Topic: ALL Initial Coin Offerings are Trash - page 10. (Read 22287 times)
Thankfully the cointelegraph publication says that 80% of them are trash but in your title, you said that ALL are trash, maybe I am just a glass half full type of guy but you have to admit that the remaining 20% that are legit are doing quite an impressive job.
To be candid, if a poll is held now to determine the motivation of people who invest in ICOs, you will see that they are mostly motivated by the money they would make and not by the project behind the whitepaper.
Large numbers of icos are trash I agreed but only few of them knows what they are doing ,i am a type who always run away from all erc20 tokens because the scam rate is very alarming ,the reason why cryptocurrency is have bad face is mainly from lost of money through ICO ,this is why I prefer coins with no ICO that the ones with icos
I agree that a very large amount of ICO is rubbish that will only follow the market, but I do not agree that this is all ICO!
I am not agree with the title "ALL ICOS are trash". Mentioned 80% ICOs in 2017 were scams, there were 20% ICOs legit, so, form the percentage itself means not ALL ICOs were trash. Some or most might be unsuccessfull projects, remembering the market condition throughout the year.
Title: "ALL Initial Coin Offerings are Trash"
Content: "What type of information do you need to know that Initial Coin Offerings are trash the majority of the time? 80% of ICOs in 2017 were scams. To put that into respective, that's 4 out of every 5."
Before hitting on ICOs, make up your mind first if "ALL" or "MOST" of them are trash.
While I agree that a lot of previous ICOs turned out to be trash or failure, some of them turned out quite well.
Content: "What type of information do you need to know that Initial Coin Offerings are trash the majority of the time? 80% of ICOs in 2017 were scams. To put that into respective, that's 4 out of every 5."
Before hitting on ICOs, make up your mind first if "ALL" or "MOST" of them are trash.
While I agree that a lot of previous ICOs turned out to be trash or failure, some of them turned out quite well.
That's why I really hope that is stricter rules and regulations would be implemented right away before anyone launch an ICO. There should be a working product already there would also be an agreement of refund for investors if they try to exit out or if it failed. Another new thing I hate is that ICOs are trying to change theirs to STO which is obvious that they are just trying to imitate things that would sell.
I'm afraid a lot of projects turn out to be scammers, but not 80%, a little less, just weak projects that couldn’t realize their ideas are often attributed to scams, or if the cryptocurrency prices fell, there wasn’t enough money to finish the project. In addition, most of the projects are faced with new rules for regulating the scope of ICO and cryptocurrencies, which must be met in order not to violate the law of the country in which they are registered. There are a lot of such projects and many of them have not disappeared anywhere and continue to work on their projects. I also lost a lot by investing in ICO and I do not protect anyone, but we need to remember about objectivity and the fact that there are quite a lot of strong projects that have brought profit to investors and benefit their community.
ALL ICOs are TRASH.
anybody who has been saying otherwise either has some stakes in it, like this one: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/are-icos-dead-5102089 who is trying to sell his ICO and make money by ripping people off, or the topics come from newbies who started making money from advertising useless tokens to others, get paid in that token (bounty hunters!) and earn some money but now since ICOs are dying they can no longer make any money that way so they want them to come back.
Not everyone, and tokens also have their own value for everyone. If you think this is garbage, then you are not lucky with the choice. They are far from ideal but you can get a profit from them. anybody who has been saying otherwise either has some stakes in it, like this one: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/are-icos-dead-5102089 who is trying to sell his ICO and make money by ripping people off, or the topics come from newbies who started making money from advertising useless tokens to others, get paid in that token (bounty hunters!) and earn some money but now since ICOs are dying they can no longer make any money that way so they want them to come back.
You might have your reasons for saying all ICOs are trash , but i do not agree with it, fine and good, we can say some ICOs are scam, no doubt, but there are certainly some ICOs you wish you did not miss. There are some with very good use case and at the exchange ,they do well. Not all fall in the trash group
Some are trash, or maybe most ICO but we cannot generalize it since there are also coins that are created from ICO and are still in the market now. We may see them dump but once in their existence they were able to make investors happy, perhaps it's just about timing, but as long as the coin
generated through ICO has an active hard working dev, that's where you say it has a great potential.
In my opinion, you should not be so categorical. Always among the projects of ICO there were both good and useless projects. At the present time of a protracted bear market, even for promising ICO projects it is very difficult to even collect softcap, not to mention the maximum planned amount. The cryptocurrency market will begin to recover and ICO projects will show themselves. True, this still needs to resolve the issue of fraud in this type of activity.
You might have your reasons for saying all ICOs are trash , but i do not agree with it, fine and good, we can say some ICOs are scam, no doubt, but there are certainly some ICOs you wish you did not miss. There are some with very good use case and at the exchange ,they do well. Not all fall in the trash group
There's a lot of posts in this section "ICOs will come back", "Some ICOs are scams", "Should I do ICOs". These all contain the implication that Initial Coin Offerings are fine and dandy.
What type of information do you need to know that Initial Coin Offerings are trash the majority of the time? 80% of ICOs in 2017 were scams. To put that into respective, that's 4 out of every 5. The odds are terrible. Going by the rules of probability, you're going to be apart of the four of five. Why wouldn't you be?
The ideas I've seen with Initial Coin Offerings are just as bad. Why do these companies need $80 million in the first place? Let's be realistic, most things don't need to be on the blockchain. Satoshi didn't need to do an Initial Coin Offering to make Bitcoin into a bustling success. He started off putting in his own money. What do ICOs actually have to bring to the table?
The people that are making these threads with a positive implication are probably apart of the scams, or they're risking their money with the odds stacked entirely against them.
It's possible to have original ideas offered for free. Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin. Some people are simply blinded by their greed and short-term to try speculate on the worthless. No wonder bubbles are so rampant within this ecosystem.
Resources:
https://cointelegraph.com/news/new-study-says-80-percent-of-icos-conducted-in-2017-were-scams
You are right that there are too many scam ICO created making everyone having hard day to filter all those scams. But i think it's not be wise to say all of the ICO were scam, since there are some good quality and original ICO created among those scams. What type of information do you need to know that Initial Coin Offerings are trash the majority of the time? 80% of ICOs in 2017 were scams. To put that into respective, that's 4 out of every 5. The odds are terrible. Going by the rules of probability, you're going to be apart of the four of five. Why wouldn't you be?
The ideas I've seen with Initial Coin Offerings are just as bad. Why do these companies need $80 million in the first place? Let's be realistic, most things don't need to be on the blockchain. Satoshi didn't need to do an Initial Coin Offering to make Bitcoin into a bustling success. He started off putting in his own money. What do ICOs actually have to bring to the table?
The people that are making these threads with a positive implication are probably apart of the scams, or they're risking their money with the odds stacked entirely against them.
It's possible to have original ideas offered for free. Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin. Some people are simply blinded by their greed and short-term to try speculate on the worthless. No wonder bubbles are so rampant within this ecosystem.
Resources:
https://cointelegraph.com/news/new-study-says-80-percent-of-icos-conducted-in-2017-were-scams
Not all of them are but you are right a large percentage simply aren't legitimate offerings or don't represent viable propositions that have potential to achieve usability or adoption and not a lot of investors are aware of that although recently there's been a huge backlash against the ICO industry because of this hence the decrease in the number of projects achieving success using this type of funding mechanism
There's a lot of posts in this section "ICOs will come back", "Some ICOs are scams", "Should I do ICOs". These all contain the implication that Initial Coin Offerings are fine and dandy.
What type of information do you need to know that Initial Coin Offerings are trash the majority of the time? 80% of ICOs in 2017 were scams. To put that into respective, that's 4 out of every 5. The odds are terrible. Going by the rules of probability, you're going to be apart of the four of five. Why wouldn't you be?
The ideas I've seen with Initial Coin Offerings are just as bad. Why do these companies need $80 million in the first place? Let's be realistic, most things don't need to be on the blockchain. Satoshi didn't need to do an Initial Coin Offering to make Bitcoin into a bustling success. He started off putting in his own money. What do ICOs actually have to bring to the table?
The people that are making these threads with a positive implication are probably apart of the scams, or they're risking their money with the odds stacked entirely against them.
It's possible to have original ideas offered for free. Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin. Some people are simply blinded by their greed and short-term to try speculate on the worthless. No wonder bubbles are so rampant within this ecosystem.
Resources:
https://cointelegraph.com/news/new-study-says-80-percent-of-icos-conducted-in-2017-were-scams
We should not say that all of ICOs are worthless because there ICOs that are really profitable and promising. I stopped making investment with ICOs because it is now hard to find a good one. What type of information do you need to know that Initial Coin Offerings are trash the majority of the time? 80% of ICOs in 2017 were scams. To put that into respective, that's 4 out of every 5. The odds are terrible. Going by the rules of probability, you're going to be apart of the four of five. Why wouldn't you be?
The ideas I've seen with Initial Coin Offerings are just as bad. Why do these companies need $80 million in the first place? Let's be realistic, most things don't need to be on the blockchain. Satoshi didn't need to do an Initial Coin Offering to make Bitcoin into a bustling success. He started off putting in his own money. What do ICOs actually have to bring to the table?
The people that are making these threads with a positive implication are probably apart of the scams, or they're risking their money with the odds stacked entirely against them.
It's possible to have original ideas offered for free. Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin. Some people are simply blinded by their greed and short-term to try speculate on the worthless. No wonder bubbles are so rampant within this ecosystem.
Resources:
https://cointelegraph.com/news/new-study-says-80-percent-of-icos-conducted-in-2017-were-scams
I have been following the crypto market for a couple of years and have come across many good and garbage projects. The thing is that to call ICO garbage is not correct, I will explain why. The most profitable IPO on return on investment - Ethereum (702 000%), NXT (697 275%), IOTA (282 300%), NEO (123 300%), Stratus (42 500%) and others... Do you have any idea what money the investor earned by buying tokens of these successful projects? ICO is primarily needed for mass advertising of the product that makes the project. Every day I come across new interesting startups on the pages of social networks, if the projects did not advertise themselves and did not make a bounty, they would not have started to work without the initial investment.
I understand why you feel all initial coin offerings are trash and this is because a lot of people have gotten burnt by investing in initial coin offerings. I myself have lost a lot of money buying some coins that has just kept going down since after the initial coin offering and statistics are also shown that project are making less and less return on investment as time goes on so is the most important thing which is to invest only in the very few good projects.
There are some projects that are very difficult to get into because of how good or rated they are so instead of investing in the scam project wait and get the good project on exchange
There are some projects that are very difficult to get into because of how good or rated they are so instead of investing in the scam project wait and get the good project on exchange
ICOs are just a new way to steal money from people but we were not into what ICOs really want to do during the 2017 ICO bubble. This led to all these many scams that have cost cypto a lot. There is nothing new that ICOs are here to solve. All the successful projects in the real world never sought financial assistance but are far better than those we see in the digital world.
If projects want to really do good, they should make things available in the form of shares so that people who wanna buy those shares will enjoy their % in the business.
If projects want to really do good, they should make things available in the form of shares so that people who wanna buy those shares will enjoy their % in the business.
Then whats the point in doing an ico? Might as well just sell shares on the stock market.
ICOs are just a new way to steal money from people but we were not into what ICOs really want to do during the 2017 ICO bubble. This led to all these many scams that have cost cypto a lot. There is nothing new that ICOs are here to solve. All the successful projects in the real world never sought financial assistance but are far better than those we see in the digital world.
If projects want to really do good, they should make things available in the form of shares so that people who wanna buy those shares will enjoy their % in the business.
If projects want to really do good, they should make things available in the form of shares so that people who wanna buy those shares will enjoy their % in the business.
I would not say all of them are trash. The secret is to find one with a good use case, a legit team, a good roadmap, and most important: an idea that has never been used before.
The ICO I am advising right now has found a niche market and does its best to provide confidence in the use case of the token. And it is going gangbusters.
Althought if I had to guess, I would say STOs are taking over the market soon. But that does not mean you won't find a diamond of a ICO every now and then...
The ICO I am advising right now has found a niche market and does its best to provide confidence in the use case of the token. And it is going gangbusters.
Althought if I had to guess, I would say STOs are taking over the market soon. But that does not mean you won't find a diamond of a ICO every now and then...
Jump to: