Topic: project products cannot function properly! (Read 398 times)

Thats why I stopped taking part in bounties or ICOs that cannot provide a working product or at least an MVP, before the launch of their token sale. Because in the most cases, such projects are just collecting money and running away with it.

the product cannot function properly because the team does not have the support of investors so it is difficult for developers to offer their products in the market. And about Facebok, why are you so sure if Facebook Coins will succeed? and even I don't think all users will take part in it. Facebok coins cannot be compared to crypto, facebok coins are centralized coins and they focus on financial systems such as Visa.

The project developers have the key whether the work will proceed and continue to make progress, with finish product it's still in need for the team to closely patronizing the development and make sure that every support that the product can get will be maximize to keep improving and updating, the
team behind are the one who's responsible  in any directions the project will proceed, with how they will lift or forget the project will decide the fate
of everything.

It's a must to always assess the team who offers the project before digging in and show your support, knowing the team will adds up confidence to the project future success.

do not expect huge profits from every project you invest, sometimes the product does not guarantee that the project will succeed according to the road map. the most important thing in investing is how to manage your financial management wisely. and one more thing to not put your money into projects that offer big prizes because it's just a trick to attracting large investments in the market.

There are so many projects that actually started well, right from their whitepaper, well-constructed and they try as much as possible to follow the road map before they got hook along the line, and I wonder if it was the project money raised that was never enough to completely it or they just decided to give up on the project which I personally do blame the complete failure of the project on the project team because they fail to care about the continuation of the project.

Many of them do relent in their effort to push the project further thee moment they get the moment and the moment that they release it, continuation should be something that should be of a great importance to them always and there are things that should show for it which I am not seeing.

when talking about products, I think a quality product is a product that has a good function, useful services and the team cares about the continuation of their project. but now there are many incidents of project fraud and you need to be aware not only about the product but also about the background of the project team, because that will determine whether the project is successful or not depends on the project team and the developer.

The problem is that almost all projects are directed to the domestic market. They don’t have a service for the community and therefore most of the products do not work. Says here comes a coin from Facebook, it will work. Since there are a lot of people who will use it.

I believe that there are several ways to verify the legitimacy of a project team and some are listed below:

1. Try to convince the team to conduct an AMA via online video conference and ask questions including technical ones that
    are relevant to the project (If the team don't know what they are talking about especially with development aspects, then
    we could consider it as a red flag)

2. Research and verify their social media profiles especially on Linkedin and Github profiles - (for core developers) and assess
    if they are really who they say they are and try to see their previous activity on projects they have worked on.

3. Observe if they have good community management and if they are regularly interacting with the community via social media
    channels and see if they are always ready to assist on any concerns  of the community. (most legit projects often responds
    to the community's queries mostly in a daily basis and if you didn't get any response to one of your queries, then beware of
    this project).

4. Observe if they are posting any documentation or pictures of team activities (e.g. attending a crypto conference, symposiums)
    If none of these has been published, chances are the project is a scam.

The thing you can do is follow projects and test their execution, for example, I have been following a project called Lympo and not only they did everything they say they will, but there is something big coming up. There was a leak like here: http://boards.4channel.org/biz/thread/15515880
And there are some serious rumors that something big is coming

I really hope so  because Ethereum was the catalyst for 2017 also, they might not have directly have an impact on the altcoins market, but it created avenue for the ICO market because it was through Ethereum that those ICo came to the market and it was because of the influx of them that investors were trooping  into the market that time, and that is what we lack now, right now, we need something that will encourage investors gain and make them troop into the market and I think that Ethereum 2.0 should be able to do that, I wish that the release was going to be this year next year is looking too far for me, it would have been nice that they do that this month of September that we also have some projects too that are being released.

I agree with your opinion, the factor that influences the good or bad of the product in the project is the limited knowledge of the team. many projects have emerged and are moderated by beginners but I would not say they are bad. it's just that this project has strong support, an experienced team will produce good results, including products that will be liked by many investors.

You stated good facts, however in the case of a product not functioning properly it can be corrected if the team is really equipped for it. A team developing a product shows their level of seriousness, now if the product experiences faults along the way, the ability of the team is tackle it showcase their level of expertise. Also, with a good working product, the project will succeed in attracting more investors while making it partnership with most platforms easy. So I don't think a product not working properly will bring down a project because it's bound to happen, but in the case where the team shows less concern, then the project is likewise bound to fail.

but I have no doubt about the project product, if the project they launch offers quality products or functions, of course I will believe it, but the point you are saying is also true that the product is not a complete guarantee for the project's success. as in the case of the miracletele project they have products that work well on the market but instead they end up with fraud.

If a project team knows what they're doing, they should be able to produce a functioning product. Projects products determines their relevance in the market because without a product of wht use then is the project itself. To me functional product means the project team knows their job.

There are two major things that are very important in the life of a project and for a project to be fully successful, we must talk of project developer, team and the product itself, it is necessary for these that I mentioned to be up to standard and if any investor can be able to find this out of any project, then they will be rest assured that their investment is fully secured and they can expect to have a very high yield profit from it.

I just don't know why most of the developers that we have now are not helping matter and they are trying to kill the ICO industry by coming up with quack projects that are not attractive and are not quality enough to really create any meaningful impact to the world, we need projects that will shake the world like health sectors, and I know that government would be more interested in that.

Of course, if you are told about a product and given guarantees for its success, then this looks suspicious, especially now, when new and improved offers appear every day. I believe that if there is a product, it should be successful in the process of its use. It is then that users will be able to rate it and give it a rating.

And I have seen a lot of that and vice versa.
What I mean is, a product is there, it is working but it lacks support.
While others are having a great financial support while the product is still a blank.
Yes there is a roadmap but there should also be beta test of whatever the item is or an application.
If none, then why is it still being fed with a lot of money while those who achieved greatness in a small amount of money could make something better.
Just why?

Hype?
There are a lot to consider with this types of non sense.

basically the product is the image of a project. if the project offers a good product let alone can function well of course investors will be interested to put their money in it. and the question is how will the team develop their products? the key is that team and developer performance is very important in a project.

as we know if a project does not have a product of course investors will hesitate to invest there and vice versa if the developer cannot develop the product properly investors will switch to invest with others. Quality products will provide a great opportunity for project success.

This commonly happened in the crypto world.
So far, we may see the product of a project offers its real use case. However, in fact, they cannot work well. Delivering a product to be accepted in the market will also depend on some factors to be successful. They are likely the concept of the product, the target of buyers or users, the utility and easiness, and also whether the product can be used around the world. Actually, it also caused by how the community team can spread the benefits and works of the products so that many more people know about it and how to utilize and maximize it.

There are projects that already have MVP before their fundraising programme. So for you to invest in such project, I believe you would have first, by yourself used and tested if it is truly working or that it serves the purpose it is meant to serve. At least, that will give you the confidence that you have invested in a project with clear view of what to work on. If there is no MVP, then do not invest in such project.

Not sure if you talking about one single project or you talking about every project as a whole. If you can't trust a project, then simply just don't invest on it. If you think that the project will not function properly, then just avoid it. Why risk on something which you think won't work?
Yeah, experience of a developer matters more than the size of the development team. This is true for every case, not just these projects.

Yes, this is one drawback that many projects have. The quality of the product is very lacking and can not go well. This is a challenge for a project that can succeed. Not only experienced developers, experienced teams and project managers who have quality.

It is currently difficult to find a perfect project with quality products. But if you're a hard worker, I guess you won't give up.

A project that has a really really working product is much more likely to succeed. Even having an excellent team, a good idea, but without a truly functioning product, it is difficult to assure the investor of success. Everyone wants to touch with their hands, for which they will pay money.

actually not as fast as you mean that each project has different goals and if you question the quality of the product depending on the funds they have collected, if the funds from investors have reached the target set, the team will continue their work according to the road map and that also requires time. You need to look at the whitepaper because there you will see project travel data.

My take on it is that projects that are really serious with platform development should already have a working system on ground for it. Token sales and funds generation should only be used for platform expansion and further innovations. You can't bring up a concept to me
 to ask for funds without at least first successfully testing it out to ensure it will work as postulated by your whitepaper. If 85% of shitcoins today had any operational platform before raising funds and tokenizing the project, I believe the value of their coins will not be so low as they are on exchanges today

When I see a project, I don’t rely on the product alone, but also look at the team behind the project, although products really matters a lot, I think to me, it is much more important because without a good product, there is no way the project can gain the attention of the community and there is no way that the project can be sustained for long in the market, it is a product that is useful that will always call users to itself.

The important role of team is just to ensure that thy manage the project very well, and they ensure that it always gets o the hear of the public and that they always come up with different project idea that will continue to make the existing one value to people and also attract newer investors, because without new investors, there is no way that the older ones can get paid also.

the conclusion is very simple, it's just about how the team behind the project develops their product. I would not say that quality products do not guarantee that they will be valuable in the market. but a product that has a special appeal for investors that will determine the actual function of the project product.

I think everything goes back to the original purpose of making the project and launching the project. because no matter how good the developer is and how well the product of the project if they have come out or forgotten their original purpose, the product will automatically be displaced and lost from the exchanger after the product is listed on the exchange. and it will not be long because only products that have potential and important goals that will remain on the exchangers.

Not even just any product, some projects have bad products and yet they called them working product,its just like building a crypto project based on means of payment when we already have hundreds of coins that can be use as means of payment,i think developers should start thinking of new ideas before building any projects,if developers have run out of ideas they should just stop buidling projects

a serious team will focus on the products they launch, for example investors before investing certainly see whether the products they make can function well? yes, if a project has a superior product structure it will attract a lot of investment in the market, but conversely if the product they launch looks bad, of course investors will not want to fund an unclear product.

Its absolute waste of time for any developer to build a project without good working product,unlike the past where its all about whitepaper of every projects now things have change drastically,if you can do your own research you will see that many ICO Projects are near their death after 2018 bear market took over and these projects are still struggling till date

remeber, ideas arent always regular as there is no need for them if thye were. you come up with something new and it is only you as the visioner and the man with the idea that can really comprehend what you intend to achieve and in  most cases, your achievement of that project is the global usage of the product so loads of sensitization has to be put in place and also your developers have to catch the aim and idea before giving you  perfect design. Logically, you have to create enough sensitization for people to see things the way you intend for them to.

A good product will not be created if team has no experience, of course they have experience even though it is still limited. And to cover this, project with a serious team will find suitable partners to support its products.

Its just like you've said that projects that have quality products do not guarantee the success of the project, your point says it all, it has come to the point where by you will see projects been managed by new teams with no past crypto experience ends up been a successful one than projects with pro teams,all this can't be predict either been a crypto investor or just a crypto trader so this is why we take risks

Product will make the team continue working and the project to be better in the future.
This product is not that important at the start of the project.
You are very right, most investors are looking on the partnership they have and how they are launching their propose project.

If you ask me I think the most important aspect of a project is the final product that they offer, that's the end that justifies the means.
A project cannot have a wonderful manager, good team, good developers and when their product gets to the market it's struggles to have a worth, that would only infuriate already existing investors and scare away other possible ones.

So in my opinion if a team has a good end product, it's growth would be accelerated and even those who weren't part of the project at the initial stage would love to join in and invest because now they can see a real project with a worthwhile product that could be good in the future.

project products that don't work well because the team can't develop their projects properly, but not all developers are like that. I think that developers who do not have experience in managing previous projects greatly affect the projects they currently manage, including products that fail, investors also will not be interested in the project.

the product is the most important part of the project because if the product has a good function, it shows that the developer can run their program correctly. but in this period many developers created quality products but did not produce good results.

Most projects that hold a decent ICO have something to show before you give them any money. It could be an MVP (minimum viable product), some strings of code, or at least some partnership with a respectable company. Any project that promises to use the raised funds for the development of a product is, at very best, trying to get some easy money. What they should do is develop their product further, not just start working on it.
and that's one of the things they need to consider if their project is to be successful and the products they create are sold out in the market.

An honest ICO will always provide you with the allocation of the raised funds in exhausting detail. Importantly, most of the funds will go to finance further development of the product. Spending something on marketing or advisors is generally okay, however, if a project prioritizes payouts to some experts, lawyers, or even their own team, that’s an obvious red flag.

Is it really a good project if it has to spend the lion’s share of its budget on lawyers?   
If the team really wishes to deliver a good product, they will make sure that you see it. If they use most of the funds for different kinds of rewards, it’s reasonable to ask.

how are you going to finance the future of your product?
So, generally, it all comes down to the good old question: cui prodest, or who eventually benefits from it!

Products in the project are the result of project development. In this case certainly behind the project ie the team will greatly influence the product it will be used in a broad scale. This is where the team's strategy is needed so that their products are widely used by many people.

The prime reason for this is people are not doing ICO to fund for the product but are creating products so that they'll be able to start an ICO. Even though your motive is good and is serious on your work, if you don't have the expertise, don't raise funds to learn.

product one of the thrones of a project, if the product has high quality many consumers will buy it, including investors like products that have a good function, if developers can create quality products and can function well as stated on their work map automatically investors will be interested to invest in it.

We have millions of project managers and developers and the success of a project certainly doesn't depend on them. That can give them some initial hype during their funding stage but nothing else! I personally have invested in few ICOs at the beginning of 2017 when the market was booming. But in reality, 70% of them never came out with a product. 30% of them came out with a really armature product which eventually went down to drain with thousands of negative reviews from disappointed users and angry investors.

I can give you a nice example of PryvateCoin. This ICO had an actual working product even before it came out for funding and the product was really amazing, a killer of whatsapp! However, the ICO could not take off and eventually the developers lost their interest on the product. It's still available in playstore, but not functioning anymore! Product quality is not the only thing, they also lack marketing skills!

I can say that what you said is true, many projects products look good but very disappointing when they are launched, even when the project products is good and also the team is very experienced they need a long time to be able to show that their product is going well for investors.

Currently seeing who is developer team really has to do because the project is good even though it is good in concept etc without the support of the development team experts in their fields can almost be sure it is only a concept without product.

agree, the project product is not a guarantee that the project will succeed, but a professional development team that needs to be considered in a project, without the performance of the developer of course the products they make will not function properly.

No project can function well without a working product. Look back at 2019 where there were only ICOs with whitapaper, that gained very high profits, none of them survived till that moment, so it is essential to have a functioning product with real value to achieve success.

indeed it is still a problem when the project is at the product development and implementation stage in the real world.  there are people who actually have a product but the supporting facilities are still lacking, this is a problem for a project that is difficult to develop let alone a project based on AI technology for infrastructure.  projects with the aim of mass payments with blockchain still seem to be having difficulty because there is still little knowledge of blockchain that knows how it works.  in my opinion that's the main problem

projects require a lot of time for the products they make to function well in this crypto market apart from this basically project developers are responsible for this, if serious developers develop according to their work maps of course the project produces good results and the products they make are valuable on the market.

I agree and it has already proven so many times by so many quality projects but remember dude you can't build the perfect rome just in a day and all need step by step to build a fully balancing product that can be accepted by the communities.
To be adopted by the community is something difficult to be implemented because we know that crypto is not yet very familiarized especially about the beta app's testers.
A quality product doesn't guarantee it can work well in the market but it needs the time to change people's mind and build full balancing product that will be working perfectly.

In achieving the success of a project certainly influenced by several factors including organizational governance, project managers, project teams, project roadmaps, project partners and also what products they want to offer in the market.
especially the experience of the developer and the team because this is the core of the project. which will determine that the project can achieve success in the market if the project can be managed by an experienced team and developer. The experienced team is very influential on the success of the project, those who have long managed the project and have valid experience in the past certainly have a good background.
In addition partners are also very important because the larger the project partners, the more investors will join them.
but the problem is the products they offer on the market can't operate properly.

in this case I am more confident with the experience / performance of the developer team and the project, I doubt about the product! the fact is that projects that have quality products do not guarantee that they can work well in the market.