Bitcoin Forum

Although there are many good ideas out there, aren't you safer to invest in an ICO which already has a functioning and proven product? ROI is much more likely in this scenario

If you find an ICO which can offer its product then send here the link, I think that you will find many investors.
ICOs with product is not for small investors, good example is Telegram ICO.

It is definitely much safer! Not so easy to find ICO's like that. There is so much hype around ideas and in the first half of 2018, many of these ideas that raised a huge amount of capital flopped and investors lost everything - Gems and Rentberry to name 2

Check ICOs at www.icoguide.com they have realistic rates and not paid ones, so it might help.

The Binance ICO was only rated 3.6 on ICObench... Crazy to think about that now!

Most icos do not have a working product already. Most of them are just proposals and they are hoping to launch their product in the future. It's best if one me can see any ico that has a working product. This would be a good one one with good potentials in the future 

Are you serious? All ICO must have whitepaper, it's the full information present of the ICO and company. Eventhough when an ICO already have their product, they must also have whitepaper. ICO without whitepaper will be listed to scam project by the community.

Yes of course, it is a good confidence to see that the ico that I want to invest have already a working product. This means that their project is a legit one. And it is a good target to those investors that aims to have a good place to their investment.

Yes, I understand this. It means not ONLY a White Paper. A product plus a White Paper is the best option :)

Having an actual product is definitely an improvement on being asked to invest solely on the back of a whitepaper but I would caution that many of those that are raising money with a product are projects that raised their first money from another source and are just using the ICO as a cashgrab for a project that has exhausted its initial funding without achieving enough success to be funded further from traditional sources of venture capital. It is less risk but don't be fooled into thinking that means no risk.

Great point. Shouldn't be too difficult to work out if that is the case but as with everything, do research

Yes, of course, an ICO that has a working product and interesting ideas will always be collecting more money than an ICO that has only white paper. I think that a work product is already a big argument for investing in ICO.

Certainly safer, but there are none. Projects can show an MVP, which in fact has no value. Investors need to simply stop and do not buy tokens of strange projects, and then the situation in the market will force to change the attitude towards ICO.

I think you'd be surprised where you can find them  ;)

As you say to invest in project which has a only whitepaper not a product is risky. But the projects with products are a few and they are only for private investors not for public sale.

It's true that I agree with you, but my money sees a lot of ico who do not have a product and they only give promises and benefits in the future, this is a problem for investors to invest because of doubts about teamwork with the project, maybe you can advise a project that good for investing

If a good project has a product before crowdsale or raising funds then I personally think it's worth investing into.

Our Exchange opened at 20-August, we hit more than 5000 users just in one week.

https://financex.io

Signup and trade, you will be interested.

and link for ico: https://ico.financex.io

Who knows of any ICO's that started with a product and failed?

So investing in an ICO that already has a functioning product is a very good idea that can bring big profits in the future. The risks of losing money are minimized, and the opportunity to profit increases.

Of course, it is better to invest in a project with a work product, for development and improvement of which the means are collected, than to invest simply in a good idea, which is not confirmed by anything.

Stay safe. Invest in a product

I agree! I would choose to invest in a project that has a product rather than an idea. But sometimes, the idea becomes real and powerful in the near future.

Can anyone share their experiences investing in ICO's, product or no product  :)

there are several criteria for choosing an ico, we can start by looking at the whitepaper. besides, I think if ico already has a product it will be more convincing for investors because the prospects are good for the future. the most important thing is that we have to analyze it well first, so we can get the legit ico.

I think investing in a new ICO is a better idea, because new ICO gives a better ROI when they are launched newly before the price becomes stable, but due to the bear market and ICO winter, investing in an ICO this moment is not an option so I will go for already existing coin that are down below their ICO price.

Having a functional product with actual use case is definitely a good assurance for the investors. Investors now are becoming smart in choosing the right ICO's to invest in. They would rather invest on something that's actually working than just mere an idea. Investors are getting tired of getting scammed and that's why having a working product would give them at least a peace of mind.

It can be difficult to find an ICO that already has a product but sometimes you don't have to look far ;)

Investing in an ICO is always very risky even if they already have a working product or MVP. The demand for a particular ICO tend to be more important that the actual technology behind it, so you are safer when investing into the hyped ICO than a non-hyped one even if it has strong fundamentals.

If it already has a proven product then the price will be higher than for non-proven products. The reason why these ICOs are attractive is because of the pre-sale discounts, they are huge because the investment is risky. The ROI if you buy at a low price point is worth the risk if the project is good

In most cases maybe, Our ICO prices are: Round 1 0.028, Round 2 0.036, and Round 3 0.047. These are very attractive prices for a crypto-trading platform without real competition in Southeast Asia.

A project might have a functioning proven product but without having a mass adoption of the product then it will be of no use, any project can build a product, but the big question is this, is the product really needed? will it have mass adoption by the people? If the answer is yes then I will invest, If not, i will not invest.

Putting investment in an ICO is somehow like a double edged sword.
If we don't careful to choose, we'll end up regret on what we invest in. But when we choose the good one, than it's a win for us.

Yes it is true that an ICO with a white paper will not make money and good one based on their team work and effort it turns a good project so we should think about the projects who are working on it and what is their idea.

Yes, it does make more sense that an ICO with only a whitepaper will not be making money as compared to one that has a good product which is working and has great ideas to offer too.

It is a good move to see that how successful the ICO are that you wish to invest in. It indicates that the project is a legit one and not a scam one. And it will be a good way to target those who are interested in it.

Yes true..  It's safer to invest in already functioning idea than the one you are not even sure if the idea will materialize..  I prefer that too but it's rare

Doesn't really mean that having a product or a working prototype would make huge difference because ICOs that have their products launched into the market are likely to be exclusively available for the big investors. Moreover, prototypes can be copied and showed to investors just to scam them later on. So, the idea is not really feasible.

An ICO with a product is far more trustworthy. It's important that product has proof of utility and success pre-ICO. Once investors know about it, the ICO will be extremely successful.

I think so too, if they have a good product that has been used by many people, for what else we invest in ico which is not necessarily certainty, is it successful or not?

That's right. You really don't know these people you are giving your money to. It's a very blind investment but a proven product that is growing provides an enormous amount of confidence in comparison

There are very few avenues in the world where you can pitch an idea and be successful in fundraising to give that idea life. But in the world of ICO's it's normal  :D  ???

Yes, this is true, ICO's with proven track record and a already introduced product or service that up and running is likely to be a good source for getting a lucrative ROI. However, the investment also depend on the feasibility of it, as most of the cases they are not cheap or available to the small investors.

There are ICOs with products and services launched on the market already but even then there are chances for them to fail. Not calling it a failed ICO but EOS recently faced scrutiniy because of a massive bug that was found on their smart contracts and now their prices are falling again.

Positively more secure, yet there are none. Undertakings can demonstrate an MVP, which in actuality has no esteem. Financial specialists need to just stop and don't purchase tokens of unusual ventures, and afterward, the circumstance in the market willpower to change the disposition towards ICO.

Putting resources into an ICO that as of now has a working item is a smart thought that can get enormous benefits what's to come. The dangers of losing cash are limited, and the chance to benefit increments. That will be a smart action.

Having a genuine item is certainly a change on being requested to contribute exclusively on the back of a whitepaper yet I would alert that a considerable lot of those that are fund-raising with an item are ventures that collected their first cash from another source. It is less hazard yet doesn't be tricked into suspecting that implies no hazard.

Some have a product but most with a successful product won't bother having an ICO. I prefer to look for ones with a good idea and a good team.

I completely agree with you, why risk your own money. It is better to invest them in a reliable, working project. For example, KamaGames, they will soon have a token seil. I want to invest 30% of my bank there.

I think it will not be a bad idea investing in a ico already having a functioning product. I think it will bring a large amount of profit in future. Beside that Ico like this are quite safer than others.

Yes 1000% now ... people are wising up after 80% of the white papers from 2017 were actually bog roll

that will rise to 99% or greater as time goes on and even those that were serious at the time realise they are not nobel prize worthy and can't pull off the unrealistic fantasy they could dream up for bct members to cling on to

you will not find the 1% that can pull it off before you run out of money

stick to btc or projects that are complete or have completed the vast majority of their project to a functioning standard with a certain use case

In other words stick to btc unless you are an expert in many fields that are required to make an educated gamble

All ICO projects that are currently present in the crypto market or had been existed in the past, all of them have whitepaper of their own. Without whitepaper no ICO projects are real.

still we need to see the whitepaper and understand it.
this will give us more security. product maybe in the public but how sure we will have the tokens running in the market?
product are products and they can focus on that as they have no white paper declaring what they will do with the investors token.

I completely agree with your thoughts if we talk about investment so we have  to be more and more careful otherwise all of our investment on wealth, money and time will go in vain that is not good. It will be wiser to spend In renowned one rather than a new one. It is better to trust in the one who is already trusted by others.

For ICO,whitepaper is must.The full information of the ICO and the company is presented by whitepaper.Even if an ICU have their product from before,they must need whitepaper.The community will choose those ICU’s as scam which don’t have whitepaper.

Stop reading all these bullshit and use your brain, I just found a high rated ICO in there site that I totally believe will turn into multi million dollar scam in future. (I do not have proof but sometime scams are very easy to smell.)



I am not sure but I feel more comfortable in investing something that is working and now just need marketing instead of something that have a beautiful looking document and no idea whether team will able to deliver according to document.

Hope ICO with a  good working products will able able to fund and collect more profit  than than the ICO which has only the whitepaper. So it should be good for investors.

A whitepaper is important, but for now it is not enough that a project have only a whitepaper. Personally I look only at new projects with a MVP and can show something real.

How a ICO can be promising without  awhitepaper. Whitepaper describe ICO properly and without ICO it's seems like a scam ICO. So can be ICO be promising without any whitepaper?

If any ICO really have working products then that's very good news for investors. But there many hype sometimes and that's occurs badly.

All ICO projects must have their whitepaper. Those which ICO projects do not have their whitepaper they can’t be real. Those are scam ICO projects. So, be aware of these fake projects.

I do not agree that any ICO can be without whitepaper. Without a roadmap, team, and whitepaper an ICO cannot be proven legit which may cause people not taking the ICO and that getting worse for it.

If it's an ICO that has created its own product with their ideas then that's great. It is well worth the investment

I strongly agree with you. It is these products and their usefulness to the society that can most likely determine the success of the project. Basing the success of a project merely on the what the Whitepaper says doesn't really work out most times.

A whitepaper contains the authentic report of any projects or organization. From whitepaper, the reader can get the idea in brief about the projects regarding the current issue and way to solve that issue of that projects or organization. Those who don’t have white paper are considered fake.

ICO based on a product can be very interesting and investor more likely to invest such an ICO if the product is legit and good. But most of such ICO offers are for big investors who have a strong capital to invest.

ICOs have been praised as the quick other option to the VC raising money process. It requires investment to compose a complete whitepaper that exhibits the comprehension of your market, item, and guide.

ICOs are unmistakably nuanced in view of the innovation and contemplations that digital currency purchasers have before they sink their well-deserved capital (in Ethereum, Bitcoin or NEO) into your token.

I believe that ICO having a functioning and proven product has a better chance of success

That's quite an interesting to me as hearing very first of such ICO. Can you specifically mention some of the ICOs offering small and average token sales which are based on such a product? It would be a pleasure to know.

A whitepaper is still necessary to lay out the future of your product, but having an actual product before crowdfunding with an ICO is a very good sign. It means that either the team has made a major commitment of time and money to bootstrap their project, or they have likely raised money from institutional or angel investors (smart money) who make a living by picking the right products to invest in.

Scammers,fake influencers, fake reviews, already destroyed crypto market in Jan 2018 to till now.Now some good concepts is in the market and The responsibility is on the shoulders of Users Don't be Greedy,Avoid fake Reviews and choose ground based idea's, Is Idea sorting out a real world particular issue of any industry.

For me I think I will prefer product then idea. This is also true that an idea can change your life, but if this is a matter of investment then I will go with product.

Obviously ICO with product is better choice. Because most of the ICOs don't have products. They only raise the fund with the planning. So many times we have to witness project failures.

ICO with product is very rare. We can not find them easily. They will have much more demand than ICOs without product. Because when an ICO is launched with just a plan we can't be sure that it will be successful project.

Yes, I think you are right. ICOs with products is so much safe than any others I believe. And the ICOs with products is much profitable for the investors. I am interested to invest in product based ICO.

Actually this is very rare that any ICO first offer you to see the existing product. Every time they just give the proposal about the product and raise fund. To be frank I never found this type of ICO till now.

Yeah you are right. Investor will trust the ICOs more if they really found the proven products. Then many investors will join. But the reality is this type of ICO is very much rare and I think doesn’t even exist in the market.

I agree with you. The ICOs should have the proven products but in real this is not happening. For that the investors doesn’t gain enough trust over the projects. If they found the real products then obviously they will be more interested.

Good point, a project is what is powered by the Product it delivers, anyone can write a skillful white paper, not so with a viable or working product

to gives with one on best of decision as expending use with the limit on release as requesting of returns on managing terms of work on projects with investmen plan on bitcoin trading with the objective dedication.

Now a day these type of Ico that already has functioning and proven product is very rare. This type of Ico will find many investors to invest in it. I think it would be a great one in future.

That's the kind of projects, i only invest into, I only invest in project that already have a working product and if possible with partners, having a product is a good thing and another thing i having partners that will use the product, not just having work product without any partners .

It means ICO's pitched only on a White Paper are difficult to invest in. One with a product is much more promising

The question means ICO's pitched on a product are much stronger than those pitched on a White Paper only

Look no further than just below this message  ;)

Think again  ;)

but in reality there are many projects that have bad trust, which is why many projects do not get investors at this time, and ultimately the project fails

For investments trust issues is always the most important thing that we always worry about. For various ICO projects investors first go through the white sheet after that their first priority is popularity of the project or how the project is sold or trusted by others is most important if the project already have ready product then it is the biggest plus point for the project.

In aspect of one ICO`s being safe or being not a scam it's so important to know to not invest in fraud team. People or investors generally follow generally some rules to determine that, White sheet is most important among them, without a strong whitesheet nothing is considered safer by the community at least.

I think investors will choose ico who has good prospects in the future. by having a product, it proves that the project has good prospects if it continues to be developed. it's one of the advantages that possessed by a project and certainly, investors will be attracted to it.

Choosing ICO'S based on product is a smart and good way to go, however, very few ICO'S have a working product before lunching their tokensale. Most of the ICO'S without any product doesn't make then scam either, this is where whitepaper comes in.

It is so much profitable to invest in a products based ICO I believe. Investing in ICOs with products is safer than other ICOs but it is hard to find this types of ICOs.

I love to invest in ICO's pitched on a product. It is a safe investment. I have invest a huge amount on products based ICO. Now I am searching for another ICO with products.

But the reality is it is really very hard to find some ICOs which are offering proven product. Most of the ICOs propose some products then start collecting the funding to reach the hard cap

starting any ICO with product i think that is the great idea.the investors are not trust in any ICO only because of white paper. if they add product that would be great.

I think the whitepaper of an ICO project is very important too. If only the product is available without whitepaper, then I make sure the project is scams. Despite having a good product, the product on a project will be poured into the whitepaper. So, the project with the whitepaper will be clearer, and if added with a good product it will be a plus for a project.

I really agree with your statement. I think the more ICO will provide proven products and proper functioning the more investors will find trust to invest. But these kind of ICO really lack in real

just take a look to my signature below, it is bravo pay...and they have running product with huge customers who used to pay anything using bravo. and bravo are start to apply their payment method with blockchain technology. i will positively say this ICO has many potential to grow and profitable for investors. its not about only whitepaper, we have excellent product and team developer. you can thanks me later, do your own observation properly.

no risk no earn ...if you love ROI or more safe investment than u better off investing in banks or just save ur money in it

The original question is not suggesting there is no White Paper with the product, just that other ICO's only have a White Paper

An ICO with product that proves actually this ICO is safe and here you can invest blindly. but i think with white paper and product that would be the best ICO.

You're right about that. That's why you'll need to do your extensive research first before investing. NeuronChain already has a working product though which is called NeuronEx. Their app allows any banked and unbanked person to send capital from anywhere to anywhere, free from any censorship but to own terms which is a really good thing for users like you who deserves data privacy! Learn more about us here: http://neuronchain.io/

Yeah it’s correct that ICO must have real products rather than just proposals. But it must have whitepaper too. Because without it we won’t be able to get proper info about the projects

This type of ICO which has its product or service on the go is much more reliable to invest than the one that has only idea and whitepaper. I think this type of project will get more investors.

i can't get you. without whitepaper how can it will be a best ICO. we can know all the details from the whitepaper, yes ico's with product is best but without whitepaper it actually confusing.

There are too many projects and ICOs available. Investors find it quite hard to figure out on which projects they should invest on. But, the ICO with ready product can help the investors to make decisions.

Investors will accept this type project than any other project that has merely whitepaper. As product is already prepared and working, investors feel quite safe to put their money on this type of ICOs.

Yes definitely  for me it is a good assurance to see that the ico want to capitalize have already a working product. It means that this product is the most legit one. The target is also very good. So the investor got a very good place for investment.

I think Most of icos do not have a working product. it is better to me if you can see any ico that has a working product.than you can share with me.i want to invest here. it is better for me.

Yes, you are right to some extent that investing in an established product based idea is much safer, I guess. But is it guaranteed that ROI would be much higher than investing in a new idea?

Of course I would prefer to choose an ICO that already has a product that works but if the ico is supported by an angel investor, I will think again.

Investing in ICO having already functioning and proven products shall be safer. But I think, investing in new ideas is also an opportunity to gain more profit taking some more risks.

There is something right. But an ICO's project that focuses only on products and doesn't have a Whitepaper, officially their team will be questioned by big investors and a community that has potential for valuation. And they will regard it as fraud or hype.

You can earn profit from both of the ICO (newly presented and functioning and proven product based) if you can take the right decision when to invest and where to invest. Meanwhile, you shall research properly before going for investment.

Most of the ICOs are not working products. Most of them have only the possibility to offer and start in the future. If anyone can show the potential ICOs who have the product of work.This would be a good one one with good potentials in the future .

Your opinion is not 100% correct, ICO with working product does not mean it'll become success, some project raised a lot of fund without working product, how do you explain this situation? Whitepaper just a way to let investor know more about the project, 2018 not a good year for ICO, anyway I still believe lCO investments

The point is it's better to invest in an ICO with a product, doesn't mean you will definitely lose your money on an ICO with just an idea. I'm not suggesting there's not a White Paper  :D

Some White Paper's I have read sound so promising but I can't bring myself to invest as the chances of success are very limited. I'm actively looking for product based ICO's to invest in

Because of the mass ICO failure of Q2 2018, investors will be much more careful when choosing an ICO to invest in. They will definitely be looking for a product if they can find one

The feedback I'm getting is that it's almost impossible to find an ICO with a product

It's true but not all ICO will have working products during their ICO. So Whitepaper is the most important.

But obviously the ideal situation is to find an ICO that has both  ;)

How many ICO's out there are based on a product? Let me know if you know of any

How many ICO's out there are based on a product? Let me know if you know of any

How many ICO's out there are based on a product? Let me know if you know of any

That is usually the thing ! Sounding promising and being workable in reality are two major things.
A lot of people focus so much on the whitepaper and the idea, which I believe Ideas can be copy, but they tend to discard what is valuable the most, which is the product.

At least, the presence of a product shows you a team that is ready to work and know what they are doing to be able to have been achieving to that stage. It is then the future of this product and its further development based on the other technicalities you have read, and how it is going to be useful enough to create demand in the long run, which you are investing in now.

I guess many ICO's are unable to produce the product first as they need the funding to implement their idea but so many ideas fail. If the product is proven then it's a good investment in my opinion.

bump

Articles continue to come out about failed ICO's. What do they all have in common? No product

If you find an ICO which can offer its product then send here the link, I think that you will find many investors.
& I get Only SciDex, This allows the expression and execution of more complex transactions. The result: readable, compliant and adaptive smart contracts for complex assets transaction (i.e. data, licensing or insurance).

Whether it has a working product or just a white paper, the success of ICOs depends on the truthfulness, honesty, dedication and just in time delivery of the project from the team member . Having a working product does not guarantee a success of an ICOs but it gives a high investors confidence rating.

Good point. No matter whether there is a product or not, people have to know about it and the team. Timing is hugely important, too.

this is a popular form why you think it is unreliable. there are a lot of facts of successful ICO. of course there are cases of risk, but does not mean that this form is not needed.

This is not about the success, it is about at least investing in something you can see which as far as I am concerned, a whitepaper without a product is far worse than a project with both unless we want to lie to ourselves. Like you said, whitepaper is just a way to give you the idea of what the project is practically based on and make you understand the product.

However, in the absence of a product, you will only be investing in empty promises, and the last time I checked, I thought investors are already smart enough to know that investing in empty promises is like taking a huge risk.

Sometimes you don't have to look to far to find an ICO with a product ;)

It would be interesting to hear from people out there that have invested in hyped ideas that never eventuated.

ICO's are very difficult to publicly fund now. Ideas really aren't going to cut it. A product is far more attractive especially if it's proven

2018, especially Q2, has made investors more cautious when it comes to ICO investment. An ICO with a product is going to be instantly more attractive. It needs to be a product that is proven and a team that has a clear vision of expansion.

yes, with the many ico without products currently many of them are scams so I think products and whitepapers are very important so investors know more details about the details of ico

You can almost guarantee it's not a scam when there is a product that has been around for a while. Especially if it is successful.

It's so difficult to find an ICO pitched on a product. After Q2 of 2018 it has to be an outstanding idea with an outstanding team to be worth the investment

The whitepaper is very important, but it costs almost nothing if the development team does not have a working prototype of their own project. A year ago, such projects collected softcaps, but now they can not collect even 10% of the required funds. No one will blindly invest in a project that gives no guarantees and assumes no responsibility for its own product. People have lost too much money.

may have existing products or proves to be indeed made quite confident in investing. but just a real product alone is not enough in the absence of the concept and the elaboration of the product system. so from those other advocates such as whitepaper still need to be used as supporting materials. ICO will be able to provide a nice clear description including the whitepaper as this will help clarify the concept of the ICO.

It's true actually but depends, if the project is really looks promising and have a good team behind the project, I will invest on that ICO. Of course not only by looking at white paper, there are many good investment too on ICOs that still fresh and new to develop the project but yeah, the risk is more bigger.

Here is the link you were looking for https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4886322.msg44016466#msg44016466
This company has dozens of working products, which generate revenue of more than $57M per year.
Also, Kamagames has more than half a million active users every day. Its token sale had just started so check the link to get more info.

it's useless you talk about products if there is no transparency, we can all claim whatever we want.
Introducing Buddy, has had products used by developer around the world and has worked with Google.
https://token.buddy.works

Certainly safer. I've never understood people who invest in an idea. In most cases, such people lose their money.

An ICO with a working product i much better than an ICO without it and all they have are only promises written on their white paper. Working product is also one of the factors i am looking for an ICO nowadays to prove that they are not scam and that they really have a good vision on their project.

It depends really. Safer? - Yeah. More profitable? - Depends.

The thing about ICOs is that so many people fall into scams and that of course hurt the entire ICOs image on the outside world. Knowing how to identify legit ones is by far the most important part of it. If chosen right, you could get big % over your investment but that is extremely risky and i recommend only to people who know what they are doing.

That is why i consider best to educate yourself and invest in the ones you like their cause for now, starting low. That way you will know what you're doing in the future.

There is an ingoing ICO for a real use-case coin called the MB8coin. The developers are already in business but want an expansion for their business. Hence, the ongoing ICO which ends on November 5. It is a real world cryptocurrency with 2100 businesses, and still growing.

You can find more about the coin through this link to the site https://mb8coin.io

Indeed, it is better to look for an ICO that already has a finished product, but there are quite a few such projects and besides the finished product is worse, but you can always see where you invest.

You know one thing about having an existing product and have been able to create some sort of little demand for this product to actually have a feel in real life how things would be like for the usage of the products by users, always tend to go a long way when it comes to investing in such product.

I always see funding as a way of building on what is already available and helping the product to grow more than it already is, when it comes to marketing and some other sort. I wonder why people tend to focus on a whitepaper that can be cloned or some empty promises. Team, minimum viable product, and the vision, speaks well than just a whitepaper.

yes, good idea and promising. but look at the facts that happened, all ico only sold an article and an appointment in the whitepaper, after ico finished they left the project and the only one left was the pump. there is rarely ico but has launched they product, which we often encounter is just a demo.

Yes! This is actually the new standard for me when investing into an ICO. Websites/whitepaper are good but even scam ICO's have them now.

Yes, its really a good idea to invest in an ICO that already have a working product. Its more profitable to invest in those ICOs than to invest in an ICO that doesn't have a working product.

I totally relate with that :). However, it might be difficult to see them, but does not mean they are not there.

A lot of them though tend to want to use the funds raised to build on the product they already have which is why I prefer sometimes to see some sort of demo and be sure the team is ready to work in most cases than just investing in an empty promise because certainly, promises will not solve the job and unless I am sure the team look solid with enough experience to build something realistic in the long run, before I can consider.

Maybe you’re right, but know what product it is cause some of them might not get the interests of people and so it might not really work as you think and you’re most going to make any profit from it. If you look at the product and see it is something that no one would be interested in, then leave it and continue with something that you know about. Maybe you should continue with the white paper, if that’s what’ can get you the profit you need at last.

Absolutely, the product needs to be proven or have an obvious place in the market. The second quarter of 2018 proved that medium level ideas are not enough anymore.

It's very difficult to find ICO's with a proven product. In fact I only know of one  ;)

As a rule ICO with a finished product small investors are not interested, and the amount there is many times more ...

FNX token on the FinanceX exchange could do something like BNB did on Binance. Definitely worth the investment

The difference is we offer fiat-to-coin trading pairs make accessing the coins you want faster and easier. This is what needs to happen for crypto to experience mass adoption.

Interesting thoughts. I agree with you, that first of all there should be a great product, rather than a good written piece of paper. But on the other hand, unfortunately, there are only 30-40 percent of crypto currencies in the top 100, that have a real, working product.

I am prefer choosing join in ICOs with working product rather than good whitepaper. I am once see people providing service making white paper for ICOs and i think we can make up white paper as good as we can but the product is important for me before join in some ICOs

I think Romad may be in full compliance with your standards. They are a blockchain anti-virus software. I have applied for their trial products and have been trialing for 2 months. If you are interested, you can take a look.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3364289.0

No, I don't think so, and I don't feel safe to invest in an ICO because right now, there is too many ICO that makes us too difficult to choose and we can read that many of them run from their project with the investor's money. So I don't think that it is a good idea to invest in ICO unless there are any prove from the ICO itself so we can be safe or at least we can see the profit will come to us. Maybe if you invest in an ICO in the last year, you can make a big advantage, but right now, it's hard to find one good ICO.

It's still safer to invest in a product. Especially one that is proven and continues to grow. All great things started as ideas but not al ideas are good ones  ;)

I usually say this, without a real product, then, there is certainly nothing to invest in. Any serious team would have at least been able to develop a prototype before even launching an ICO and it is this product that would really give an investor the confidence as to whether the project would fly in the long run, have potentials and the team will keep building on it and developing it to the world. Whitepaper is a waste of time to me if the important things are left out first.

We are doing some serious sideways movement at the moment. Not sure whether this is a short delay in the bear run or the plateau before the upwards projection. But with a bull market a round the corner I have found an ICO with a product. FinanceX exchange that supports fiat-to-coin trading pairs and has already launched is releasing FNX token. It's own market. One to watch people

ICO's with a functioning product make up less than 3% of total ICO's. FinanceX is in a great position  ;)

It's so rare to find an ICO like this. Especially with a coin backed by an exchange. We all saw what happened to BNB and Binance. FNX and FinanceX could do the same thing, especially when they offer fiat-to-coin trading pairs. So many markets to choose from with FinanceX and easy cashout straight in to your bank account

The problem is that no one has a working product. The organizers first want to receive funding, and then start doing the work. In this case, the desire to create a good product is missing, since there is no motivation in the form of income.