Blockstream CEO Adam Back expressed the opinion that ICOS, despite their controversial nature, have funded several really important studies.
Back stressed that in the vast majority of cases, when conducting ICOS, the goal of projects was to enrich their creators, and this is unethical. In addition, the very concept of ICO does not provide any effective protection for investors. The CEO of Blockstream said:
“Investors do not have rights, there is no financial supervision, so you can not know what the funds are spent on. Given all the temptations, I would say that most of the money received during the ICO is used for personal enrichment of the founders and promoters. And when the money runs out, they just launch a new ICO.”
At the same time, Back admits that some ICOS have funded really useful research:
“Of course, there are exceptions, and some interesting ICO projects and altcoins have funded research or allocated grants for them. But the overall efficiency of the ICO area is much lower than that of startups.”
Back believes that most altcoins with high capitalization are useless coins that have attracted funds only thanks to a competent and expensive marketing policy. He noted that the best developers will not work in the ICO, so projects are forced to hire second-rate programmers.
Recall that recently, Adam Back called Ethereum and several other altcoins with high capitalization “Ponzi schemes”, putting them on a par with well-known financial pyramids.