The problems with ICM (the term as claimed by the trenches) today: 1. Adverse selection is at work meaning currently most of the founders that choose to fundraise this way are probably tier 2 or 3. There are a few exceptions. 2. Adding a "flywheel" and "token buybacks" at the earliest stage of a startup is a monumentally terrible idea, because early stage companies specifically require capital to grow (and thus build the equity value of the company). It should never be going back to investors. 3. Even with a "flywheel" in place, 99.9% of startup investors that make returns do not get paid back with dividends, but rather through the sale of the company or at IPO, and we currently have no legally bonding structure in place that ties together these ideas 4. I strongly believe most founders should be highly communicative, but founders spending all their time communicating with token traders and speculators and attempting to build flywheels instead of actually building their business is a huge waste of time. What could fix this: 1. Some thoughts below on transparency and tokenization structures 2. Better founder vetting from existing ICM launchpads 3. Launchpads that think through the whole lifecycle, not just the launch itself 4. Legal frameworks for bonding tokens and equity together that allows for non-flywheel strategies 5. Slowing down and publishing comms schedules to give founders space to cook