oh, so, ifxy should be viewed and received in the industry as a "competent" choice for ico guidance and consulting? and i presume that perception would be based on this first time at the rodeo effort with the nuvus ico? funny that i don't see the description of their business in their filings as you have explained it. there is so much that is not clear in their filings or in their corporate story as it is unfolding. lots and lots of dots that are not connected or don't even seem quite connectable at all. i think this new business effort will be short lived, as i do not think that ifxy will become a successful player in the ico space at all. i don't think that they have the right folks to formally gain any real credibility in this space. i think the otc baggage is too heavy and their tactics to hype ifxy stock price along with the nuvus ico was not a very wise thing to do. i think it greatly detracts from their ability to be perceived as credible, and i think that continued attempts to use the hype method to float the stock to the public is not the way to bring the right kind of attention to their business or to be taken seriously by promising companies looking to do an ico. especially since the ico market has cooled off so much and the most successful and promising ico's turn to high profile experts in this industry and as regulatory concerns intensify. look at this new market development hot off the press:
and no, and expert does not have to have 15 years experience in their niche. there are "experts" in very young areas of business and knowledge, by virtue of their level of knowledge and experience within that industry. there are experts in the ico field who already been involved in dozens of highly successful icos. so, there are experts in this area without a doubt. ifxy constitutes an inexperienced player at this time and i would not consider them even "competent" consultants at this juncture.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
