Nowadays, blockchain startups more often think about carrying out Security Token Offering (STO) instead of IEO (or almost dead ICO). This is a new fundraising format, which from the legal point of view is still weakly formed and is something between an IEO and a traditional IPO.
Of course, STO is very expensive because of the lawyer services cost. Besides there are different approaches in marketing and PR, for example:
▶️ There is no sense in the Telegram community
STO investors are institutional investors, usually from $100K (depend on their jurisdiction), who do not use Telegram. Analysts from VC/crypto funds can check up the presence of social networks, but we are talking about more conservative Facebook, Twitter with your product's TA, rather than Telegram.
▶️ More severe restrictions in advertising
Even with an IEO or ICO with a target for Asia, it is a good idea to have a legal opinion. In the case of STO, token-sale is subject to the regulation of financial instruments promotion in each of the country where you are looking to raize funds.
▶️ Focus on PR of the product rather than the token sale
In case if an IEO, some of the publications are various press releases and materials that end in one way: "... by the way, soon we are having a token-sale, here are the terms, the site, the social networks". In the case of STO, with this approach, chance get is to get into a fine, so you better promote product rather than token sale.
▶️ There is no need in Bounty and Airdrops
Of course, it depends on your project legality. I heard about the case when a startup wanted to release security and utility tokens at the same time. But if there is only STO, bounty and airdrop won't fly here then.
▶️ Large business media - not crypto media
For crypto- and VC funds it is better to make a publication in global business media Tier 1, something like Forbes or Inc., than in 5-10 second-rate crypto media with the name which contains all possible variations of the words "token" and "coin".
Of course, STO is very expensive because of the lawyer services cost. Besides there are different approaches in marketing and PR, for example:
▶️ There is no sense in the Telegram community
STO investors are institutional investors, usually from $100K (depend on their jurisdiction), who do not use Telegram. Analysts from VC/crypto funds can check up the presence of social networks, but we are talking about more conservative Facebook, Twitter with your product's TA, rather than Telegram.
▶️ More severe restrictions in advertising
Even with an IEO or ICO with a target for Asia, it is a good idea to have a legal opinion. In the case of STO, token-sale is subject to the regulation of financial instruments promotion in each of the country where you are looking to raize funds.
▶️ Focus on PR of the product rather than the token sale
In case if an IEO, some of the publications are various press releases and materials that end in one way: "... by the way, soon we are having a token-sale, here are the terms, the site, the social networks". In the case of STO, with this approach, chance get is to get into a fine, so you better promote product rather than token sale.
▶️ There is no need in Bounty and Airdrops
Of course, it depends on your project legality. I heard about the case when a startup wanted to release security and utility tokens at the same time. But if there is only STO, bounty and airdrop won't fly here then.
▶️ Large business media - not crypto media
For crypto- and VC funds it is better to make a publication in global business media Tier 1, something like Forbes or Inc., than in 5-10 second-rate crypto media with the name which contains all possible variations of the words "token" and "coin".
