Topic: Never invest no product ICOs - page 42. (Read 6774 times)
I do not trust companies that do not have a product. Most often, such companies do not reach soft cap.
I will not do that, I will invest in the company who are in group of ICO because they are legit and not scam . there are some people taking advantage from it but it is still profitable to invest and worth for the income.
It seems that with so many current ico, we do not really have time to learn all the projects one by one. Of course ico that has a real product is a good thing. But in fact they are also not always successful, as happens in real estate products for example, this is because the perception of similarities have not been formed in this community.
Most often, if a company does not have a product, then this is a scam project. I advise you to be careful with such projects.
i do agree on you mate. sometimes i see a startup that dont even have a white paper but starting thier presale. And their roadmap is 1-3 years before the product launch. Its really wise to have a research and backround check on evry startups that you are planning to invest. To save you hard earn money.
I mostly agree with you but sometimes there are projects that take some time to achieve a working product so you this type of ICOs deserves some attention as they will rise for sure when the product is finshed and it can be used by all of us but the main aspect remains that a good ICO right now must have a working product even if it is alpha phase.
I agree. Investing in a company without a product is a bad idea. You risk losing all your money.
ICO project without product is the scam.
When a product or work prototype, it gives more confidence in the successful completion of the project. After all, before ICO makes a prototype, the company works and finds investment, it means that it really works, has experience, knows the weak point of the project and will overcome it.
I a gree with you.
When a product or work prototype, it gives more confidence in the successful completion of the project. After all, before ICO makes a prototype, the company works and finds investment, it means that it really works, has experience, knows the weak point of the project and will overcome it.
I a gree with you.
I agree, because I think ICO that does not have a product is most likely ICO is a scam and if the ICO is not a scam then the price will go down (according to my personal experience).
I was wondering, why a lot of projects don't have such an important thing for a successful ICO as a product.
When a company has a product it means they have it to develop. In such case, a company shows why they need ICO and how the company will be growing. What is more, there is more trust because a company has experience in a field they are working.
For example, KickCity company that exists two years. KickCity an event platform that generates revenue and has a Helsinki government grant. KickCity needs ICO to make business bigger and to become a decentralized platform where every user is rewarded for ticket promotion.
On the other hand, no product ICOs can prove their success just in theory. There is no proof base that product will be developed and will be working right.
In such unstable industry as ICO everything has to be under control. The product is one of the things that shows the campaign is not a scam. That is why I believe it is better to invest in ready-made products ICOs.
I agree with you that the availability of a ready project for developers is very good for their reputation and for collecting money during the ICO. You in fact understand that very few developers of start-ups can boast of a finished product, because this requires money. Money can only give ICO. Without money, the idea can not be realized. When a company has a product it means they have it to develop. In such case, a company shows why they need ICO and how the company will be growing. What is more, there is more trust because a company has experience in a field they are working.
For example, KickCity company that exists two years. KickCity an event platform that generates revenue and has a Helsinki government grant. KickCity needs ICO to make business bigger and to become a decentralized platform where every user is rewarded for ticket promotion.
On the other hand, no product ICOs can prove their success just in theory. There is no proof base that product will be developed and will be working right.
In such unstable industry as ICO everything has to be under control. The product is one of the things that shows the campaign is not a scam. That is why I believe it is better to invest in ready-made products ICOs.
I think that ico will be successful only when the project is will be needed by society. so my choice fell on the project Yumerium, if you have not heard about it, then I advise you to get acquainted and you will understand why I think so.
I think existence of a working product not important part of ICO success, at least in the first weeks after first listings, much more important are hype around project and community attention.
I was wondering, why a lot of projects don't have such an important thing for a successful ICO as a product.
When a company has a product it means they have it to develop. In such case, a company shows why they need ICO and how the company will be growing. What is more, there is more trust because a company has experience in a field they are working.
For example, KickCity company that exists two years. KickCity an event platform that generates revenue and has a Helsinki government grant. KickCity needs ICO to make business bigger and to become a decentralized platform where every user is rewarded for ticket promotion.
On the other hand, no product ICOs can prove their success just in theory. There is no proof base that product will be developed and will be working right.
In such unstable industry as ICO everything has to be under control. The product is one of the things that shows the campaign is not a scam. That is why I believe it is better to invest in ready-made products ICOs.
When a company has a product it means they have it to develop. In such case, a company shows why they need ICO and how the company will be growing. What is more, there is more trust because a company has experience in a field they are working.
For example, KickCity company that exists two years. KickCity an event platform that generates revenue and has a Helsinki government grant. KickCity needs ICO to make business bigger and to become a decentralized platform where every user is rewarded for ticket promotion.
On the other hand, no product ICOs can prove their success just in theory. There is no proof base that product will be developed and will be working right.
In such unstable industry as ICO everything has to be under control. The product is one of the things that shows the campaign is not a scam. That is why I believe it is better to invest in ready-made products ICOs.
Yes that is true, that ICO dealing without a product is definitely a scam, so be sure to read the white paper before you put up your money as investment, because product will actually the best basis to analyze of the investor, this is one way of keeping away from scammers, and if you found a scammer in here , please don't hesitate to be vocal.
The issue is not whether there is a working product. It is whether it has a real use. How many beta testers have tried it? Many projects come up saying that their product is patent-pending or that big corporations are testing it. How do we know for sure that the MVP is real?
Yeah i agree! better invest in projects, that already have their own product, like Sonder Ico for example, that have their own app yet
I agree with you on investing in projects that have ready-made product because that can convince you of how dedicated the management of the product are and you know what you are promoting but there are also some projects without product that are also successful but this are very few. It is better to make good research about a project before deciding to invest in it and your investment should be based on you conclusion of the research.
I do agree that as far as ICO's are concerned we need to make sure that the ICO has an actual product capable of being used or utilized by its customers or clients. Even beta prototypes as fas as I am concerned is a sign that things are going as planned and that the ICO is not a scam.
Exactly, I can never understand how so many crypto users are blindly investing their money in ICOs with no product or any kind of development to show case. They don't even know if the devs are capable of developing the product or not and not to mention if it has any real world use case or if there is enough demand for it.
Never invest in ICO if dont have product. because ICO without any working product can easily be a scam. But not all ICO without product is scam, maybe initially they dont have it. that;s why the company using ICO ways to collect funds to make their product. Learn about their whitepaper and roadmap. in roadmap they will explain about when the product release, when ready to use and etc.
But better if they already have working product first
But better if they already have working product first
I was wondering, why a lot of projects don't have such an important thing for a successful ICO as a product.
When a company has a product it means they have it to develop. In such case, a company shows why they need ICO and how the company will be growing. What is more, there is more trust because a company has experience in a field they are working.
For example, KickCity company that exists two years. KickCity an event platform that generates revenue and has a Helsinki government grant. KickCity needs ICO to make business bigger and to become a decentralized platform where every user is rewarded for ticket promotion.
On the other hand, no product ICOs can prove their success just in theory. There is no proof base that product will be developed and will be working right.
In such unstable industry as ICO everything has to be under control. The product is one of the things that shows the campaign is not a scam. That is why I believe it is better to invest in ready-made products ICOs.
When a company has a product it means they have it to develop. In such case, a company shows why they need ICO and how the company will be growing. What is more, there is more trust because a company has experience in a field they are working.
For example, KickCity company that exists two years. KickCity an event platform that generates revenue and has a Helsinki government grant. KickCity needs ICO to make business bigger and to become a decentralized platform where every user is rewarded for ticket promotion.
On the other hand, no product ICOs can prove their success just in theory. There is no proof base that product will be developed and will be working right.
In such unstable industry as ICO everything has to be under control. The product is one of the things that shows the campaign is not a scam. That is why I believe it is better to invest in ready-made products ICOs.
This is true but in cryptocurrencies world the hype and fake volumes are king and would take money from dumb morons like nothing.
Jump to: