Bitcoin Forum

I have seen many ICOs' having advisors for namesake and only a few have for real. Can we believe a project based on the Advisors?

Or is it necessary for ICOs' to have Advisors before Token sale? Seen some using Bounty campaign to get Advisors.

Check that advisors reputation, if he's known for supporting successful projects before, you might consider him.

Also many new Startups are finding it difficult to get Advisors. Many struggle where to look for. So many are going without Advisors.

I don't judge a project based on advisors. Still don't know if it is important to have them and others will judge that project based on having Advisors?

yes, advisors have an important role in selling ico as controllers of token marketing, advisors with a good reputation will influence investor interest

If the project is real, I think they must have an advisor. The ICO must now be better than 2019 which has many ICO frauds. It is better to be careful before making a choice and does not rush to join the ICO project.

Sometimes these consultants can be very effective, but sometimes they don't. For example, Roger VER is currently Azbit's Advisor, but it has almost never been effective.

There are some people who invest in a project based on the advisors, but that is not what I consider before investing in a project. I consider the idea behind the project and how far the developers have gone with the project before I invest in it.

Most of the project out there are just for show, putting faces of a reputable advisor but not for real. Yes advisor can be sign for a good project but make sure both part have the deal. Maybe you should contact that person and verified if he/she real advisor of that certain project.

Hell no, Advisor team isn't the significant factor, there is a more important factor when analyzing and researching. We can't blindly depend on it only because the project simply has a reputable advisor without considering another significant role like the core of projects, what is the project trying to solve.

In other hands, when it comes to a necessity an advisor. It could come up with a foreseeable influence. Since the role is one of the pillars that support the project, I don't mean it the strong pillar but more to like a supporting role.

I think that the ICO should have advisors, but It's not necessary. Good advisors are a great addition to the project.

I think having advisors depends on the project and its team members but in my humble opinion i know that having advisors is helpful because advisors are people who have been in the cryptospace for quite sometime now and have gained in-depth experience about how to promote ICOs and also how to seek partnerships and strategic investors to invest into the project.

This would be more valid reason why you invest in a particular project.
Most of the ICO Advisors are just being paid by the dev team and most of the time, they really don't know them personally.
They just contacted him via social media channels because they have seen his profile somewhere.
Very rare that an Advisor has real business with the team other than receiving their pay check and being the face of the project.
So for me, having an ICO Advisor is not compulsory but if that person can genuinely help the project advance their developments, why not?

Already many projects specify such advisors on the site. But, I do not think it is necessary. It does not work and clearly seen by all of us. It is wise to further develop your project with the money allocated to them.

It's good for ICOs to have advisors. The advisor should be one with a very good reputation and reliable too. Not just any random individual.

Yes basically, projects new on crypto doesn't have the experience that they need in order to fill in the gaps that will suffice the need of the market, and cryptocurrecy advisors are needed in order to supply the team with updates and news, what to do and avoid in launching the project.

It depends on the adviser, I mean if you are going to have a decent adviser team than yeah it would be amazing but if you are going to just fill it in with your friends than whats the point ?

So, check out the advisers and search their names on google, most of the time it will show their linkedin page which should be what you are looking for, after that just check where they have worked so far and at what position, if that satisfies you than it means the advisers were needed because it gave a plus but if you can't even find them or found them but didn't find it impressive than it was totally unnecessary.

Those are small things that help the ICO reach to a level but its so tiny that unless you have like Erik Vorhees on your advisers list than you don't have to share it.

In my opinion, advisor team is one of the terms to rate any ICOs. If the project has a strong advisor who is an influencer in crypto/ blockchain industry , it can attract more investors.

In year 2017 and Early 2018 all ICO projects that been advise by mcafee has taken ICO market by storm and most of them are successful in their ICO fund raising.

But if you were to check where are they now, You will be surprise that those projects ends up a disaster after the ICO sale.

Advisors are just another picture in the team page, i highly doubt that these advisors can make or break an ICO project.

What does an Advisor do? What's the role of him? When you come to know this question's answer, you will realize how much important advisor is for making a successful project.

I don't see it as compulsory. It can be a forgone alternative because its an area that can be handled if the team has robust knowledge and ample experience on the field. Or better still, one or two advisors are okay to minimise recurrent expenditure

I consider this a necessary item! A lot of questions arise for the team during an ICO and advisors can help with the right choice of decision on which the success of the project will depend on!

