Topic: Do you pay attention on advisors when choosing a good ICO project? - page 4. (Read 638 times)
February 09, 2018, 07:13:21 AM
the development team and advisors are the most important selection criteria. if the adviser's last few projects were unsuccessful, then conclusions about the next can be done easily. on the other hand, past success does not guarantee anything
February 09, 2018, 07:07:18 AM
Lately all the projects try to attract best faces onboard for their projects, I started noticing that they are almost the same everywhere. What things are more important for you? Are advisors one of the most significant criteria?
I don't look advisors when it comes to ICOs because most of them are not interested in the project and just want to make some bucks with advertisement. I focus on the team; they don't have to be that popular but they should have an experience.
February 09, 2018, 05:17:39 AM
If they advise seems credible, sure, why not? But it's important to form your opinion first and then look for 2nd opinions.
You might have always missed something.
You might have always missed something.
February 09, 2018, 05:17:02 AM
This criterion is not determinative, but it is obvious that it is one of the most important. Well-known consultants are at least one of the signs that the project is not a fake. You can write to them by direct link and ask a question
February 09, 2018, 05:14:54 AM
Lately all the projects try to attract best faces onboard for their projects, I started noticing that they are almost the same everywhere. What things are more important for you? Are advisors one of the most significant criteria?
Advisory I dont really consider in an ICO project, I'm more concerned with seeing Whitepaper to be my consideration than advisor's project
February 09, 2018, 04:56:19 AM
Some advisor really make truth review about project, but some of the get paid for do that. So do your own research is the best thing you can do
February 09, 2018, 04:55:40 AM
of course we are.The advisors are so important for a project destiny they guiding well also the good advisors are very good pr for the project.people trust the ıco's because of advisors
February 09, 2018, 04:47:45 AM
If the project is truly has potential there's no need for such Advisors. A talented team, impressive whitepaper and attainable road map are my requirements in choosing ICO. Advisors are just a plus points to the ICO but it's not a must.
February 09, 2018, 04:28:46 AM
Yes, advisor is an important position, usually an advisor is already experienced in making the project successful, it can attract investors and support the marketing team to reach the target, so it can be said that one of the success factor in ICO is the team behind the ICO, people will check the legitimate and the experience of the team before they invest
February 09, 2018, 04:23:35 AM
Lately all the projects try to attract best faces onboard for their projects, I started noticing that they are almost the same everywhere. What things are more important for you? Are advisors one of the most significant criteria?
If we talk about Initial Coin Offerings, there is a lot of variables to consider and I believe the team advisors is one of many variables. But we should really look into the bigger pictures as a whole team not only the team advisors. We must deeply research the background of the founder, the developers and the team behind supporting the project. February 09, 2018, 04:19:33 AM
Yes, consultants are also factors that need to be referenced.
Sometimes you can judge which trading platform the ICO project might be based on from a consultant from the ICO team.
Sometimes you can judge which trading platform the ICO project might be based on from a consultant from the ICO team.
February 09, 2018, 04:14:13 AM
To be honest, I don't bother with the advisors. But this is not to say that If I see the face of a thief on the board of advisors that I would over look that and go ahead and send my cash to them. Of course, not. My may concern isn't advisors but the roadmap of the coin, its use and the expected total supply. If a coin is in billions and the ICO price is high (say up to $1), that is a no-no sign for me. I believe supply is key in determining the price of a coin.
Do you mean the minimal contribution price? I agree that it shoudn't be too high, but 1$ isn't too small?
February 09, 2018, 04:10:21 AM
No, only people I trust that have experience in crypto currencies, lest Bitconnect repeats itself.
February 09, 2018, 04:09:19 AM
To be honest, I don't bother with the advisors. But this is not to say that If I see the face of a thief on the board of advisors that I would over look that and go ahead and send my cash to them. Of course, not. My may concern isn't advisors but the roadmap of the coin, its use and the expected total supply. If a coin is in billions and the ICO price is high (say up to $1), that is a no-no sign for me. I believe supply is key in determining the price of a coin. But if it's a couple of cents I might just toss them a few dollar for so many coins.
February 09, 2018, 04:05:08 AM
Advisors cost a lot of money.
You can count approximate expenses for each ICO for understanding how high probability of scam.
You can count approximate expenses for each ICO for understanding how high probability of scam.
February 09, 2018, 04:00:39 AM
I care much about the dev team members and their track records, the marketing team and the roadmap
February 09, 2018, 03:53:06 AM
Lately all the projects try to attract best faces onboard for their projects, I started noticing that they are almost the same everywhere. What things are more important for you? Are advisors one of the most significant criteria?
Here in this thread there are many criteria for the choice ICO: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/how-to-choose-a-good-ico-what-criteria-2901548Advisors are important. Good advisors willn't go to bad projects. Most often they get paid in tokens. Therefore, it is important for them to get the tokens of a successful project. Some are paid on etherium, bitcoin and fiat money, but more often in tokens of project.
February 09, 2018, 03:43:28 AM
Not entirely, I think advisor only as an object when doing research I think. What makes Project interesting is their Team & vision
February 09, 2018, 03:36:31 AM
Most people will say that I'm wrong but I don't put much attention on advisors while I'm analyzing white paper. If I have any doubts about the project I may only try to find their linkedin profiles to check if they are real people and have any connection to the project. You will never know the amount of advosor's participation in the project. It feels like usualy their involvement includes about 1-2 skype calls.
February 09, 2018, 03:35:42 AM
It is definitely important. Advisors who are willing to put their names out there in support of an ICO means that they are risking their reputation to a certain extent, if the ICO fails. In order to avoid that, I would assume that respectable advisors would refrain from supporting scammy ICOs. So advisors mean a lot to me.
Jump to: