>scam ICO
No need to be redundant.
No need to be redundant.
In some cases people have taken the time to work out a set of incentives that allows a market that previously needed to be operated by a corporate entity to be operated without central control.
Such an incentive scheme has intrinsic value equivalent to the coordinating body it replaces. An ICO for such a scheme is not necessarily a scam.
Certainly the vast majority of ICOs are scams, but not all. The vast majority of beggars sob stories are lies, but not all are. Sometimes someone really is in a tough spot and needs a couple dollars.
too few users to even be considered, in my opinion
>Augur's user numbers dropped off sharply after launch in 2018: from 265 daily users in early July, to 37 on 8 August.
Maybe not a scam, but this does not convince me of the value of ICO-backed projects
Or anything where money is raised for a non-profit organization. Preferably as donations. More transparent this organization the better. Non-profit nature is very good in guarding against my expectation of profit by the work of an issuer.
Similarly, you can't use a regular currency (like just paying users in dollars, AllAdvantage style) because the value of a dollar is more dependent upon other markets like housing or food than on advertising. If attention is mispriced with that system, the only party who can correct that is Brave, and Brave doesn't has neither the information nor the incentive to set a correct market-clearing price.
If one of your examples is a charity fraud scheme masquerading as a crypto-currency start-up [0], I'm not sure you have a very good argument.
The scam comes from them not completing their promises and leaving with the money and no "product". The coin's value is irrelevant (as long as it isn't 0)
(Link discussing Harvard endowment investing) https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/arti...