Teeka Tiwari is a more blatant scam than Bitconnect itself.
Teeka Tiwari is a more blatant scam than Bitconnect itself. This guy charges thousands of dollars to hear his five coins that he says will turn $500 into Five MILLION dollars. Once you pay, he drops “knowledge” with his first coin… Chainlink. Are you fucked? Chainlink is still up over 600% from their recent “partnership” announcement with google, holding a marketcap of over HALF A BILLION DOLLARS. This coin is the most “pumpy” coin in the ecosystem right now. Everyone knows about it, and most people are smart enough not to get in at this stage. Because: What is their revenue? Close to zero. Is Google in an exclusive agreement with Chainlink? No Is Chainlinks decentralized oracle difficult technology to replicate? Definitely not. Is half a billion an absurd valuation from even an equity standpoint? Oh god, yes. Are utility tokens even worth equity?! NO!! Utility tokens give you NOTHING in the company. You hold their chuck-e-cheese token. A utility token is only as valuable as the tokenomics and the frequency of it’s use. Just because google is using it, it does not add more direct value to the token price than a mom-and-pop using it, if the frequency is the same. For the love of god, do not support Teeka. All he’s doing is trying to make money off the backs of retail at zero risk to him. If he was such a prophet, why would he not just earn his own money from the calls he so confidently knows? Why would he charge a pitiful couple thousand, when he knows that a) each $500 he puts in will earn him $5M and more importantly b) The more people he shares this info with, the more people should in theory buy the coin… this would make the price rise. Not giving away this “info” for free is a blatant tell that he doesn’t believe his own lies. Teeka is preying on the impressionable and the vulnerable, don’t let yourself become one of them.
Exactly! Very well written! What most people don’t realise is that they are investing in utility tokens. This means that the token needs to have a good UTILITY. There needs to be enough demand for it to tackle the huge supply that most coins start with (and a very big part is held by the team members who are eager to dump and become milionaires… and who can blame them?). I will give you an example of 2 projects I invested in that both are delivering but I have come to realise that one has very good tokenomics and the other one very bad tokenomics. I’ll start with the bad one: DBET: project looks good. They are delivering and have their gaming platform out and it looks awesome. But the tokens will never get any value because the tokenomics suck. The dbet tokens are used on their platform. You buy it, use it and then it returns back to the supply. So it’s a zero-sum game and even with big adoption it will never gain any value because the supply remains the same. What’s worse is that they changed their tokenomics for the worse. It was first promised that you’d be able to be the house with your tokens but they changed this for the worse. GET protocol: GET is a protocol that offers ticketing companies a platform to work on where the scalping and fraud of tickets becomes impossibe. The tickets are registered on the blockchain and the ticket is linked to your simcard. 2 ticketing companies are using it and the excpectation is that more will join. But with the current 2 the expected tickets sold exceeds 2 million for the coming year. To get to the point: for every ticket sold the ticketing companies need GET to work on the platform. This GET gets burned and is gone. So adoption will increase the demand and decrease the supply which in time will create scarcity. So all that “the foundations are good” is irrelevant when the tokenomics are not good. Both are important but people have been ignoring the tokenomics in their search for great projects.