Seriously, even paying $1 MILLION USD to get listed on big exchanges is WELL WORTH the money!

Guys, i watched the DevCon and was shocked in disbelief when you said you refused to get listed on big exchanges because they charged a measly $200k

SERIOUSLY? That’s an absurd decision to refuse, from both a marketing and economic perspective.

Every other project that knows marketing well would know to pay the fee to get listed, but since the marketing decisions of the team have been terrible so far, let me take the time to explain.

So, from a marketing perspective, ALL the active crypto community is centred around centralised exchanges, as decentralised exchanges would probably take a long while to become popular, so, basically, getting listed on the exchanges is the same as getting listed on is ranked the top 1000 site in the world now BTW). After listing, long term speaking, you get heaps of free ongoing attention and traffic, especially with price movements, once the price moves up, much more people will suss out this ‘maid/btc’ thing and get to know/join the community! And the exchanges have so many people trading on it, so this will accelerate community growth by significant amounts!

From an economic perspective, every coin that gets listed on exchanges experience at least, a temporary increase in price. Which usually also results in a permanent price shift and a higher price bottom, especially if the project is good. Just look at all the other projects and their price movements, seriously. Monaco was the recent example, from $7 to $15 right after Bithumb listing. Now, the team at Monaco obviously holds the tokens too, at least 20% of the tokens, so $20 million in value(as their market cap prior was 100 million), so the listing more than doubled it, that’s more than $20 million made from a $200k expense, 10000% ROI! Tron was also similar, 50% increase in 24 hours due to exchange listing, team already holds billions worth of Tron from good marketing last year, the project doesn’t even have any decent tech to be honest(tho now they’re starting to ramp up), So anyway, if they held $1 billion worth of Tron which they do, 50% increase makes their value = + $500 million, for a $200k investment. 250000% ROI.

This is not a joke guys, please know how the current markets are working, the exchanges are undercharging for listing to be honest to get themselves listing more tokens while making a fair profit, but from an economical prospective of these projects, if they know how to monetise the listing, such as holding a % of tokens at the start or just simply buying your own tokens, and then pay for a listing, the profits are WAYYYY more than $200k in 99% of the cases. Now, from what I know, the team has some Maidsafe token holdings, though, not as much as 30-50% like newer crypto projects, but I believe it’s DEFINITELY worth the money to get listed immediately on all the big exchanges(As well as a ERC-20 token transformation which should go side by side with the big exchange listings), I can suggest ways to help the team monetise, one simple suggestion is you simply need to buy up some tokens if you don’t already hold enough, to make the cost of listing on exchanges actually cost neutral, or rather, in 99% of cases with other projects, you actually get back much more than you spend. Can’t you see? The exchanges are charging this because they well know that on their platform, the traders are going to spend much more than $200k buying the new listed token/coin, otherwise, it’ll be absurd for them to charge the amount, and we would be absurd to agree to pay the amount. But that’s not the case! Right now the situation is vice-versa.

People are focusing on the the $200k upfront, analogous to focusing on the half empty glass(and to be frank, it’s more like 5% empty, $200k is really… nothing compared to what you’d get in return, and thats an understatement) Please start focusing on the 95% of benefits you’d get from being listed on exchanges such as Binance, Bithumb among others, and if they want you to pay to get listed, pay to get listed. You only have to do so for a few big ones(1-2) big ones, smaller exchanges will follow suit as the project becomes more popular and has significant trading volume, they’ll likely be proactively listing it for free, but we need to take initiative to make the project more popular first, get the snowball rolling and others will jump in.


Large exchanges are only one of many ways to get exposure…


Yep, one of the easiest and most effective ways ever. Much more superior to other ways ATM. All other ways actually cost money. This way, you get way more exposure to serious investors, you make a lot more than $200k, you get to the top 25 crypto projects, you get even more exposure.

So stupid to not pay $200k, I used to be a BTC OTC trader and I know from first hand experience, one client can buy way over $200k sometimes, and they’re obviously investors in crypto, listing on the exchanges will get you exposed to so many of those people who would together invest so much more than $200k, or even $20million. Here’s another story :

So 200k is like what? 20-25 BTC? Well people are making 100,000 BTC deals, there’s a serious amount of money that wants to go in cryptos at the moment, not taking advantage of that is foolish. You can keep looking at the $200k and forever say, no I won’t pay that upfront no matter what, or wake up and realise how ridiculous that decision is in relation to current investment interests.


Actually… Sorry to tell you but I don’t care about investors - I care about devs and real users…

How does the network benefit by people sitting on their coin they bought because of greed and hope for a Lambo without even knowing what the project ‘They invested in’ does…?

… You are pretty fast in judging - don’t assume others are stupid only because they disagree that this is the next move that makes most sense.

I don’t even say you are wrong with the monetary benefits for investors - that is absolutely possible - in my world that just is not the priority … We are only talking about the temporary placeholder token here…


OK my bad, I seriously didn’t think I need to say that, real users will come after the speculation and marketing. The investors will be one of the first new users, the investors will also introduce it to their friends and market the product. Having a dominance in the market cap monetary wise basically CAUSES you to have a dominance adoption wise. If the project is good.

