Because there is nothing wrong with promoting the Chicken-Coin, as long as the Chicken is not the one who buys that coin and is then encouraged to promote it through Network Marketing.
During a meeting with some entrepreneurs, when they figured out that I am quite into the crypto-space, they bombarded me with questions and I discovered that while one of them is already collaborating with a supply chain traceability project, a lady had been invited by a links to a Bitcoin presentation. Network Marketing and Cryptocurrency: an association that I would gladly avoid.
The traceability project is beautiful. Moreover, I too have joined a project of this type and I will talk about it in the near future.
But when I hear about the presentation of Bitcoin, which maybe only happens on Wednesday nights, I feel the first chills go up my spine. The chills are due to the number of swindles taken by so many people and who have told me their experience, so much so that I get to experience this sensation as if I had been through it firsthand.
Bitcoin needs no introduction on Wednesday evenings, nor does it have a minimum volume of entry, nor does it need engaging presentation evenings. Careful, I am not against disclosure, but it must be aimed at promoting training and information, not tempting compensation plans and somewhat "creative" projects.
This article will be awkward, but I aim to set a milestone in the evaluation of projects.
First point: the project must be carefully evaluated.
How innovative is it really? How many others have already tried or are trying? For example, if a new cryptocurrency is proposing a new (centralized) Wallet for cryptocurrencies and tokens that allows you to pay directly from the application, this is nothing new. But nothing at all! We already have the various Crypto.com, Enjin Coin, Electrum, Ledger. If we really want to be trasgressive, Coinbase and Binance are definitely valid thanks to their integrated Wallet, much more decentralized than these "innovative emerging Wallets". Finally, if we are fond of banks and cannot do without a 100% centralized system, there is also Wirex.
I still have Firstcoin and Coinspace in my ears, two projects that we no longer hear about, which have moved really huge capital, and which aimed at the dissemination of Cryptocurrencies, the creation of a universal exchange system, and the creation of ATMs for Cryptocurrencies .
Second: What influences the price of the coin (or aspiring one)?
Is the currency listed on a public exchange? What are the volumes traded on the currency? What is the maximum supply and what is the circulating one?
I still have the situation that happened with Firstcoin in my eyes. The adherents had to buy a package of FRST, these alleged tokens, which however had to remain tied for 6 months and could not be sold. Imagine what happened: for months and months the volumes were obviously biased towards buying as tokens simply could not be sold. The price therefore continued to rise.
And when was the package unlocked for the first to enter? Massive sell & Price Drop. In practice, the price collapsed in the space of a couple of days from over $ 10 to less than $ 50 cents. Here and here, two of my previous articles warning on the subject.
How to generate the same mechanism? Convince people that by staking coins you receive periodic dividends, perhaps even daily. The shiver went to my neck. Wait while I'm going to make myself a coffee to warm up.
Well, now with the cup at hand I can continue.
Third: and where is the Blockchain?
In this case, it must be evaluated whether the Blockchain is really decentralized, public, permissionless, trustless ... in short, a few things. Starting with a rough screening, you can check how many nodes the Blockchain has, the distribution of the Hashing Power, the location of the nodes (see Tron, see Ethereum), the number of active addresses, and many other fairly technical information.
Clear that a repository on Github, before being a "good start", is a necessary start to develop conscientiously a project, but the validity of the content remains to be verified.
Moreover, a folder on Github contains programming codes that are unlikely to be verifiable by members. These potential adherents will likely be dazzled by the potential earnings that are being feared and will not have the incentive to try and take the project apart with their own hands. Do you want to go against the leader you've already talked to? Or take down the business of the snack friend who invited you to the presentation?
Fourth: where does the income for those who hold (or promote) the coins come from?
In real cryptocurrencies, you can earn from the market mainly by appreciating the coins you hold, with trading or with Staking. Staking is a method to generate votes on your Full Node (PoS) or alternatively to vote a Delegate that groups voters (dPoS). The more votes a node / delegate gets, the more it gets a block validating power. I have rarely seen Cryptocurrencies, worthy of the name, pay more than 15% per annum for staking.
What if what your Pollo-Coin is doing isn't really Staking? I'll explain…
Staking involves the release by the company proposing the cryptocurrency a Reward proportional to the amount of votes provided to the node that actually validates the block. In a block it is assumed there is information to be validated. A Pollo-Coin that has yet to launch its app on the market does not yet have P2P transactions to validate. And if its Exchange is centralized, it does not need to enter all the data in the Blockchain (see difference between Binance and Binance DEX).
So, if this Pollo-Coin were already in circulation, on the basis of what would its members be paying perhaps daily? And how come it would pay bonuses to those who recruit other people? Shouldn't the Blockchain make the transaction pseudonymous? And these bonuses, since there is no information to validate, on the basis of what would they be paid?
The question you should have started asking yourself is: is it really necessary for cryptocurrency to move through Network Marketing?
Fifth: let's go beyond staking, which I think I have questioned sufficiently.
Now suppose that staking exists, and is real, that is, with real information to be validated. Why is a bonus available for inviting other people?
Considering that even Pollo-coin to have a minimum of market appeal should be disinflationary (not necessarily deflationary) and therefore have a limited supply, how many people still need to be recruited to finish the Chicken-coin Supply?
The cases I see are two: either the Supply will not be really limited and since this system is centralized, some data on the circulating coins and on the attached Max Supply may be falsified, otherwise when the definitive threshold is reached (if it is really fixed), they will not be able to no more coins from the Supply to be used to pay commissions. While staking can still be paid, but at that point it will have to really act as transaction validators, and the reward for the staker will have to be a fee on the transaction. How many transactions and commissions will then have to be on this Chicken-coin to keep staking profitable? And how much then will this Pollo-coin have to capillarize its diffusion?
There are therefore risks: if the Coin were not used sufficiently, the transactions, and therefore the commissions, would be few and the Staking rewards just as poor. Do you really expect all Chicken-users who have joined this network to keep their money tied up to keep staking? I believe not, the Blockchain (if it ever existed) will lose nodes and will tend to centralize more, reducing transactions even more and creating a potential spiral of abandonment, sale of the token and consequent zeroing of the price.
And above all: if the Supply has all been disbursed, where will the recruitment and maintenance commissions of those captivating Compensation Plans be taken from?
Sixth thought: but the people who promote these projects, are they Chickens too, or are they serial fraudsters?
We talked about decentralization, Blockchain, free trade, Supply dynamics, but who are the people who promote these activities and what Portfolio / Carnet do they have?
I remember when I collaborated with a regular product network marketing: it kept repeating that the structure created and the consequent income generated would be heritable for 5 generations. In this case, re-entering among the first adherents in some projects miserably fallible in a few months, and creating a sufficiently large structure, the 5 generations system them at once.
Network Marketing as a way of promoting cryptocurrency is not a combination that needs to be done. At least for the way most of the businesses that claim to deal with cryptocurrencies through network marketing are understood, but which so far have only created financial holes to the detriment of investors, as I already wrote on October 31, 2018. Let's leave the cryptocurrency to the free market, and we eventually use Network Marketing for the promotion of services connected to them, but not for the promotion of the same.
And as Gianni Rodari said: "Mistakes are necessary, useful as bread and often also beautiful: for example the Pisa tower." And as I add: “In fact, they only built only one Pisa Tower”.