Bitcoin Forum

There are many things I don't care about anymore in crypto projects

1. Algorithm
2. Max supply
3. Advisors
4. Analysts
5. Unknown or not popular partnerships

All these are just simply Hype creating shits, any projects that will attract me nowadays will do more than just these and again newbies should look into Utilities,big Partnerships and Top exchanges only, this is 2020 and lots of things have changed.

This is my eye opening advice since 2016

Good factors and advice. The exchange where the project and team desires to get in should be a big factor. Most of the projects that we have seen and just list their tokens to an unpopular exchange doesn't gain the traction.

But for those that launched their projects through IEO in Binance and other popular exchanges mostly get the spotlight. The utility or the use case is a great factor because that's the main reason why a token has been created which will serve as its purpose.

Good one OP, years back Algorithm can make one start buying a coin thinking the more the mining difficulty rises the scarce the coin becomes, it doesn't work this way anymore, for any coin who doesn't have good use case will fade away fast nowadays, investors are more smarter now

I agree with the utilities, we haven't seen any project that has real life usage or has a complete use case. Almost all of the projects that are mushrooming are simply a copy of previous successful projects. But what makes it sad is that there are still a lot of inexperienced investors that still fall for this kind of frauds. They thought it will be the next big project, jump on the bandwagon without research and then complain when they have lost a lot of money.

It's no lie that back in the days advisors can drag a lot of hype on a new crypto projects making this the most interesting and effective way of driving awareness to a project back then but now it's no more working be you anybody it won't change a thing

That's a big no-no, don't rely on market analyst, most of them are paid anyways, you everything they spew is nothing but garbage and just to shill for a certain coin. And once you get trap it will be really hard to get out, unless you're willing to suffer a negative.

As far as the OP's advice, yeah, I do hope that new investors will really do their research first. We are no longer in the 2016-2017 wherein there are a lot of crazy and irrational investors. We need to mature if we wanted to stay long in this game and more money for us.

That's true, What you have mentioning in your thread like utilities, partnerships and exchange site will be very needed for the long term progress of the project. A lot of things have already changed and it looks like we must started to ignore the technical analysis as the mostly the market sentiments were coming from the news related to the product development

If all projects follow your advice, then instead of at least some idealism, we will get millions of tokens that serve as a replacement for money and do not differ in any way from synthetic exchange instruments, and if even simpler, they do not differ from air with the taste of success. The market is already oversupplied - and now projects are at least trying to attract new customers in addition to the fact that "Oh, we are working with [exchange-name]"

It may worth mentioning that one has to properly check about the partnerships.

I remember there are coming out news now and then about Ripple partnerships with big names, news solely for pump and dump, since those partnerships usually don't happen.

You have to find your own way in crypto space, do not follow any analysts predictions, you can learn one or two things from them believe in yourself, most times analysts are very confusing and misleading

That's a vital information, we still need that information although it's used to hype people.
But then, if we do the right research, we will not fall for the wrong project and as the fact says majority of the projects fail, we should be wise enough to study before investing, that would not guarantee a success but at least it should help us in minimizing the risk.

As an investor, I don't usually focus on one project only, even how good or how hype it is they are all the same, learning to diversify is what I do as I have matured, been here in the crypto market since 2015 so I believe I have seen and learned a lot already.

The problem with majority of new crypto projects are

1. Useless use cases
2. Listing on bad exchanges like p2pb2b exchange and Exmarket
3. Lack of good partnerships
4. Too many repetitive ideas

Some projects have useless partnerships displaying on their IEO websites, some are even fake, using stolen companies icon without their real consent, I don't trust partnerships unless they are well known or very popular

I think utility should be number one feature to look out for because in the very near future this will be the driving force of projects, any project which have no utility will find it difficult to survive, only demand can bring about a healthy price growth, if this is absent then that project can only survive temporarily.

Utilities will be the only answer for surviving in near future, any projects that failed to deliver good use case will have big problem and likely get abandoned by investors and holders

1. Advisors
Honestly it's been vain all along choosing projects become of an advisor, popular or not it doesn't matter anymore, what matters is the real use case of the project

2. Analysts
I've know analysts to be not very good with their predictions, the fact that crypto remains unpredictable means that analyst are useless

Projects get listed or promoted on top exchange has more chance of success rate but it doesn't mean that every projects on top exchange will be successful, as you said utility plays major role than anything but in 2020 what we are getting in new projects are just the old idea with few modifications that is why we also need to check the uniqueness of the idea.

