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.
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?
Projects listing or raising funds on big exchanges is not easy at all, very costly. That's why some projects chose small or shit exchanges for listing at little or no cost. In the other hands, some project team also chose them in order to carry out their underlying scam related motives. For example, they can just dump their team tokens and run away any time.
That's because they're cutting costs in order to deliver more to people, or so they think that's how it goes. They fail to realize that the most crucial step in introducing their product to the market is by placing it on a platform where most people are actively engaging in trades and not some obscure platform just to save a dime or two. Some of them might be good, yes, but the way their decision ends up with mediocre exchanges really just gets you how poor their decision-making skills are. Most teams are even using signature campaigns aside from registering on a known platform just to get their voices heard, and most of them got the results that they wanted. If a team is incapable of making such decisions, then I guess supporting what they offer is a terrible idea to begin with.
They have no other option but to choose those lesser known exchange. I mean, based on how many scam projects pop up every now and then, I doubt well known exchanges will be willing to risk their reputation by listing those new project tokens on their exchange.
And do you really think that they failed to raise funds because of choosing a "small" bad exchange? I doubt that.
Are you saying that new projects still raise funds successfully using exchanges like p2pb2b? That exchange hardly have good investors, I doubt this your point mate, projects that use p2pb2b can't even raise soft cap target easily And do you really think that they failed to raise funds because of choosing a "small" bad exchange? I doubt that.
They have no other option but to choose those lesser known exchange. I mean, based on how many scam projects pop up every now and then, I doubt well known exchanges will be willing to risk their reputation by listing those new project tokens on their exchange.
And do you really think that they failed to raise funds because of choosing a "small" bad exchange? I doubt that.
And do you really think that they failed to raise funds because of choosing a "small" bad exchange? I doubt that.
I think that those projects that try to cooperate with such terrible exchanges are initially scams. we all understood a long time ago that it is not necessary to use these exchanges and therefore do not invest in such projects.
Don't take this personal OP because they did it intentionally, everyone knew how bad exchanges like p2pb2b and Latoken are, any project that lists on these exchanges know what will happen, it's a waste of time warning the team, id say better avoid such projects cos nothing good will come out from the project
It's really pointless to blame new projects that choose exchanges like p2pb2b exchange to raise fund because I'm 100% sure they knew what that will earned them already, what's more confusing is bounty hunters who still choose p2pb2b exchange bounty projects to promote, it shows that some bounty hunters don't know what they are doing honestly
Yes, so in this case what should be blamed and directed are hunters who do not know what they are doing honestly, it is very good to tell them not to promote projects that choose bad exchanges like p2pb2b to raise funds. 
We have a few problems for this case:
- The project can't really payed a big exchange who have a good reputable reputation.
- The project cannot pass due to diligence on reputable exchange end they decide to list their token on some exchange who doesn't really care about due diligence.
- Too much people asking "when exchange" to make this user "shut up" they listed the token ~LOL. Some people still thinking a token has been listed on exchange is an legitimate 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?
You are wasting your time warning them not to list on p2pb2b exchange and other bad exchanges, they already know where they are going, any projects that use any of these bad exchanges have no good intent right from the start, p2pb2b exchange is a scammer and shit coins projects den
It's really pointless to blame new projects that choose exchanges like p2pb2b exchange to raise fund because I'm 100% sure they knew what that will earned them already, what's more confusing is bounty hunters who still choose p2pb2b exchange bounty projects to promote, it shows that some bounty hunters don't know what they are doing honestly
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?
I think that if you study this issue and read the listing and de-listing rules, as well as the conditions that certain cryptocurrency exchanges set for the project team, then it will become clear why many projects cannot afford listing on the most rated cryptocurrency exchanges, and also why some teams do not want this. it happens when a team cannot pay the down payment requested by the exchange according to the listing conditions. but there are other cases, when developers do not seek to get on the largest and most rated exchange, as this may expose their activities. at least any cryptocurrency exchange has much more opportunities for analyzing one or another new project in order to identify all the possible risks of cooperation with this project, and these opportunities are much greater And stronger than any investor or trader whom developers can always easily deceive . 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?
Exactly i have seen even some good projects listing at low volume exchanges for both fundraising and trading but in the end they are unable to raise there target amount and even if they continue the project after that the price of their token keeps sinking because of low volume and now or low buy orders. 
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?
I believe they know it is a bad exchange and a scam, but they have no other choice. They do not have the budget to go to larger exchanges, so they will opt for those small exchanges because its listing fee is very cheap, sometimes free. 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?
Listing on good exchange like binance is not easy as you think even if they have all the criteria met they need to pay huge among for IEO that is why some projects choose small exchange and get ruined by themselves due to the bad reputation of the exchanges.For those kind of projects ICO is really good to be honest because in the long term they have chance to emerge as big projects. 
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?
They won't listen to any single little person to voice out a good suggestion. They have planned it all along even before you have suggested them, they will list it to those kind of exchanges and will abandon the project.If they are concern with the project they do, they will push through the limits and get a better exchange for the satisfaction of their investors.
There is nothing to blame in this case, the project team that chooses a small exchange for their new project is their full rights, even though it is not good for the project, but their abilities are limited to that, only what I am surprised is that the bounty participant has already knowing this still participates in projects like that. 
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?
Jump to: