Topic: How to create a ICO - page 3. (Read 3410 times)

Great article. Thanks for that.

I think the nature of ICO's will develop over the next 12 months. There have been many mistakes of ICO's we can now learn from.

Way too many ICOs hitting the market today. Because of this the money is spread to thin and legit good ICOs are having trouble reaching their goals.

I agree, but even if an altcoin has a great project and a amazing product because of the influx of ICO's they need to focus on doing things correctly to get noticed.

Marketing is slowly getting more and more important as getting the word out about the ICO is vital.

The end of the day the product and the project are important. Everything else is on the second plan..

Why do you say that? ICO's are a great way for a altcoin to raise capital to launch without VC's taking large chunks of the business before it has had a chance to blossom.

step 1 : dont

Thanks for the feedback! Part two will be out soon.


Thank you for reading it!

Thanks for article.

Good first article about the thoughts behind creating a ICO. I am interested to see your next article as it will have to become more technicall (i.e. writing an white paper etc)

Thanks for the response! It is a mixture of both a great concept and a great marketing team. Teamwork makes the dream work

Totally agree and I think too many fail AFTER the ICO because people don't really know "how" to analyze them (really no different from equities but it is magnified with ICO's).

For example, there was a saturation of Real Estate ICO's but if you analyze them most are NOT "investing" the funds received into Real Estate.  A top end platform can be developed for $200K.  So why are they raising $10M-$20M? The value of the coin drops 60-80% once it hits the market simply because the coin is not worth the money put into it.

Many projects where the "idea" is good but they are simply over funded.  This is where "caps" come into play. Another point I think is very important to a successful token after the ICO is to make sure the project has the right "hard cap" to fund its needs.

I agree as well, I will make the changes to the article.

Agree completely agree with this statement. We need to be tougher on projects who are only wanting to create an ICO for a quick buck.

I agree completely and the after the ICO articles maybe articles on blockchain will follow. But people invest into ICO's without any knowledge of blockchain technologies.

I feel knowing how ICO's are created and prepared might help people look deeper into ICO's and not just invest in ICO's that advertise all over the internet.

May be the better question would be to ask how to create blockchain technology?) since ICO without technology behind it is a scam

I agree with a lot of your points, Marketing is a very important tool not just for reaching out to as many people as possible, but also to get those people to believe in your project. Sometimes ICO's fall down just down to the fact that they can't sell the idea in under 30 seconds and people get bored. I do believe that there is more than marketing, I company who has a very flawed concept with a great marketing team will surely fail at some point whether that's after the ICO or before because people will look at their idea and think it is stupid.

What I mean by a strong team is a large strong team on all aspects, marketing, developers good CEO's with experience and finance experts with some great advisers on top. True you can probably fake some LinkedIn profiles and pictures, but honestly i think most ICO's don't, only the scam ones. True that is something that could be implemented.

I am happy to have your opinion, that's why I created this thread! I want honest opinions and ways to improve, so thank you

I think they mean both, or if any future countries ban ICO's.

Do you mean in China and/or South Korea? In my country, you can launch as many Ico's as you like. Regulation is yet to hit us. It seems a flash ANN thread is all it takes these days. But with so much competition the new crop of ICO's have to make the extra effort.

A good concept/Idea is necessary, website, a strong team - developers and such, and enough funds to hype the whole shebang to the "moon" is required.

I agree with this, you need to make sure that you actually have the ability to create one without the police knocking on your door.

OK, maybe "99.9%" was a bit sarcastic but marketing is a HUGE part.  In our experience, people don't want to read through the details, they want the 1 minute video.  It's understandable and graphics/videos can explain things quickly (picture is worth a 1,000 words).  It's human emotion.  INFORMATION makes people THINK.  EMOTION makes people BUY. So a shiny, graphical website will do this much better than a black and white site but I wish more people would focus on the "great concept" as you said, and then look for viability of that concept (i.e. a Back To The Future hover board is a great concept but is it implementable?).

I also think teams are important but how can you tell who a "strong team" is? Unless you are talking about a "Mark Cuban" type backed ICO/or these Names that pop up on every ICO now, but then this gets away from the creativity side.  This is where I think REAL Due Diligence comes into play, which is NOT LinkedIn Profiles and Images (these can be created by ANYONE and falsified).  For example, if there is an incorporation behind the ICO which requires real KYC/AML due diligence (certified passports, proof of residence, bank references, etc.).

Anyway, just my opinion.  Great to see people like you doing the research and providing the info "prior" to creating/investing in the ICO.  Keep it up