I am sure many of us have the same experience, even I made those mistakes too in the past. But then we can realize that it is a mistake, and we start to research by ourselves, so we can know how to select the project. We don't have to listen to other people before searching for the other info about the project that we want to invest. If we can know the info that can help us determine whether to invest or not, so we don't select the wrong project to invest.

Good points, newbies need to focus more on real utility and better exchange listings, we are in IEO era and for an IEO project to be successful top exchange is a must, for projects who are fine with softcap targets can use few good small exchanges like Probit or bithumb

That's a nice one.  Before we too much care about coin supply, team members and some partnerships in attracting us to a project.  But there is need to look beyond that.  There is one thing I don't joke with in selecting project, and that is Utility.  This is very important.  Utility draws demand and this is very important for development.

Good point there OP, but I believe the maximum supply should also be considered.  There are lots of projects that held IEO only offers a small part of the maximum supply, thus if successful and listed on exchanges may tempt the dev to dump those remaining tokens that they are holding.  Besides, having utility and scarcity is way better than just utility alone in terms of value appreciation.

Utility is the best part to take very serious when investigating any new projects, this is what will determine how long the project will survive in today's market, investors are now smart, once they see that a project have no good demand in the market they will go for other project

It also depends on who the advisors are, because in crypto people who have experience and have good partners are also seen as role models by investors, here we are not talking about lies but reality that has happened before.

I agree that since the beginning days of ICO, devs are always showing up something to create hype for their projects. Only the people who are all experienced by coming across various projects and its profits and losses may easily filter them out and most others are simply falling into those traps with their hard earned money and time. I must appreciate you for opening this topic as this will definitely guide many people to stay against artificially hype creating factors.

Out of many of things you have mentioned, I still believe circulating and maximum supply are sill a deciding factor for value of an asset. Advisors from reputed backround are still good to go with but the ICOs I have checked are appointing random people as advisors and allocating big share coins/tokens for them which makes me to think like fake members to enjoy those shares.

Nothing really matters for a new project because when you read the risk statement part of the whitepaper you would come to know that they are not accepting anykind of responsibility if the project fails so basic thing is that we should by now realize that investing in new projects is very risky and we may lose but the good thing is there are still good projects and with calculated risks you can still survive in this market.

It's true. Projects hire known advisors just to get investors but still some ended as scam. Usage would be top of the list for me to convince me to join on a project. Some takes time to develop but its all worth it if it has usage.

Nice, I do care about the maximum supply. Since 2017 or 2018 all altcoins circulating supply has been increasing when price was dumped. Even small, but I do care about the partnership. We are expecting new ideas, right? New projects partnership couldn't match with top projects all the time.

gone are the days when john mcafee says a word about the project and everybody seem to cram buying the tokens. its never working anymore because investors are all fed up about the projects that doesn't really make them rich. since the beginning of 2018 the investors are scratching their heads thinking why they put money to a crap project that wasn't even listed to a scam exchange.

Honestly if there is utility and that utility is something that creates a lot of buzz, that is enough for me nowadays. Because, if you can use the coin and you can use it on some place that is not stupid or idiotic, but some place that actually makes sense, I would assume that it would be pretty awesome.

Like for example take a look at BNB, I know it is a huge coin tied to biggest exchange, but that is just the perfect example, it is a utility coin that you can use to pay the trading fee plus it is wanted because it is on the biggest exchange.

One of them missing and you wouldn't have it big, look at some smaller exchanges coins, they are not that big, so "not wanted exchanges coin" is not important; which means if there is utility to use that coin and you would love to get some, that will always increase the price. Community hype about it is important as well of course, I can't just ignore that, but so far I have seen so many coins hyped but turned out horrible.

The real well factors i accepting a good project in larger partnership with high popular exchange then it's sup chance for successful IEO. I believe unpopular exchange couldn't top services because there low numbers investors area. For token value appreciation it will manage dev team if their have demanding supply.

Now the project does not go with that hype like before. Investors have become much smarter now. I agree with you. Without a big partnership, nothing big can be expected from that project. The project has to prove that they will do well even if it becomes a big exchange list. Again, not all the coins listed on the big exchanges are credible, because the money is being played here and the owners of the exchanges are very greedy. So a project has to be said to be trustworthy by researching everything well.

that is because every time there is a new project which its usecase is more sensible than the previous one, people starts dumping their current investment to move to the new ones.

developers trying to make demands for their tokens by adjusting the minimum staking collateral is just not working to make investors buy. same with partnership announcement, it only makes investors think the team is lying while they get impatient while their eyes opening to see what really is going on.

Remember in 2018 when AI, Augmented and Virtual reality was a  thing, all these projects are dead in water. The most important thing investing in the space is the team, if the team is solidly behind a project with time they will develop a good product and  the value will surely come

Max supply and Advisors are as well important for investors to check before investing, contrary to OP's view, and should not be entirely neglected. For instance, I can't invest in any project with max supply of say 1 trillion, doesn't make sense to me and I'll like to see reputable and experienced advisors who can help attain the project aim with the team members. What I don't take into consideration are analysts or influencers shilling projects, they are always paid reviews.

I'm telling you. I have soon projects with high maximum supply so wonders and some with so small still dragging legs. What matters in a project now is team and their enthusiasm towards their project growth. Even if the total supply is high it will definitely move if they apply some tactics Moreover news moves coins these days. I care about my findings not anyone.

I can't agree more with the factors you listed out. The most important thing everyone should loook out for is the exchange and and big partnerships, especially if the project is at the phase of IEO, the success depend solely on the exchange the tokensale gets listed on because advisors and algorithms plays just very little role in the success of projects in this 2020. Nice advice, i believe everyone especially the newbies will learn from your advice

True, but I don't think you should bring into factors utilities (by utilities i guess you mean use cases and what it is going to do? ) and exchange listing.
The project can always come up with mind blowing ideas, but most of them are actually quite not possible to achieve with their current team. Those are just "all talks".
As for the exchange, we have seen coins being listed on some well known exchanges, but ending up dying. So, I would say, one should take these two factors lightly.

When it comes to investing, you must consider everything because having a good exchange doesn’t guaranteed at all and investors still looking for the team of the new project, and the total supply of a new project. Personally, I made a lot of research before I invest and the hype of getting into big exchanges is not good at all because it will fade away later on. My eye opening with the new project is that, the hype is high during their first months and after that, if they are really good I must see the continues growth over time.

Partially I don't believe in all those theories, this days is very hard to predict any project, I don't think you can determine the future of any project with all the listed factors. I support checking coinmarket, top exchange listing, partnership and team, they are the main factors to know before investing in any project

I agree with you but still I wish to add something to the first point, that is algorithm. Well, to me algorithm is a very deciding factor because if the algorithm is not perfect how can the platform work and if the platform can't work appropriately, how can the utilities work?. Although the hype about algorithm has slowed down a bit but it is still very important in every platform. I totally agree with the fact about exchanges because one good thing about exchanges is the users within it and therefore listing on top exchanges known to have large users will surely bring more exposure to the project. Other factor such as partnership, also matters but I feel utility and exchanges matters most.

The conclusions are fair and insightful. If I was going to look into projects these will be on my own list of criteria to check. Partnerships is a great one because I find that bringing a project to life without having connections to well established allies is almost impossible. Libra initiated by facebook is a great example of these crucial partnerships. The take home philosophical message is to read both the big and the small print!!!

I don't think OP get the gist of crypto all that well...

Most of the ICOs that came forward in the ICO rally times went bust for the simple reason that they didn't focus on supply economics and didn't have a good algo to support their purported utility.

The whole 'utility' alt-coin is not much more than a sham. There isn't much into the utility of any alt-coin at the moment. No matter how innovative or how well networked its team is.
Crypto is good for some payment solutions but altcoins that start on the premise of providing a utility on launch fail.
The single most important thing to maintaining trustlessness, the foundation of cryptocurrency, is to have a good algo.
Building upon that, token distribution is also very important. For sure nobody would want to hold much of a coin that a corporation bagholds in epic proportions.

You can't rely on new projects to runs as what it is intended to be that is why they fail and investors regret to put their money. Investors are now smart enough to consider newly created projects that have good advisors, partnerships, but for now, they are looking at how this project runs to see its potential.

People now had learned already from their failure in the past that somewhat push them to more vigilant. People now are asking for assurance and that they need to see how this project having support from reputable exchanges. Because they know that most projects that have backup by exchanges have a big chance to grow unlike it happens to those who have not.

I don't think you should take lightly about the use cases of a certain project. I believe that is one of the important things to look at any project. Without strong use case in the market, the project will not survive. If it is mere trading and just "all talks", I don't think they can sustain the interest of their supporters. Actual application will attract more users as long as they have significance in their daily lives. Without this, I don't think the lifespan of the project will be long.

utility means the usability for the platform to adopt its token and give it the utility usage that any holders can also take the advantage from their tokens. This is a very important thing that more than a technical thing. This is related to the product development

Most people who jumped into a serious conclusion about a particular project has no proper knowledge and experience. Unlike to those old folks who been able to take adequate failures, is those who take more precautions rather than newbies. So self study is the best ways to prevent any scam project take their potential victims.

We get many lessons from the current market situation. The number of frauds, the project failed because of strength and weak support, made crypto enthusiasts more selective in choosing projects. No longer focused on the total supply and function, but also partners and other support.
A recent trend that is quite popular is seeing the team and the support or partners of the project. For example, there is a project that officially announces that it is working with a trusted company, such as Binance Labs, which will definitely get more intense attention.

Yes, of course, it all goes down to the Main Idea of the project what it is use cases and purposes. But those things you have mentioned above are key points to build a good community and supporters. Especially a good partnership, If you have a reputable partner right now and you can launch an IEO on top exchanges, you are attractive to possible investors. To survive in you need to build trust first, I knew there are so many waste ideas with no support and trust,

Exactly, I absolutely agree with you. Sometimes, project teams offer very complicated projects with very promising development in the future, but they are nothing after the token sale ended. they are not listed in any exchanges and gong to die. Although they offer professional teams with the very good whitepaper, but it will be nothing if after token sale over, they have no exchange, no real use utility, and also no big partnership.

But now, fortunately, several new projects have been gaining these things. Many new projects use IEO and they also choose the moderate exchange to top (although some still list on shit exchange). It is a good move. A new project listed on the good exchange will have a chance to grow well because people will believe in the coin because of listed in the trusted and big exchange. Moreover, it is also supported by the good partnership news and also its token utility for real use, they will have a better increase every time.

To build trust you need to show some results or progress, otherwise you'll lose the investors as these people will always find good projects that could make them profitable, and knowing that the competition has been increasing already, projects that are not living with the competition might just fail in the end.

If a project has a great utility, it will surely attract more investors to invest in a project. A lot of crypto projects nowadays were launched but only few of them have good utilities and those only remained in the market. Trust is also a great factor to build up into investors and the developer of the project because without it, the token of the project will remained zero value.

For me, what matter is these 3 things: The exchange where it is listed so I make sure that the exchange is reliable and there are no issues of it, next is the volume because I want to know if I can get in and out easily in trade and third is its market capitalization. By considering this factors, you can easily avoid not good coins or project and you can lessen the risks that you are taking.

The scam projects and the shitcoins around the market are continuing to increase, by having enough knowledge for sure we can identify what is a scam project or what is a good coin and avoid scam projects and some altcoins.

You will also need help from others who have already tried to identify the project too. The technical view is not playing strong indicators to determine how good or bad the project was.
The creator of this thread has been mentioning the correct thing about what already changed since last year.

What you've mentioned are now the norm or the qualifications partnership with a highly reputable exchange like Binance is a big must or a big factor for the life of a project, usage will differentiate it from other projects, once investors see that the project is just a hype or a copy of other dead projects, that spell the end of the project.

But even big partnerships doesn't seem to go well at the end. However, listing the project in top exchanges is also one of my way to spot if the project will be successfully made or not. Projects before are way different from today. Despite of all the criterias, we can't deny the fact that they should push to make it hype. With all the hundreds of projects today, looking for their products and objectives, we can probably see if one will survive or not in crypto space.

Eye opening advice indeed, long time ago I was so interested in what OP talked about on his list, max supply, advisors, crazy analysts that are too misleading but these doesn't matter anymore today because they aren't the reason why a project survives, the only thing we should acre about is utility ( Real Use Case )

Now that your eyes are wide open what are you going to do now?

I have some plans but there is just nothing that will prevent teams from dumping and scamming. Even the campaigns today aren't really that convincing that the team will not run with the money they collect and dump their tokens before abandoning the project. The only thing a bounty hunter can do is only join the BTC paying campaigns.

I have to say that I disagree with your opinions. There are scammed and unsuccessful campaigns, but it doesn't mean there are no good campaigns. I currently joined some campaigns that pay the rewards exactly at the time they promised and also showed their plan specifically. The important thing is that you have to do really careful researches before joining in. Just do the best and when the results aren't your expectations, you won't be too disappointed because you know there is always risks in this market!

Advisors can't be trusted anymore, do you know that they get paid in good money for creating hype for their projects? That's advisors job unless they aren't popular, many projects team use McAfee as an advisor to Hype their projects but almost all those projects are bad.

We have only IEO now in crypto space, I heard DYCO did very well with fundraising, I think that will change very soon, right now the only two weapon that new devs needs for their new projects are Top exchanges and Promising use case

True! I don't usually give all of my money to a project just because an advisor says so! That's their job to ensure that most people invest in a project as possible. In this cryptocurrency market, you shouldn't believe in anyone but yourself only. You can listen to others' words as preferences but don't give pay all your trust into it!

Almost every one in crypto space have experience the following minus newbies, in 2017 it's always about max supply, advisors and little little cheap ways of creating hypes and they worked back then, things have changed drastically, there is no room for HYPE based projects with no real use case anymore

How about those good projects that are started in small exchange but eventually transfer on top exchanges later on? I think you are saying that only listed on major exchanges are those only legit? Maybe your perception ia different but its not right to judge a project without seeing the real potential of them.

There are more than projects that begins their market liquidity on small exchange and manage to be listed on top markets. I think the basis for this is quite shallow.

DYCO was not even so big like IEO and ICO. Dyco didn't get a lot of hype too and you must see how much roi that has already made by DYCO compared with ICO and IEO. OP was telling us technical analyzation is not so important compared with the sentiment from the market.

You are right and that's what I've been doing right now so far I have over 7 campaigns straight coming from projects that paying are paying Bitcoin, after I finish my campaign I am lucky to got accepted from another campaign if you are active in the gambling campaign, there are chances that you will get accepted, of course, good posting habit is a big qualification.

All of us here who entered into crypto space start with thinking to earn money here.
And according to my experienced I never invest in any of the project, instead I most often
joined in bounties before but now I usually make day trading compared to what I had started
before, due to it is more profitable too.

I don't invest anymore in altcoins, I'm done with the few altcoins I have in my portfolio, now I have interest only in trading and bounty hunting, the best way to pick promising projects is their use cases, utility matters a lot and nothing comes close

Both trading and bounty hunting will not easy now. Trading needs to analyze more to find the potential coins, and I am sure that there will be many altcoins that can make us feel confuse to select one or two coins to trade. In the bounty itself, you will feel difficult to choose which project can reach their goals in the future because the short term will not be determined as a success because they need to continue the project for a long time. If the team can not survive in the long run, you don't have to support that project, and you better search for the other project.

Yes, and everyone has different interests in carrying out their work in crypto, because at this time the bounty campaign has also begun to be good and market conditions have also begun to improve, so everyone can choose it to serve as their additional work at this time.

I have not seen so many projects using DYCO to raise funds, we need more projects to know if it is good or not. Currently IEO still does its job well and has helped a lot of good projects succeed in this market

Even use cases are of different types, some use cases aren't needed on blockchain and they died in a very short time, you need to be careful when picking coins with utility, make sure their use case or the problems they plan to solve is needed in crypto space

Thanks, friend suggestion. For me, the ICO is experiencing a decline and investing in ICO at risk. I am currently focusing more on Bounty campaigns. For me, enough this is not at risk when compared to investing in ICO. But we also think that the ICO one day can be back successfully as in the period 2017. So some of your suggestions as algorithms, Max Supply, advisors, analysts, and partnerships are unknown or unpopular, can be back to be a guide before investing in ICO.

I'm also looking on usage and partnerships gone are the days that when you just need hype coming from well-known personality and you have a good coin, personality-based coin are now gone we are more on usage and getting the project listed in a big exchange like Binance or Kucoin, after the King Casinos fiasco people should stay away on negative exchange where they hold IEO.

Once you've spend a year or two in crypto space the way you see things will be different, there would have been so many things one would have learned from, the only thing that's important in crypto space today projects utility, this is what will determine their success

I don't see anything better than what OP said, there is no way a scam exchange can use a popular partnerships on their scam projects without getting busted and even if a project claimed they will get listed on Okex for example we a know that Okex exchange will say something about it on their Twitter channel

Yes, don't why OP comes to the conclusion that only bounty paying bitcoin directly is really worth and will succeed. Maybe it's just coming from his bitter experience of unsuccess project.