (as urban legend has it: all the famous high tech entrepreneurs started out in a garage).
I do not know if Satoshi started out in a garage, but I do know that he/they certainly did not spend $100K to launch bitcoin and the blockchain saga. He/they wrote a brilliant essay, called a white paper (Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System), and convinced the crypto community to follow. Then came Vitalik and the others.
If you have an idea that engulfs you, do not listen to anyone. Take your time: success does not happen overnight. Develop it in your mind, until you are certain that it is ready to be shared with the world. If it is good and worthy it will find its way to the public.
We managed to gather $100K, and we are passionate about our idea. It took a year to mature and form its shape. We did not want to give a promise in exchange for money. We decided to spend our money on an MVP.
To return to the initial question: would Satoshi do it again if he/they knew the impact of his/their work? I believe he/they would. His/their work changed the world, and he/they would definitely not go for an ICO.
SUN token Founders
suntoken.io
