Topic: Is it the same? (Read 535 times)

It's a relative topic and can vary for each sympathizer in the crypto world and we may not be able to arrive at a concrete and solid truth. In my opinion, a project failure is when is failed to fulfill its internal objectives and reach the masses or fail to get some texts in conventional media or large media. On the other hand, the evolution of scam is increasing due to the increase in the market, arousing people's greed.

But the pattern exists and in this case it's to raise a large number of funds and not apply it to the established consensus.

many projects have implemented this strategy structured were very good at the start but when in the middle the development didn't go well it is better to avoid investing in the new project because the risk is very high you can look for investments in top coins

The adopted phrase for the projects you described here in the Cryptocurrency world is SHIT COINS. Most of them have inexperienced team with no major partner to help their projects to success and thereby ignore the project in the midway leaving their investors' funds wasted or looted. Some are scam from scratch but the investors get distracted by the promises too good to be true offered by the team with scam intentions.

To show a good potential or not, in fact we can't see how much budget a developer has spent on marketing bounties, unless they pay bounty hunters with Bitcoin or Ethereum. Payment with BTC or ETH looks more serious and intent on running the project. They really want something real and dare to sacrifice a large amount of money to pay the bounty hunter.

This is very different from the developer who paid with shittoken. Actually, there is no real money spent by the developer to measure how serious the developer is in handling the project.

In the beginning, the developers and the team can be very active to communicate with all people in the community, and they still give progress on their project. But in the next few months, one by one of the team and even the developer disappears, and people losing contact with them. The bounty manager will be busy handling and convince the participants and the investors that the project still running. We can see that sooner or later, all of them leave the project without saying anything to people, and they run away with the investor's money. The bounty manager can't do anything because that is not in his control.

I kind of doesn't understand the analogy here. Isn't it good if the project has a huge amount reserved for bounty hunters? That somehow means they will spend more on marketing. Care to elaborate on this more?

For OP, it is hard to check every project you bumped into to check if it is going to be successful or not. What I do is that I stick to a bounty manager with a good track record. These bounty managers, if they are good, check every bounty before they accept managing them. Some even notify people if the project became bad after a few weeks. Well, bounty managers are human too so they make mistakes. But still, the track record and them being able to care to their hunters is sort of the key.

yes it's the same, I call it the Failed project. whether the project disappeared suddenly, committed fraud, or failed because it was not popular. I call it that for whatever reason, the project costs the investors a loss. and if you ask what a worthy project is like ?. I believe that, worthy projects are those that are in the top 100 coins with the largest market cap. and they are still developing. If these two things have been fulfilled, I think the project is worth investing in.

I am also a bounty hunter in this forum. and I made it a job, because I am unemployed.
Projects that fail due to several factors, such as failed fundraisers, developers run off investor funds.
But the project's biggest failure was not getting enough publicity.
Potentially good projects all go well with developers and investors.

Don't like bounties but I can tell you for sure, you can't judge the projects success based on bounty itself.
Bounty is just way of rewarding the new investors and helping publish the existence of that project to wide range of investors. Consider bounty as "ONE OF" the marketing strategies out of hundreds which helps new ICO's to gain popularity.

Now project's success absolutely depends on how these bounties do well (i.e. marketing) and also how investors see the future of it based on its concept, ideology, long term or short usage, modesty etc.

The judgment is mother of all if investors don't like it and same thing goes viral. Revers is also true!

actually it's simple, legit projects always have active developers and also have developments every month, not only that the team also communicates with the community.
Every day or every week as an investor you must monitor every progress, this is very important, so that when the project becomes suspicious you can take steps to anticipate and get out of the project and look for other better projects.

From my little experience, failed projects are those who run some features but failed to pull through with their WP or roadmap. The devs just have the ideas in their brains but aren't able to keep it a reality to finally actualize it. I had several tokens like that in the past. But if tokens dump after they're listed, it's a normal thing to me as early investors always take profit quickly to reenter trades. That isn't a sign of a failed project. Sometimes, these dumped projects recover once they've used cases embedded in them.

Any project that doesn't have a problem it's addressing or solving simply doesn't have utility. Such a project should be avoided because it doesn't have potential. Always look out for a use-case token/coin while investing. They're the potential projects.

You need to pay attention to the Bautista Manager who leads the company. If the Manager is well-known, this is an advantage. In second place is the rating on sites. The number of people participating in social companies.
Again, the White Paper. Next, I calculate the possible profit from participating in the bounty. If the profit is good, then I join the bounty.

It is still quite difficult to judge, because there are still many good projects that fail and projects that look bad but end in success. So far, I have evaluated projects only by looking at their consistency and always providing updates that have been done by the team. If the project has no updates and is not active at all, it is clear that it is a bad project and has no hope for the future.

These projects are to be dumped and evaded by the investors because their team didn't continue working on the development or they just gathered enough funds and just want to leave the space, i've seen some of them and even got in touch with some projects in the past, their aim is just to make money and even their products aren't working in a proper way. I do know about alot of projects like the ones you're talking about, it's makes me feel a headache to see that amount of failed projects. Also now, alot of projects succeeded because of the DeFi hype but they aren't going to live for a long period so just be safe interacting with them.

Most of the projects you've mentioned are just the same and oftenly the team is just unfortunate that's why the project fails or doesn't get enough recognition to be successful. Some projects fails because they spent so much time upon waiting on reaching their cap or they are analyzing the project in a very time consuming way. Most of the time, I rely on the project manager in terms of the projects potential, I don't usually trust the whitepaper. If I have past experiences with the project manager, I will right awat join it because I know the leader's reputation and he won't definitely ruin it.

I doubt they had "poor marketing" strategy. They all start with the intention of "failing". They make all those false promises, gain peoples attention and a hype is created, they slowly exit scam people without even people realizing that. No matter what "marketing strategy" they apply, serious investors know what the real deal is and will avoid them at slightest inconvenience. If a project has potential and the developers keep on working, they are bound to succeed.
Like I said, I have a feeling they make it look like they didn't try to scam people and had a "bad ending", but these were planned all along.

Honestly it is difficult to know the prospect of any project and by the way, "potential" in your context could mean so many things to different people. If you are talking about getting listed with good price you can guess the prospect by trying to explore where the token intend to be listed. Although many dev do not like to give answers to where the coin will be listed or they can lie some other that come forward to talk about listing in exchange platforms such as Latoken, p2b2p, probit etc are likely to end up with wash token price. I have seen some project recently in the past that had gone inactive for almost a year and comeback strong. https://the4thpillar.io/ with token ticker 'FOUR' is one of them. This mean it is difficult to tell the prospect of any token

If the team themselves are communicating with the investors then it is a good sign. I have lots of coins that came from different kind of bounties and most of them failed. Somehow I still see some of them manage to make through, they continuously make updates to everyone and keep on informing on what are they doing in the meantime.

If you can see there are big money that have been put on a project then  it has a potential of supporting it's cause, and also if they have accumulated funds that could stabilized it's coin price after the sales.

I think it is most of the times when it comes to low budget projects. And actually, IMO, new projects should also be somewhat distiguished by there budget, not in there own tokens but in terms of USD/ETH/etc. As we already know that this is surely gives us a trend that the said new project is being quite productive and generous at the same time, and that would also be considering their marketing strategies.

I have seen all sorts of projects and bounty campaigns:
The ones with high budget, they have paid and project is a success and vice versa.
Same goes for projects with small budget mostly they pay and project is a success but sometimes even small budget campaigns do not pay or the project fails. So the conclusion is that there is no guarantee and bounty is not free money it is constant hard work where you are only in profit when you average out after a year.

Scam projects apart if we take only the legit project 90% of them even go into such phase like getting a hard high on the price which they were set while selling tokens when it hit on the exchanges which normally happen as a result giving lot of tokens with discount price at the time of ICO sale.

A failed project is a failed project, the reason why they failed are of different reasons, either they exit scam or the team abandoned the project or other it's all failures, some use cases are useless in crypto and people don't like investing on them for some reasons, this means that not all introduced projects are scam, some just failed it is, that's why diversity is the best in crypto space

hard to tell the truth. but in real cases, say like ETH, their ICO used to be worth only a few dollars and is now worth hundreds of dollars. So it can be concluded that a project is successful when the team is really serious about managing the project, the product is well developed, has a large community, is listed on the top Exchange, etc.

First, it is not easy to know which project that can turn to become a scam. Second, the scam project will not stop to promote their project until they can get the investor money. Third, they can run away without telling people.
Many projects have the same idea with a different concept to introduce their project to the public, and it is hard to say that the project will have the potential to grow in the future. All we can do is be careful to select the project.

We must understand that the projects that have stopped are not all scams. of course with clear reasons and evidence. Most projects fail because they cannot pay for their core needs (developer as well as marketing) and that causes the project to fail and is discontinued in order to stop the ongoing losses. it's a different story if the project has received an investment but suddenly they stop for absurd reasons and without clear evidence, that's the easiest thing to call a scam

Every thing really needs research to the fullest, it is not enough just to rely on instinct, especially in terms of crypto, because there are so many projects including bounties that look interesting but they can still experience sudden scams even when we least expect it, this is a case that I have often encountered in crypto.

Usually a project has some 'potential' in my eyes if the team put an effort into marketing their project so when their product released someone gonna use it and the devs team active enough either in their chat group or even better when there's frequent commit in their github repo relating to their projects.
a project that has inactive team is like a really huge red flag in my opinion

For something to fail means it started at some point right? Now in my own opinion, a failed project is a project whose team started the development process, worked for some time and then it came crashing maybe as a result of lack of further ideas, mismanagement of funds or not sticking to their roadmap thus leading to lose of interest within the community hence failing. Also, a project depreciating within time is majorly caused by the team, how? As a project team, they have to put everything in place to ensure the continuous developement of the platform, they also need to follow their roadmap, adjust when need be, add more features and so on, through this way, they will constantly keep their users hoping for more hence more engagement from the users and that's what drives a platform to be valuable; take a look at Binance platform, Ethereum etc, then you will understand their teams are different from a whole lot of other projects. A scam project is one which didn't developed anything but ran away with the funds generated.
Lastly, a potential project have the neccessary features, but first they have a very good use case and by mare getting involved with the project, every idea and what the team is working on is laid bare to understand. A project with potential also goes for good exchanges so as to attract more users hence keeping the development going.

Yes, but what about the Emporium.Finance CEFI bounty project which is managed by a highly trusted manager like Hhampuz? does the project pay all participants? I think this is not only about a manager, but also about who the project team is, because a manager who is very trusted can also be fooled by an irresponsible project team, # think

First, you should look at the bounty manager. Successful bounty managers don't want to partner with unsuccessful projects.
Web sites and social media addresses can often be fake content. It is sometimes very difficult to understand that they are scammers 

I bounty hunt before but just minimal.

I think it is when it gives you the urge to buy their coin than just waiting for their bounties to be given.
It means you are getting attached to it and may have seen a future for it.
Projects with high chances of failure won't have that urgency. It doesn't even give you a little push to invest in it.
Or, they could pass the soft cap but that's it. They will list their coin but it wouldn't even affect the value of it.

I judge a project with their use cases, must not be repetitive like many others, if it's a popular use case it will be hard for the project to be successful, investors will see such projects to be less attractive, also the past history of the team with blockchain is what many new projects don't have today, most new projects comes with newbie team members, that's why they make huge mistakes most times

Trusting the bounty manager will not guarantee you to get a potential bounty campaign that can succeed or not because the bounty manager will not know for sure. But if the team of that project is not actively communicated to the participants and the bounty manager, and they still hide many pieces of information about the project, you can feel suspicious about the project because that can be one sign that the project can scam you and others. But that is not always happening like that because the scammers will figure out the other way to scam people.

You can't really tell but only have to believe your instincts, sometimes one can be wrong too and that's normal because failure is why we win sometimes, do your own research and have a positive mind, a quality project will surely appear to be one, the problems with bounty is payment evade by the teams

But considering the current  trend most of them now don't get CMs for their Bounties,...they manage it themselves as they are quite familiar on the fees and which gives them more savings, well, this more often happens to projects that has a low budget.

I don't know how to choose a potential bounty project or not, I prefer a trusted bounty manager, even though the project bounty has potential but the manager is not known or a newbie, the project does not necessarily pay bounty participants

I haven't been into bounty hunting for more than a year now, so do not know exactly what is trending now.

But I used to categorized projects based on the rank of Bounty managers. Those projects which had fresh Bounty managers I would generally skip those projects unless they have a product which is ready and already being used.

For example the last project that I participated as a hunter was Atomic wallet. It is a successful project but was handled by a newbie bounty manager. I joined the project because they had their wallet ready.

So it depends basically how you understand the project and how you categorize it.

I maybe wrong but I'm considering them as "Abandoned Projects".
As the term says, abandoned meaning they tried it but failed so they abandoned it .

This I don't know. There are many altcoins who suffered this kind of scenario. I've seen most of my altcoins that I got from bounty campaigns years ago depreciated its price because of lack of support from either community or the team itself. I feel terribly sorry for those projects though that has a good intention and will do everything just to make the project successful but in the end, failed because of lack of support.

Right now, it is hard to pick which has potential or not knowing that the project that is very beneficial to the people can become a scam in the end. I don't if there are some people here who has basis but for me, I don't have since I'm not investing into new projects. I focus on the old and top coins.

I solely care about potential projects if I see probability to exit with profit.

Potential for investors is as highest profits as possible and as lowest risks, losses as possible. I will find for potential projects when price falls from their past peaks, volume drops and almost no movements in price. If I see their developers are working (on Github) and there are schedule to release upgrades, products in their plans, I will put them into potential project list.

If the crypto market has good trend, I will accumulate cryptocurrency or token of those potential projects. I will exit after I take profit because their potential is only promise and in crypto market, promise means nothing after the hype gone away.

if I personally have several provisions that can state if the project has potential, that is :
1. the project is still active to develop its products;
2. the project runs according to the roadmap and whitepaper that has been made;
3. the team always responds and provides information about the progress of the project;
4. already listed on exchange, because in my opinion exchange is very important to attract new investors to invest in the project;
5. coin from the project has a high volume on exchange, because with a high volume it proves that the project is good and many people believe to investing in the project.

A coin that still has working blockchain and is traded somewhere, but has no development activity and very low volumes can be called a zombie coin. A coin that no longer mines new blocks is a dead coin. Both zombie coins and dead coins are a type of a failed coin. But you don't need to wait until that to consider a coin as a failure, if a coin fails to deliver its promises for years after launch, then it's also a failed coin, it's clear that either the devs have no desire or not capability to deliver what they have promised, or their project was unsound from the start.

If the coins doenst have value or demand any more then you can count it as one of the shitcoins. It's impossible for them to be back if they cant even make their coins to have a good daily volume . No one will be interested for buying it so the only option for holders is forget and move on to another project , it can also happen even in  known project ,if they lost the interest of old investors then it most likely another dead project.

I'm not really bountyhunter, but as long I see an opportunities I do. For me it's quite easly to scanning which one good project or scam project.
Biggest point is :
- Scripts website(feature, UI, and more how they descibe the project), It's one point they does they have good coder(team) or no.
- What they technology.
- How the project will be went.
- What's kind milestones.
- How their descibe on whitepaper.
- Who they are? has good track or reputation? and who is behind the project(such company investment or people).
- Where the office is located.
If there's are good qualified by myself, I'll looking forward into bounty programs even invested action.

The most bountyhunter doesn't care about project, their only need paid after their have done taks or jobs.
That's one proven when tokens listed on exchang / marketplace then dump happend.

 

Actually I don't  mind it, as I'm only getting some.of their opinions on how they view the things I mentioned earlier, as also I've been on a project that has no longer a value...
I do wonder if they can see it the same way I do.

From the looks of it; i do not think you would get the most desirable answer that you would love. A bounty hunter atleast (most hunters 85%) cares less about a project completing its features or having a product. A bounty hunter (85%) would cal a project failed if it has refused to yield speculated rewards in $.

This is why you would see several hypes about dego or tokoin being excellent even if their product has less adoption.

It is easy to figure out the potentials of a new project; from the partnership, roadmap; seriousness of the team as well as their honesty, with a succesful tokensale. Just my suggestions, always do your own research

Poor marketing has something to do why the projects failed. If the dev cant execute a good marketing strategy then they cant attract investors to support their project.

Their project will be unpopular and possibly cant reach their softcap, reaching the softcap is an indication of having a potential to be successful in the future.

This is some of what I notice to these projects that are not scam but has bad ending.

I was a bounty hunter so I can really tell if a project has huge potential or not, every project has their capacity of bringing funds to bounty hunters which can be categorized under low budget funds(token/usdt/eth/btc) and high budget funds,(token/usdt/eth/btc), I understood from these categories that

•   Low budget projects approximately $3k paying hunters in token/usdt/eth/btc usually have good potential at the end the campaign. Examples are Injective Protocol, Cartesi, DeFi Yield Protocol
•   High budget projects approximately $500k+ paying bounty hunters in token usually fail and have less volume if listed on exchange. Examples are Hivenet, TLSGROUP

In conclusion, potential project brings less budgets for bounties hunters. Take note.

I think if a project is dead, closed, failed, de-listed or even has no volume at exchanges there is not much you can do about it because either you will have to sell really cheap or you just move on considering it a failure and that is all.

I am not a bounty hunter am even scratching the hair on my head in wonder why you asking however you have your rights and reasons to ask. But TBH in my opinion bounty hunters may not be the people to ask they just do it for bounty pay-day, although some are investors.
How I see a project with exciting turn-out, if the project don't give themselves hype they won't man-up too.
Seemly almost all bounty project lives for that.

Greetings Bounty Hunters!
I'm just curious on how do you call a failed project (project who run some features but didn't continue) and a project who depreciated within time (projects who has lost its value due to its low demand and market value)
As I'm only aware of Scam projects ( projects that only within plans and didn't  proceed to any features )

Another thing is how can you tell if it has a potential  or doesn't  have any?