Topic: Do you believe in ICO Ratings? - page 106. (Read 6918 times)
Yes, I believe that most of the time these ICO ratings have some reference value, but you can't always rely on these ICO ratings. Because some ICO projects are paid marketing, the score is higher.
I read the right thoughts of people, all these sites with the rating of projects is just an information source to learn about new projects and nothing more. DO NOT look at the grades, think for yourself and study the project. All estimates put by sources can be purchased. And do not forget, you invest your own money and think many times before sending them to the purse of any project!
i should say to you don't believe to any website which has no real evidence of the ICO being number one or they put some rating in it.
maybe my suggest, you need searching by your self. like you asking they manager or you ask in this forum talk to people who have a lot experience in here. people who have a high rank will definitely tell you or give advice from their experience. do not be shy to ask because they will be happy to answer your questions.
maybe my suggest, you need searching by your self. like you asking they manager or you ask in this forum talk to people who have a lot experience in here. people who have a high rank will definitely tell you or give advice from their experience. do not be shy to ask because they will be happy to answer your questions.
I personally like ico rating like icobench.com, because it makes it easier for us to find ico that has been running, or still upcoming, and also not hard anymore to find out about the ico, because it has been described and in reviews
ICO ratings provided by some sites are good for reference but we still have to make our own research and trust our own self judgment on projects if its worth investing for and putting our hard earned money.
I do not know if such a web can be trusted. Assessment of ICO can not be seen from such web. But the web is very popular among bounty hunter.
I use it just to see the team and rate an ICO some very good and complete. besides that i did nothing
I use it just to see the team and rate an ICO some very good and complete. besides that i did nothing
Many times I watched these services for assessments in the projects I wanted to invest in, the rating was low, but they gave an excellent profit, and so many times. projects with high scores turned out to be on the contrary a scam, so now I do not believe any ratings.
I only use them to find new ICOs, I would never consider investing into one because it has a high rating.
Most of these websites charge ICO's a lot of money, and therefore a biased towards the ICOs that are throwing a lot of cash at their marketing.
Most of these websites charge ICO's a lot of money, and therefore a biased towards the ICOs that are throwing a lot of cash at their marketing.
It is good that there such kind of websites which give a rating for the projects, but making it the major basis of making a decision to invest is not a good idea. This is just one of the sources to help find a good ico.
I see many Websites that provide ratings for ongoing ICOs or for the future. Examples such as the ICObench.com Website, ICOrating.com and others.
Which is my question whether you believe in the rating provided by the website. Seeing many ICO's do not match what they value. Many ICOs are arguably good ratings but when the token sales of the project only reach softcap. And there are projects that I see have a fairly mediocre rating but their token sales reach hardcap. I took the example of Lalaworld on ICObench.com they get Rating 3.7 but their token is sold out.
So let's discuss ICO Rating!
ICO ratings is a good reference but it is not very reliable because you can pay for it to be included in their list. Doing your own research is still the best way to check an ICO if it is worth to invest or not. Which is my question whether you believe in the rating provided by the website. Seeing many ICO's do not match what they value. Many ICOs are arguably good ratings but when the token sales of the project only reach softcap. And there are projects that I see have a fairly mediocre rating but their token sales reach hardcap. I took the example of Lalaworld on ICObench.com they get Rating 3.7 but their token is sold out.
So let's discuss ICO Rating!
I do not believe it's better to double-check everything yourself, it's your money! To make it is not difficult enough to read about the team whether they are real people, whether there is a working product. If you have any doubts, it's better not to take risks
Yes i believe in ICO ratings sites, maybe there are some bad rating sites also but we can't neglect those who has done rating with genuine method and provide service honestly. So i still believe in ICO rating sites.
In my opinion, I believe that a classification is necessary but not 100%, through it we can consider our research, we can prove the qualities required for an ICO such as: a good project, but some research agencies can forge the classification, knowing that everything is possible in the middle of the internet, but most of the great agencies committed to success, show necessary and essential concepts. However, a good personal analysis is still advisable.
I put little faith in ICO ratings given ease of manipulation with bounties. etc, although I do consider specific aspects and generally aggregate the scores across all the platforms to help inform my decision, but ultimately it is a small part of my process.
i dont believe in ico ratings. if you give money ico rating may be higher so I am researching myself. I do not believe anyone else's score.
Not really sure. Some seem like paid advertising and others seem like the people rating them will profit off their opinions anways. So if they rate high just so they can sell high after the ICO, or because they are getting paid to rate high, then that's no good and I feel like that's what's happening a lot atm.
I'm curious, but are these ratings bought? can the project pay people who make ratings in order to increase their assessment and investor confidence? What do you think about it
I see many Websites that provide ratings for ongoing ICOs or for the future. Examples such as the ICObench.com Website, ICOrating.com and others.
Which is my question whether you believe in the rating provided by the website. Seeing many ICO's do not match what they value. Many ICOs are arguably good ratings but when the token sales of the project only reach softcap. And there are projects that I see have a fairly mediocre rating but their token sales reach hardcap. I took the example of Lalaworld on ICObench.com they get Rating 3.7 but their token is sold out.
So let's discuss ICO Rating!
Yeah you`re right as of now not all ICO ratings will our basis because it depends on how they visualize their roadmap,platform,whitepaper and their background to make people convince.For me my basis was not the ICO ratings but on how they facilitate their ICO project that makes me attracted to joined.We all know that every ICO was good and have their capability to make you convincing to joined but it`s depend upon our choice which the best for us to participate their compaign.I believe that ICO is not only it`s ratings but it`s our feelings and choice so that you can joined which is perfectly for your choice. Which is my question whether you believe in the rating provided by the website. Seeing many ICO's do not match what they value. Many ICOs are arguably good ratings but when the token sales of the project only reach softcap. And there are projects that I see have a fairly mediocre rating but their token sales reach hardcap. I took the example of Lalaworld on ICObench.com they get Rating 3.7 but their token is sold out.
So let's discuss ICO Rating!
Yes. But not only the ratings. First I shortlist the ICOs based on the ratings (Ratings from different web sites/ Persons). Then I do my own research. For an example, I did my own research for Daneel and I bought that.
I see many Websites that provide ratings for ongoing ICOs or for the future. Examples such as the ICObench.com Website, ICOrating.com and others.
Which is my question whether you believe in the rating provided by the website. Seeing many ICO's do not match what they value. Many ICOs are arguably good ratings but when the token sales of the project only reach softcap. And there are projects that I see have a fairly mediocre rating but their token sales reach hardcap. I took the example of Lalaworld on ICObench.com they get Rating 3.7 but their token is sold out.
So let's discuss ICO Rating!
The review sites like that usually only touch the surface of the ico and there's a lot of factors that can make an ico sold out or not, for example being endorsed by mcafee can make an ico sold out but the rating site doesn't make their review based on this factors. It's always the best to do the research yourself, if you have an ico you like, join their group chat and read about news and people's discussion because you can guess how much they will sell. Which is my question whether you believe in the rating provided by the website. Seeing many ICO's do not match what they value. Many ICOs are arguably good ratings but when the token sales of the project only reach softcap. And there are projects that I see have a fairly mediocre rating but their token sales reach hardcap. I took the example of Lalaworld on ICObench.com they get Rating 3.7 but their token is sold out.
So let's discuss ICO Rating!
Jump to: