Topic: New projects team failed to listen to advice about bad exchanges (Read 275 times)
They never had a good plan for the projects right from the start, no serious team will use exchanges like p2pb2b exchange or vindax exchange, it won't do good for their projects, I'm sure that's what will come to mind but scammers and unqualified developers will see p2pb2b exchange as a chance to pretend as if..... all just to deceive investors
the team has their own way of promoting and selling tokens and they also must be thinking about costs etc. they will not listen to anyone because we are not part of the team
Serious project has a great team behind it and they all know about crypto expecially about exchange, they all know which the good and the bad exchanges. So for serious project the team will choose the good one, But why a project choose bad exchanges, My opinion because 2 reason. The team don't have funds and The team want to scam people
Some projects have the intention of scamming people that's why they use exchanges like p2pb2b and vindax, these exchanges have bad histories of failure honestly, what would make some one go ahead with this when they know already knew what will happen?
Reason why they don't listen is because they think they have resourceful team who could make findings and give them the best advice. They rely on their team on advice but don't seek for contributions from communities. Many of them rely most time on exchange ranking on CMC and they stick with one that rank high and they can get easily listed. This is part of the reason why Latoken is their hub. For project to be successful, you have to listen to your community as well. Some members have experience than the founders of some project.
It is much expensive to list on big exchanges, some of these developers would have love to have their projects on big exchanges atleast to make more money buy most at times they don't have enough cash to do that. Although there are some that list on shit exchange out of greediness but who cares about those kind of projects.
the most stupid mistake of new projects is to choose such bad exchanges as you called. Maybe they choose these exchanges because the listing is very cheap and maybe because all these projects are just scam
It's not mistakes, many new devs know about p2pb2b and other bad exchanges but some don't have the cash for big exchanges and their project isn't big enough to pass binance exchange screening so they have no choice but to start from small exchanges 
It's their fault if they do not take the warning sign which is using small exchanges in their IEO and got a bad result if that is the case might as well avoid investing in that project or do not participate at all if they have a bounty campaign, they have a decision of their own that is why they still proceed with using bad exchanges for crowdfunding.
It is the budget issues they will be having to limit them to small exchanges, you cannot list the coins for free and the projects that are running needs to be listed in any exchange one way or the other to get the project moving forward and if the project team is not in a position to spend more money then they will end up in exchanges that are cheap and to get your coins listed in top exchanges are not cheap.There are various reasons for that.
I don't think they don't want to be listed on popular exchanges for fund raising, the problem is not easy to list on exchanges like Binance
or KuCoin. There are several criteria that may not be met by new team projects, one of which may be related to a number money must
be paid. Or even have to make a number of deposits so that new projects can be accepted. So we cannot blame new projects if they end up
listing on small exchanges.
true, new projects must meet the criteria to enter the big market, because the big market has its own regulations in order to register, and the cost to enter is not small, not yet they must have a large community to support their project, so it is very difficult to enter the market big or KuCoin. There are several criteria that may not be met by new team projects, one of which may be related to a number money must
be paid. Or even have to make a number of deposits so that new projects can be accepted. So we cannot blame new projects if they end up
listing on small exchanges.
I don't think they don't want to be listed on popular exchanges for fund raising, the problem is not easy to list on exchanges like Binance
or KuCoin. There are several criteria that may not be met by new team projects, one of which may be related to a number money must
be paid. Or even have to make a number of deposits so that new projects can be accepted. So we cannot blame new projects if they end up
listing on small exchanges.
or KuCoin. There are several criteria that may not be met by new team projects, one of which may be related to a number money must
be paid. Or even have to make a number of deposits so that new projects can be accepted. So we cannot blame new projects if they end up
listing on small exchanges.
They have to list it in small exchanges with very least requirements for them to be able to say that their project is going on forward and in a way to success. Good projects, whether to be listed in big or small exchanges will still survived no matter what. It all depends on the platform being used in crypto market for the project to be that successful.
It's their fault if they do not take the warning sign which is using small exchanges in their IEO and got a bad result if that is the case might as well avoid investing in that project or do not participate at all if they have a bounty campaign, they have a decision of their own that is why they still proceed with using bad exchanges for crowdfunding.
It is the budget issues they will be having to limit them to small exchanges, you cannot list the coins for free and the projects that are running needs to be listed in any exchange one way or the other to get the project moving forward and if the project team is not in a position to spend more money then they will end up in exchanges that are cheap and to get your coins listed in top exchanges are not cheap. 
Some projects have good use cases but they ruined everything with a simple mistake of using small exchanges for fund raising, exchanges like p2pb2b, vindax, exmarket, sistemkoin won't do any good, what's more surprising is that majority of new projects don't like listening to advice, you warned them about these exchanges but they still go ahead of use these useless exchanges and in the end they will say they failed to raise funds, who is to be blame for this?
It's their fault if they do not take the warning sign which is using small exchanges in their IEO and got a bad result if that is the case might as well avoid investing in that project or do not participate at all if they have a bounty campaign, they have a decision of their own that is why they still proceed with using bad exchanges for crowdfunding.
Sometimes you wont blame them because they may not have enough money to afford those big exchanges you suggest to them , hence they prefer to go for cheaper Exchanges .
Apart from this how about paying that huge money on a big exchange and due to low trading volume token get desisted after a short while ? I think some of them also consider this and prefer to build their volume from small exchanges before getting to the bigger one.
You must know big exchange site puts more qualification and it's not only paid to be listed but the team must also prove its product to the exchange site and it must have supported by the big community too. Apart from this how about paying that huge money on a big exchange and due to low trading volume token get desisted after a short while ? I think some of them also consider this and prefer to build their volume from small exchanges before getting to the bigger one.
It's not all of coins can be listed on a big exchange site easily.
Sometimes you wont blame them because they may not have enough money to afford those big exchanges you suggest to them , hence they prefer to go for cheaper Exchanges .
Apart from this how about paying that huge money on a big exchange and due to low trading volume token get desisted after a short while ? I think some of them also consider this and prefer to build their volume from small exchanges before getting to the bigger one.
Apart from this how about paying that huge money on a big exchange and due to low trading volume token get desisted after a short while ? I think some of them also consider this and prefer to build their volume from small exchanges before getting to the bigger one.
They made the decision so they take the full blame. Sometimes it surprises me that most team will build a project then go for an exchange which have no good IEO success etc, get listed and expects a magic to happen. It is not rocket science but everyone in the crypto space knows the good exchanges and the bad ones, thus when a project is listed on a bad exchange users tends to be more careful which is why after an IEO (if at all it will be successful) the price dumps, but comparing in other good exchanges it is not always the same.
From another side, most times project teams who have a bad motive lists on those exchanges then carry out their act. Therefore, all I can say is, I have no business with any project listing on bad exchanges because it is already seen as a dead project.
From another side, most times project teams who have a bad motive lists on those exchanges then carry out their act. Therefore, all I can say is, I have no business with any project listing on bad exchanges because it is already seen as a dead project.
Some projects have good use cases but they ruined everything with a simple mistake of using small exchanges for fund raising, exchanges like p2pb2b, vindax, exmarket, sistemkoin won't do any good, what's more surprising is that majority of new projects don't like listening to advice, you warned them about these exchanges but they still go ahead of use these useless exchanges and in the end they will say they failed to raise funds, who is to be blame for this?
If the project is good then they should not have any problem listing on atleast mid sized exchange in my opinion, low liquidity and repute based exchanges is never a good idea and i have seen teams ruining there project as a result of listing on their launchpads. I think project teams should apply on atleast reasonable exchanges and should wait for their turn to get listed make decisions in haste to list on any exchange available is not a good idea. 
the most stupid mistake of new projects is to choose such bad exchanges as you called. Maybe they choose these exchanges because the listing is very cheap and maybe because all these projects are just scam
Some projects have good use cases but they ruined everything with a simple mistake of using small exchanges for fund raising, exchanges like p2pb2b, vindax, exmarket, sistemkoin won't do any good, what's more surprising is that majority of new projects don't like listening to advice, you warned them about these exchanges but they still go ahead of use these useless exchanges and in the end they will say they failed to raise funds, who is to be blame for this?
You assume the team did not want to list of big exchange which is very wrong, to get listed on big exchange now require alot of contact and influence plus money to pay for listing fees, most of these new projects do not have money to pay for listing, plus the pressure from the their community to get listed on exchange push them to some of these so called small exchange
its not that the team didn't listen, they are just part of the scam that these exchanges are plotting.
exchanges like, latoken, vindax and p2pb2b are well associated with scam projects and if the team still engage to them it only means they are also up to something fishy. there are few exceptions but majority of them as we can see are just garbage. blockburn is just one that really sticks in my mind everytime IEO scam is the topic. it literally burned investors because i did try to ride the pump while they did a bounty campaign but just before the campaign end, it just pop.
exchanges like, latoken, vindax and p2pb2b are well associated with scam projects and if the team still engage to them it only means they are also up to something fishy. there are few exceptions but majority of them as we can see are just garbage. blockburn is just one that really sticks in my mind everytime IEO scam is the topic. it literally burned investors because i did try to ride the pump while they did a bounty campaign but just before the campaign end, it just pop.
Jump to: