The news can read it in greater detail, in many pages today, but here one of them:
https://www.criptonoticias.com/mercado-valores/fundador-expanse-afirma-binance-pidio-400-btc-listar-criptoactivo/The issue in question, rather than revealing a secret to voices, is the absorbing of the amount requested, which seems to exceed any expectation.
It is not a secret, and so I have been saying in multiple threads and forums, that the market for cryptocurrencies, and ICOs above all, is taking the opposite way to what was originally planned, the use and abuse of Airdrops and Bountys , as well as the lack of a tangible evaluation model for the creation of products and services, is generating a chaos within the market, which, being already speculative, brings the subject together, so that both can charge whatever they consider, as that they consider, by the service that is.
It is not a secret for anyone, and I say it loudly, that I am an integral part of an ICO, and as such, apparently, it will be more business to write my adventures and misadventures trying to work from the honest side of the subject, that keep trying to grow this ecosystem by massifying and facilitating its use.
In my case, we have seen many times, when someone and not just one, has told us that our project "does not involve a technological innovation" and we have had to explain that the innovation in our case is not technological, it is educational and marketing . obviously many people have ignored and others have given us a second reading beyond the source code and if you know how to program in this or that language. What is coming this story, is that those who criticized us in an opportunity, have listed within their "customers" many XXXXXCOIN, which after getting their support a market cap of about 14 MM USD $ lowered the Market Cap to 1 MM and disappeared from the market, and now with that capital obtained, they can repeat the operation with other names about 3 or 5 times, because now they have to pay the membership fees to many sites.
What most impresses me and calls for reflection, is the comment of the CEO of Binance, asking the developers and ICOs, not to worry about how much they charge, if not if their project is really good to be listed. In the hands of who are we putting our project? someone who believes that he and only he can know if a project is good or bad, someone who believes he has the right to tell us if something suits us or not? It seems a repeated story when many years ago someone decided that Tesla's project was not good enough.
We must have a minute of reflection, and in a previous article I said it, we do not believe more superhumans, we do not empower those who are not prepared for it, we maintain power with the basic idea of the BTC, a community of distributed and anonymous decisions, not where an individual can decide, if a project is good or bad, I and many people consider that my ICO is good, because this man must close the doors to develop.
unfortunately I do not have the mediatic weight, but if it would be just a
"run" of BINANCE to teach these "super Human" that can not decide the course of technology, it is, of course, that not all projects are good, but it is MY job to evaluate them, not to tell me which ones are good.
Latest news: 
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
Shop
Bidding Open
Topic: 400BTC to be listed in an EXCHANGE? (Read 1032 times)