Expert Insight

David Thomas: Comparing ICOs and STOs following a number of scams

David Thomas of GlobalBlock examines how STOs have begun to replace ICOs, which although rarer are not dead in the water yet

David Thomas, founder of London-based GlobalBlock, says Initial Coin Offerings were the acronym on everyone’s lips during the cryptocurrency boom of 2017. They were, and to some extent still are, a driving force for the cryptocurrency industry as a whole.

For some, they were the introduction to cryptocurrencies and made savvy investors a great deal of money. While for others they have been a waste of investment – and at worst a scam.

ICOs are similar to angel investments where product creators put out a document called a whitepaper to advertise the technology on offer, how it works and why it’s a good idea.

Interested individuals or organisations then send funding in the form of major cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin or Ethereum (some ICOs can also use fiat currencies.)

Worthless currency

In return, the investors receive crypto in the form of whatever the coin or token on offer is. In contrast to IPOs (Initial Public Offerings on regulated stock exchanges) investment in an ICO doesn’t give any ownerships in the company developing the technology. It means you are effectively taking a gamble with an “at present” worthless currency.

Essentially, you pay now with the hope and expectation that in the future it increases in value to make you a return.

Given the unregulated nature of ICOs, anyone could put a whitepaper together, take the investment and run off with it, leaving those who did invest with a sour taste in their mouths. Unfortunately, this was a reality for many in the last few years as complete failures and scams masqueraded among legitimate ICO raises.

If we fast forward to today, ICOs are now more few and far between as caution now tends to prevail before investors commit to funding projects. We would suggest that if there is an ICO project out there that piques interest, a good indicator of its credibility is whether it has been ‘signed off’ by a reputable legal firm as well as more fundamental qualifying criteria.

Better future

This includes – does it have an existing revenue stream? Is the ICO planning on being frugal with investors’ money? Is there an actual need for blockchain? Does the project save time and money? And finally, will it build a better future?

Due to the levels of fraud and warnings by the SEC, the likes of Facebook, Google, Twitter and Mailchimp have banned ICO-related adverts and investors are being driven to look at alternative means of investing.

This is where Security Token Offerings step. They are similar to ICOs in that they are an offer made by a vendor to a wider audience – in which the consumer can purchase tokens built on blockchain technology. However, where ICOs are the direct sale of coins or purported utilities, STOs are the sale of securities and by taking part in STOs, they are considered to be an investor and not a client user.

Effectively, they pay to receive a security that is represented by a token and to do this, there is a level of bureaucracy (namely the company in question must register the offering with the SEC).

Full regulation

STOs sit as a go-between from crowdfunding of ICOs and full regulation of the blockchain, and where STOs successfully register with the SEC they can taken advantage of exemptions such as the Reg A+ – giving them many similarities to shares.

Experts are very confident in STOs, believing that their market cap will exceed $10 trillion by the end of 2020. In contrast, ICOs have raised roughly $5 billion.

All of this doesn’t necessarily mean that ICOs are finished, the right projects have just become rarer and it would be safe to assume they will become rarer still as the industry pushes for further regulation and oversight resulting in a pick up in STO popularity.

So, what are the negatives t STOs? Firstly, there is the significant administrative burden which carries, in part, increased legal costs. However, this is typically deemed to be offset by providing extra security for investors. It is also noted that current exchange listing can be problematic with main line exchanges not fully supportive as yet. For example, Binance requiring legal proof that tokens have a utility.

Natural evolution

STOs are a natural evolution of the sector and the next step forward towards establishing crypto and blockchain as a viable, secure method of investment asset that will inevitably provide investors with the underlying confidence and security that they need to participate in the space.

Some of the finest minds in the world are currently working on STO-related tech projects that will undoubtedly play an important part in real world technological evolution and so it only follows that investors will want a reliant and secure method to participate in that potential growth.

Related Articles

No, Starbucks accepting crypto is NOT a tax nightmare

Paying capital gains tax on everyday expenses is not appealing to many, so it’s understandable that there is some concern around the soon-to-be launched Bakkt solution. Amongst other things,...

Five essential tips for blockchain startups

During the height of the crypto boom, everybody from Paris Hilton to the Venezuelan government seemed to be either setting up or promoting ICOs as token values skyrocketed. Even...