that in the past ICO projects performed very well if they used ERC20 tokens or projects built on established platforms. because it has the potential to grow well and reduce risk when compared to creating new technology. but now on the contrary I don't see ICO functioning properly even though it's built on an existing platform like ERC20.
I will not blame the platform because the platform has been built in such a way, but I will blame the developer, Why? because most developers have misused this for crypto schemes to get rich and most project failures are based on the background of developers who do not have extensive knowledge and deliberately tarnish the ICO project's bad image.
A part of the blame should be reserved for those who invest in these trash projects. If no one invest in these shit projects, then why should anyone try to come up with such ICOs? I was really surprised to see people willing to invest in really trash projects, with hardly any future potential. It makes me wonder about the standard of the cryptocurrency users.
The Ethereum ICO of 2015 should be taken as a benchmark case. When they went ahead with the ICO in 2015, most of the development was complete. And the ICO was priced competitively, with the hard cap set at $18 million ($0.31 per coin). Now compare this to the current bunch of ICOs, many of whom have hard cap above $100 million. And surprisingly, all they have is an idea, with the development work still in its infancy.