How important are ICO advisors? - page 3.

squatz1

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1285

Flying Hellfish is a Commie

Quote from: trobin on February 22, 2018, 12:30:43 PM

Personally I don't really care too much. Let's take Kyber as an example. They have Vitalik as an advisor which bought them a lot of hype in the ICO stage but since then you really wouldn't have any idea that he was an advisor. Ultimately a project will be evaluated on the final release and an advisor won't have too much say or input in to this, they might help navigate a few situations but won't make a bad project in to a good one.

This is what I mean when I spoke before, advisors can be used to hide a company (or in this case, a coins) failure at having any value at all. So if the coin in question is simply stacking advisors, it'd be fair to notice that they might just not have anything going on and might screw you due to them not having a working product and just wanting the hype to make a couple bucks.

Don't put all your trust and faith in a couple peoples faces, names, and titles. It could all be a sham anyway.

Yaunfitda

hero member

Activity: 2870

Merit: 594

Quote from: peter.from.penn on February 21, 2018, 09:56:44 PM

When most people evaluate ICOs, they consider the advisors. However, most are looking for big names in the crypto sphere. In my opinion, it's more important to look for industry experts outside of crypto. The goal of most blockchain projects is to gain usage and adoption in the real world, and expert advisors with credentials in major industries open doors to new markets. At the end of the day, when projects exhaust their ICO funds, they must earn revenues. What do you think?

I think they are very helpful but you still need to do your homework and do your due diligence if you really want to invest in a certain ICOs. But I don't know though if experts outside of crypto would be helpful. The only experts that I can consider to be helpful are those who really know their stuff. So I have to disagree looking at experts outside the cryptosphere.

There are a lot of in deep experts out there and most of them have really a good background and experience that you have to consider what they have to say.

trobin

full member

Activity: 177

Merit: 102

🤖UBEX.COM 🤖

Personally I don't really care too much. Let's take Kyber as an example. They have Vitalik as an advisor which bought them a lot of hype in the ICO stage but since then you really wouldn't have any idea that he was an advisor. Ultimately a project will be evaluated on the final release and an advisor won't have too much say or input in to this, they might help navigate a few situations but won't make a bad project in to a good one.

googs84

sr. member

Activity: 630

Merit: 256

CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!

I think advisors are not that important as we are discsuing here because ICO is something that is not in the hands of advisors or they can’t predict the right things for it so surely. Though they might speculate few project path very surely then also it doesn’t mean the path will follow like that until the end. It’s all about the public buzz when it comes to the ICO selection or project roadmaps. It must be know what majority of the people like or dislike and the final decisions or advisory must be taken from that voting. So this is why I believe advisors are not that important.

kaya11

full member

Activity: 1344

Merit: 110

SOL.BIOKRIPT.COM

Quote from: squatz1 on February 21, 2018, 11:17:13 PM

They're important, though but people should know that a big name isn't everything. Everyone has had their own array of failed ventures.

They are not really that important to me. They just fill up the ICOs' websites and an additional payment and funds will be slashed off. Most ICO failed even they have good advisers on-board.
It's best to hire more developers and paid to work fellows out there than people who do nothing and just waiting for the payment. The best adviser would be if there is, none other than Satoshi nakamoto, he can foresee the what relies ahead, but I guess he won't do that.

metenjean

full member

Activity: 854

Merit: 140

I don't think advisor really give any advise to any ICOs nowadays, i think its more like their brand ambassador which being paid to promote their ICOs rather than giving advices about how the project should go. Anyone can become an advisor and i think recently John McAfee become the hottest advisor in ICOs and i think he already endorse a lot of ICOs not to mention he become advisor to ICOs such as UTK (Universa), or Bob's Garage, etc.

CrazyCryppa

newbie

Activity: 14

Merit: 0

I think what is really important is to distinguish between advisors who will actually assist a particular project and who are there just because they've been paid a handsome amount to list their face on the website.

Herbert2020

legendary

Activity: 1946

Merit: 1137

Quote from: peter.from.penn on February 21, 2018, 09:56:44 PM

ICO advisors.

this sounds more like a new version of the same old scams known as "Pumping Groups" where they pretend they are giving "trading signals" and use fancy words for it but in fact they a scam pump and dump group ripping newbies off.

Quote

The goal of most blockchain projects is to gain usage and adoption in the real world,

ICOs have been around for a while now and they have been receiving a lot of money. show me ICO that actually gained some real world usage and not just remained on exchanges and got pumped and dumped then we can use that as our own point of reference for analyzing ICOs.

...but the problem is such ICOs do not exist!

gaurav@zup

jr. member

Activity: 38

Merit: 3

It's very important to have advisers in any new industry as they guides the team to understand the underlying challenges and how to solve them.
But unfortunately nowadays the ICOs are listing advisers like a Fish market sale and most of which are not real so do your due diligence and see to it that the advisers those who are listed are really the part of the team.
Most of the time the advisers are being listed just because of the big fat famous name but the need of the advisers are in every company has specific role
* Tech and development adviser
* Marketing and sales adviser
* Financial adviser
* Operations adviser
see to it that each adviser listed are related to some of the above roles or else don't bother to invest your hard earned money just because a Actor or a sports player is a part of the team.

Andrey123

sr. member

Activity: 1778

Merit: 305

It's useless to listen to their advice ...
These people are already so rich, and they are paid to make them praise a company.
And if something goes wrong, they just shrug their shoulders.

At the time of the 2008 crisis, many advisers to the head of the Federal Council gave advice, as a result, thousands of people were left without housing, and they were not even judged normally.

squatz1

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1285

Flying Hellfish is a Commie

ICO advisors, while helpful aren't something which should force people into making an investment in a company or not. Advisors can only do so much, and in most companies they're only around for someone to get a nice paycheck, plus you don't want to have too many advisors as you're just wasting capital on too many people who are doing nothing.

They're important, though but people should know that a big name isn't everything. Everyone has had their own array of failed ventures.

peter.from.penn

member

Activity: 62

Merit: 11

When most people evaluate ICOs, they consider the advisors. However, most are looking for big names in the crypto sphere. In my opinion, it's more important to look for industry experts outside of crypto. The goal of most blockchain projects is to gain usage and adoption in the real world, and expert advisors with credentials in major industries open doors to new markets. At the end of the day, when projects exhaust their ICO funds, they must earn revenues. What do you think?

Topic: How important are ICO advisors? - page 3. (Read 520 times)