I don’t care about money either, but the rest of the world seems to and I just think it’ll be stupid not to use that to our advantage. Plus, it can actually give more funding for development. You can’t win this argument either way.

Okay - I will stop here again because

I’m not stupid I just don’t agree with you

Ps: okay I didn’t think I would need to say that but what annoys me is your arrogant tone and especially


Sorry, I didn’t say you are. I’m saying the decision is. I apologie for not making it clear. The decision can be bad or stupid, doesn’t necessarily mean the person making it is.

1 Like

You can’t either if you keep using terms like “stupid”.


I’m pretty sure you are correct about this @foreverjoyful.

The gains that can be made, if you hold large enough amount of token, and get listed on bigger exchanges, will be higher than the initial cost of listing.
I think one would be making a fool’s argument trying to argue against that.

If the cost of 2-3 months of development was the only reason not to, then I would say the decision is not precisely rational.


There could be other reasons, and whether or not those are rational, I know nothing of.
There could be many reasons. Even such reasons that cannot be communicated now.

You get almost no likes @foreverjoyful, but if I look beyond that stuff, stuff that could make people dislike you, (tone, approach, a certain aggressive thing in your language) and one or another bad idea, … I do not actually see that you would be wrong per se in this observation.
And however much I do not want to be falling in the same box that you are now (being disliked), I just have to say this. Because at the same time I like facts most of all. Facts and reason. Regardless of where it comes from. So if an idiot says something true (or a rude, arrogant smug arse, whatever you dislike most), then it is not less true.
(I’m not implying you are one, sorry, it is just figuratively speaking).

Until there are facts saying that this observation is wrong, I’m not actually going to think it is. Social pressure or not. And I do hope that no one holds it against me :slight_smile:


No worries - I didn’t think you called me stupid

It’s only that I’m an arrogant person and I get annoyed when I have the feeling people think I’m slow :wink:


Well, we all can’t win if we don’t realise and accept facts to make a better decision. I’m presenting arguments. You’re arguing how presenting my argument, that’s an ad hominem fallacy, but anyway…

Well first, I thank you for not attacking me as a person. Though honestly, I’m not trying to present it in an arrogant tone, but I am just, sigh… very frustrated at the illogical and just, unimaginable, decisions the team makes. None of them help the project more than it hinders it.

I’m pretty sure most people in this forum are long enough in crypto space to know that listing on good exchanges and easier accessibility would be a good thing :slight_smile:

And the team for sure knows this too =)
… as I said I don’t even disagree with the value that comes with additional exposure and liquidity…
… But I do think the team consists of highly capable people and I trust them on this (and it’s not like telling them what they know anyway would suddenly change everything…) and I think it’s best to work together full steam along the path maidsafe is thinking makes most sense for now

Ps: and I guess I could have just said that in my first post and clarified my position a little bit :thinking: - sorry for that @foreverjoyful


I think everyone here could understand what it is like being frustrated, the way you describe it, we might have experienced it in some other situations. Things get very real for all of us here, even though we are talking on a forum about it.

And we all have various understandings of how things should be done. Naturally, when you feel really strongly something should be done some way, and you see it is not done like that, it will cause frustration - especially if it is something you care a lot about.

I understand that you see a way forward that you are absolutely sure would be better for all of us. The best thing I can say is that we are all human, and it is very easy to trigger reactions in people, that are going to work against them listening to potentially good ideas you might have.

It is hard if you are an impulsive and impatient person online, easily expressing your frustration that then makes some formulations less sensitive, because it will make it harder to get your ideas to shine through all of that.

Now, this is all generally speaking, off the topic and regardless of what way is right and not in this particular question.


I agree with this guy! time to wake up guys. you’re loosing tracking


I have to say I’ve seen this be true in many cases and really agree with @foreverjoyful

I can only dream of the day when this type of major exposure comes to the MaidSafe project that I love so much,

instead of being wasted on things like Tron / Verge etc…


i’d pay exchange before paying trip to ayr for dev lol


Why not crowdfund it here?
All that believe strongly that it is worth all the money (and even five times more) - come together and pay for it. As you say, it can only be a win, no?


they got angel investment then they crowdfunded their project then sold equity… investor putted enough into this project.

1 Like

I would only see that argument valid, if you were a significant distance away from 100% sure (i.e. not so sure), that it would be a highly beneficial path to go. If you are sure, this additional injection will have a good return.


I see everyone’s point that by investing in a top crypto exchange like Binance would get more exposure, thus more liquidity and higher prices, which also can increase interest of not only investors or supporters but also developers. But it is a risk as we can’t predict what the markets will do. What if it takes a huge year long slump after some undeserved exuberance? Then you’d wish you paid for development. Where I get conflicted is do you spend all this money to push maidsafecoin and then have to explain its a proxy token and then push the message of safecoin? Will the exchanges try to charge a second time to list safecoin? Could you do an airdrop like EOS is doing with the erc20 token (most likely). Are we too close to test safecoin to justify all that effort and money when the money could just help pay to get us there faster with more certainty?? To me it’s about risk. I get the economic drivers that make this a valid argument though. @foreverjoyful I like that you go against the grain but sometimes it’s hard to tell if you’re not just being contrarian as your posts tend to be very provocative and critical. No offense there just pointing that out for future consideration.