Startups

Blockchain technology got a massive boom in 2017 raising the market cap to 770B before crashing to sub 130B within 18months. Majority of the growth was based on the hype with little or no substance to back it up & when the sale begins there wasn’t any fundamentals to support the price. We heard about big names getting into the game but none of them actually made it to mainstream in terms of products. 

    While dump really hurt the growth, it also stalled any major corporation interest in the space. While bitcoin has almost done 3X within spam of 4 months, we heard the news of Libracoin, a cryptocurrency effort by world largest social media giant Facebook. Skepticism aside, just an official effort from such major corporation is a big win for the industry which has more cons than pros. I’ve not disectd the paper at length but have been asked by many friends on what does it mean for the bitcoin.

As mentioned earlier, it’s in the interest of cryptocurrency since facebook has the maximum market penetration in the entire world. As of Q1’19, they have 2.38 Billion active users. No other organization or country have that kind of market reach or distribution across the planet. With them making it super simple for their users to on & off-ramp the cryptocurrency is massive. Gone are the times where Facebook was limited to sharing photos & statuses. Now it’s a complete media platform for businesses and individuals which isn’t just limited to connecting but a serious amount of commerce happens through it.

Messenger is one the most popular application of facebook with mind blowing usage.

Here are the key statistics:

• 20 billion messages are sent between people and businesses every month
• There are 300,000 active Messenger bots on the platform
• Messenger is the second most popular iOS app of all time – behind only the main Facebook app
• 1.3 Billion people use Messenger every month
• 40 Million active businesses

No other company have statistics even close to this when it comes to engagement.

Today, Facebook is not only a social media landscape rather it is the entire virtual world where from promotion to status updates to managing your own business pages can happen. And as sending messages from one place to another one is possible; the future holds a hope for something similar for payment transactions too.

Today Facebook has merged E-commerce industry into its layout and offers promotion, buying and selling of products/services. Now, imagine the payment methods used in today’s transaction; everything happens via bank, right? The digital wave has although transformed the mode of payment, but the infrastructure still stays the same: Centralized banking channels. Although, the payment method of e-commerce industry is done by banking sector today, but it will be transformed into digital currency soon. In fact, some e-commerce websites are accepting digital currency in their payment sections.

Since, Facebook is supporting a large network of e-commerce industry, it is possible that Facebook coin would be supported and promoted by e-commerce industry. Recently, Facebook has launched a new blockchain based currency named “Libra” on a platform called “Calibra”. This would support cross border transactions with the help of blockchain and that too instantly and at extremely cheaper rates.

With the announcement, the stock price of Facebook has surged 20% cumulatively and had a very positive impact on the current crypto industry as well where the bitcoin has surpassed USD11,000 resistance for the first time in 2019. Now coming back to Facebook. Well, public also get conscious upon the discussion of any new currency. A currency backed by the centralized party; I feel, it would be hot discussion.

Facebook has got its maximum possible market share; Facebook just had to maintain that market share as expansion of can’t be done within the same industry now. So, the company with the highest market penetration can use the same to become a financial institution as well. By launching a Facebook coin, it will not only get the connectivity, but it will also get the more market share in the industry of digital currency.

The aim of Facebook is to connect people onto the single platform by which users will be able to use their every account from a single username. That is why Facebook is keep monitoring and is supporting only real accounts rather than fake accounts; for promotion and connectivity, Facebook is also completing the Corporate social responsibility (CSR). As, Facebook is providing free Internet service in the developing nations so that these nations can also get connected with the world.

Well, Facebook has the most active users in the world; so, ideally everybody has a single real account. Facebook is promoting/supporting this through connecting people’s different account onto the singular platform (User Id) through which Facebook can get to know the psychographic/physical factors of its users.

Like, in terms of applications, Facebook has connected itself with Instagram, WhatsApp, etc. Only, payment/currency sector is not connected with it. But Facebook will also attach currency with it as the company is getting the utmost benefits from blockchain technology. Facebook Coin will not be only promoted by the e-commerce industry, but it will also be transformed as the bank accounts. From currency accounts to entertainment/business profiles would be onto the singular platform by the single User Id.

They’ve the most information on what’s happening in the world but that’s not enough especially with the outlash they’ve been getting around privacy and selling data to advertisers. In addition there is a limit to how many people can be on facebook and they’re approaching that limit very quickly. There isn’t enough people on the planet. With Mark’s pledge to prioritize privacy combined with stalled growth it has to come up with new avenues to earn revenue and I think that’s where the idea of Libra is brilliant. They have the opportunity to become the world largest financial institute and payment process. They’ve access to people in regions which is almost impossible to others to get. Kids get a facebook account way before their bank accounts and I am confident a decent percentage of their users don’t have any bank account at the moment. With facebook, issue of Cash-in & Cash-out is solved and if it becomes a global standard money may not even leave the system giving it such a tremendous amount of capital that can turn it into the world most powerful empire.

With such fears there is some resistance from regulators in terms of who can sense of bit of fear if that happens. While there has been some serious questions posed by thee bitcoin maximalists, that’s a minor issue in my opinion at this point in time so let’s see how things progress

RANDOM FACT: I am also LIBRA by star !

Here is the official link to Libra

Today when we think of loan or a financial product, the first thing that comes in our mind is bank. You want to have mortgage, go to banks, you want to have credit card, go to bank, you want to make a deposit, you go to bank, you want to wire, you go to bank. Though many may argue that they use online banking but that’s still a bank and unless there is a very strong reason for you to go to a 3^rd party, you try to consolidate financial matters through one single institute & the first choice is bank.

Their brand power, accessibility & trust factor is unprecedented. 3^rd party vendors are not more than your corner convenience store where you go when you need something in emergency, but weekly/monthly grocery is through Walmart or any big retail store. While price is certainly a factor, availability everything under one roof is also very convenient. Same is the case with bank however as opposed to big shop pricing discount services at bank are often expensive as opposed to 3^rd party. There is a premium to exchanging currency or do a wire transfer. Though lot of it is attributed towards the fact that they can charge that premium without churning a big chunk of their business, but the other factor is high operational expense that they’ve to occur. While our parents were used to banks, we’re using a combination of services to well fit our need, but it’s diluting the dependence on bank. As the shift grows banks have to take a different approach competing with startups & they’re well poised to do so.

While they’ve the customer base, well capitalized and have the infrastructure & regulatory clearance.  They however may lack the thirst to innovation & are slow to move. I however think that the best approach for them is to partner up with startups & built a marketplace.

Now while banks have their own arrangements and partnership for every product they offer, they do operate more like a close loop system, but I think it’s time to change it. They should instead turn into a hub to offer multiple services. May be like Amazon but white label. At the moment they’re operating more like United Airways but what if they shift their model to Expedia with a white label badge. You want to transfer money from A to B, you’re presented with 2 options. Be there in 4 hours, it’s cost $10, be there in 2 days, cost $1. On backend banks have APIs of startups which provide those services and banks can use those startups to find the most efficiency way to perform a specific service. Win for banks and win for customers. Customer churn rate will reduce and banks will keep their branding.

There has been recent cases where banks have partnered up with startups providing them the branding but if they do it well, they should just actively pursue it as a business line. I don’t expect big banks to buy into this idea soon, but the one that does will emerge as a winner and won’t provide space to startups to displace them.

My bank of future will have very few branches and will have partnered up with 100s of startups offering services and competiting for best quality & cost.

Let’s see who that’ll be in 5-10 years

I wrote about Trust & it’s importance in the last blog post here. I’ll try to cover more on Open Financial also known as decentralized financial systems AKA DEFI. You can pickup thee term as per your liking but as much they’re interchangeable they’re also subset of each other depending on the reference that you apply.

An open system can be decentralized or centralized depending on your definition of centralization & same with openness where it could have so much high barrier to entry so it’s not truly open. Example is being a bitcoin miner where you can’t participate unless you run a very sizeable operation. Theoretically it’s decentralized but there are couple of entities that control majority of the hashing power.

Trust in finance is super important & that’s the basic of any transaction.

When you look at all the financial system around us, we believe they’re open, but they’re not regardless if they’re in developing or developed country. They’re operating more like silos. They do interact but with permission very inefficiently. If you had to transfer money from one bank to another bank in us, it’s quite doable but you’re at the mercy of bottle necks involved in every party involved in the transaction.  I still have restrictions in performing multiple tasks that require branch visit. We do have SWIFT, Interac, SEPA & other systems which are comparable to protocols but they’re inefficient with no visibility into the process.  There’s a reason why majority of the world is unbanked because cost of banking is high. There is an argument that unbanked don’t need a bank because they are poor but in fact they’re poor because of barrier to financial tools.

To bring down cost of banking or access to other financial tools, unbundling of the system has to be done & DeFi makes it possible. I’ll give you example of how that can be done. Right now if you look a the process of loan origination, there are mainly 3 parties at a financial institute that make it happen. They’re

• Debt Raiser
• Debt Issuer
• Underwriter

Debt issuer makes the business case for the loan, while underwriter assess & approves the risk & loan, and debt raiser finds the money to fund the loan. Though they all belong to same institutes but there is a friction between them since they’re responsible for their own departments. Now hypothetically what if all three work independently and are able to scout outside their institute, that’ll ultimately benefit the customer. Chances of success are much higher due to participation of more and more players. Now the biggest pain point here is trust. Would they trust each other now that they’re dealing with outsiders ?

That’s where DeFi & protocols become important. Now I’ve simplified it a lot, but this is how it’s supposed to work. E-Mail is based on Simple Mail Transfer Protocol

(SMTP) which is common across the globe so your interface can be whatever you like it be but for transmission it has to follow SMTP standards.

I’ve been particularly excited about Decentralized exchanges & protocols which empower small players to build interesting applications. ERC20 based tokens on top of ethereum were a success which lead to thousands of applications being built serving different used cases. While different chains don’t talk to each other at the moment, but that’s going to change in coming days.

No one size fits all and that’s the case with financial apps too. Needs are different based on demographics so niche apps are required to serve them well. While protocols are scary for the majority but  there isn’t any neeed to be paranoid about the utility. What percentage of people around us knows how does SMTP work. They just use gmail, Hotmail etc.
It wasn’t possible to transact online without using a 3^rd party. Decentralized exchanges make it easy. Now we have tools to hedge, lend, borrow that are gaining popularity on the internet as well. I am very excited about this development because it opens up the financial world to everyone with internet access, which is billions of us. Local, national, international all can enjoy the tools without any discrimination. 

Coming back to trust issue where I laid the importance of trust in financial transactions. Protocols make this job easy & playing field for every participant. As long as you satisfy the protocol rules, you’re in. Your app doesn’t need to have a track record of centuries or decades to participate. Rules of pedigree are broken here.

 Status quo enjoys the trust, regulatory barriers & support of the top movers & shakers but soon their kingdom will be challenged. There’ll be a revolt by the millennials where they’ll move to alternative options which probably will be built on decentralized financial system which is open, non-discriminatory and fair to to every one. It’ll be a war where incumbents have to innovate, competitive to a very rare breed of smart and intelligent engineers globally who’re building tech apps to serve the customers much better.  I expect majority of the incumbents to give up or find intelligent ways to build partnership & integrate into the decentralized system.

Some of these things might look alien, tails from utopia but there is serious work in progress where transactions are growing with more and more participation from community and institutes alike. Tech companies have tendency to go parabolic once they find market fit & I expect this the case here as well.

Bitcoin is considered to be too sacred when it comes to critisism in cryptocurrencies. Bitcoin minimalism has developed a cult culture where anything that comes remotely close to taking away the dominant position from bitcoins in cryptocurrency is hit with criticism. While I don’t disagree with the BTC dominance, it is hurting the growth of ecosystem. Altcoins also known as shit coins have diluted the space but they’ve a reason to exist.

My involved in the industry span over 7 years &  have witness bitcoin narrative being sold shifting from transfer of value to store of value. Ethereum was at one time referred to as bitcoin 2.0 though the function & use case was totally different. As much as I love bitcoin, matter of fact is that bitcoin wont’ work with security tokens & there has to be a different chain to accommodate this use case.

Here are few of the reasons why Security tokens have a different trajectory from bitcoins.

• Decentralization

Bitcoin is decentralized & there isn’t any restriction on who can own, transfer or mine bitcoin. There is absolutely no KYC or filter to censor any one. With STs, there is a set of regulation that gets tagged along & impossible to be imposed with bitcoins. If some thing can’t be audited & controlled, it won’t fly with regulations.

