Slashdot Mirror


Telegram's Billion-Dollar ICO Has Become a Mess (amazon.com)

Jon Russell and Mike Butcher from TechCrunch report of the mess that is Telegram's billion-dollar initial coin offering (ICO): Telegram's ICO was supposed to be a record-breaker to develop a platform that brings the decentralized internet to life. Instead, it has become a mess with the tightly controlled fundraising process in disarray as early backers sell their tokens for handsome returns. The company recently canceled the public sale piece of its ICO, the Wall Street Journal reported this week, after it raised $1.7 billion from private sale investors, according to SEC filings. But the issues date back further.

Telegram's grand vision is to build the TON (Telegram Open Network), a blockchain-based platform that extends its messaging app, which counts 200 million active users, into a range of services that include payments, file storage, censorship-proof browsing and decentralized apps hosted on the platform. According to the original whitepaper, the plan was to raise $1.2 billion using both invite-only private investors and an open sale to the public. Telegram later extended the raise to $1.7 billion before it canceled the public sale altogether. That's almost certainly because it had already raised enough money to develop TON without the risk of running into the SEC's ongoing ICO probe by soliciting money from the public. The result is that the ordinary people can't buy Telegram's Gram crypto token until it is released on exchanges. There's currently no timeline for that. But, with massive demand for the messaging app and deep discounts for early backers, a secondary market for buying and selling tokens early has emerged -- with huge returns already realized by some.

12 of 34 comments (clear)

  1. Tech journos spouting nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Many tech journalists seem to fancy themselves polymaths and make statements on politics, finance, economics, sociology and other such topics that they think are sage, but which are actually rather doltish. Wired and Ars do this a lot, but so do other outlets.

    What the author is describing is not a "mess." Raising money in pre-public private sales, or even never going public with a security at all, or creating a private secondary market due to desires from earlier investors to liquidate, are all pretty normal things in the world of securities.

    1. Re: Tech journos spouting nonsense by reanjr · · Score: 1

      Broken promises that lead to bigger gains for early whale investors is the whole problem crypto was invented to address. Funny how almost every new altcoin project seems to rediscover all the problems of traditional financial industry, without providing anything not already offerered by existing tokens.

    2. Re:Tech journos spouting nonsense by SNRatio · · Score: 1

      Are you invested?

    3. Re: Tech journos spouting nonsense by orlanz · · Score: 1

      Yup, this is totally not news. Wow, journalist discovers how stuff works... since the dawn of man. This happens all the time and no one really cares. And no one should. If it's not public, then let it be. People gamble and lose money in many other more distructive ways.

      Since it is all private monies, then the public's pensions and retirement funds shouldn't have any intended exposure. So... who cares. Let people with lots of money pass it back and forth to other such people.

      And as for the initial buyers' profit taking... that is normal too and the way it should be. Early on an investment, there is a LOT of risk and that risk comes down as time goes on. So there is an expectation of higher reward for that higher risk taking. So high risk/reward people cash out after a time and move onto other similar investments. The medium risk/reward people replace them and will be replaced later on as the risk/reward changes. The flip side is that the higher the risk, the greater the failure. For this profit taking, there are probably 9 others which were total or near so losses.

  2. Missed the Telegram ICO? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    Never fear! I'm willing to part with 10K of my very own Dogecoins and I'm selling them for only $10 each! Buy now before their value goes above $100*!

    * may or may not happen within the next 1000 years.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  3. The WhatsApp People Lied, Telegram Won Big Time by dryriver · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The WhatsApp developers kept going on and on about how they hate datamining, storing user data, selling user data to advertisers and so on. "We'll never be like the services that just track their users for gathering personal data, targeting advertising" bla bla bla bla bla. Lots of people bought into that. Then Facebook offered the devs Billions, and they sold out immediately. WhatsApp is part of Zuckerborg's personal data stealing empire now. Part of 1984-book.This of course sent millions of people over to rival service Telegram. And guess what - Telegram is just as good as WhatsApp for casual communication, without being owned by Facebook. If anybody is in trouble, its WhatsApp, not Telegram. Its WhatsApp that has become completely untrustworthy as a personal communication tool, or even worse, a business communication tool, not Telegram - or at least not yet. Maybe Telegram will get bought out as well. Oh well, how hard is it to code a rival to Telegram - another alternative will just spring up, and people will move again.

    --
    Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
    1. Re:The WhatsApp People Lied, Telegram Won Big Time by dryriver · · Score: 2

      The biggest problem with all of these messaging apps - they can all pretty much send the exact same text, images, videos, documents, emojis and so forth - is that often, specific people try to pressure you into communicating with them over a specific service of their choice. For example, for years TONS of people - none of them very computer literate - have been trying to coax me into WhatsApping with them, and each time were terribly surprised when I say "I don't do WhatsApp. I don't trust them." There may be 20 better alternatives. Question is, can you talk to the people you need to talk to over them? People who use WhatsApp for example, in my experience, don't even bother responding to an invite to join another service like Telegram. They are happy in WhatsApps walled garden, and "don't understand" why you wouldn't just honor their invite to join WhatsApp as well. Of course these are also people who think "its OK to put all your private information into Facebook". The messenger app/service - centralized, decentralized - doesn't matter at all as long as it can do what it is supposed to do. Question is, what do you do when you CANNOT persuade other people to talk to you over that service, and they keep going "Why don't you just install WhatsApp, man? Everbody is on there... Why don't you join as well?".

      --
      Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
  4. Blockchain problem? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    Needs more graphene.

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  5. Why does /. link to Amazon Alexa developer pages? by tonique · · Score: 1

    Why does the link next to the heading go to "developer.amazon.com/alexa/smart-home/compatible"?

  6. Re:Not as bad as APK by fmoliveira · · Score: 1

    But an APK is just a renamed ZIP. Are you criticizing yourself?

    RAR

  7. Re:Not really a billion dollars by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

    Over a billion dollar has changed hands, the dollars are real ... only the longer term value of the tulip bulbs is imaginary, for now there are still plenty of suckers to be fleeced.

  8. Too Little, Too Late by Fieryphoenix · · Score: 1

    It doesn't matter how much money they raise, they have lost the race. Pied Piper's decentralized internet platform is already hosting partner web sites and processing compute tokens.