Author

Topic: [2018-03-16] ICOs Are Over, So What About The Product? (Read 116 times)

hero member
Activity: 672
Merit: 526
This project was stupid, uninteresting done by people who only want to benefit from momentum. Yes, stupid projects that are not revolutionary or offer real utility or a new protocol will not succeed in your ICO.

They talk as if the problem is just a lack of resources, but they forget that the project itself can generate resources if it is good enough. Just see the services section here of the forum.

ICO is still revolutionary and will help in this redefinition of what we mean by decentralized financing.
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 535
You know this is about the negative publicity that have plagued the cryptocurrency sector since the price of cryptos had declined from its peak. Let us give it a time to recover. Sooner or later, we will see influx of investors like it once used to. You see, nobody even noticed ICOs before until Bitcoin reached the news due to its outstanding performance in the last quarter last year. (I bet a huge chunk of the population worldwide did not even know about ICOs until the aforesaid eventful time.) If ICOs made it in the past with zero audience, what makes you think it will not make a comeback with a bigger audience this time, considering it is no longer starting from scratch? Just wait and see.
hero member
Activity: 994
Merit: 515
Get'em boys
CoinJob has failed to meet its requisite funding goals during their Initial Coin Offering (ICO) according to an announcement on their website in February, now it informs on error.

The project for a low-fee, distributed labor marketplace for computer-based work was launched in August 2017 and planned to raise up to 60,000 ETH, but collected $7,639 (less than 30 ETH at press time), according to ICObench.

“Definitely after the first day of the pre-sale, we knew we weren't going to make it because we just didn't see that many people are talking about it,” a former team member told Cointelegraph anonymously.

According to the source, the biggest problem was insufficient investment in marketing and not giving themselves enough time to advertise. “I think our idea was solid and our team was fantastic but, at the time, there were not standardized routes to having a successful ICO, so we were doing a lot of stumbling around in the dark trying to figure out what worked and what didn’t,” he said.

“I learned that having a great project means nothing if no one knows about it, and building a brand and getting the hype around your project is the most important things,” the source said, adding that the team is going to return money raised to contributors.

Last summer was a good season for ICOs, with more than $1.5 bln raised by 119 ICOs from June to August 2017, according to statistics of ICObench.

In 2017 ICOs raised a total of $4 bln, according to an EY study that analyzed 372 projects.  More than 10 percent of ICO proceeds are lost as a result of hacking attacks.

Besides suspicious cases like PlexCorps, DRC or RECoin there are unsuccessful ICOs that raised significantly less than expected and should close their project and those who continue their business but postponed the launch of the product.

Jan Brzezek CEO & co-founder of Crypto Finance believes that only five percent of ICOs will survive five years and only one percent will actively generate revenues for their clients in an amount which would be standard for private equity (P/E) investments. In October, Vitalik Buterin predicted that about 90 percent of token startups will fail.

“Even good projects are not raising the kind of money as in the past,” said Wulf Kaal, professor at the University of St. Thomas and director of Private Investment Fund Institute. Since late 2017, the ICO volume has been slowing down, and fewer projects are reaching fundraising goals, in November 2017, less than 25 percent hit goals, compared with more than 90 percent in June, according to the EY study.

source https://cointelegraph.com/news/icos-are-over-so-what-about-the-product
Jump to: