Topic: Do you believe in ICO Ratings? - page 11. (Read 6947 times)

You are right, high ratings can be bought. Alas this happens, because not for nothing 80% ico is a scam. Therefore, I always check the company myself, regardless of the rating level.

I do not trust any ratings, because they do not provide objective information. Virtually any rating can be bought, and many project teams do this to enhance their investment attractiveness, even those that are fraudulent can have high ratings

The only ICO rating is not a way to trust on a project. Behind the success of any ICO, team member background and project roadmap also contribute. ICO rating is only a part of it.

For this year I saw too many examples when projects with high ratings deceived their investors. For this reason, I have no confidence in these organizations. I'm not saying that they are all scammers, but I think that there is no need to rely too much on the opinions of outsiders.

Thou, ICO rating has been used a measurement towards identifying some promising projects, I must confess it has led so many people into serious problems. Thou helpful, however, the fact that an ICO is rated amazing doesn't mean it can't eventually end a scam.

Henceforth, aside basing one's research on ICO rating only to invest in a project, I think it's best if other options like studying the white paper/Roadmap, Team/developers are put into considerations.

No, don't trust ICO ratings. Do your research. There is no shortcut to that, to your own work! Don't trust the ICO ratings because they can be bought, and don't trust the most visible projects because it just depend on marketing spend, not on the quality of the project! Look at the substance, the business case, the value of the space they are claiming to take over or "disrupt", the nature of tech to be developed, the business experience of the team (most teams don't have a clue of the underlying business!!! so they can't disrupt anything...)

Recently, I have been following in particular Stellar and Stellar-related tokens. Stellar is on the rise because of the prospective Coinbase listing - probably one of the best bets for 2018. Up by more than 50% from the level a week ago, and it will continue for sure. Price has potential to multiply! Worth looking into tokens issued on the Stellar platform that will also profit from the new rise of Stellar...

There, I found an interesting, solid project, experienced people, with their token issued on the Stellar blockchain: AXU of argentas.io. They seem to have ANN for their community-oriented presale too https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/xxx-4431900 Financial blockchain, solid idea & white paper, thinking of putting in some. Just too low profile so far, but it definitely is a hidden gem in my opinion.

Of course one has to diversify between tokens, not to put the eggs in one basket, but this one looks to be worth the risk with a very attractive presale price of 0.4 XLM for 1 AXU that is 50% less than their ICO price later, so together with the underlying Stellar price going up, giving a double boost to it, looks to be like a sure winner, gains soon in pocket I believe. Following some EOS related projects too along with other Stellar projects, maybe finding some further ones there too. But I am definitely for AXU as an undiscovered diamond - others I like are much more well known - so far...

There are many websites with ICO reiting, but in my opinion the site https://icobench.com/ provides very accurate and reliable information about companies.

For a long time everyone knows that the rating is bought and sold. There are many examples when a project with a low rating shows itself very well. Or Vice versa, a project with a high rating turns out to be scam or their tokens cost nothing. And why look at such ratings?

I don"t look at the rating of the project, because I know that everything in our world can be bought. Very often I saw high scores from scam projects. There were also projects with high ratings, which even soft cap didn't collect

I do not believe in ICO ratings these days. Most of them are paid ratings. No wonder some scam ICOs still had higher ratings  

I do not really believe in the ICO rating sites as some of the highly rated ICOs do fail sometimes. I just do little research on my own about a project then I decide to invest in it or not knowing fully well that I am responsible for my decision and will have no one to blame if anything goes wrong with the projects am investing on.

I have never believed in ico ratings, so many of the ratings of ico projects are false. Investors are cheated to invest in their ico by high ratings. I used to believe in ico ratings, but now I hate them very much.

I think the rating is not quite accurate. As far as I know you can buy this rating. This can be perceived as a primary filter to pay attention to the project but not more

I do not trust all ICO rating websites. I trust some of the ICO rating web sites. There are several criteria for the ICO project to be successful. I also read the ideas of crypto money experts. but be careful. ICO projects with a high rating ratio have the potential to fail.

Yup, the problem is not knowing which is which in a lot of cases for sure.

Of course not, and those who believe in such services will soon understand that they are being deceived. In any case, all these assessments of such services very well affect our psyche and we already think that the project really has value.

although not much , I think it's worth listening such sites as ICO Bench, ICO Bazaar, ICO rating - in the trends they always have only cool projects

I think it depends on the elements used by the ICO rating platform to rank the projects. Also, how transparent the process is. We know  cases of rubbish projects paying for a high ranked ICO.

Not in all. Some ratings are not trustworthy.

I absolutely do not believe in the reviews because I have seen highly rated projects fail and underestimated projects have been successful beyond expectations. Is it due to luck?