I agree, the influence of the advisors affect investors.  Aside from selling aspect, advisors are there to guide the project depending on their role, it is not good to just have a marketing advisor, they should have a complete package of advisors like legal advisors, financing advisors etc.  These people as I said will guide them in every step of the project journey in delivering roadmaps and towards success.

I think that the team needs people with different competence. In order that everyone was engaged in the business and carried out the function. In this case, the project will be successful.

Yes, advisors are important for an ICO project. Without some well-reputed advisors, no ICO can make success generally! But don't believe advisors by seeing their pictures. Have some research about those advisors and look at their success score, reputation and other things! A few days ago, I was researching an ICO project, so I found my Sydney was there as an advisor. Personally, I know Sydney, he is a trending ICO  advisor. So, I asked him " are you really an advisor for that ICO? he replied no I am not, they out my picture without dealing me! So, to find a good ICO project, you need to go through many things, and don't fall by seeing the advisor picture, try to verify them.

Advisors does not means much to me because even scams projects do have advisors and advisors don't really have influence on how ICO spend raised funds but be that as it may, there are some advisors that any ICO they support always end well

I do not think advisors are important i personally never put much weight to advisors when im analysing a project before investing for me this advisor thing is just for matketing purposes and to create trust that reputed names are somehow connected with this project, also if you sre impressed with a project and its advisor fo contact the advisor and ask his affiliation with the project do confirm with that person before investing.

Advisors play an important role, but not the most important one when choosing a project. If the adviser has a good reputation and has cooperation with successful successful projects, you can consider the project you are interested in to participate in the ICO phase.

For me having an Advisors is a plus especially if the advisors are well-know in crypto industry though it will not give assurance that the project will succeed because it will still rely on the core team and how they will brought their idea into life.

It depends on the kind of adviser this ICO have, because I have seen a lot of ICO companies that list advisers that are not known in the world, this is not cool because an adviser should be someone that is very familiar with the crypto space and have gotten a lot of experience over time, at least if we are to see people that are well known in the crypto space as advisers, then we would be able to build trust within investors interested in the project.

No, I do not think that advisers are really obligatory characters. Today, this is probably a more optional procedure, because along with other projects, cryptocurrency today is not a completely transparent structure.

They are getting their advisor on Linkedin, and we all know that Linkedin had a lot of fake accounts and fake credentials so be sure to do a double check before you believe on what is listed in their credentials, so many are caught and posted in the scam sections.

I see no use of the so called Advisors.
No one comes up with idea to collect money for a project when they know nothing about it. It's not the advisor they need but the experience and determination in carrying out the project.
The so called advisors in crypto industry are mostly self declared crypto experts who just knows how to attract attention and raise controversy.

Based on your need. Do you really need advisor for your project to develope the platform? If so, then it is good to have some advisor on board. If you think it's enough for you by forming a founder and some engineer, then go on!

I think advisor of many project are just to push the tokensale and not really necessary nor a compulsory.

If a team can run the project the way they want and they can maximized their medium of advertisement and they can do what ever they need to do to have a smooth running ICO project they dont need any ICO advisor, as you can observe there were lots of ICO team that has an advisor and in the end the project went successfully and some were not but still they dont pay people, for me advisors are just and introductory that they need to gain the attention of the investors. Sometimes a good bounty manager can be an advisors for the ICO.

I think the advisors need to be very important in the development of the ICO and when they sell they also have a special strategy from the advisor.

I think its a plus if an ICO have a advisor or advisors and if possible the advisor is a very popular person it might help the project in few ways like guiding the project to there success and making the project to be well knowned too and that doesn't mean that projects without advisors won't perform better

As far as I know, ICO is hiring their financial advisers and market adviser to be able to communicate and understand the market, to be able to be safe when market is unfavorable, and to be able to attract more people that will going to support their project. And that doesn't necessarily means they are compulsory. Hire as you can because you are the one who needs to pay them.

Of course, advisors are one of the most important components for a successful project. but I know the AZBIT project in which one of the advisers is the founder of Bitcoin.com. But the project still can not raise funds

actually the advisor is indirectly needed in developing a project. because the advisor is the person who manages a process for the project to run well. so indeed in my opinion every project certainly requires an advisor that must be there.

For a startup in the early stages of development, good support from qualified specialists is important. An experienced, recognizable advisor is one of the components of a good project.

Advisers with good reputation means a lot to a project in the sale phase.
Investors looking at the team experience but also the list of advisers is also important for investment decision making.

Advisors are necessary for the success of a project. There are some advisors that are experts and are well respected when it comes to cryptocurrency and blockchain technology. Some of them have fans. Therefore, if they notice they are serving as advisor for a particular project, they would create interest in it, just because of them.

For me it's not compulsory to have advisors of the team is very experienced in crypto. I always check that in the first instance. If not, then only I look for advisors information.

If the advisor is popular in crypto industry and have a succeeded project then it could make a big impact on a newly created project because of the connection of their advisor but the success of a project doesn't rely on the their advisor but the team itself and how they will make a working product.

No, we can't believe a project only by the advisors! Sometimes ICO projects use fake advisor's name or they lie with the advisor names. I don't think advisors are compulsory for an ICO project, but I think a good advisor can impact good support for the ICO project. If you want to pick a good ICO project then you have to research not only advisor but also the team, whitepaper, background, partners everything!

I don't think so, but the advisor is also important to be used as a reference in choosing a project or ICO because to determine the project or ICO that we will choose, then we have to evaluate it from many aspects, not only from one or two aspects, but everything is important to rated as concepts, advisors, communities, managers, total coins and more

It is to increase the reputation on the campaign and the project, they don't necessarily have an overall decision to where the project is heading, some dev just want prominent name in their website it's part of the campaign, but I don't want my name in any project as an advisor, it's to risky if you do not meet the developers face to face.

A good project doesn't need this advisor, they are paid and most likely will only tell good things about a certain project. Some project is using it as a marketing plan to get some exposure. I think it is better to run a btc paid signature campaign.

Now the new advisors thing is IEO because exchanges act like advisors do, renting credibility.

of course, i think the advisor is indeed needed.
their roles may look like they are not needed, but they are needed to control the sale of tokens.
with a great advisor, their sales will go as expected.

No these advisors have nothing to do with the platform, they want to make the project looks legit, some legit investment site has this and they think their project will look good if they have something like this, in their page.

Nah, most of  ICOs have advisors for name sake and I rarely see them doing anything. If advisors were any good then most of ICOs won't be getting failed.

first I thought yes, but not for now
currently good advisor cannot be a guarantee for a successful ICO project, for a successful ICO project it is very difficult now even though they have a good team and partner

Ico should have advisor to make price is higher after listing on exchange market, an ICO owner have respect with investor with buy back after listing on exchange market to make their coin and asset will have higher price.

i think its for the best. They are advisors for reasons. I thinks they're the one who plan the ICO and controls it.

Advisors may sometimes mean the success or failure of a project. Advisors many times bring key investors into a project. They also facilitate partnerships... I mean great ones. The best you want to do is to have influential advisors in your project. Their name can fetch you millions.   ;)

yes, I strongly require an advisor in the ICO program, because with the presence of advisors they will have a minimum level of error, and mistakes cannot be made and should not occur in the ICO program.

Although, we have a situation where some scam ICOs used pick fake advisor which I think it better not to have one than using a fake advisors. However, ICOs having or using it not a must but ICOs need an advisors in other to successful because most of the advisors are usually crypto legal practitioner who's pros and influencer person.

I think that the whole system of the company's ico market is quite simple and reliable for all private users of cryptocurrency, including new companies. What security tokens and other projects offer today may invite some difficulties for users. Today, for the company’s ico market, there are two enemies. And the first is fraudsters, and the second is the poor state of the cryptocurrency market, when investors migrated from the company’s ico market to stock exchanges.

I do not think it's really compulsory especially if they have a big team that covers all aspects. It's on the team if they want another set of eyes to look into their project and if they want to attract more potential investors since most of these advisors are "influencers".

ICO having advisor should not be a bad idea, although may not be too compulsory. The position of the advisor will be more beneficial to the investors and participants if I'm right, I feel they can always help as Intercessor within our transactions. And help to regulate and reduce cheat.

Almost all ico projects now a days appoints advisors.previouly ICO projects have ignored the role of advisors but as it gave the experience of handling ICOs and the resulting impact to fund raising, it is now become essential to have advisors.
Initially advisors we're just for purpose of project marketing but due to competition, their role and responsibilities have been changed.
One of the most important factor of any ico is it's advisors. So very carefully the selection should be made.
I have seen a project which has been launched by team of advisors:)
The reputation of ico can be determined by experience and level of advisors associated with the project.

Having an advisory board for a project is a good idea. It helps the team to acquire new ideas and strategies to develop the project successfully.

We cannot believe projects based only on the names of  the advisers but  they still could mean a lot for the project. Their reputation could play an important role, as it is high probability that they would not like  their name to be connected to a scam project. So, advisers are only one criteria to be checked, but an important one.

Yups, I think advisor is an important part of ICO. some investors consider a number of things in investing in the ICO, one of them is by looking at the reputation and track record of the adviser. In general, investors will invest in ICO with advisers who have a reputation and a good track record. thus a good reputation from advisors will increase the level of investor confidence in the ICO.

If you notice, those ICO's who have popular advisers tend to sell their tokens faster compare to those ICO's who doesn't have any popular people in their team so Advisers is a big role in marketing the token.

There are some ICO's who became successful in their token sale because of the popular adviser but after that, as all the altcoin experienced their price also plummeted. Advisers only help on marketing the coin but they can't change its price as many will dump their coins when it is listed on an exchange.

If you notice, those ICO's who have popular advisers tend to sell their tokens faster compare to those ICO's who doesn't have any popular people in their team so Advisers is a big role in marketing the token.

There are some ICO's who became successful in their token sale because of the popular adviser but after that, as all the altcoin experienced their price also plummeted. Advisers only help on marketing the coin but they can't change its price as many will dump their coins when it is listed on an exchange.

Advisors are indirectly a marketing tools, apart from the fact that they can guide and  tutor the ICO developer to the right path, also more investors tend to adopt ICO  when it is discover they have advisors with good track record and solid exprience relative to the project, Advisors should be compulsory.

The success of an ICO is not about the team and advisors but their project product. The advisor might have a deeper knowledge on what will not be of benefit to the community, and no matter how hard they make try to make it work, it is the product does not have the power to attract the interest of end users; the project will make no meaning in the long run and fail.

Are you saying most projects that has failed didn’t have good advisors, you see, it is not every ides one has that must be turned into a project immediately, the only problem I see with these ICO is that they did not do their market research very well before coming up with such project.

More like a marketing picture, These advisor hardly advise at all :D they get paid for using their picture as part of advisory team.

Also hardly any of them interact within the investors community.

A strong team to back your ICO project is rudimentary to its success. Without a credible team, your project will fail to attract serious investors and plunge in the crowded pool of failed ICOs. Though there are a plenty of reasons for failure, but no one can deny the lack of a strong team behind failed ICOs.

I agree, that is why to further strengthen the team, they need to have these advisors that is expert on their fields.  Even with a strong team but with no one to guide or advice them, they will take more time to accomplish the goal and even have gaps and loop hole in their activities.  Remember people might be skilled on technical staff but definitely they will be lacking when it comes to  other field expertise.


Advisors are not intended to interact with community.  They are in there to guide the team to fully maximize the resources.

Reason why they wanna see advisors is for them to see if your team has connection to popular individuals and makes you project a good investment in a way. Investors will come right in when they see Tim Draper or Elon Musk as part of your advisor because that would mean these advisor vouch for the team's success.

It's not compulsory for ICO's to have advisors, but it's a good marketing strategy to have a reputable individual as an advisor. The individual may not necessarily be giving any advice, but he's reputation in the industry could send a positive signal to the investing public.

Having somebody that has a personality that is upped by many people, will actually boost the ICO its advising. For example, having Roger Ver as your advisor, Roger Ver is a known personality in cryptocurrency. So, if your ICO is been backed by him, you have a high percentage in  getting your ICO more successful.

Nope, the whole Advisors thing is a bad thing for the space, most of these so called Advisors bring little to nothing to the project, there was a survey carried out on this topic and most of these Advisors said they know little to nothing about the project they were advising which is a blow to the whole ecosystem. They collect free tokens and dump on people

Nope, advisors are just collecting free money many of them doesn't even perform any function to help the team i feel they are not that useful

Advisors are public people who have experience in the field of activity that they represent. Of course, each advisor has his own experience and range of connections. In my opinion, many advisors are temporary in this market. They are not ready to go to the end and develop this industry. And this is normal because the market is young.

I have a list of advisors who had successful projects and in some projects i participated as bounty hunter. I follow them mainly but the market is growing, new people come with more experience and goals. Therefore, i recommend that you first look at the project. It is necessary to disassemble into parts and allocate time to make a lot of conclusions, for example to communicate with team, look at the activity of social networks, chats, etc.

Yes that what i always observe in any ICO project, We don't know know what happen behind the scene but the main role for advisors are just for added picture in the team section that will create an illusion that an ICO project has a high quality and experience team,

Most advisory team takes 4-10% of token allocation an amount should be shared by bounty hunters since they are the one who do most of the marketing for a project