Topic: Do you believe in ICO Ratings? - page 63. (Read 6918 times)
There is a well known method for ICO investing: do your own research. In the previous year once I've been asked to help one ICO to send some e-mails to different ICO related websites (including listings) and I've discovered that a pretty big part of the ICO ratings are require payments to get your project listed on their website
For me, I believe in ICO rating because this rating are the basis of trust in that certain ICO that are launched in the cryptoworld, it may not be a 100% rated to be successful but the rating is near , it matters in the running promotional campaign of that certain ICO.
I only trust Icodrops.
Best Ico ratings site at all.
But of course you always need to do own research of the project.
Best Ico ratings site at all.
But of course you always need to do own research of the project.
For me personally, I see ICO ratings as just a yardstick to judge a token's potential. There are a lot of other factors involved and should be read up about before making a final decision.
No, I do not believe ICO ratings. Most of them rank for money, not for the merits of the project. And in general there is such a regularity: If ICO-project has many different positive ratings, then this project is bad. The last few months I have noticed this trend. Recent projects such as Pchain, Quarkchain and others did not have similar ratings.
Most ratings might be wrong or might not go as planned. Some ICOs can be rated very high and yet at the end of the tokensale event, there won't be listed on any major exchange or they won't yield any profit.
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!
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, i believe in ICO ratings, when i see the ICO had a good ratings, i join in that ICO because i believe in ICO ratings. Crypto experts are rating it, that's why i believe in ICO ratings.
I trust this source icodrops,because the projects that they put on their site are often successful.Their specialists conduct high-quality work, deliver truthful information, but in practice, not all things are reliably accurate
I dont belive at Ico ratings at all, if one ico has very high rate but in social media people dont talk about it, its not very good choose to invest on it. In ICOs most important thing is hype right now.
I used to evaluate ICO based on these rating sites, but not that much anymore. The review quality has gone downhill plus so many half-baked rating sites had emerged to ride on the crypto hype now.
And also don't rely on youtube review videos too, many supposedly reputable youtubers are actually paid for their reviews. I can say 99.9% of them are paid reviews.
And also don't rely on youtube review videos too, many supposedly reputable youtubers are actually paid for their reviews. I can say 99.9% of them are paid reviews.
No, I don't believe in all ICO Ratings, only some of them. But sometimes I use ICO ratings to assist me when doing ICO research. I take a look for different ratings, but I always make a decision based only on my own review.
I do not believe it, but they are also a factor to help us identify potential ico, those numbers they can deceive the site easily.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!
I think if we go in there we have to believe. Of course they are not always right, but at least give a little picture with their criteria. 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!
If I only rely on an ICO rating then I do not believe it, but if the ICO rating from some sites then I believe, and I am grateful that simple things can make me successful in ICO investment.
ICO Ratings can be very useful and beneficial in providing a general overview of the ICO, some of these sights are quite accurate, but not all tell the true story and potential of the ICO, remember, these are independent sights that might be influenced, so before you put your trust in them and use their take as a guide to invest, carryout your own research, it will be more helpful you knowing where to put your moneys
I think icobench and icodrops can be trusted. These time-tested resources and ratings there correspond to reality.
I agree with you. Icodrops has a very strong team that provides people with very important and relevant information, but even they can sometimes make mistakes, for this there is no 100% certainty about the success of the project.
when I am interested in rates and scores I am going to www.icobench.com and www.icoguide.com, these two for me have realistic rates, when I am making research my opinion is always matched with their scores.
Not all, of course. Many of them are just corrupt and there's no point in trusting them. It is worth paying attention when ICO is marked as "paid", and when this project is really well worked and studied all the details, and only then gave their assessment. I only trust ICO Drops now.
Like I have said before, the sites like ICObench and others are clearly paid by some ICOs so that they can have higher ratings. I don't trust any site that gives out many 4-5 star ratings. Most projects in crypto deserve a 1-2 star rating.
No, I don't believe in all ICO Ratings, only some of them. But sometimes I use ICO ratings to assist me when doing ICO research. I take a look for different ratings, but I always make a decision based only on my own review.
I do not believe it, but they are also a factor to help us identify potential ico, those numbers they can deceive the site easily.
I do. Aside from reading the whitepaper thoroughly, checking out the webpage and everything. ICO ratings are also one of the factors why I invest in ICO's today. It's why I invested in Chozun 途赞, actually.
Jump to: