ICO IDO IEO

У нашей платформы нет прямых конкурентов с подобными механиками

In total, during the Public Rounds of 2021, while the market was growing, just over $2 billion was invested and 1763 fundraisings were conducted, of which:

• Coinlist raised $630 million and 18 projects

• Tokensoft raised $84 million and 6 projects

In 2022, this amount decreased to $611 million and 1136 fundraisings, of which:

• Coinlist raised $255 million and 7 fundraisings in the first half of the year.

• Tokensoft raised $65 million and 9 fundraisings

The share of ICO in quantitative terms is 4%

The share of IEO in quantitative terms is 13%

The share of IDO in quantitative terms is 83%

It should be noted that more than half of the total volume of venture investments on public platforms, throughout the entire existence of these ICO, IEO, and IDO platforms, was raised by Coinlist and Tokensoft.

Comparative analysis and differences with potential contribution competitors

Our difference from:

from IDO

If we consider IDO Launchpads as competitors and focus on the IDO market size, then at the current stage, ALL Launchpads except DAOMaker are unprofitable. This is not taking into account the entry cost to the Launchpad

The cons of Launchpads today can be highlighted as follows:

1. Exclusive public rounds, with rare exceptions of private sales

2. Large unlocks of public rounds (15-50% at TGE), leading to token dumps and 2-3x price drops

3. High entry threshold in Launchpad tokens

4. Difficulty of participation for newcomers

5. Limited project descriptions and lack of research

6. First come, first served purchase system (FCFS)

7. Allocation distribution among large token holders, resulting in small allocations for small investors

8. Long wait times for sales to start

9. Complex stage system from start to first profit

10. Lack of manuals, assistance, or support

What are the key differences of our platform from IDO Launchpads?

1. We do not limit ourselves to public rounds, but focus on Seed and Private rounds, and possibly Early Stage.

2. Investors, who join at this stage - invest in long terms according to vesting

3. We have no entry threshold in tokens. All investments take place with a platform commission

4. Simple participation for users with any level of knowledge

5. Full project description, information aggregation, and research with a rating system

6. No FCFS system and application of our own participation mechanics

7. Possibility to participate before the start of sales and notification at all stages

8. Our own allocation distribution principles that exclude the FCFS model

9. Simple participation system with only a few stages

10. User training, prompts, and information about any element of the platform, integrated Academy, and knowledge library

The following table compares launchpads and all the key indicators

from ICO

If we consider ICO platforms such as Coinlist or Tokensoft, there are some drawbacks to them. For example, on Coinlist:

1. There is a limited number of projects, exclusively fundamental infrastructure projects

2. There are a large number of users who want to buy tokens at early stages, but there is not enough allocation for everyone due to the rare projects

3. Sales occur on a first-come, first-served basis, and allocations are distributed from the beginning of the queue according with Karma

4. There is a problem with multi-accounting and abuse

5. The Karma system is complex and often unattainable for investors with small capital or lack of time

6. SEC control over the activities of platforms, which results in a lack of projects that do not have the capital to license their activities

7. The personal account functionality is poor

TokenSoft differs from Coinlist in that it allows non-custodial wallets to be connected to the Ethereum network, but it also has very limited functionality

Comparing Coinlist as our competitor is not correct in the context of implementing our platform. But if we try to compare, the functionality of our platform and the opportunities that open up for investors, users, and startups surpass Coinlist

1. There are significantly more projects attracting funds for development

2. There is an opportunity for a large number of users to buy and sell their assets on the platform

3. There are no queues for presales, and our unique mechanics allow us to avoid queuing

4. As a result, there is no need for multi-accounting and abuse

5. There is a rating system for accounts that does not form your participation in the queue but opens up many additional ecosystem opportunities

6. The application of unique mechanics allows us to bypass SEC regulation for financed projects

7. There is a detailed personal account with graphical representation, statistics, and a full description of assets

from IEO

Лончпады на Централизованных биржах по сути являются для бирж лишь инструментом, что бы большое количество пользователей удерживали монету биржи на своих счетах и не влияли на ее цену. Так как везде реализован механизм снапшотов кабинета и удержания монеты в течении определенного срока.

Так же количество участников превосходит общую аллокацию в сотни и тысячи раз.

Конечно же аллокация распределяется между крупными держателями, которые по умолчанию холдят монету биржи на самой бирже.

Сравнение нашей платформы с СЕХ биржами не корректно.

from other

Certainly, there are currently many non-public platforms on the market that have functionality elements similar each other. However, the rapid development of these platforms is limited by the amount of audience and funding for their own development.

Public platforms that are starting their development and allowing the creation of fundraising pools very often have raw and limited functionality, lack of funding, and limited reach.