Kickico - a crowdfunding revolution, or ICO for ICO (comparison with other platforms)

So, I continue my series about ICO. Today I decided to consider another project that I liked (with the simplicity and obviousness of the idea, at least) - Kickico . And this time from 4T (or K) I will single out only one thing: the concept. Why? Because many people ask the question: “how can the concept be assessed in general?”. Of course, the analysis below does not pretend to be all-encompassing, but it places the accents and gives the logic of my reasoning as a possible investor of the project in extremely general colors.

For the beginning of IMHO: ICO (ITO - Initial Token Offer) is the highest point in the development of charity, as well as crowdfunding and crowdinvesting: if you follow the whole history of this phenomenon, you can understand that its basis is reaching the level of more and more abstractions and simplifications .
')
And on the basis of this thesis - my brief analysis-comparison ...

Level zero

If we talk about the history of cryptoinvestment, then the first attempt at the primary placement of tokens is to recognize the collection of funds for MasterCoin. It was 2013. It was in those days that the tradition was laid to open the topic of a new project on Bitcointalk.

Interestingly, the final amount was as much as 5,000 bitcoins, that is, with the current rate, it is 20,000,000 dollars. However, then the prices were different.

Automation of the process of creating, distributing, selling tokens could not be called successful. And so, V. Buterin and his brainchild, Ethereum, appeared on the scene.

Level 1

Ethereum had several obvious advantages:

1. This project immediately became closely tied to the development of communities. The number of those who use and simultaneously develop the network of Ethereum increased in proportion to the popularity of the platform;
2. Ethereum immediately "sharpened" not just as another fork of Bitcoin, but as a "currency" with its own buns and features, one of which was just the automation of ICO.

There is also a minus, which greatly delays the entry threshold: the emission of tokens on Ether "requires serious programming skills, but leaves the user with problems of marketing, consulting, distribution, listing of a token." In order not to look for a long time - look at the smart contracts and everything will become clear: this is not the most complicated code, but for non-coders, and this will be enough to discourage the desire to engage in the direction further. Hiring question? Yes, but it is only a crutch.

Level 2

Alexander Ivanov - a well-known (now) Russian developer understood the problem and presented his Waves platform to the crypto community, based on the consensus of the LPoS format, which is nothing but the development of the PoS idea.

"Waves" have become an undoubted step forward. In addition, it was Waves that introduced decentralized exchanges (DEX), where currencies are traded not through the usual “layers” (usd or btc, for example), but directly to each other.

If we take the stages of transition from crypto-scafforing on a “pure” blockchain (Bitcoin) to A. Ivanov's product, we will see the following pattern:

1. With each new project , the input level decreases, that is, it becomes more massive;
2. In addition to technical improvements, other upgrades are beginning to manifest themselves, for example, Waves conducts marketing of projects launched on this platform: more precisely, a separate ICOhub division deals with this;
3. Finally , not only does the number of those who can make an ICO increase, but also to participate in it at the expense of the all-round development of platforms.

Thus, all this very much resembles the process of programming itself in retrospective deployment: first there were only those who wrote in assembler, then this language was “simplified” and there were dozens and hundreds of coders, then even more advanced languages ​​appeared, and the programmer communities began to count thousands, and nowadays - already millions. Of course, this does not mean a proportional increase in the quality of the code, but of the mass character, which, however, follows the well-known law of the transition of quantity into quality.



It was for this model: “to make faster, but also reliably, but also beautiful” went to the platform Kickico , in my opinion. Judge for yourself:

1. It is possible to organize on it not only ICO, but also personal crowdsale (crowdfunding, including - without issuing a token), with which you can raise funds for the publication of a book or, for example, an audio album;
2. The main parameters: the number of tokens, the launch of the campaign itself, the distribution of tokens and other technical wisdom are issued out of the box by default;
3. You can run campaigns whose tokens are created on "air", "waves", "graphene" or on any other blockchain, even your own: thus, the capabilities of all the listed communities are used, and also a synergistic effect is created from the joint use of different platforms;
4. The process of trust, which is so lacking for many who want to launch a new product for the first time, is solved in several ways at once: trusting the platform itself, its community, as well as organized checks of the services being started;
5. And another thing: the integration with Bancor Protocol, which not only “suddenly turned” the KickCoin token into a smart token and gave it liquidity, but also the platform itself integrated the Bancor’s network, thanks to which the campaign tokens that collect funds on it can also become tokens and will be traded immediately, bypassing the stock exchange. This solution itself increases the cost of KickCoin, since it is they who are provided with all these smart tokens.

In this sense, Kickico is the future , since for the founder, technical details are always an extra headache (do not let it be said during the Habrozhiteley hearing :). Especially for small and medium projects. Of course, it is always possible to find intelligent programmers, but in a saturated market it is not so easy to do it, and if you say, “to find both quickly and cheaply”, then it is simply impossible.

Let's remember another evolution. The evolution of operating systems. The first of them were cumbersome, were difficult to program and understood their units. Then DOS entered the arena with clear access to files and navigation system. And then - the revolution took place: Apple (and without their knowledge and Microsoft) created what we use to use the billions so far - “windows” (Win + Dos). Below is a picture - just for clarity: that simplifying the form always requires complicating the content.



In my opinion, Kikaishio is a revolution of just such a scale: interface . After all, it is very important in the field of crowdfunding that the idea was born on time, which means - quickly. Since the invention of the radio, when Marconi and Popov fought for the primacy of the creator, little has changed. Quite the contrary - the speed and scale only increased. Yes, not everyone likes the simplistic approach: but this world requires it.

So when I hear that Kickico is the same as Waves (or even Ethereum) I understand that the community has room to develop: yes, these systems complement each other and certainly don’t deny, but if Ethereum is a supercomputer that can “Sharpen” a lot of tasks, Waves is a service specializing in this world computer on a specific task (emission of tokens), then Kickico is already a specialized set of programs that can do everything related to the distribution and monetization of ideas very nicely and well.

To understand the process deeper - let's dive into the world of comparisons.

Classic crowdfunding vs Kickico

The first thing that comes to mind when a crowdfunding model is voiced is Kickstarter or, for example, Indiegogo. But, as the creators rightly noted, “transboundary, lack of intermediaries, transparency, and absolute flexibility of compensation formats through the creation of tokens,” is something that is difficult to achieve on centralized resources.

Of course, now there are still problems in the logic of smart contracts and so far there is no global reputation system within blockchain-society. But since 2009, much has been done in this direction and the main thing is that even more will be done, while centralized models, on the contrary, will regress: their support requires more and more resources that are spent on those tasks that are “defaulted” in the blockchain environment . And trust is first of all : moderation based on the p2p principles is much faster than its counterpart in a world where everything is subject to a clear, pyramidal scheme.

The simplest and most obvious example is the distribution of funds when a campaign has ended with an incomplete collection. How to solve this problem? In centralized models: either to give a part if some minimum threshold is reached (say, 250,000 out of 1,000,000), or to give only the full amount (collection 100%). And in decentralized? You can make everything more flexible - it is enough that the corresponding model is claimed by the community. Smart contracts are an elegant solution.

Moreover, fundraising around the world is a task that is poorly solved in the world of centralization, but not in the one that Kickico develops.

And about classic crowdfunding: you can't collect it for a free children's book, for example. Because no one needs it. Kickico has 1% of the fees that authors can allocate to the fund for such non-commercial projects. This is important because this is how a platform can help non-commercial projects see the light. “Almost charity: more precisely, its innovative model!”

Blocks vs. Blocks

Of course, you should pay attention to the comparison of those who go side by side with Kikaishio . I will not be removed to infinity gradations - I will take only a few obvious examples:

1. Single cycle platforms. Example - ICObox is one of the strongest teams in the Runet, which is ready to develop a marketing strategy and technical implementation, and also sand it all with a legal component for ICO. But the solution is not for everyone:
   
   The first is the command: it is rather difficult to scale it, because declared a certain level of expertise. In addition, this approach immediately limits the possibility of paralleling tasks: for example, even at Kixstar, there can be 1300-1400 campaigns running at the same time, half of which, at least, will succeed. ICObox is doomed to the successful launch of one and all;
   
   The second is the price threshold: entry from 25 to 50 btc is not for everyone to do, and most importantly - not always necessary;
   
   Thirdly , in many respects this project is closed on a cycle: that is, it does not develop a certain ecosystem, but provides the “turnkey ICO”, ​​thereby limiting both the audience and the prospects for its development.
2. Techno-start launch platforms . Examples - COSS, Starbase:
   
   Of course, they are closer to the idea of ​​Kikaishio, but still limited primarily by the creation of infrastructure projects, while the second wave of ICO implies a greater focus on the real sector and personal crowd campaigns;
   
   In addition, in addition to the flexibility of creating the projects themselves, Kikaicio has a reverse plus - specialization in charity products, while the same COSS says much broader development directions, which means it will be a Swiss knife, which is not bad, but spraying is always a big risk.
   
   Often, tokens of this kind can be safely attributed to securities and, moreover, "they gladly accept American citizens, which means only one thing: the highest degree of risk for both the organizers of the company and all those who participate in their campaigns." However, there are exceptions.
3. Local sites . Examples - ico365, planeta.ru: here the question is not so much in technology, but in the geo-referencing: yes, wechat is very popular in China, but it is absolutely not used in Russia ( and it is also forbidden ), and in other countries It is not the greatest success. Local products are not bad, they are just another way of development: it to some extent contradicts the idea of ​​openness of the blockchain and therefore is rather a transitional form than an evolutionary and non-dead end.

Thus, for me personally, Kickico has a number of undoubted advantages over both ancestors and followers (and even competitors) - precisely in terms of the created environment as the final product:

1. Clear niche positioning: crowdfunding and crowdfunding in all directions;
2. At the same time - fan coverage of the audience through the creation of an eco-environment;
3. Advocacy and development of the blockchain principles, which means following the main trends of the global community;
4. Finally, the standardization of all important components of the ICO, and not just technical.

Therefore, Volen agrees with the team that „KICKICO has a number of exceptional solutions, such as, a unique model of its own token, provided with a reserve fund, creating a unique economic environment“.

The ICO team goes well: apparently, there are those who agree with me. What do you think?

PS In conclusion, I want to say two more important things: first, it is always very interesting to me, as evaluated at one of the coolest IT resources of ICO, which simplify technology ; secondly, in any industry, everything always goes to the union (online retail chains, say, and marketplace online), so the ICO is not unique here and we must first proceed from a similar, objective reality.