FunFair's token supply
I'm trying to better understand FunFair's token supply/ICO model.
During the ICO they set a hard cap of 3 billion FUN tokens (Phase 1 had a hard cap of 1 billion and Phase 2 sold x3 the total amount sold in Phase 1), which was met. Please correct me if this not correct.
- For every $1 USD there were 166 2/3 FUN tokens created
- 100 FUN tokens went to the contributor and the remaining 66 2/3 FUN tokens were divided among the Founders (37.5%), Advisors (2.5%).
I'm curious what the remaining 60% will be used for. Are these the tokens that casinos would purchase and would they be offered at a discounted rate? Also, is it common for companies to use a service like New Alchemy for the ICO?
On marketcap I see the total FUN supply is ~10 billion but in circulation is only around 5 billion. I assume that creating of 66 2/3 tokens for every 100 + the bonus Trench periods = the total supply (from 3 billion FUN tokens issued to the public).
Posted Mar 5, 2018, 2:44 PM UTC
Yep, here you go. Directly from the October company update (https://funfair.io/funfair-company-update-16th-october-2017/):
Thanks for the info. I had no idea phase 2 had been replaced and am approaching this with a very limited finance background. Do you know what kind of regularly/compliance issues they were facing?
Not saying this is good or bad thing but I thought all the rules of the ICO were coded into a smart contract making it “impossible” to change once live. I’m a big FUN supporter but it seems a little weird to me that they could so easily change the amounts allocated and distribution schedule when this has already been so clearly defined.
If FUN tokens are considered company assets, does that mean holders have some voting power/ownership in FunFair’s operation?
[deleted]
There was a legal reason they stated. First of all it would trigger a tax event for US citizens if they suddenly got "free" tokens.
The biggest reason they stated was China regulations however, back when phase two was supposed to happen China regulations where the big next thing and it was unclear how legal the phase two plan was. The stopped it for that reason.
Token dilution was also a weakness in the plan.
For a holder it didn't matter. Maybe they where even better of. Phase two could have decreased your cut of the pie. Now phase two is cancelled and a big chunk was burned, you got a bigger piece of the pie.
Isn't the average US citizen barred from participating in an ICO? From the update it sounds like they're still a little uncertain about the legality of token burns.
Yeah but nobody can stop them doing anyways. It's their responsibility, FUN's terms of agreements said they weren't allowed, but they also didn't have to do KYC.
What update? The October one? I don't read any uncertainty in that and if they were they would not initiated a burn. That would be reckless and stupid. Not their style.
No they’re not shares. The tokens they own are company assets like the token you own are your assets.