What is FuelCoin? And is the project dead?
In this FuelCoin review, we'll run through everything you need to know about FC2.
You'll discover price updates, fundamental analysis of the project and predictions for FuelCoin in 2018.
1. What is FuelCoin?
FuelCoin was a cryptocurrency designed for payments.
Their vision was to make FC2 a rival to Bitcoin.
When it was first created, they achieved rapid growth but since then the coin’s following and development community has died off.
They were also listed on Bittrex and Cryptopia but trading volumes have now slumped.
Their trading symbol was listed under FUEL and FC2.
In total, there were 100 million coins released (these were pre-mined in a Proof of Stake model).
Their wallet is available to download for Mac, Windows and GitHub here.
So let’s look at the fundamentals of how FuelCoin works.
Note: FuelCoin (FC2) shouldn’t be confused with Etherparty (FUEL), a cryptocurrency with a similar trading symbol.
The vision of the FuelCoin project was to deliver a cryptocurrency solution that’s more stable than other coins on the market.
This aimed to make the cryptocurrrency more practical and reliable for day to day payments.
That's mainly because you’d have a long-term value that doesn't fluctuate so often.
For example, when you look at the value of cryptocurrencies, you can see that they’re constantly going up and down.
And it’s not unusual to see huge price swings day to day.
Now whilst that’s fun for investors, it’s also a serious problem for the adoption of cryptocurrency.
For example, how can anyone pay for an item with cryptocurrency, if the value isn’t stable?
Let’s say you want to buy a car with Bitcoin - and in one week, the coin's value goes from $6,000 to $15,000.
If you go in on Tuesday, your Bitcoin might be able to buy the whole car.
If you go to the car dealership on Thursday, you need 2 Bitcoins.
So a lack of stability means the coin’s price isn’t reliable.
And that’s what FuelCoin aimed to fix.
This stability model was aiming to solve a similar problem to coins like Tether, which peg the price of Tether to a USD to keep the value stable.
As a payment cryptocurrency, FuelCoin was designed to be used in ecommerce.
The FuelCoin stated than Bitcoin is more like a digital commodity - and a store of value - rather than an active cryptocurrency.
The team compared it’s use case to commodities like Gold and Silver.
And therefore they argued that Bitcoin isn’t suited to the ecommerce industry.
FuelCoin reasoned these problems to down to Bitcoin’s:
High transaction fees on the network
Slow transaction verification times
And I can see their logic:
For example, Stripe removed support for Bitcoin because of its impracticalities for ecommerce.
Instead, FC2 wanted to create a more active cryptocurrency.
Their vision was:
Websites could accept payments in FC2 tokens
International payments could be accepted
Universal currency across countries
Fixed number of tokens (100 million), to match supply vs demand
1.3. Social Network
The team behind FuelCoin also saw an opportunity in terms of Bitcoin’s lack of trading activity.
For example, 70% of Bitcoin’s aren’t actively traded.
Whereas FuelCoin aimed to create more of a social interactive cryptocurrency, where FC2 tokens would be traded more actively.
However, as you’ll discover below, FuelCoin’s project was actually de-listed from Bittrex because of their low trading volumes.
So whilst their vision was the complete opposite, most holders of FuelCoin tokens weren’t actively trading.
1.4. Leadership Team
Encrypted Labs was the development team behind FuelCoin.
This project was led by their CEO, Ian Worrall.
In interviews, Ian states he developed FuelCoin as a rival to Bitcoin because:
- Bitcoin has a poor reputation for DarkNet purchases
- He wanted to change people’s perceptions about cryptocurrency
- To move cryptocurrency away from the nefarious spending activities associated with Bitcoin
- To build a brand with more transparency than Bitcoin (Bitcoin’s original creator is unknown, whereas Encrypted Lab’s development team are more accountable)
- To create more trust in terms of building partnerships with merchants
2. FuelCoin’s Mining Model
One of the key differences between FuelCoin and Bitcoin is their mining model.
Bitcoin’s mining model is Proof of Work:
Whereas FuelCoin’s tokens were already pre-mined on release.
This type of cryptocurrency mining is often referred to as Proof of Stake.
And it basically means if you stake FuelCoin, you’d be rewarded with more tokens.
This type of model is designed to make it’s price more stable, because users are incentivised to hold the tokens rather than constantly trade them.
Proof of Stake also means that individuals are rewarded, rather than rewarding huge mining companies.
So for example, Bitcoin can’t be mined by the average person - you need a powerful mining rig.
With FuelCoin, you can just hold buy the coin, hold it in your wallet and receive rewards just for staking it.
So what’s the difference?
And why did FC2’s founders release a pre-mined tokens?
Here’s a few advantages to FuelCoin’s pre-mining model.
2.1. Transaction Verifications
Bitcoin relies on miners to verify transactions on the blockchain.
If there’s no miners, the network won’t operate properly.
But the problem with this model is that as more and more Bitcoins are mined, the algorithm to solve transactions on their blockchain becomes harder.
With FuelCoin, everything’s pre-mined.
There’s no need for miners to verify transactions on the blockchain.
2.2. Barriers To Entry For Mining
Mining Bitcoin isn’t possible for everyone.
There are huge barriers to entry.
In fact, it costs thousands of dollars to mine one Bitcoin, plus you need a lot of electricity and a powerful mining rig.
Back when it was first released, you could mine Bitcoin with a standard CPU laptop.
Anyone could do it.
But nowadays it takes a lot of preparation, time, electricity and resources to mine Bitcoin.
With FuelCoin’s pre-mining model, they wouldn’t need to rely on miners to adopt the platform.
So that means they don’t have to worry about problems with mining - such as:
A lack of hash power on the network
Slow processing speeds
High transaction fees
2.4. Environmentally Friendly
Mining coins like Bitcoin requires a lot of electricity.
That’s why most mining companies are based abroad in countries where the cost of using mass amounts electricity is more affordable, such as China.
FuelCoin’s Proof of Stake model is potentially more environmentally friendly, because it doesn’t require mining.
Therefore, transactions on their network don’t require much electricity to verify.
Pre-mining can offer more security to a blockchain’s platform too.
Miners often pool their resources together - so that they can reap the rewards of more collective hash power.
But the problem is, if a mining pool has a 51% or more hold of the blockchain’s total hash power, a 51% attack can be launched.
A 51% attack means transactions can be blocked, reversed and double spending of tokens can occur.
That’s a serious threat to cryptocurrencies that rely on miners.
With FuelCoin, their tokens are completely pre-mined, so they’re not at risk to a 51% attack.
3. FuelCoin Predictions
Today, this coin is no longer trading.
Yep, that's right - the project failed.
But at one point, it did hit exchanges such as Cryptopia and Bittrex.
So what went wrong?
Well, it looked like FC2 trading died off in February 2018 (see my price chart above).
That means they have no future - so need to make any predictions.
However, FuelCoin’s downfall represents the risks of investing in cryptocurrency.
So as an investor, what can we learn from FuelCoin’s downfall?
Well, here's a few reasons why the FuelCoin project failed.
3. 1. Failed Cryptocurrency Exchange Partnerships
Cryptocurrency exchanges are one of the effective ways for a coin to reach mass adoption.
That’s because these exchanges collectively host millions of traders, who are looking to invest in the market.
So getting listed on a cryptocurrency exchange means more exposure to new investors.
And the more investment that comes into the coin, the more value the currency gains.
After all, a cryptocurrency is only worth as much as someone’s willing to pay for it.
Bittrex actually delisted FuelCoin in 2017.
This announcement came after Bittrex stated they were only going to list coins with trading volumes of .2 BTC to .5 BTC/day.
FuelCoin’s trading volume didn’t hit the minimum required by Bittrex, so they were removed from the exchange.
Because there’s expenses and maintenance involved on hosting a coin via their exchange.
So if there’s not enough traders for the coin, then Bittrex won’t make a profit on the cryptocurrency.
Hence why they decided to cut off the dead wood.
For FuelCoin this meant losing thousands of dollars in investment.
It also meant they lost a lot of exposure to investors, and that their total trading volume would drop even lower.
Whilst they were also listed on Cryptopia cryptocurrency exchange, FuelCoin was eventually de-listed from there too.
3.2. Leadership Conflicts
Leadership teams are the backbone to any successful cryptocurrency.
Just like how a pilot flies a plane to it’s destination, the CEO’s role is to steer the cryptocurrency towards mainstream adoption.
And one of the key reasons behind FuelCoin’s downfall was their leadership team.
Some on the Bitcointalk forum had problems with the coin’s leadership.
For example, they voiced concerns about the founder’s long-term strategy - as you can see in the screenshot below.
3.3. Long Term Strategy
FuelCoin’s plan wasn’t didn’t really think about the long-term strategy of the project.
For example, they wanted to ride the ‘hype wave’ of investors, without considering that short term decisions can’t lead to long-term success.
They actually stated on the forum that even if they topped cryptocurrency trading charts, they didn’t expect FuelCoin to stay there for very long.
Now if you compare this to coin’s like Ethereum or Bitcoin, it’s a completely different strategy.
And I think investors need to be aware that short term price pumps won’t last long.
3.4. User Adoption
Cryptocurrencies are like businesses.
If you’re looking at their investment potential, you have to think about the cryptocurrency as a business.
And everyone who invests or holds the coin is a customer.
Now if the business doesn’t have enough customers, they’ll struggle to become profitable.
And if you cut off the profits to a company, they’ll eventually go out of business.
It doesn’t matter how good your blockchain technology is:
If you don’t have customers, you’ll go out of business (eventually).
And this is basically what happened to FuelCoin.
They couldn’t attract enough investors.
So eventually the money dried up, the coin’s trading volumes dropped and the project was abandoned.
If you look at FuelCoin’s Twitter page, they haven’t tweeted anything of value since 2015.
Now obviously, an active Twitter account isn’t essential for a blockchain project to succeed.
But this shows FuelCoin’s lack of investment in marketing.
Plus, their website is low budget too.
So you can tell they didn’t spend much money on marketing.
And if there’s no marketing budget behind the project, you’re going to struggle to:
- Advertise your technology
- Attract potential investors
- Keep the hype going about your project
- Demonstrate your project’s credibility
- Announce updates that could lead to a spike in trading price and volume
3.6. Low Trading Volumes
As discussed, FuelCoin was de-listed from Bittrex due to it’s low trading volume.
As an investor, if you see low trading volumes it’s a warning sign that the project may be struggling - or heading towards failure.
Trading volumes = the amount of coins being traded for that cryptocurrency
If trading volumes slump, then it’s a sign that:
- The coin doesn’t have many active investors
- Investors aren’t confident in the coin
- Holders might be trying to sell - but it might be the case that there aren’t enough buyers interested in the project
- Not enough investors know about the project
- Or that the coin doesn’t look like an attractive investment option
And here's the problem:
Trading volumes operate in terms of supply vs demand.
Less demand for a cryptocurrency = lower trading prices
So when FuelCoin’s trading volumes slumped, the price went down.
The less people are interested in trading the coin, the more the price will drop.
3.7. Lack Of Partnerships
Partnerships are a big part of gaining new users for a coin.
But FuelCoin didn’t announce any partnerships, which is a worrying sign for investors.
As FC2 was designed for payments, merchant partnerships would have been a great way to accelerate the coin’s growth.
For example, look at OmiseGo’s payment platform and their partnership announced with McDonald’s.
That’s a huge sign of their ambition, and also creates momentum for their user base to grow.
Plus partnerships usually create a spike in price along the way.
4. Why Did FuelCoin Fail?
Whilst the concept of FuelCoin was intriguing, their project looked set to fail.
So you can see why the FC2 project was abandoned:
- They had no marketing budget
- Their community didn’t agree with the coin’s leadership team
- Their trading volume dropped so low that the coin was de-listed from Bittrex
- They didn’t announce any merchant partnerships
- They didn’t have a long-term strategy to grow their user base and increase adoption
- They didn’t have a whitepaper, their website feels low budget and their Twitter account wasn’t maintained
As investor, these are all warning signs to watch out for.
Nowadays the cryptocurrency industry is highly competitive:
New ICOs are being launched everyday.
Many of them receive millions of dollars in funding, whilst their marketing budgets are high too.
So more and more projects are failing:
Because it’s becoming harder to compete.
And the chances of launching a successful cryptocurrency are very slim.