Topic: 80% of ICOs are Scams - page 31. (Read 12249 times)
It's actually an obvious fact that majority of ICO's has no intention of fulfilling their promises. Most are only concerned about getting investors funds. Its quite amazing that the percentage is this high. I do hope that some regulations would be enacted to bringing this fraudulent ICO's initiators to book.
Saw this study on twitter... https://twitter.com/Zeex_me/status/978981735101878272
I've seen a lot of people asking about how many legit ICOs there are, so I thought I'd share
Quote from the article: "The study begins by breaking down ICOs into 6 groups: Scam, Failed, Gone Dead, Dwindling, Promising, Successful. “On the basis of the above classification,” they wrote, “we found that approximately 81% of ICO’s were Scams, ~6% Failed, ~5% had Gone Dead, and ~8% went on to trade on a exchange.”
"Scams were defined by researchers as “Any project that expressed availability of [an] ICO investment (through a website publishing, ANN thread, or social media posting with a contribution address), did not have/had no intention of fulfilling project development duties with the funds, and/or was deemed by the community (message boards, website or other online information) to be a scam.”
DYOR people ...
As we can all see, most ICOs right now are scam and not trusted by expert investors to invest our funds with. According to the research, crypto analysts say that out of 100% of all number of new published ICOs, almost 90% of them are scam and the remaining 10% is still profitable to invest with. In this case, we must be knowledgeable enough before investing on projects. I've seen a lot of people asking about how many legit ICOs there are, so I thought I'd share
Quote from the article: "The study begins by breaking down ICOs into 6 groups: Scam, Failed, Gone Dead, Dwindling, Promising, Successful. “On the basis of the above classification,” they wrote, “we found that approximately 81% of ICO’s were Scams, ~6% Failed, ~5% had Gone Dead, and ~8% went on to trade on a exchange.”
"Scams were defined by researchers as “Any project that expressed availability of [an] ICO investment (through a website publishing, ANN thread, or social media posting with a contribution address), did not have/had no intention of fulfilling project development duties with the funds, and/or was deemed by the community (message boards, website or other online information) to be a scam.”
DYOR people ...
I am a believer but to the point that I do not agree the findings that 80% of the ICOs are scams , not really that figure no one shows as the statistics , I do not say that there is no scams but there is a few we can not prevent that , but not to many ICO scam i believe in that. But this does not stop people from further testing themselves in this direction. This is a revolution in the crypt and brings both profit and new players who are able to influence and create competition to certain tops. scams are everywhere on internet outside internet well but ico are may or may nt be fully be scam but the growth of icos really made people talk more about ico they may be probably scam because of ico turnover collection.
Well, of course, 80% is too much, but I think that somewhere around 50/50 at the moment may be true, but personally I have met up to now two such projects
imagine, when all of ico accepted on exchanger, trade by all of us, its possible to accommodate all of coin on exchanger? and they want to accept i dont know that is good coin or not? there must be much coin and not all coin will trade or accept on exchanger. so there are many zonk coin, that is scam or they are not accepted on exchanger
yes, you are saying right 80%+ Ico is the scam.there are plenty of scam projects and they are making troubles for good ideas.
I believe it's kinda wrong to spread terrible news about ICO when their ventures have succeeded. Some had helped from ICOs and some are most certainly not. What I need to state is that since it never helped us, doesn't mean its terrible. Not all are a similar trick. Simply put resources into different ways.
because of these scammers constantly introduce new restrictions and come up with new laws! the world community is not against bitcoin and vsaye crypto system, they are against new companies-who turn out to be scammers!
A lot of ICOS have problems now financially because they were selling their ETH slowly, now ETH price dropped many ICOS panic sold and dumped their ETH, causing an even bigger crash in the market, which also worked against them because many of the ERC20 tokens are now rendered worthless and tacky and many people just don't want to buy them or they don't trust ETH itself anymore as a platform. We are now on a low point in this market cycle so many ICOS will be rendered useless also soon. The quality projects though will outshine the rubbish.
Well at this point it is simply impossible to say that 80% of ICOs are scam. Most of the ICO started this year, most of them are still under development.
People are screaming scam after months after the ICO happened when there isn't a big profit or the price dropped.
People are screaming scam after months after the ICO happened when there isn't a big profit or the price dropped.
Yes it is true, more and more of a scam ICO than ICO who succeed at this time. And this is of course is very worrying because more and more people coming into the crypto world just for making money and don't care though must be harming others. Therefore, we should be careful in investing, I even think of just doing trading only more than invest in a new ICO because it is risk.
Currently, predicting the percentage of fraud in the ICO is uncertain. So I think maybe more than 80% of scams are going on today so we need to update our knowledge of market experiences to avoid fraudulent schemes.
So only 8% of ICOs are reliable projects with tokens being traded on exchanges..
Wow, that's a very disappointing figure and a scary tendency.
Wow, that's a very disappointing figure and a scary tendency.
100% of the result will not be exact and there are no guarantees. But it's possible to increase the "hits" in the correct ICO well, if you study the project.
Unfortunately, even a good study of the project is not enough, there is a risk that they will not collect the investment, or they will collect but reduce the payments for the bounty. There are a lot of such examples.
It's really sad statistics. And this means we need to be very careful and choose ICO to invest only after learning all the necessary information about the project.
Saw this study on twitter... https://twitter.com/Zeex_me/status/978981735101878272
I've seen a lot of people asking about how many legit ICOs there are, so I thought I'd share
Quote from the article: "The study begins by breaking down ICOs into 6 groups: Scam, Failed, Gone Dead, Dwindling, Promising, Successful. “On the basis of the above classification,” they wrote, “we found that approximately 81% of ICO’s were Scams, ~6% Failed, ~5% had Gone Dead, and ~8% went on to trade on a exchange.”
"Scams were defined by researchers as “Any project that expressed availability of [an] ICO investment (through a website publishing, ANN thread, or social media posting with a contribution address), did not have/had no intention of fulfilling project development duties with the funds, and/or was deemed by the community (message boards, website or other online information) to be a scam.”
DYOR people ...
I've seen a lot of people asking about how many legit ICOs there are, so I thought I'd share
Quote from the article: "The study begins by breaking down ICOs into 6 groups: Scam, Failed, Gone Dead, Dwindling, Promising, Successful. “On the basis of the above classification,” they wrote, “we found that approximately 81% of ICO’s were Scams, ~6% Failed, ~5% had Gone Dead, and ~8% went on to trade on a exchange.”
"Scams were defined by researchers as “Any project that expressed availability of [an] ICO investment (through a website publishing, ANN thread, or social media posting with a contribution address), did not have/had no intention of fulfilling project development duties with the funds, and/or was deemed by the community (message boards, website or other online information) to be a scam.”
DYOR people ...
Author, if you participate in all projects without analysis. That agrees a lot of projects will be fraud. But why set yourself up for the worst? carefully choose a bounty and your opinion will change. Good luck to you.
Indeed many scams are out there but factor in that some (good and bad) use the same ICO platforms. There are several services which offer ICO platforms out there (with payment, campaign tracking and built in KYC hooks.)
Is there any statistics on the number of ICO screeches? I think there might be a good topic for discussion and the constant updating of the list of tokens. it would be a good idea to create tables
Saw this study on twitter... https://twitter.com/Zeex_me/status/978981735101878272
I've seen a lot of people asking about how many legit ICOs there are, so I thought I'd share
Quote from the article: "The study begins by breaking down ICOs into 6 groups: Scam, Failed, Gone Dead, Dwindling, Promising, Successful. “On the basis of the above classification,” they wrote, “we found that approximately 81% of ICO’s were Scams, ~6% Failed, ~5% had Gone Dead, and ~8% went on to trade on a exchange.”
"Scams were defined by researchers as “Any project that expressed availability of [an] ICO investment (through a website publishing, ANN thread, or social media posting with a contribution address), did not have/had no intention of fulfilling project development duties with the funds, and/or was deemed by the community (message boards, website or other online information) to be a scam.”
DYOR people ...
I've seen a lot of people asking about how many legit ICOs there are, so I thought I'd share
Quote from the article: "The study begins by breaking down ICOs into 6 groups: Scam, Failed, Gone Dead, Dwindling, Promising, Successful. “On the basis of the above classification,” they wrote, “we found that approximately 81% of ICO’s were Scams, ~6% Failed, ~5% had Gone Dead, and ~8% went on to trade on a exchange.”
"Scams were defined by researchers as “Any project that expressed availability of [an] ICO investment (through a website publishing, ANN thread, or social media posting with a contribution address), did not have/had no intention of fulfilling project development duties with the funds, and/or was deemed by the community (message boards, website or other online information) to be a scam.”
DYOR people ...
That's why it's best not to bother with ICOs, there are just too many scammers in this world, and an ICO is an attractive way of duping people. I just didn't realize it was this much. The worst thing is that such assholes have probably made millions off the hard work of others, mean while regular folks are suffering during this time.
I think that most people who have some kind of investment background understand that start-ups launching ICO are high-risk investments and their expectations as such.
Jump to: