Bitcoin Forum

Enough of people just creating tokens just for the sole purpose of trading it in exchanges and making money after the ICO. In order for a token to survive or stand the test of time, there is need for it to have a working product or service it directly supports. This is what a lot of tokens are lacking today.

In my opinion, any token to be created should bring in something new. It must be a token that will add value to the society and not just for the purpose of trading it in exchanges and cashing out money.

If we actually want cryptocurrency to survive and appeal to the ordinary people, then we must create ONLY tokens relevant to the society's needs or solves at least a particular societal problem.

This is actually true. Most people only create this tokens because of trading it. Not all really have value.

This idea, of course, is good. However, to implement it, you need to create a special body that will decide who to conduct ICO, and who does not. There will be another bureaucratic body, in which corruption will surely thrive, because very large amounts of money will be constantly involved here. As a result, good and promising ICO projects that will not give bribes will not be allowed to conduct an ICO. So let it be better as it is. It is necessary for states to check and register only ICO teams, checking them only for the possibility of fraud on their part, and they should not interfere with the essence of the project. Only in this way will we be able to obtain independent and diverse projects, and let the market determine which of them is needed by society, and which one is not needed. Investors also need to delve deeply into the ICO projects and invest only in the best of them. Then everything will be all right.

I agree with what you say.

Actually, the whole speculation and "making money from nothing" icos have pretty much crashed and burned.
There are still hundreds of icos popping up, but the entire ICO market is pretty much dead.
It's actually not surprising when you take a step back and look at how insane the ico bubble was.
Now, after a whole year of the market crashing and being sluggish, investors have wised up and aren't throwing money at icos with only a whitepaper.

This of course, is good news, no one wants a crypto market where it's value is based on only speculation.
But, in a way, it has also been a bad thing.
Legitimate ICOS with amazing tech and amazing solutions have had a hard time just like all the others.
Take Neon Exchange, one of the best icos and most hyped one so far this year.
Even they are struggling.
Last year, a company like Neon exchange would have absolutely killed it.

Happy Realization I guess?

Every white-paper "claims" to bring something new to the society *virtual society* Exchanges just don't like people accepting these changes :P You know if one wanted to change the world through ICO's, they wouldn't create them in the first place.

Every ICO is created to solve some social problem. However, they don't get past the exchanges.

I agree with you. So the token was the future, should stand behind it really work product.. Without this token will not survive for a long time.

If this is the case then there's no need for ICO's because it seems that there's no unique project coming up and everything was redundant. I understand your sentiments but there's no regulatory body to enforce or implement this policy. So short term, project are going to be born every day, duplicates of other project in the past but still gullible investors are wiling to put up investments. This is how the game is played and I don't think it will simply evolve overnight. I'm not saying I don't agree with you, what I'm trying to drive up is that is going to be difficult because the market is free.

All who have at least some relation to the cryptocurrency, have long been waiting for its application in real life. And I think it will happen soon.

I agree on you, many projects nowadays are just useless and nothing but a mere illusions, and an after being listed on the few exchanges, it will be dump because of the certain reasons, first would be their product is not that useful to the community, or no working product at all, this is one of the basis of the dumpers in trading, they really want to liquidate their assets, and make some money. I hope developers could understand the need for making a real project, not just an illusions.

I agree with you, but leave so as there is, too, cannot be. Every day there are more and more scams and not just scams and ordinary speculators who create projects and conduct ICO.

All ICO with working product will happen only if we have ICO regulation, coz we alone can't do much thing as trash ICO boom is the side effect of cryptocurrency decentralization

I think you know for a fact that MOST ICO's doesn't have any working projects yet that's why they are conducting it and I believe that's the sole purpose on why they are doing it. And that's the risk in behalf of investors wherein if the project will not work, do not deliver results or a scam that's the loss anyways I'm not saying all but most investors only want profit without taking a look in the value of it in the future.

If all crypto people like you, crypto will get hearts in the community, unfortunately people just want to get money quickly but don't think about the products that have worked.
btw, Buddy already has a working product.

ICO tokens often have a very good and innovative project idea. The idea is useful and could solve an actual problem. Most developers fail in executing, actualizing, and making real product those ideas. Like you said, most of them enjoy the money without developing the project further.

This isn't an easy problem to solve because ICO basically means crowdfunding for random people. These developers have little incentive to continue the project once they got their money. Most token sink right after they hit an exchange and you can't sue them legally if they make little progress in the project, so small that you eventually give up to the project.

This is a good concept and if every ICOs came under regulations, a possibility.
Every fund raisers in real world through IPO needs to have at least some work done towards creating the product or service while ICO are started from a simple web template.

Only investing in old ICOs which already have working products

Agreed!

Upcoming STOs, for example, create a technology/platform behind it before the actual launch.

It is actually not good with the way similar tokens are just created everyday. Nothing new, just a repetition of another project. And completely nothing unique about most projects.

Working products in an ICO project is helpful to contribute for the progress of the crypto that you're promoting. Without any products is a bad reputation project and mostly what i heard turned out scam or shitty coins. So I recommend that we should invest in a project that has a good and demand product for crypto.

There are some exceptions to this though. Some ICOs have actually good proposed idea that is actually feasible. Now If people would boycott those since they have no working product, we essentially killed of a potentially revolutionary project by not giving it a chance. 

unfortunately only a few teams really prioritize that desire and we can't prohibit irrelevant projects, irrelevant projects will always appear if there is still demand therefore investor awareness is needed to kill plagiarism projects and projects that don't have products

First of all, I strongly believe that those kind of Ico that is only used for trading, will not even last for a month or two in the market. The ICOs that has true value will be the only ones who will survive in the market.

Amen to that, exactly my thoughts. ICOs are kind of stuck in the world of cryptos, only focusing on the ones already using cryptocurrencies. That is not a way to go, crypto will die if it will not appeal to the average man.
It should appeal, by affording a better alternative to a problem.

I agree with this one. Gone are the days of just promises and hype. Having a MVP or prototype should  be the new standard for ICOs. I just hope investors should be smarter by now.

I understand your sentiment but there is no regulatory body to enforce or implement this policy. So in the short term, projects will be born every day, duplicates of other projects in the past but investors are still easily fooled into installing investments. I'm not saying I disagree with you, what I'm trying to do is that it will be difficult because the market is free.

I am totally agree with you. Any project should be useful for society and should bring something new in ours lives.

Myabe that is right but there are some tokens that doesn't have working products but helps the society there are some utility tokens and there are some ICOs that their main goal is to cure some disease or also solve some problems in our community some tokens that have working products are also good and helpful but not all some are for entertainments and some are for illegal things but it is to our society though.

According to the day by day new technology, the ICOs are playing a vital role by creating tokens with working products or the products they are producing products with their ICO.

Agree with you, community want to check working product not just MVP or Whitepaper.
I only join ICOs, which are created by famous working companies. For example: Organicco, they have company, solutions and partners around the world.
Invested 5000 GBP and wait for his platform on blockchain.
You can check this potential project here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3379079

you're right, I see very rarely tokens that last long enough, only a few months or even a few weeks after the ICO after that the tokens are forgotten / have no value at all.

Of course, the topic starter rights. But when choosing a project for investment, you are probably working on information about it, and do not invest in a dummy. Projects that do not carry any value are unlikely to attract enough funds. And if you mean that to the ICO time project should already have a working product, then on what means should it create this product?

I agree. The upcoming mainstream in crowdfunding by crypto is Security Token Offer. They need to have at least a product and compliance regulation, before receiving investment from individuals as well as organizations.

There are indeed many coins/tokens that are created for trading purpose only. That way the coins will be useless if its  related to any other things than trading and some kind of investment.

I agree with you. Tokens are not een supposed to be traded that much, imo, they are supposed to be used for acquiring some goods or services. ICOs are ways of monetizing the actual businesses by allowing to access some things with decentralized money. Trading is alienation from initial purposes, because people don't care about what stands behind the names, they only care about price dynamics. And there aren't many tokens that are actually representing some projects. Best case scenario, we are talking about a token and a newly formed company with huge ambitions to become useful one day by helping to distribute energy, manage online adversiting or make the world accept their debit cards. That's why I like an ICO that hired me recently. Though I'm generally sceptical about ICOs, this company already has its product in three countries and partnerships all over the world. An ICO is just a way to expand for them, to add some new features to a well-established business. And that's how they all should be, imo.

What? It is sure that all coins have been using in trading and I think this is an aspect for Cryptocurrency for most coins to survive, But A coin should have a base product or services for it to start, Just like bitcoin the soul purpose for it was its unique digital transaction that all other coins are being using right now, It seems that the blockchain technology was the thing that all has been using, And if your not familiar for a coin to start you should read more in the forum, All coins that have been produce now needs a unique services or product to simply start.

Normally most of ICO tokens is utility token. They coin is specifically use for that product use. But exchnages give them real prices...

You're right, that's what happened. Everything is included in the whitepaper, but everyone can compose, lol. So choosing an ICO project must be careful. Previously I had succeeded with IOST, after that, I was not interested in other ICO projects, maybe only DAEX that already tradable before public sales that caught my attention.

I agree with you. The project that offers a work product is very important to me. Unfortunately, there are very few such projects.

We are starting an AIRDROP and then laucning an ICO in 2018-2019. Our website is still in development, but at least we have the real product (mainly automobiles and real estate). You can check it out here: https://www.ndinvest.ltd/?lang=en&NDC=1&sbm=1&payment=BTC. We are going to make ANN thread and add other relevant information soon. Stay tuned!

Not all projects create tokens for the purpose of trading. Maybe they are not just capaple to make a working product.

Yes I agree but sometimes the development of the projects to create a working product takes time. Also we can track it on their roadmap or announcement channel. But if they can't follow their roadmap then that's red flag

You should not worry. All useless tokens and coins will eventually die and only those useful token will stay.

No matter how you preach about this, the ICOs will continue to create nonsense tokens.

Cannot agree more into this. Now tokens are being created for trading purpose only. There is no innovation to it. So I think tokens should come with some good ideas and something new.

Based on this statement I think this is true because the main purpose of creating token is for trading based on this idea are overall good and helpful for the investors.

I totally agree with you. There are enormous amount of purposeless tokens in the market. They has no purpose and are just there for making the money. If we want the cryptocurrency market to be adopted by the general population, then it should bring utility in the market.

i think you partially right, but i think there's some working ICO idea still, which doesn't sell any physical product, but still worth investing

Yes, I have found many projects only make the coins and launch the ICO and earn the money, after the ICO finished, the team seem disappeared and never update any news about the project, some project have not list in the exchange over the year and no any product.

I fully agree with this opinion. A company that conducts its ICO must already have its own product or service. Even if not completely modified, but the product should be. Such ICO as a rule and are in great demand among investors.

This might be true. Because most of the tokens are created for the purpose of making trades. This idea is overall a good one.

Yes this is true. And sadly there aren't many good projects that are taking place. They are just here for a short period of time and will just disappear. And after they gt enlisted, they will be dumped and the investors will be in deep trouble. Let's hope that the developers will come in terms with it and will develop a real project, not something which will disappear.

If there were ICO regulation, then this will certainly happen. But this is not the case here. Also most of the ICO do not have any working projects, and that could be the reason that yet these are being conducted.

The main problem with ICOs today is that they are operating in a unregulated space and honestly, there is not authority or governing body that will regulate them. If we try to regulate the ICO space then the point of centralization is going to come in. So, the situation is very complicated right now.

maybe it's been too many duplicate projects in that product mode.
but most of them just want to make a profit in a fast way, and do not prioritize the project again, when they have gotten a profit in the market.
but I agree with you that every ICO must be right to make a work product to last a long time.

I have seen that, all the ICOs promise to bring something new that will help others, at least, that is what their Whitepaper and roadmap says. But, most of them either can't get listed on exchanges or they are just scammers who have no intention to bring those new products they are offering.

I agree and support your proposition. Yes! we know that tokens are assets.and it the future. it should stand besides products.So i think, if we really wanto survive crypto currencies, tokens are needed.

yes the ICO project must be strictly regulated from now on so as not to have a bad impact on cryptocurrency especially ethereum, all ICO must have new technology, products and must work real. so that crypto is increasingly developing into a good new technology not for the nest of fraud!

As I know most of the Ico’s has no functional products. There are only some of the Ico that only has working product. Investing in a project having working product is a good idea.

I fully agree that tokens should be issued with a work product, which in turn should be improved. Thus, the working and prospective product will support the released token, which will have a demand for the purchase and, accordingly, the price will increase.

Indeed. No one can argue with you on that. Tokens should contribute in society but as well as on the person itself. Thus, the economic balance will be maintained.

That's exactly what the crypto currency was created to achieve, it was created to add new value to the society but these days the story is different, people just do one page project and create tokens for it and list on the exchange, I think to stop those kind of tokens, more people will learn how to research on good ICO's and stop investing on projects that doesn't add value to the society.

I agree with the author of the topic that itvis necessary to hold the ICOs of projects with the working product, and it is needed at least in order to turn back the small investors and trust in ICOs.

Why only in old coins?
I think that the new coins are not worse than the old ones. New coins are better because they can be invested at a very attractive price and they can show good growth.
The main thing is to carefully choose the projects you are investing in.

Yes, people have become more cautious about the choice of projects, we look at where there is a beta product, who will benefit one way or the other otrasli

If so then there's no requirement for ICO's on the grounds that it appears that there's no one of a kind undertaking coming up and everything was excess. I comprehend your feelings, however, there's no administrative body to uphold or execute this arrangement.

I agree with you.Many people creates tokens for making money after the ICO.And I think they should create tokens with new products.

With traditional startups, although the proportion of projects has to be more productive with projects without products. But most investors consider many aspects to invest rather than just projects and products that they will invest. For the blockchain sector, most startups are the idea and they need money to do that

I concede to you, numerous undertakings these days are simply pointless and only unimportant fantasies, and an in the wake of being recorded on the few trades, it will be a dump in light of the specific reasons, because it would be their item isn't that valuable to the network. I seek designers could comprehend the need after making a genuine undertaking, not only a dream.

This is a good idea but it requires a special organization to implement the rules and regulations that who will determine how ico will start with new working products and it will be easy for investors to find the perfect ICOs.

This isn't a simple issue to understand in light of the fact that ICO essentially implies crowdfunding for arbitrary individuals. These designers have a minimal motivator to proceed with the undertaking once they got their cash. Most tokens sink directly after they hit a trade and you can't sue them legitimately on the off chance that they gain little ground in the venture, so little that you inevitably abandon the task.

I completely agree. How can people believe in crypto currency if in most cases this very currency does not represent anything and is an emptiness, a soap bubble.
But if the companies conducting ICO could present a really working and useful project, I'm sure the attitude to the crypto currency would have changed for the better.

Yeah i am agreed with you. Most of the ICO projects don't have the product. They just only make the plan or vision and starts the ICO. Many ICO projects fail to make the product real.

If we analyze the present market situation we will see most of the projects are worthless from my point of view. They are just alluring people with attractive whitepaper but no real products.

I think only ICOs with real products should exist. Because some ICOs only build with the preplan and do the crowdfunding. Often investors fall into loss projects as the projects cannot fulfill the projects.

Exactly! You just spoke my mind. I could not agree more.. It is very essential for tokens to be created with value or good purpose rather just with the intention of trading.

You are correct. It seems day by day worthless project’s number is increasing with great extend. Many of them ultimately turn out to be a scam. So very few actually come up with good approach.

there are many people who do not want to make new projects. because people's money is not safe, so some of them are scam. but I support it. because it is a condition for development.

That wouldn't be bad actually, it would certainly limit the number of fake ICOs created without any product/MVP and without a plan to create one in the future. Only fake promises and big words.

Better than just creating tokens with working products, they should create tokens that have people who have agreed to use them for their intended purposes. Buying a token because it has a working product is still just speculation if you don't plan to use that token to get that product.

You also have defined what a "working product" is. It is a beta version? It is phone App? It is a non-blockchain tool? Does it have to be on the blockchain?

In my opinion the biggest flaw in ICO buying is that people don't pay attention to the team. They buy the shine. The idea. Good ideas still fail through poor execution. Happens all the time. And THAT explains what is wrong with many ICOs. Buy the team, not the shine.

Sounds good and I agree with your opinion. Most of the Ico’s are scam. Many of them have no functional projects and it’s the risk for investors if the project unable to work further.

The crypto market is mostly about speculation and when a new ICO is released investors are tempted to get those crazy returns you might get if the project succeeds. It is preferable to invest in a project with a working product, but if you invest is a riskier project then the returns can be bigger - just like the losses

I think that not easy to get a new token that has good prospects. at least, we can start it by looking for it through the good ico. and to get a good ico is a difficult thing because we have to really know about it. we also have to be more careful in order to avoid the scam ico.

This is quite true. People shouldn't just buy a token without having the plan to further make use of it for the purpose. Some just buy in order to resell at a higher price.

yEAH, leave the token with no real products. theu just pump and dump coin. Too many scamers whp profit from ICO. Most ICo extended cause too many shitcoin relaise. I think exchangers should delist low volume coins and ban no working products ICO or new coins.

currently, the more new coins appear together with ico. with many of these new coins we have to be more careful to pick them up. Good coins will have good prospects in the future. and I think to put a coin that is not good is not easy.

It is still hard to control the creation of tokens as it is relatively easy to create one. No one is a central entity that can manipulate such tokens. One thing a user can do is do his own due diligence. Study the project first, check its background, its legitimacy and its feasibility to launch a real working product, how strong the project in terms of community support and many others. Don't jump the hype without even browsing their website.

Yes, that's right, because with products that work and run smoothly will make people continue to use tokens from these products and the price in the market can continue to increase, so the token not only hopes for traders to be more expensive, but also to their users.

Well it's a pity that many people in the crypto space are only there for the money they can make from the space, most people don't really care about the tech, whether it has a working product or not. they are in for the money and not the tech.

