ICOs (Initial Coin Offerings) are a concept that emerged slightly over a decade ago in the cryptocurrency world after fundraising methods underwent a revolution. Maybe you are one of those wondering, ‘When was the first ICO held?’ In this article, we will walk you back to 2013, when the first ICO originated. We will also discuss how the fundraising environment has been influenced today by these ICOs, and the challenges they have birthed.
When Was the First ICO Held? The Mastercoin Story
J.R. Willett is recognized for the first ICO with his invention, Mastercoin (now called Omni). The concept of an ICO was born in 2012 when Willett released a white paper called ‘The Second Bitcoin White Paper’. In this paper, he explained in detail a new protocol that would be developed on top of Bitcoin.
Willet introduced the idea of Initial Coin Offering in the whitepaper, as a medium through which projects of new cryptocurrencies could raise funds.
Willett’s significant achievement occurred in 2013, when he initiated the Mastercoin ICO, securing USD$500,000 in Bitcoin. In contrast to conventional fundraising techniques that typically involve regulations, bureaucratic procedures, and intermediary parties, the ICO approach enabled Willett to connect directly with the cryptocurrency community.
Investors could buy Mastercoin tokens, which claimed to improve Bitcoin’s functionality by allowing digital contracts and decentralized applications on the Bitcoin blockchain.
The Mastercoin ICO represented a groundbreaking event in the cryptocurrency space, being the initial public offering of tokens to finance a blockchain-related initiative. It relied on the assurance of technological progress instead of a tangible item, a framework that would eventually become usual in the ICO landscape.
The Significance of Mastercoin’s ICO: A New Way of Fundraising
The success of Mastercoin’s crypto ICOs, which garnered funds through Bitcoin in a decentralized and clear way, was crucial in initiating the ICO phenomenon. It provided a straightforward response to when the first ICO was held, while also paving the way for a new category of blockchain projects to gather funding.
In contrast to conventional Initial Public Offerings (IPOs), which necessitate relinquishing equity and adhering to stringent regulatory oversight, ICOs enabled businesses to gather capital without forfeiting ownership and with significantly reduced regulations.
This was particularly attractive to developers and entrepreneurs who considered conventional funding methods to be overly complicated.
What set Mastercoin apart was its ability to utilize blockchain technology and decentralization to raise funds directly from the community. This approach allowed early stage cryptocurrencies to forge a solid connection with their backers and foster a more engaged and dedicated user community.
The ICO model became popular, and a go-to method for fundraising with the blockchain and cryptocurrency industries.
ICOs vs IPOs: Key Differences and How ICOs Work
The rise of ICO as a fundraising method is often compared to IPOs (Initial Public Offerings), but while both are ways to raise capital, the models differ significantly. Here’s a breakdown of the differences:
- Equity vs. Tokens: IPOs involve buying company shares, and granting ownership, while ICOs provide tokens for access or utility, not ownership.
- Regulation: IPOs are regulated by authorities like the SEC for investor protection; ICOs lack regulation, risking scams and fraud.
- Ownership: IPO founders relinquish equity and control, unlike ICOs where founders maintain full control without giving ownership.
- Investment Process: IPOs require intermediaries like brokers for share purchases; ICOs allow direct participation using cryptocurrencies like Ethereum, eliminating intermediaries.
Much like IPOs, ICOs generally follow a multi-stage funding process, which includes private sales, pre-ICOs, and the ICO itself, each offering different levels of access and bonuses for early investors.
| Aspect | Initial Public Offering (IPO) | Initial Coin Offering (ICO) |
|---|---|---|
| Nature of Offering | Sells shares, granting equity ownership. | Sells tokens for access or utility, not ownership. |
| Regulation | Heavily regulated by authorities (e.g., SEC). | Generally unregulated, increasing risk of scams. |
| Ownership | Investors gain equity, diluting founders’ control. | Founders retain full control; no ownership rights for investors. |
| Investment Process | Requires intermediaries like brokers. | Allows direct participation using cryptocurrencies. |
| Investor Requirements | Investors must complete KYC and meet specific criteria. | Minimal requirements; often just a crypto wallet is needed. |
ICO Mania: From Mastercoin to Ethereum and Beyond
Mastercoin’s ICO Success sparked a surge in cryptocurrency fundraising. As additional projects started to see the possibilities of ICOs, Ethereum conducted its own in 2014, generating $18 million.
This marked a crucial point, as Ethereum brought forth the concept of smart contracts, offering a framework for additional decentralized initiatives to fundraise via ICOs.
After Ethereum successfully carried out its ICO, this approach of raising funds was no longer perceived as an experiment, but a viable method of sourcing funding for blockchain projects. Thousands of ICOs sprang up by 2017, raising billions of dollars.
- ICO Funds raised in 2017 (Source: Coin Insider)
According to Coin Insider, approximately 252 ICOs collectively raised around $5.7 billion in 2017, with 2018 witnessing 1602 projects fundraising approximately $13.6 trillion.
The Downside of ICOs: The Rise of Scams and Regulation
With the surge of the ICO market, it also drew its portion of malicious individuals. Numerous projects did not fulfill their commitments, and a few were blatant frauds, resulting in increased regulatory examination. Governments globally started paying attention to ICOs, with certain nations prohibiting them completely while others implemented new regulations.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) cautioned against possible scams and deemed numerous tokens as unregistered securities. This resulted in heightened scrutiny and legal measures against numerous projects that did not adhere to current regulations13.
Despite the difficulties, ICOs significantly contributed to the growth of the cryptocurrency ecosystem, providing prospects for both investors and developers. Currently, more regulated models like IEOs (Initial Exchange Offerings) and STOs (Security Token Offerings) are utilized; however, ICOs continue to significantly impact how blockchain projects obtain funding.
Conclusion
The concept of ICO began with Mastercoin, the initial public token sale for a blockchain-oriented initiative. The achievement of this ICO paved the way for a new phase of fundraising, enabling blockchain initiatives to circumvent conventional financial systems and directly connect with the cryptocurrency community. ICOs have changed how projects secure funding, providing a different option to conventional IPOs with reduced entry obstacles.
ICOs have made fundraising more accessible in the cryptocurrency realm, allowing additional projects to emerge and more investors to engage in the digital economy. Although there are hurdles with regulations and fraudulent activities, the impact of the initial ICO, Mastercoin, is essential for grasping the development of fundraising in the blockchain realm.
