maybe hardcap doesn't guarantee the success of a project, because what can make the success of a project run is the team or developer. we know that out there are so many projects that have reached their hardcap, but when they enter the market, the price is really unexpected. sometimes it is due to products that are not very good at competition. some projects also fake their hardcaps. well, because of that we must be careful.
You are right, even though the Ico project is successful in the sales they do, but it does not guarantee that the project can survive on the market. because many Ico projects were successfully sold but they failed to maintain their value in the market. wouldn't it be very difficult to build their market again. 
Topic: Hardcap ICO is no guarantee that the project will succeed - page 18. (Read 31507 times)
ICO is not a guarantee that the project will be successful, because most ICO projects are still limited to concepts and do not have clear references,
but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?
but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?
I agree with you on this 100%. When I see some people showing interest only for projects that claim to have reached softcap, I just shake my head. That is no guarantee at all. Many projects even fake this hardcap stuff so what's the fuss about it. I prefer projects on low key yet they do marvelously well.
ICO is not a guarantee that the project will be successful, because most ICO projects are still limited to concepts and do not have clear references,
but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?
I think that in the market of crypto currencies nothing gives any guarantee. Participation in the ICO is a big risk. Each participant assesses risks according to its criteria. But even the combination of positive moments doesn't give you any guarantee that the project will be successful.but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?
I think only a few percent of all ICOs are currently active and growing. Of course, thanks to ICO, currently the market is very busy, I can mention some big ICO projects up to now such as Qtum, Tron, ONT, Bat, ... They have been successful compared to ICO prices. In the past, despite a year of bear market
ICO is not a guarantee that the project will be successful, because most ICO projects are still limited to concepts and do not have clear references,
but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?
I think that in the market of crypto currencies nothing gives any guarantee. Participation in the ICO is a big risk. Each participant assesses risks according to its criteria. But even the combination of positive moments doesn't give you any guarantee that the project will be successful.but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?
I think only a few percent of all ICOs are currently active and growing. Of course, thanks to ICO, currently the market is very busy, I can mention some big ICO projects up to now such as Qtum, Tron, ONT, Bat, ... They have been successful compared to ICO prices. In the past, despite a year of bear market
ICO is not a guarantee that the project will be successful, because most ICO projects are still limited to concepts and do not have clear references,
but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?
but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?
I agree with you on this 100%. When I see some people showing interest only for projects that claim to have reached softcap, I just shake my head. That is no guarantee at all. Many projects even fake this hardcap stuff so what's the fuss about it. I prefer projects on low key yet they do marvelously well.
ICO is not a guarantee that the project will be successful, because most ICO projects are still limited to concepts and do not have clear references,
but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?
Reaching hardcap of a project will turn out to be an advantage for the project if the fund raise is being utilised in the best interest of the investors. There have been cases of project with huge fund raised which turned out to be unsuccessful in the long run. Competent and experienced team are needed when handling projects. but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?
I agree with your opinion, because I have experienced this. a project that I followed hardcap was achieved, but when entering the market the project price dropped rapidly and I suffered a loss.
Of course, I agree with your words since the achievement of the hardcap is not the main indicator of the success of the project, since the market is very full of similar projects that after the successful implementation of the ICO simply went to the bottom. The main goal of any project is to create a product and support it, and funds can always be raised.
yes, many projects are almost similar out there. when a project is hardcap, it doesn't guarantee whether they can survive or not. because all depends on the superiority of their products. many hardcap projects, however, lose competition in the market and fail. 
ICO is not a guarantee that the project will be successful, because most ICO projects are still limited to concepts and do not have clear references,
but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?
well there a lot of good coin before that not start in ICO or premine and they are one of the top coin todaybut projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?
so we can say it not really about getting hardcap is the reason for one coin to be successful
i think its about the community support and the knowledge of the team behind it
Of course, I agree with your words since the achievement of the hardcap is not the main indicator of the success of the project, since the market is very full of similar projects that after the successful implementation of the ICO simply went to the bottom. The main goal of any project is to create a product and support it, and funds can always be raised.
Unfortunately, in some projects, the main goal is to collect as much money as possible and that's all. Such projects, when they collect money, simply spend it on different nonsense without developing the project, or worse, they create new unnecessary ICO.
I think that in the market of crypto currencies nothing gives any guarantee. Participation in the ICO is a big risk. Each participant assesses risks according to its criteria. But even the combination of positive moments doesn't give you any guarantee that the project will be successful.
improved market moments, may be used to attract investors to join the project, but true to your word, it all does not provide a guarantee for the success of the project. even after their sales are successful, they must determine their success by surviving at a good price on the market. ICO is not a guarantee that the project will be successful, because most ICO projects are still limited to concepts and do not have clear references,
but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?
I think that in the market of crypto currencies nothing gives any guarantee. Participation in the ICO is a big risk. Each participant assesses risks according to its criteria. But even the combination of positive moments doesn't give you any guarantee that the project will be successful. but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?
It is sometimes good to see a project reach hardcap, inasmuch as it isa legit project an that the team is ready to deliver their promises. If any project reaches hardcap and yet fails after listing on exchange, it is a pure scam.
This is one of the reasons investors are afraid of funding projects with their money and at the same time, those projects find it hard to reach hardcap.
This is one of the reasons investors are afraid of funding projects with their money and at the same time, those projects find it hard to reach hardcap.
100% agreed. I also invest in some project that reaches their hard cap. but not a success. Therefore now I'm very careful when investing in ICO. before investing, read their whitepaper and get an idea about what they are doing and how the team will achieve it. and also do some research team is good and trusted. I found some good ICO called Harmony. do some research and invest it.
need to be checked from the start what is their total supply and adjust to the accumulated price and their sales target. if the hardcap determination is reached but sets a fund that is not so large, the developer will find it difficult to determine the plan that applies afterwards. There are also projects with soft cap funds that look maximal but can continue to target their roadmap, so the point looks the same but there are several different points.
Achieving hard caps from crypto currencies does not increase the success of crypto currencies. Hard Cap is the gateway to the struggle for a slightly better crypto currency. Many projects have achieved a hard stamp but have not yet succeeded. Many are not yet registered in the market and many are still struggling to gain public trust. We cannot make the hard cap a benchmark for the success of a coin. Hard cap is just a funding problem and not dealing with problems from project implementation so that the success factor of a crypto currency does not only depend on the hard cap.
Can you atleast give some names of icos who reach hard cap and get trash in the end of the project?because me personaly havent seen or joined ico bounty who reach hard cap and ended up being trash.Im just curious can you guys name some
ICO with hardcap is no longer a benchmark that the project will succeed and the project is not a fraud.
I have experienced a 3x hardcap project and taken away by a team that does not exist until now.
I am already bored with ICO and will now focus on IEO and listed coins.
I just hope ICO will return to normal like before.
I have experienced a 3x hardcap project and taken away by a team that does not exist until now.
I am already bored with ICO and will now focus on IEO and listed coins.
I just hope ICO will return to normal like before.
Like Boscoin. The project accumulated funds in a short span of time and there was a craze for it. See it's state now when nobody wants to even talk about it and the team is not active on telegram too.
Right.If a project is created for profit, then a hard cap can be detrimental to success. The team will get more money than the minimum for development, then it has no big desire to work productively. And what for? there is money
Jump to: