Topic: What keys point you look in ICOs before investing or supporting. (Read 180 times)
Having a media presence is really convincing. If the CEO goes on youtube then you know that the project is real, so then you look at the rest of the project and the whitepaper to see if it's actually worth investing in. some are not actually scams but just a failed project started by an incompetent team
August 31, 2018, 06:52:39 PM
First of all I have to check the team behind the project is real or not by checking they LinkedIn profile or any social media and after that checking the team whether they are having a good programmer or any blockchain expertise. Learn their whitepaper I think it's very important, in whitepaper all information about the project is available there. and the idea of the project and the roadmap also, the community behind the project also plays an important role here.
August 31, 2018, 06:45:15 PM
We all know 80/100 ICOs turned out to be scam before they reach on the exchange or before their first birthday. You can check it on list of dead coins Coinopys & deadcoins. ICOs picked the market in 2017, since than till today also lot of new ICOs are collecting huge amount of money from investors. Some ICOs have good intention to solve the problems presently crypto industry are facing and some ICOs brings new technology to the cryptoworlds. But on the other hand some ICOs are being launched In the market to scam peoples with their well design fake website, team members, roadmap and whitepaper by mentioning unofficially name of big exchanges.
Now the main thing is still ICOs are collecting huge amounts of funds during their token sale, What are the key points do you guys look before investing or supporting ICOs. Lot of community members will have different different opinions. Let's share your opinions and knowledge.
Well personally, I do first check the platform that the project itself is promoting. And also, how popular that project is The popularity has a huge contribution on the project's success. Popularity is next to the demand which happens to determine the price of the tokens upon being listed in the market. those that will have a high demand re those that would be worthy of investing. Now the main thing is still ICOs are collecting huge amounts of funds during their token sale, What are the key points do you guys look before investing or supporting ICOs. Lot of community members will have different different opinions. Let's share your opinions and knowledge.
August 31, 2018, 06:42:30 PM
I generally try to make sure there are no suspicious team members, that mean, people whose background can't be found or a lack of information about the project itself.
August 31, 2018, 07:38:34 AM
1) Product
2) Team
3) Whitepaper
I only see this three thing, then I decide to invest or not....
2) Team
3) Whitepaper
I only see this three thing, then I decide to invest or not....
August 31, 2018, 07:35:42 AM
In reality, there are some ICOs that are scams. We can review these aspects before investing. We have a real development team, a broad and most important open support community, a clear investment direction, a white paper to read the project, and a roadmap. Prudent investment can minimize risk and maximize profits
I am looking at www.icoguide.com ratings I trust them , they are not paid, so this is one but not only criteria.
The current craze for ICO (Initial Coin Offering), of which there are many, unsurprisingly attract a growing number of unscrupulous or not severe enough people, eager to take advantage of this new mechanism to raise more easy money. To avoid falling victim to scams or wobbly projects, a checklist of essential things to consider before investing in an ICO can be particularly helpful:
1. The team.
It is the crucial point: who is the maneuver behind the ICO in question? The answer to this question will depend on the degree of confidence that will be granted to the project, before going further in the analysis. First, the team’s stakeholders — and especially its founding members — must be publicly posted, with links to learn more about each. The possibility to go on their profiles Linkedin and Github (for the professional profiles) is appreciable if it is essential to get a better idea of their experience.
For example:- Linkedin profiles, even if they only rely on declarative information, allow us to see, for example, where the founding members of the project worked until now. Have they been in the blockchain ecosystem for some time or have they been there very recently? There is nothing wrong with the introduction of ICOs by ‘newcomers,’ but some caution is legitimate in a ‘gold rush’ context that attracts many opportunists.-Github profiles allow seeing which languages are mastered by developers, which is another exciting information.- A very active Github profile is not the best sign for the key developers of the project. Conversely, an active profile, which has been around for some time, inspires more confidence.Twitter accounts can be fascinating to browse for points of interest, viewpoints, connections, and founding members of the project — and watch their evolution over time. Do they post on blockchain topics for some time? What do they post? With whom do they exchange (publicly)? Etc. It is not a question of rigid reasoning on each of these elements (the absence or the non-activity of a Twitter account, for example, is not crippling!), But the sum of these checks put the end at the end allows us to draw up an overall picture which is itself revealing. Note that sometimes ICOs are worn by recognized personalities of the ecosystem blockchain, which of course changes the deal. Thus the ICO of the EOS project (launched at the end of June 2017 and still in progress) has so far proved to be very successful. Mostly thanks to the reputation of Dan Larimer, Blockone’s CTO who runs the EOS project, and who has already established his ability. This ability is to create compelling blockchain projects: he was in fact at the origin of BitShares, valued at hundreds of millions of dollars, and Steemit. In this type of case, it is apparently easier to trust the project, since one of the founding members already has a recognized ‘CV.’Also, an essential criterion of the seriousness of an ICO or rating of ICO,although difficult to evaluate, lies in the degree of involvement of its members. A full team, who ticks the right boxes, and who can count on a robust Advisory Board, is not enough in itself: it must have several key members fully involved in the ICO process.
2. The Role of the Token in the Project
‘The blockchain is the solution, but what was the problem?’ in the same way that was evaluating a blockchain, the project requires asking whether it answers an existing problem, assess an ICO project requires checking that the token being issued is of real use. Will it be used as an intended use? Could the plan work? It is common for projects running ICOs to have no need to create a new token.Also, it is essential to check that the token complies with the ERC-20 standard, which has become a recognized standard.
3. The Terms of the ICO Itself.
How will the ICO be done concretely? The most significant transparency is involved in this area, with the risk of unpleasant surprises afterward. It is therefore essential to know how many tokens the company plans to create and how they will be sold, etc.
4. The Roadmap
The Roadmap is a crucial element that concerns both the transparency of the project and the seriousness of the work of its members. Investing in an ICO requires knowing the steps that will follow the fundraising, which must already be planned by the company, and posted publicly on its site, at least in part. A fuzzy and poorly detailed roadmap may hide a lack of strategic vision … or the risk of a scam. Besides, it is essential to try to evaluate the credibility of the roadmap and to be wary of projects that would promise months and wonders quickly…
5. Funded Money Will be Used.
How does the company intend to spend the funds raised at the ICO? What will be the distribution of the use of this money? This information cannot be evaded and must be consistent with the roadmap.
6. The Code
It deserves being cited first, and yet … it is often difficult to assess the strength of the code, including for an insider. We must, therefore, rely on what we can, according to his level of technical understanding. In any case, we must make sure that the code is public, and see if a trusted third party has audited and validated the code (which does not always prevent, that said, some hiccups).Without going so far as to study the code in detail, which is not within reach of all, it is at least essential to go and look at the white paper published by the project team. The white paper is the original file of a blockchain project, which lays the groundwork. As such, it must be very rigorous and to present at least the technical basis of the project. A white paper that would evade technical issues and put forward or even abuse of flashy terms (‘revolution’ or ‘disruption’ …) is a bad sign.
7. The List of Advisors.
Recognized and renowned personalities in the blockchain community are in high demand and should be part of ICO’s advisory boards. Most often, their presence is an excellent sign — at least when it comes to professional profiles. Be careful though: it has happened that some projects show personalities who had in fact never agreed. It was after such a case that Vitalik Buterin (founder of Ethereum) announced that he would not accept being an ICO Advisor. Therefore, if you meet an ICO advisor who says he’s on advisory board, is a lie.Who-is-more, if the list of reputable advisors of an ICO can be a great plus in the credibility of the project, this criterion should never be self-sufficient. Let’s not forget, for example, that the most prominent fiasco of all blockchain projects, The DAO (victim of a resounding attack in May 2016, following a loophole in its code), counted several great personalities of Ethereum among its Advisory Board, and supposed to have checked the solidity of the code…The absence of Advisors should not be a stumbling block to not participate in the ICO. In the end, their presence should instead be seen as the cherry on a cake already provided…
8. The Community Surrounding the Project.
Is there a dynamic and growing community around the project? Does the Slack of the project, if it exists, have many active members — is it boiling (it was, for example, the case of Tezos the weeks preceding its ICO), or somewhat quite sleepy?
These questions are essential for two reasons:
● First, an active community is, on the one hand, a good sign on the interest in the project, on its ability to attract enthusiasts.
● And the second on the openness ofits team to build an efficient robust network.
9. The Reputation
What does it say about the project on specialized forums on Reddit, in blockchain meetups…? If we have to beware of false positive comments (posted anonymously by the project team in question), a review of the comments on different forums and social networks allows us to get some idea of the general opinions.
The reputation of the project is measured by the number of exchanges (cryptocurrency marketplaces) having decided to trade the token created by the project — that is to say on which it is possible at the ICO of buying and sell the token. Projects that are unknown or considered far-fetched will not be accepted by all exchanges. The number of exchanges should not be the only criterion of evaluation: the best is to go to see if the main exchanges have made a choice to trade the token or not.
10. The Legal Aspects
An ICO project with one or more legal specialists in its team earns a lot of seriousness and credibility. Otherwise, having the support of external legal experts is important.The situations are very heterogeneous depending on the project, depending on their seriousness, their ambition, the nature of the project, or the operation of their token … Sometimes, some ICOs do not even have Terms and Conditions on their site!
1. The team.
It is the crucial point: who is the maneuver behind the ICO in question? The answer to this question will depend on the degree of confidence that will be granted to the project, before going further in the analysis. First, the team’s stakeholders — and especially its founding members — must be publicly posted, with links to learn more about each. The possibility to go on their profiles Linkedin and Github (for the professional profiles) is appreciable if it is essential to get a better idea of their experience.
For example:- Linkedin profiles, even if they only rely on declarative information, allow us to see, for example, where the founding members of the project worked until now. Have they been in the blockchain ecosystem for some time or have they been there very recently? There is nothing wrong with the introduction of ICOs by ‘newcomers,’ but some caution is legitimate in a ‘gold rush’ context that attracts many opportunists.-Github profiles allow seeing which languages are mastered by developers, which is another exciting information.- A very active Github profile is not the best sign for the key developers of the project. Conversely, an active profile, which has been around for some time, inspires more confidence.Twitter accounts can be fascinating to browse for points of interest, viewpoints, connections, and founding members of the project — and watch their evolution over time. Do they post on blockchain topics for some time? What do they post? With whom do they exchange (publicly)? Etc. It is not a question of rigid reasoning on each of these elements (the absence or the non-activity of a Twitter account, for example, is not crippling!), But the sum of these checks put the end at the end allows us to draw up an overall picture which is itself revealing. Note that sometimes ICOs are worn by recognized personalities of the ecosystem blockchain, which of course changes the deal. Thus the ICO of the EOS project (launched at the end of June 2017 and still in progress) has so far proved to be very successful. Mostly thanks to the reputation of Dan Larimer, Blockone’s CTO who runs the EOS project, and who has already established his ability. This ability is to create compelling blockchain projects: he was in fact at the origin of BitShares, valued at hundreds of millions of dollars, and Steemit. In this type of case, it is apparently easier to trust the project, since one of the founding members already has a recognized ‘CV.’Also, an essential criterion of the seriousness of an ICO or rating of ICO,although difficult to evaluate, lies in the degree of involvement of its members. A full team, who ticks the right boxes, and who can count on a robust Advisory Board, is not enough in itself: it must have several key members fully involved in the ICO process.
2. The Role of the Token in the Project
‘The blockchain is the solution, but what was the problem?’ in the same way that was evaluating a blockchain, the project requires asking whether it answers an existing problem, assess an ICO project requires checking that the token being issued is of real use. Will it be used as an intended use? Could the plan work? It is common for projects running ICOs to have no need to create a new token.Also, it is essential to check that the token complies with the ERC-20 standard, which has become a recognized standard.
3. The Terms of the ICO Itself.
How will the ICO be done concretely? The most significant transparency is involved in this area, with the risk of unpleasant surprises afterward. It is therefore essential to know how many tokens the company plans to create and how they will be sold, etc.
4. The Roadmap
The Roadmap is a crucial element that concerns both the transparency of the project and the seriousness of the work of its members. Investing in an ICO requires knowing the steps that will follow the fundraising, which must already be planned by the company, and posted publicly on its site, at least in part. A fuzzy and poorly detailed roadmap may hide a lack of strategic vision … or the risk of a scam. Besides, it is essential to try to evaluate the credibility of the roadmap and to be wary of projects that would promise months and wonders quickly…
5. Funded Money Will be Used.
How does the company intend to spend the funds raised at the ICO? What will be the distribution of the use of this money? This information cannot be evaded and must be consistent with the roadmap.
6. The Code
It deserves being cited first, and yet … it is often difficult to assess the strength of the code, including for an insider. We must, therefore, rely on what we can, according to his level of technical understanding. In any case, we must make sure that the code is public, and see if a trusted third party has audited and validated the code (which does not always prevent, that said, some hiccups).Without going so far as to study the code in detail, which is not within reach of all, it is at least essential to go and look at the white paper published by the project team. The white paper is the original file of a blockchain project, which lays the groundwork. As such, it must be very rigorous and to present at least the technical basis of the project. A white paper that would evade technical issues and put forward or even abuse of flashy terms (‘revolution’ or ‘disruption’ …) is a bad sign.
7. The List of Advisors.
Recognized and renowned personalities in the blockchain community are in high demand and should be part of ICO’s advisory boards. Most often, their presence is an excellent sign — at least when it comes to professional profiles. Be careful though: it has happened that some projects show personalities who had in fact never agreed. It was after such a case that Vitalik Buterin (founder of Ethereum) announced that he would not accept being an ICO Advisor. Therefore, if you meet an ICO advisor who says he’s on advisory board, is a lie.Who-is-more, if the list of reputable advisors of an ICO can be a great plus in the credibility of the project, this criterion should never be self-sufficient. Let’s not forget, for example, that the most prominent fiasco of all blockchain projects, The DAO (victim of a resounding attack in May 2016, following a loophole in its code), counted several great personalities of Ethereum among its Advisory Board, and supposed to have checked the solidity of the code…The absence of Advisors should not be a stumbling block to not participate in the ICO. In the end, their presence should instead be seen as the cherry on a cake already provided…
8. The Community Surrounding the Project.
Is there a dynamic and growing community around the project? Does the Slack of the project, if it exists, have many active members — is it boiling (it was, for example, the case of Tezos the weeks preceding its ICO), or somewhat quite sleepy?
These questions are essential for two reasons:
● First, an active community is, on the one hand, a good sign on the interest in the project, on its ability to attract enthusiasts.
● And the second on the openness ofits team to build an efficient robust network.
9. The Reputation
What does it say about the project on specialized forums on Reddit, in blockchain meetups…? If we have to beware of false positive comments (posted anonymously by the project team in question), a review of the comments on different forums and social networks allows us to get some idea of the general opinions.
The reputation of the project is measured by the number of exchanges (cryptocurrency marketplaces) having decided to trade the token created by the project — that is to say on which it is possible at the ICO of buying and sell the token. Projects that are unknown or considered far-fetched will not be accepted by all exchanges. The number of exchanges should not be the only criterion of evaluation: the best is to go to see if the main exchanges have made a choice to trade the token or not.
10. The Legal Aspects
An ICO project with one or more legal specialists in its team earns a lot of seriousness and credibility. Otherwise, having the support of external legal experts is important.The situations are very heterogeneous depending on the project, depending on their seriousness, their ambition, the nature of the project, or the operation of their token … Sometimes, some ICOs do not even have Terms and Conditions on their site!
Well I first look for a project that i like, that solves a problem we have in the world. Could be anything really. Then i try to see how much presence they have online and how big of a following, that should indicate how well the coin will do short term. For long term the concept most evolve and work, making the developers very important. If you want both good long and short term aspects, look throught the developers, following & presence online and of course look for good ideas to start with 
First off, make sure that the developers are not anonymous. If they are, that is as red of a flag as it can possibly be. If there are names listed Google them thoroughly, focusing especially on the development team and the advisory board.
Always make sure that an ICO has a wide and, most importantly, open supporting community. A public Slack or Telegram chat for all investors is generally a very good sign. Other sources like Facebook, Twitter or Reddit, can be extremely handy when evaluating an ICO as well.
There is no universal rule about what stage of development should the project be at before it can hold an ICO. At times, there will only be a white paper and a rough roadmap.
BitcoinTalk.org is the biggest forum dedicated to Bitcoin and everything crypto-related. When it comes to ICOs, this forum will definitely come in handy, as this is where the announcements (marked [ANN]) are made.
This entire guide can be summed up in just a few words: know exactly what you’re investing in. And there is no better way of learning as much as possible about the project than reading its white paper.
If a project has no working code whatsoever prior to an ICO, or even if they do, but it isn’t open source - that’s a major red flag.
Venture capital investors make their living on investments, which makes them the pickiest contributors. Learn from them.
Before even considering taking part in an ICO, make sure you’re not breaking the law. ICOs are outright banned in some jurisdictions, such as China and South Korea.
This is what I do before investing in icos or considering investing, yeah its a Long process but Its worth the effort getting scammed ain't no fun.
Always make sure that an ICO has a wide and, most importantly, open supporting community. A public Slack or Telegram chat for all investors is generally a very good sign. Other sources like Facebook, Twitter or Reddit, can be extremely handy when evaluating an ICO as well.
There is no universal rule about what stage of development should the project be at before it can hold an ICO. At times, there will only be a white paper and a rough roadmap.
BitcoinTalk.org is the biggest forum dedicated to Bitcoin and everything crypto-related. When it comes to ICOs, this forum will definitely come in handy, as this is where the announcements (marked [ANN]) are made.
This entire guide can be summed up in just a few words: know exactly what you’re investing in. And there is no better way of learning as much as possible about the project than reading its white paper.
If a project has no working code whatsoever prior to an ICO, or even if they do, but it isn’t open source - that’s a major red flag.
Venture capital investors make their living on investments, which makes them the pickiest contributors. Learn from them.
Before even considering taking part in an ICO, make sure you’re not breaking the law. ICOs are outright banned in some jurisdictions, such as China and South Korea.
This is what I do before investing in icos or considering investing, yeah its a Long process but Its worth the effort getting scammed ain't no fun.
We all know 80/100 ICOs turned out to be scam before they reach on the exchange or before their first birthday.
Increase the ratio and make it 90/100.ICOs picked the market in 2017, since than till today also lot of new ICOs are collecting huge amount of money from investors.
At this prime, most of the ICOs are legit and most of them now are one of the top coins which is included to top 100.Some ICOs have good intention to solve the problems presently crypto industry are facing and some ICOs brings new technology to the cryptoworlds. But on the other hand some ICOs are being launched In the market to scam peoples with their well design fake website, team members, roadmap and whitepaper by mentioning unofficially name of big exchanges.
And you know what? they are also imitating what those legit projects are doing, they are promoting their intention to solve problems and help the economy and transactions but their bad motives is inside.Now the main thing is still ICOs are collecting huge amounts of funds during their token sale,
If they reach their soft cap, they'll continue if not they'll stop.What are the key points do you guys look before investing or supporting ICOs. Lot of community members will have different different opinions. Let's share your opinions and knowledge.
Given by most.1. Real team/legit developers
2. Real use
3. Road map/whitepaper
4. Goals / future plans
If I'm missing something have someone to fill it.
We all know 80/100 ICOs turned out to be scam before they reach on the exchange or before their first birthday. You can check it on list of dead coins Coinopys & deadcoins. ICOs picked the market in 2017, since than till today also lot of new ICOs are collecting huge amount of money from investors. Some ICOs have good intention to solve the problems presently crypto industry are facing and some ICOs brings new technology to the cryptoworlds. But on the other hand some ICOs are being launched In the market to scam peoples with their well design fake website, team members, roadmap and whitepaper by mentioning unofficially name of big exchanges.
Now the main thing is still ICOs are collecting huge amounts of funds during their token sale, What are the key points do you guys look before investing or supporting ICOs. Lot of community members will have different different opinions. Let's share your opinions and knowledge.
Now the main thing is still ICOs are collecting huge amounts of funds during their token sale, What are the key points do you guys look before investing or supporting ICOs. Lot of community members will have different different opinions. Let's share your opinions and knowledge.
Jump to: