Topic: Do you believe in ICO Ratings? - page 9. (Read 6947 times)
I pay attention to the ICO ratings. but before I take part in the project I study them myself.
Ratings can be manipulated and from doing various bounties, and investing in ICO, I can say ratings on various ICOs are indeed being manipulated on various ICO rating sites. I've seen some scam ICOs get good ratings while some very ones getting low rating! Let's say I am appointing an ICO adviser for my ICO who also gives ratings to various ICOs, a top expert on some ICO rating site, whether my ICO has an unrealistic target, product, budgets or not, that advisers is bound to rate my ICO greatly! People choose to invest after doing proper research and ratings are something they also depend on. So a top ICO expert's word has a strong influence over a new investor.
i believe in icorating.com they have reliable data analytics skills we can relay on their ico rating i feel they have fair display of merits and demerits in upcoming ico coins
No I don't believe the ICO. Rating can be buy. I try to use my knowledge and intuition when choosing an ICO. Unfortunately, now even ICO with a high rating can be just scam.
These ICO Ratings serve as one of the factors that we can consider in choosing an ICO to invest in. But it doesn't mean its 100% true or reliable. Actually, I don't have any idea how they come up with those ratings. So if I am going to invest, I don't just look into the ratings. I go over every detail of a certain project before I will decide to invest.
To some extent the ratings provided can be taken into consideration, because based on several factors they make the rating such as the real time usage and so on. In the mean time ico's going as a scam even the project getting high ratings were the failure from the developer end for which we cannot blame the ICO rating people.
The ratings could be taken into consideration, but lightly. Unfortunately lately I see a lot more ratings that are not spot on and honestly not very clever. I still read them, but they are not what they use to be.
No, i dont believe in ICO ratings. Most of them are not real and honest ratings. They are biased.
To some extent the ratings provided can be taken into consideration, because based on several factors they make the rating such as the real time usage and so on. In the mean time ico's going as a scam even the project getting high ratings were the failure from the developer end for which we cannot blame the ICO rating people.
Most of the rating is bought by experts, do not look at icobench and other sites have all of them almost all purchased.
Often high or low rating ICOs are not a guarantee of the success of an ICO project. I once joined ICO which has a high rating but it turns out the sales are not successful, and on the contrary, I often find ICO that low rating even gets a successful sale. Well, the judgment is indeed objective, we have to do our own analysis and consult with a more expert friend.
The ICO rating assessment report will never guarantee that the project will be strong. The ICO project that scored high rating could be scam. so every investor should do his own research and try to make the best decision.
No. do your own research. Best project that will change the world in 2018 is Trufield. Check out this token, Trufield token (TRUF). This project is a humanitarian one that will revolutionize healthcare by providing free health data management systems on the blockchain for millions of people. Presale is live and open to all investors so grab your tokens at 25% discount. Buy here at http://trufield.com or http://trufield.io
Talking about proper resources for most of us aiming to considering promising ICOs and ITOs are ICO Drops and renewed likely technical places.
ICO rating is just one of the factor that contributes to the success of a project. Acceptance of the project in reaching softcap or hardcap is driven by the overall impact on how it could solve a current problem and the viability of the commodity being sold in particular. There are projects that reach softcap or hardcap but never continue to flourish in the future.
I trust only one site, this site icodrop ... other site I do not like and they have strange ratings for ico
I periodically monitor ICO ratings. But I do not really believe in their objectivity. Since I already saw enough examples when these ratings were wrong. But it's easy to look at new projects, I like how everything is structured.
Not at all, I think it's better to study the project and make up your own opinion on 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!
I agree with your colleague, and I also do not really trust the site's ratings ICOBench, for example, I do not believe, they are a lot of good startups cut. In my opinion, strong projects do not need any evaluation, I know the projects that Hard Cap collected in 3 minutes, and they did not need any rating))) a good project can be seen from far away) 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 are BS. Easy to manipulate. You have to do your own research
No, it's far too easy to manipulate the ratings, lots of the 'experts' just sell ratings to ICOs. They're ok for filtering out real shitty projects though.
Jump to: