Topic: 4 main reasons why ICO projects are not trusted - page 3. (Read 791 times)
You can research independent sites that do a deep analysis of the team and the project idea itself
Support is important indeed.
Also, my number 5 is legal - how much resources founders spent trying to make an ICO legally viable? If the IC is legal and regulated, it can eliminate many issues from number 1-4, since you need to get through a lot of checks while doing a legally correct ICO.
Also, my number 5 is legal - how much resources founders spent trying to make an ICO legally viable? If the IC is legal and regulated, it can eliminate many issues from number 1-4, since you need to get through a lot of checks while doing a legally correct ICO.
I think Team is important too, if the team cannot be trusted by their profiles, then you have no reason to follow or invest in this ICO.
Yes at least they are not foreigners and can be recognized in a professional, educational background of quality.Easier you can check them in linkedin.
Reviewing ICO projects is becoming a challenge because we have tens of them per week with their crowdsales starting. Some projects are making investors life harder because their websites ar not explaining how real they are and what they are really doing: using hype around cryptocurrency or trying to do the project.
The reasons why ICO teams are not trusted:
1. They have not links to social profiles of their members on facebook or linkedin.
2. There is no dedicated person that answers emails or in social media.
3. Communication is not personalized. You chat or email with a person with no name or a name you can not check is true.
4. You have to wait several days to get the answer from the team.
The reasons why ICO teams are not trusted:
1. They have not links to social profiles of their members on facebook or linkedin.
2. There is no dedicated person that answers emails or in social media.
3. Communication is not personalized. You chat or email with a person with no name or a name you can not check is true.
4. You have to wait several days to get the answer from the team.
Very good points, I think nobody can disagree. In fact, I would even say numbers 4, 3, 2, then 1 are the priority. But to be honest, these are simply basic customer support that is very important to all start ups, all services, not just ICOs.
The smart ICOs now already take care of 1. Everyone has that. They even have 2 or 3 done easily now through Slack and Telegram and even here.
That said, the best ICOs invest a lot of money in promotion and bounty. so 3-4 are hired people from here and freelancers. So not necessarily the best solution.
Good projects recruit and train the support staff first. Then they launch.
Reviewing ICO projects is becoming a challenge because we have tens of them per week with their crowdsales starting. Some projects are making investors life harder because their websites ar not explaining how real they are and what they are really doing: using hype around cryptocurrency or trying to do the project.
The reasons why ICO teams are not trusted:
1. They have not links to social profiles of their members on facebook or linkedin.
2. There is no dedicated person that answers emails or in social media.
3. Communication is not personalized. You chat or email with a person with no name or a name you can not check is true.
4. You have to wait several days to get the answer from the team.
The reasons why ICO teams are not trusted:
1. They have not links to social profiles of their members on facebook or linkedin.
2. There is no dedicated person that answers emails or in social media.
3. Communication is not personalized. You chat or email with a person with no name or a name you can not check is true.
4. You have to wait several days to get the answer from the team.
Sure, that's a real points. Team that doesn't exist on Linked In, or that does't reply is strange and not trustful.
I think Team is important too, if the team cannot be trusted by their profiles, then you have no reason to follow or invest in this ICO.
The ICO teams getting unprofessional day by day, there are some serious team with serious efforts
But there a lot of fake unprofessional team, I mean A LOT
They just want to collect money as much as they can by bluffing as much as they can
But there a lot of fake unprofessional team, I mean A LOT
They just want to collect money as much as they can by bluffing as much as they can
If team members are unknown, there is even no need to look at project. Because I like most projects but I can't see any team who can execute it. So team does matter.
My 4 reasons would be as follows (but not in any particular order):
1. Project/Concept cannot be achieved, no basis for it to work now or in the long run.
2. Too expensive, soft caps/hard caps, token value also.
3. The board of members and advisory team are not solid, inexperienced, no knowledge, no feedback.
4. ICO website doesn't exist or not descriptive, No groups/channels for community and no communication between team and community.
sorry im a newbie, can you please tell me why the board of members is a reason?1. Project/Concept cannot be achieved, no basis for it to work now or in the long run.
2. Too expensive, soft caps/hard caps, token value also.
3. The board of members and advisory team are not solid, inexperienced, no knowledge, no feedback.
4. ICO website doesn't exist or not descriptive, No groups/channels for community and no communication between team and community.
That is why you should join their Telegram channels or groups - in those groups you will be able to receive information about the ICO and keep up to date with anything about the ICO.
Reviewing ICO projects is becoming a challenge because we have tens of them per week with their crowdsales starting. Some projects are making investors life harder because their websites ar not explaining how real they are and what they are really doing: using hype around cryptocurrency or trying to do the project.
The reasons why ICO teams are not trusted:
1. They have not links to social profiles of their members on facebook or linkedin.
2. There is no dedicated person that answers emails or in social media.
3. Communication is not personalized. You chat or email with a person with no name or a name you can not check is true.
4. You have to wait several days to get the answer from the team.
The reasons why ICO teams are not trusted:
1. They have not links to social profiles of their members on facebook or linkedin.
2. There is no dedicated person that answers emails or in social media.
3. Communication is not personalized. You chat or email with a person with no name or a name you can not check is true.
4. You have to wait several days to get the answer from the team.
what..for a second I think I have been reading about poloniex.
Joke aside, there are already some alts that have a function for predicting some ICO like WINGs for example, you can get the alternate view about an ICO with them tbh.
The projects I follow will not be trusted when it has no clear and fresh idea, the Dev stamp team does not reveal or have scammers, no community of interest, no roadmap and whitepaper. Here are some reasons I often overlook ICO projects.
My 4 reasons would be as follows (but not in any particular order):
1. Project/Concept cannot be achieved, no basis for it to work now or in the long run.
2. Too expensive, soft caps/hard caps, token value also.
3. The board of members and advisory team are not solid, inexperienced, no knowledge, no feedback.
4. ICO website doesn't exist or not descriptive, No groups/channels for community and no communication between team and community.
sorry im a newbie, can you please tell me why the board of members is a reason? 1. Project/Concept cannot be achieved, no basis for it to work now or in the long run.
2. Too expensive, soft caps/hard caps, token value also.
3. The board of members and advisory team are not solid, inexperienced, no knowledge, no feedback.
4. ICO website doesn't exist or not descriptive, No groups/channels for community and no communication between team and community.
Well I agree with the first three points you mentioned but taking time to reply doesn't make someone fraudulent, it might be because they are getting too many mails or some other reason as far as you are getting a reply I don't think it should be a problem.
All the point you have raised is what characterized open source, decentralized idea! Majority of us are not here for celebrity status that is why if you are buying to ICO, you mustdoyour own research and accept the risk you are willing to take!
Of course it's a risk, as buying the ico, you will not be able to exchange it to sell it at least for the same price that was previously...
My 4 reasons would be as follows (but not in any particular order):
1. Project/Concept cannot be achieved, no basis for it to work now or in the long run.
2. Too expensive, soft caps/hard caps, token value also.
3. The board of members and advisory team are not solid, inexperienced, no knowledge, no feedback.
4. ICO website doesn't exist or not descriptive, No groups/channels for community and no communication between team and community.
1. Project/Concept cannot be achieved, no basis for it to work now or in the long run.
2. Too expensive, soft caps/hard caps, token value also.
3. The board of members and advisory team are not solid, inexperienced, no knowledge, no feedback.
4. ICO website doesn't exist or not descriptive, No groups/channels for community and no communication between team and community.
Thank you for this guide. With this, ICOs should be regulated to prevent scams. Yes, linkedIn profile helps but I wonder if how can victims track or catch suspects and bring them to prison. Too bad nowadays some ICO where merely fly-by-night, no one goes to jail if ever they screw up investors.
At the moment, even communication with team will not save you from fraud of any kind. Main thing you need to recognize - Does the idea brings added value to the industry or not, than you'll decide to invest or not. This is not 100% guarantee too, but who wants to kill the working business?)
added value?
hmm did bitcoin brought added value or redistributed it away from the established financial system?
secondly added value is possible no problem, but then you have to look for efficiency,
Quote
4. You have to wait several days to get the answer from the team.
I guess this one should not be included! Because, the team are always too busy to answer all question being asked everyday.
But I totally agree on the rest of your reasons, especially no. 3, because it makes everything more suspicious. I hope it soon got implemented on some good suspicious ICO's, but all we can do now is to choose properly those trusted ones without your 4 reasons to make a sure profit.
and there are way too many of them out there right now. It makes evaluation really difficult for inexperienced and even expererienced investors. It's not easy to just go through thousands of projects as a noob and pick a descent one, especially when you have no idea of the overal blockchain trends and how they might affect the future. It's tricky, I know, but if you manage to find this one project out of these thousands that will make it, then you definitely will be rewarded handsomely, most of the better projects are not even known all that much and they will explode when people start learning about their use-cases and potential future use. There is so much potential but unfortunately so many people taking advantage of it.
Yeah! All points discussed were correct! Anyone should be wise in joining any campaign. Such campaign with low credibility should be avoided. I think it is mostly important that a campaign must have a good personalized communication. A set of team is assigned for the overall campaign. PR is quite relevant for the success of a certain campaign and if one has not supported it with good PR back like what is stated in the forum, neither no designated person to answer all queries or if there is but will took a while to answer, then maybe it is the red signal that this campaign should be avoided.
Jump to: