Topic: Do you believe in ICO Ratings? - page 26. (Read 6947 times)
I think ratings can a good indication of the ICO, but I wouldn't recommend investing solely on the basis of the ratings. I would still look into their whitepaper and roadmap and researched on the team and the community. Before participating in their bounty, you should check everything out.
many people always check the ico rating before investing. they make it as a reference to choose ico, many of them who believe with ico rating. but I believe in many investors when choosing ico.
Personally, I believe in some reliable ICO ratings, which have already proven themselves in practice. But in any case, it is also necessary to consider the opinions of experts and their research.
When it comes to ICO rating website in terms of investing in ICOs, I only use them as a guild as they are not thbnbat trustworthy in some of their speculations, i will not call it predictions because they actually do the needful before rating the tokens.
Personally I always have some believe in ICO rating, the information they provide are very useful and it helps gives me a quick overview about the ICO before I do further research. I think ICO rating sites are good, especially the high reputed ones.
Even projects with the highest ratings can fail on sale. So do not pay attention to this.
It is true that higher ratings does not guarantee that the project will be successful. But at least you can say that such projects will be having a higher probability of giving good returns.
it is a decent criteria however insufficient as a lone this. Group and group backround, ann string, abundance spending plan, web and online life pages.. this is a blend!
ico rating can incraese trust to investor invest to project
but dev can pay to ico rating site can get good rating
but dev can pay to ico rating site can get good rating
I think that we also should not be too trust in these websites. The best result is when we do our own research on the project that we will invest.
For some people that's not enough so they turn to those sites. If you're not able to do a proper research then nothing can save you.
I think that we also should not be too trust in these websites. The best result is when we do our own research on the project that we will invest.
Some rating platforms employ former wall Street analysts who conduct an in-depth study of token sales before sharing their opinion on any project. These ratings can be valuable indicators of project viability and potential profitability and are definitely worth considering as part of your overall project research.
There are also platforms run by "Internet entrepreneurs" and Internet marketers who just want to cash in on the ICO boom. Their ratings are de facto useless as these platforms do not use experienced analysts and they are not managed by people who have the knowledge or skills to evaluate projects. Such projects are likely to encourage startups to buy a high ICO rating on their platforms. Such agencies should be avoided.
There are also platforms run by "Internet entrepreneurs" and Internet marketers who just want to cash in on the ICO boom. Their ratings are de facto useless as these platforms do not use experienced analysts and they are not managed by people who have the knowledge or skills to evaluate projects. Such projects are likely to encourage startups to buy a high ICO rating on their platforms. Such agencies should be avoided.
Obviously not, even us 'normal' people on here are just shilling for bounty rewards, those ICO sites are doing the same on a bigger scale.
high ratings can only be the result of a good fee for these sites. on the other hand, how can one recognize an innovative technology if it does not yet have any practice? in any way, respectively, and the rating may be either low or it may not be at all. so I think that need navigate on these sites, but not entirely, and all same try to think creatively and critically under attachments
I want to believe that ICO rating sites have criteria they use in conducting their reviews, ranging from the team members, project quality, whitepaper and some other factors. I think some rating site such as icobench could be trusted. But it is also advised that individuals do indepth research in prospective ICO's you're willing to invest.
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 making of ratings is a rather rough and unreliable business. It is created by people without the use of technical means on the basis of only subjective assessments. Therefore, such ratings can not be accurate. They should be viewed, but you should not rely on them completely. In any case, when choosing an ICO investment project, you should conduct your own research and make a decision based on all the information received. 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!
Most people looking for ICOs do look in ICO Bench or similar ones, but that will only give you a first clue about the ICO. Nothing replaces YOR.
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!
Not at all, I think they are crappy way of scamming people. The only way you can get good ICOs is upon your own research. I do my own study in this case, I think examination is important part of conclusion and research reduces the risk by many numbers. A good ICO can’t be found like this, I would suggest you to read the whitepapers of few ICOs, find out what their opponents are and what difficulties can they face in coming years. 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!
ICOs work for me so I would go with ICOs and I do invest in Alts as well. I think there are many ICOs out there that are. Research is important part of finding a good deals, I would suggest you read the whitepapers of few ICOs like Liven and Redcab.
to helps as rendering lists of index with different unit of indication as trader to work on decision with selection of point on objectives,
to collects of return as displacing use of option with the submission of funds on exchange with the trading market.
to collects of return as displacing use of option with the submission of funds on exchange with the trading market.
I don't like ico rating. Most of the time they are not objective and use speculations. Therefore, I believe that no one believes in them.
Some months ago, here, I faced a theme about icobench, and an author claimed that all their rates are custom-made. I'm certainly embarrassed by those experts who are doing rates on projects. On the other hand, this is normal things, even if they are custom-made, the platform needs to earn somehow, I hope that all ratings are custom.
Jump to: