Crypto Kingmakers: Evaluating Exchange Listings
Cryptocurrency exchanges have long been considered potential ‘kingmakers’ for up and coming ICO projects both pre and post launch of crowd-funding rounds owing to reputation, trading volume and community value, as well as prior experience of shrewd coin selection.
Cryptocurrency exchanges are (at a base level) responsible for fostering liquidity in the market whilst providing competitive choices for investment consumers in the market: both with regards to the exchanges themselves as well as the diversity of the coins they offer for trade.
When a new token is announced for listing on popular platforms such as Coinbase or Binance for example: trends show an increase on interest as represented by value and investment potential. Whether this offsets the prohibitively high cost of entry incurred by such service providers however is yet to be proven.
Separating the Kings from Pretenders
2018 has not been a fortuitous year for many start-ups and underdogs.
Whilst data shows an overall increase in investment volume for new ventures, it also shows a significant failure ratio within these same figures. In fact, data published by tracking agency ‘ICORating’ suggests that a majority (55%) of these initial coin offerings have failed within just the second quarter of this current year.
Potential reasons for this include a ‘bubble’ effect resulting from the artificial inflation of token prices which in actuality hold little to no real value, inability to acquire funding or meet expectations, and the difficulty of gaining attention and penetrating a highly competitive space.
Considering the reported failure rate of ICOs at present, it would be reasonable to exercise caution when considering investment in any of the influx of new tokens on the market (no doubt exacerbated by recent decisions made by Coinbase).
A Utilitarian Perspective
This writer reccommends that you apply critical thinking, solicit the advice of experts and knowledgeable friends, do your own research and cross-reference it with those of pundits and your peers, and do not let anybody encourage you to make any premature decisions. This is all simple advice easily taken for granted, but timeless nonetheless.
We host our own series ICO Analysis / review articles at Hacked.com: articles that break down each project into its fundamentals: such as the strength of the team, technical theory and existing products, and other factors. All of these fields can be incorporated into your own research and analyses. Additionally, I myself frequently publish interviews with a wide range of leaders and experts.
If a coin has no real actionable purpose, inexperienced leadership, technical fallacies, poor communication, or any combination of the above plus more – then there is a good chance that said coin holds no real value, beyond they professed by its proponents.
Looking at Trends
We can’t predict the future, however there are some observable indicators and trends which could point towards the next coins to be chosen by top platforms.
After the PR nightmare surrounding Tether of late, there has been something of a rush of new contenders attempting to become the next stable-coin (a fixed-value token used for off-setting bear markets, or to be used as an intermediary. One of the most talked about of these is the Winklevoss twins’ ‘Gemini Token’.
Adjacent to the ‘Gemini Token’ is the unique investment orientated token from BitMart exchange entitled the ‘BMX Token’. Like a stable coin it can be used as an intermediary for exchanges with other forms of cryptocurrency, however it has the added benefits of affording token-holders discount on all on-platform transactions in addition to being able to stake these coins towards potential new coin listings in the future.
I have also frequently borderline evangelised Terra Virtua on this site and beyond.
As a disclaimer I have no holdings or stake in any of the above companies or tokens. Additionally, I possess a small and transient amount of Bitcoin.
Featured image courtesy of Shutterstock.