• Perception Issues

Bitcoin till date have kind of stigma attached to that which has refrained multiple brand names and status quo to stay away due to additional risk that may have a bad reward/risk ratio in their books. For STs,  blockchain should come clean with no prior baggage

• Non-Recoverable

There is a sizeable quantity of bitcoin that are lost forever due to one reason or another. Similarly there has been incidents of hack or private keys loss. In traditional world, if you lose your certificate you can get a duplicate, but in blockchain if it’s gone once, it’s gone forever. STs must have a mechanism to reverse & fix these transactions

• Limited Functionality

Reason why Bitcoin is now referred to as storage of value is due to limited functionality. There is very little which you can do with your bitcoins. Yes there has been forks to improve some of the desired features or sidechains, but overall it’s like running a bullet train on existing track. You’re losing efficiency.  STs need creative functionalities which will need an entirely new chain

• Lack of KYC

With STs every stakeholder is identified, and this process is enforced. With BTC that’s not possible and there isn’t any discrimination between any of the participants.

This list isn’t exhaustive but just gives a rough overview why there would be a new chain(s) that will serve the next layer of Security tokens. Once this has been realized among the industry, there would be more R&D into developing those protocols.

While general consensus about ICO is that the days of ICO (Initial Coin Offering) are over post 2018 crash, IEO (Initial Exchange Offering) is generating similar kind of buzz wave.  I can see lot of co-relation between ICO & IEO when it comes to FOMO, interest, price manipulation etc. Major difference between IEO & ICO is IEO is supported by an exchange while ICO has to get listed on an exchange. Due to ICOs performing really bad in 2018 mainly due to lack of liquidity IEO does covers that portion rally well. While there are only handful IEOs executed, results are very encouraging for initial buyers with returns resonating to ICOs in early days. I expect it to follow the same hype cycle of ICOs but on a relatively smaller scale.

Let’s cover this more in detail.

What is an IEO?

Initial exchange offering is administered or conducted on the platform of a digital exchange also called cryptocurrency exchange on behalf of the startup that looks for funds for its newly issued tokens.

While ICOs generally use their own website or 3^rd party tools to conduct the token sale process which isn’t link to exchange. Post-sale, exchanges get involved where they determine if they want to list the token or not. Through IEO, exchange listing risk is mitigated.

This facilitation however come with a price tag which is either a fix fee or percentage or combination of both depending on the arrangement between token issuer & exchange they’re using. Generally the fee structure varies from 50k USD to 500k in fixcost  plus 5-10% of the total sale.

With struggling exchange business, this can provide much relief to their operations if done correctly however they won’t like to conduct lot of them to keep the scarcity.

How are IEO and ICO different?

While I’ve mentioned the major difference between ICO & IEO, here are the fine prints

• In case of ICO, fundraising is conducted at the token issuer’s website while IEO makes use of the platform of the digital exchange that conducts the token sale.

• The crowd sale counterparty for ICO is the project developer but in IEO, it is the cryptocurrency exchange.

• The smart contract is managed by the company or startup conducting the token sale for ICO and in case of IEO; it is the cryptocurrency exchange that manages the smart contract.

• In ICOs, the marketing budget needed by fundraising companies is significantly high. The project would have to invest many resources to get the attention of the public and investors. In Initial Exchange Offering, the marketing budget is relatively low as the exchange actively markets the tokens of the startup.

• There is no screening required before a startup can launch an ICO but is required in IEO and the exchange screen the company before it allows it to fundraise on its platform.

• Another difference is that only after the funding gets completed, ICOs mint their token while tokens are generated by the project and sent to the exchange platform in case of IEO.

• IEO promises higher Liquidity, transparency and protection than does ICO.

• Vested interest of exchange provide some level of oversight over the project.

Liquidity crisis for ICOs

“When Binance?”is possibly one of the most asked question in telegram channels because investors are looking to offload their purchased tokens for multiple returns and moving onto the next one. As if running the project itself isn’t a hard task, exchange listing consumes both human & financial capital.

Creating a token is super simple but listing it is super hard specially on big exchanges. Though there are probably more than 300 exchanges globally, 1% of them own 90% of the volume & that’s where the competition comes in. Not just that exchanges are charging for exchange listing fee, the volume need to be significant else there is a danger that the token will be delisted. To avoid that firms do pay up for market making, which isn’t just ethically & legally questionable but also financially expensive. Orphan tokens end up in decentralized exchange or tier 3^rd exchanges where volume is close to nothing. As per few reports only 1 out of 5 tokens was able to be listed. Number for tier 1 exchange is probably 1 out of 15.

It cost anywhere from $100,000 for tier 2/3 to $3M for tier 1. There has been claims of charging $5M – $8M during the bull markets as well. Exchange rather than specifying it as listing fee, they call it due diligence cost. In all honesty, they’ve to perform the due diligence because they can get into trouble by offering something that could be fraudulent.

State of IEO:

The first ever cryptocurrency exchange that embraced IEO was Binance and launched its IEO platform Binance Launchpad. BitTorrent (now bought by TRON) conducted a token sale on Binance Launchpad in January and raised $7.2 million in a short span of 15 minutes & generated 4X returns within days . Fetch.AI was the second IEO on the same platform that hit a hard cap of about $6 million in 22 seconds. The Binance Launchpad was a success and how could other exchanges miss out such a lucrative opportunity (they charge listing price and a percent of the fund raised) as they started launching their own IEO platforms.

The Singapore based major exchange Huobi jumped into the ring by launching its own IEX platform. However, to look different from its competitors and to attract more investors, they named their fundraising model DPO Direct Premium Offering and is prominent for allowing users purchase crypto at a price lower than the market price. KuCoin wanted to “reveal the hidden blockchain gem” and launched their KuCpon Spotlight. The Malta Based exchange OKEx announced about the launching of their platform OKJumpstart for holding IEOs on March 13. Bittrex IEO is an upcoming IEOs scheduled to be launched in the first week of April.

ICO vs. IEO. Which one is preferred?

Back in July 2013, Mastercoin held the first ever ICO initial coin offering which was vigorously followed by many Blockchain projects fundraising in the same way however ICOs have many flaws slowing down the progress of fundraising and this engendered the need for other means of fundraising like STOs Security Token Offerings and now IEOs which has actually created a buzz in the crypto world.

Some people might argue that IEO is the same old wine in a new labeled bottle but that is not true. Though both IEOs and ICOs share the same rationales of IPOs Initial Public Offerings, both are fundamentally different. What makes IEO unique is that the project has to pass through a comprehensive assessment by the exchanges in order to curb problems face by ICOs-Scams. This way, IEO becomes riskless for investors to put in their money unlike what the scenario had been during the ICOs craze when investors would invest in any ICO including those who could offer even a white paper. This is the reason why majority of crypto experts prefer IEO over ICO.

The case of RAID IEO is a best example here. Bittrex had recently cancelled the IEO for RAID project just hours before the start of token sale. The reason behind why Bittrex cancelled IEO for RAID was the termination of partnership between the e-gaming data analytics platform OP.GG and RAID. Bittrex considered the partnership between the companies an important part of the project and the termination of the partnership simply made the token sale redundant and not in the interest of the consumers of Bittrex.

Major Advantages of IEO

The biggest advantage of IEO for the team/project is quick access to vetted investors and hence funds just like the companies that after launching their IPO initial public offerings get their name listed on NASDAQ exchange and get access to funds. Couple of days ago I read in an autonomous research that ICO issuers have no other option but to pay an amount anywhere from $1 million to $3 million to get their tokens listed on an exchange. Further adding, there are additional costs as well like they have to spend on running marketing campaigns and hiring advisors. Since exchanges still charge high listing fees and share in the funds raised for conducting IEO, the startup/team behind the token get time to focus on the project development and not on marketing and fundraising.

It is an open secret that exchanges earn a lucrative amount of money in the form of listing fee and share in the funds raise which further depend on the size of the platform. In addition, IEO participants after creating an account on a particular exchange might still roam around and ultimately become regular costumers.

