/biz/ - Business & Finance

inventors deserve to be paid for their ideas

>>20683241
have you considered the idea that it is in fact healthier for the team to have such a large portion of the supply, because they have an extremely long term vested interest in the token, and the growth of its marketcap to solidify its ability as an alternative to traditional stablecoins

>>20683241
You're an actual retard. What's the stock market? Oh you're buying into a company in a hope they'll be profitable. Is your stock worth more than the company? No you're piss in a bucket of piss. Reinvest money you make until you can do something like they did and until then quit being a piece of shit mad at other people's success.

>>20683271
bro its the TOP allocation. they could do that with fucking 15% of the supply. They dont need BILLIONS for themselves. The Team allocation is more than the TREASURY. The only reason the there is a team allocation is to sell. The funding of the ecosystem is taken care of by the treasury and ecosystem funds - which are both below 25%.

>>20683241
>>20683263
>>20683271
>>20683326
i read it was a 4 year lock but nobody answered if the locked tokens get the rebases too.
I assume they do.

>>20683341
Who do you think has stronger hands? The team who invented the actual product, put months if not years into researching and developing the protocol with a vested interest in it quite literally changing the financial system as we know it

Or some chinese whale who buys 25% of the supply to make some extra money for chink lambos

>>20683326
>You're an actual retard. What's the stock market?
imagine if 90% of BTC were in private hands right off the bat.
>buying into a company
THIS IS BASE-MONEY. A PRIMITIVE. its not a fucking company or a platform. its literally M.O.N.E.Y and on that front they are no different than the FED who give new money to their friends at banks.

>>20683348
I actually don't think they do. You can check their Etherscan wallets and see how they haven't had any additional tokens added.

>>20683341
Who cares. Seriously why do you care? I’m making money. They’re making money. Everyone with ampl is making money.

Yes this in smells like ZEC coin. Never worked out.

>>20683369
im not saying they will sell. what i am saying is that 90% of the supply of a "base-money" and a "adapative-gold" is in the hands of private friends of the team.

Not equitable at all.

>>20683374
the rebase affects all tokens. its in the algo. it HAS to affect all the tokens

>>20683241
How many threads have you made about how much LINK the Chainlink team is in control of? Yeah that's what I thought. Get the fuck out of here with your fake concern thread.

>>20683348
Nevermind it looks like they are affected by rebase but yes they're locked for many years to come and I don't think they're calculated in circulation? Something like that.

>>20683404
It’s actually a good thing. Why? Because of adoption. When adoption comes where are institutional adopters going to get their ampl? They don’t want to market buy. They NEED otc deals. You going to give it to them? No. Am I? No. This is actually bullish and well thought out.

>>20683375
>Seriously why do you care?
KEK you serious? thats stupid ass question. if i am not supposed to care about this then what am i supposed to care about in crypto? so you want me to just a passive sheep like you?
im making money too but im not talking about. there is more here then just making money. this is supposed to equitable and fair. when it isnt

>>20683430
chainlink isnt a base-money you idiot

>>20683450
Nothing’s fair dude. It’s about about fairness. It’s about liquidity and always has been. It’s needed for adoption. For real adoption you need massive sums to give out. It’s foresight and you don’t get it. So you cry about it not being fair. Waaaah waaah.

>>20683449
they have the treasury and ecosystem funds for that. 25% is for the team and advisor which is the majority share

>>20683489
He's obviously a gigantic crybaby because people sold off RSR to buy AMPL and he got fucked in the process.

>>20683499
Good. So what’s your problem? Sounds like jealousy

>>20683489
>It’s about about fairness
its marketed as "BETTER BASE MONEY" how are you not getting this? this isnt a platform or a network. its a primitive. The whole point of AMPL is that its better than the system we have - where the money goes to the banks (which the team reference time and time again). this is exactly the same. 90% to them and their friends.

>>20683527
AMPL >>>> BASE-MONEY
BASE-MONEY >>>> 90% in private hands

you dont get it?

Tether cartel tard is concerned.

>>20683547
So where else should it be? Government hands? Stop seething.

the distribution of circulating funds is pretty damn good. ~500,000 for the top 50th holder.
with the team tokens though it's scammy. But it looks like they dumped 1.5% already

Ampleforth: Employee & Advisor Pool 18.5859%

>>20683572
>So where else should it be?
T H E P U B L I C
fucking kek, i think the low-iq meme goes both ways - AMPL holders and AMPLESS

>>20683372
>imagine if 90% of BTC were in private hands right off the bat.
I have bad news for you

>>20683241
>IT'S LITERALLY FREE MONEY BRO, QUIT YOUR CRYING!

>>20683609
Yeah I was just looking at this, that's not a big percentage at all compared with many other projects.

>>20683609
thank you anon for atleast willing to see what it is i am getting at. is this from etherscan?

>>20683609
And in fact the team dumping part of their market share actually seems really stupid on their part if they were just in it to scam.

>>20683631
so your saying...... lemme get this straight now....... 90% of ALL BTC that will ever be mined were in private hands at the start??
I know SN distributed whatever coins he had to the people he knew and held 1mill as well. but thats not 90% - maybe the 90% of what was mined then, sure. those were a small % of the total. this is 90% of the total. big difference

>>20683699
You realize you can just go look at the wallets and see what distribution the team owns right? Its definitely WAY WAY less than 90%.

>>20683609
>>20683678
so the tokens ARE NOT locked, like some anons here claim they are. the private investors tokens are vested for 4 years i think

>>20683717
>Its definitely WAY WAY less than 90%.
jesus the reading comprehension on this. 90% in non-public (private) hands. 25% to the team

>>20683762
What you have yet to explain is why that’s bad other than it’s not fair

>>20683762
I can read perfectly fine you stupid piece of shit. If AMPL dips today I'm dropping another 50k on it just because I think you're such a stupid piece of shit and you obviously hate money.

OP is just salty because other people will be richer than him. The devs and the initial investors took a bigger risk and put up more capital than you. They get a bigger reward. If you think they are just going to market dump everything you are absolutely retarded. And if they did, that would just even out the distribution anyway.

>>20683790
i mean thats really it. my issue is that its "base-money" (so not a platform or network token)... thats all. i have AMPLs. just wanted to talk this out. im in a better space now. so they have sold alot of the tokens (which is good) but it also means they are not locked either (which is fine)
>>20683797
kek seething

>>20683866
>than you.
im in AMPL anon. and i im talking about the public which is much bigger than me

>>20683870
So all this sperging because it’s not fair. Money system isn’t supposed to be fair. It’s supposed to reward those grater who are better at deploying money than those who aren’t as good at deploying money.

Take a step back and ask yourself. Are you happy with yourself with this sperg thread?

>>20683637
>>20683639
yes
>>20683271
>>20683678
assuming the project is successful, the lock benefits the team, not the holders. if it's sold now it's better for everyone else because in absolute terms, it's easier to gobble up their tokens now than when the market cap goes higher.
if the project fails, no lock and fairer distribution means everyone else is a bagholder.. the risk/reward is pretty interesting
>>20683727
it's in the article
Four-year vesting schedules with one-year cliffs.

>>20683919
>Are you happy with yourself with this sperg thread?
yes anon i am at peace with myself. unlike other anons in this thread that think talking about their coin is a personal attack on their existence

>>20683866
The irony is the earlier they dump the better it is for the project in terms of distribution and the protocol. Who the hell wants bitcoin v2 with whales dictating which way the market goes.
Now in the take-off stage is the best time to create fairer distribution.
The later they dump creates distortions even if it is the same in % terms - it's not the same in absolute terms.

>>20683924
>it's in the article
>Four-year vesting schedules with one-year cliffs.
the tokens in the team and advisory wallet were moved 29 days ago (out) - so not locked.
they went from 25%(article) to 18%(etherscan)

>>20684002
>Who the hell wants bitcoin v2 with whales dictating which way the market goes.
exactly

>>20684019
yes i'm aware they have the release graph and already said 18% earlier in the thread

I hold a very small bag of AMPL, but it’s hilarious how much concern trolling this coin gets.

>>20684049
thanks anon. appreciate the help

>>20683348
nobody ever answers any of these things, ask how to get into the pilot geyser with way higher rewards than the beehive for the fresh meat and count your replies

>>20684104
>pilot
Yeah, that's actually strange. I searched around and couldn't find any info on that.

>>20683369
this is why biz should just clone it and launch it with proof of liquidity on uniswap with a 7 day countdown timer

>>20684095

It's a caring fucking place.
Now tell me what your having for din din so the board can critique.