Finally investors who participate in IEOs face the least risk. They simply create an account on an exchange and can participate and purchase tokens in any IEO launched on the exchange instead of creating many accounts and dealing with a number of wallets on different exchanges. Leading exchanges such as Binance make sure the projects pass a vetted process of assessment before the token sale gets conducted on the exchange because they do not want to loose costumers by getting their reputation spoiled by cooperating with an illicit or fraudulent project which means there is always a higher degree of trust in case of IEO. However, in case of ICOs, you could be at risk if you are not good with spotting scams and dubious projects. A legitimate exchange will never host scams so if you are a member with one, you would face the least risk. Initial Exchange Offerings IEOs allow investors to take part in Initial Coin Offerings ICOs with low risk.

Challenges for IEO

• Non-compete between exchanges

When a token is launched independently there isn’t any affiliation with a specific exchange so it can be listed on multiple exchanges exposing itself to lot of users. My concern is that if a token was sold through a specific exchange there may be reluctance for other exchanges to list it specially the competition one. While goal of crypto is to build an open financial system, this may lead to a silo approach.  

• Lack of volume

While IEO does guarantees exchange listing, it doesn’t guarantee a volume. If the volume drops a lot, there is a delisting risk.

• Regulatory risk

While they’re marketed as utility tokens, there is a chance that they’re a security in multiple jurisdiction. In that case they would have be classified under Security Tokens, which I’ve covered in detail here.

• Delayed liquidity

While there is a guarantee that it’ll be listed on exchange, the firm offering the token may delay listing due to any factor. Major factor would be product not being ready or bear market.

• Lack of lock-up period

In case of traditional IPOs, there is generally a lockup period for early investor but so far there isn’t anything like this in IEO.  This can create a pump & dump scheme, so buyers beware & don’t buy into any hype.

How to become an IEO participant?

You need to follow five steps to take part in IEO.

1. Throughout the last year, the fame of ICO has dwindles to great extent but they still are the main mediums for fundraising for many cryptocurrency projects. So first of all you need to be sure if an IEO is going to take place by checking the website of the startup/development team.

1. You need to know about the exchange that will conduct the IEO. If you are already registered on the exchange and have a wallet, you move on to the next step. If not, you need to create an account on the exchange in order to participate in IEO because a token issuer may sign an agreement with only one out of many exchanges and in that case, you would have no other option but to create an account on the exchange.

1. You need to complete your KYC Know Your Costumer which is an anti money laundering AML procedure. Once you are registered with an exchange, you would have to go through a sought of verification procedure to reduce security risks. You need to do it as soon as possible because it may take the exchange some time to get your identity confirmed.

1. Now you need to find out the crypto option that is available. You normally have the options for ETH Ethereum and BTC Bitcoin over the exchanges except for some in the likes of Binance who go with their own tokens.

1. Finally, you need to wait for the time until your Initial Exchange Offering IEO starts. Make sure you are present minded and do not miss the token sale for it might only last for couple of minutes or may be less (the case of Fetch.AI).

IEO! The next fundraising boom?

Back in 2017 & 2018, ICO engendered a fundraising boom in the crypto space but a notable number of ICOs were conducted by scammers, looted investors who blindly trusted every ICO and this was the sole reason why ICOs lost their glory and prestige. In addition to ICOs with dubious nature, ban on ICOs in countries like China, Macedonia, Nepal and Ecuador exempted a big source of funding for the startup and companies who wanted to fundraise for their tokens. Since IEO ensures provision of high level trust, security, project credibility and instant fundraising, it is no doubt going to engender the next fundraising boom in the crypto space and hence will become the standard model for raising funds.

Conclusion:

Having said that, one might argue that there is nothing like a perfect crowdfunding model/mechanism because since Mastercoin till the present day IEO, we have been seeing so many crowdfunding mechanisms with ICO the most prominent among all but due to the arrival of IEO, even ICO looks in hot water. Things can change. We have seen things getting flipped 180 in matter of days. Who knows about the future? The life span of IEO could be shorter than that of ICO as well. It depends on how advanced the new crowdfunding mechanism is. A more advanced CFM than IEO will no doubt dwindle the prospect of survival of IEO. But for now, the perks and benefits promised by IEOs are way too lucrative to be ignored and as a result, it will take priority over ICO but I still think STOs are the way to go for any similar offering.