That's just the simple truth, most people don't really care about the product, they don't care if they have working product or not, they most care is the price, and i think the moment people starts to care about the working product, the better for cryptos, the better some of fake coins will go away and real coins will stay.

Nowadays, people are more concern about the profit they would be making than the use case of the project which would be what we should focus on. What most ICOs doing is the opposite of those who are going to be listed in the stock market because the company has to prove itself first that they should be worthy to be listed and has a capital requirement and they already have a proven track record which would make the people buy the stocks while in ICOs, they collect the money first before doing anything that's why many are being scammed.


It's a given that it would be very risky because anything can happen which would make the team backed out leaving the investors in vain that's why a working product should be introduce first before having an ICO so that people can assess whether it would be worth investing in. I think this should be one of the qualifications but then the problem is that there are no authorities who will assess the approval of those ICOs.

With this way, the investors may be able to avoid scam projects. Some scam projects actually have MVP, but at least they will waste their money and time if the scam project failed. Some real companies want to collect funds first to develop their working product, unless they already have some capitals.

Yes. i saw a lot of those projects and in fact, i think they outnumbered the good projects. A lot of token ico's now are just here for the quick bucks. Remember that some rumor says that a lot of HYIP creator goes into the crypto space so i expect this thing now.

Really the people are using cryptocoins just for trading purpose or profit purpose. These coins are not used to solve any problem of the society. So, ICO should create such kind of cryptos which will be used for the society.

Good concept but if every ICOs has to came under a regulations or authority then it will possible to take this step. Or Only investing in ICOs which already have working products. So, need a time for ICO's for going through with products.

i agree with you. in my opinion your idea is good by applying this we can reduce to get scammed. hope in near future ICO's authority will think about this idea.

You say it right, but every new Ico created is practically a clone. Already, ideas are simply exhausted in the pursuit of profit, and many simply create things that are easier and faster. Therefore, there are many counterfeit Ico that do not bear any value. And creation of a product in general can afford a unit.

It would be great if was requirement to the projects to have MVP before going to ICO. As statistics show a big amount of ICOs are scams, that kills this market.

Totally agree with you. ICO of late, a lot, but promising and good projects are actually few. Each ICO is designed to solve some social problems. But that the token was not dead in the future, it should be followed by a real, working product.

create ICO's with working product that is unique idea i must say. if this idea can be implemented i believe all the token will come up in market for long time.

I agree with you totally. The investors just buy and store their cryptos for future. They just wait when the price will be increased and make a profit. Actually, there is no value if you don’t use it for solving the societal problem.

I agree, I only personally invest into ICOs that have a working product, even if it is in Alpha.

It means I can see what they are trying to achieve, what I am investing into and I can give feedback on where they are going wrong. It also shows that they haven't just created it just for an ICO as money, teamwork and time has been spent way before they have even got close to fundraising.

The problem is that you can write a white paper, have a website and start fundraising and it's very hard to keep them to their word about what they are going to do.

There is no value of anything if that thing is not used for the society. So, the crypto coins should be used for the society. There are many problems in our society and the general people are not able to buy cryptos. So, I think it should reach to the general people also.

if ICOs create token with working product maybe it will be the one way to get rid from the scam coin. all ICO's authority should take this step.

Cryptographic money and ICO tokens are intended to speak to working tech activities or items. Tragically, that hasn't been the situation. Of the main 100 cryptographic money ventures recorded on CoinMarketCap, fewer than 40 have a genuine item that works.

I think it is also a goal of many cryptos popping up. but to be able to make it look successful and thus there is still a refusal of the subject who wish to intended recipients such as community and the many facilities that do not yet support this. might be a good idea but the idea for this deployment is still a hard thing.

Numerous undertakings point to their mainnets as their working items. While that is great, a large number of them have practically zero OK appropriation. Along these lines, for ventures with dynamic mainnets as their items, we'll be concentrating on those with OK client base.

I agree with you that all ICO must be created only relevant to the society's needs and will solves at least a particular societal problem. It is sad to see that most ICO nowadays are only do a fund raising but don't actually have yet their own or built product. They are only visioning it and will build the project once they have the funds collected on ICO. By the end of the ICO, most of them ended up being a scam ICO.

In the world of practicality ICO project team should consider this things, they should make contracts to other shops and business partners wherein people can actually use token to buys things even the price drops as long as they can use it for buying things I won't see any problem at all...  And yes team should not create token for the sole purpose of just buying an selling and holding...

Prevalent crypto ventures like OmiseGo sprung from a similar stage, making Ethereum the pioneer birthing stage for some decentralized applications. Let’s see how it will help.

Very true but this is human nature and everytime there is money to be made some people will be willing to do anything to get a piece of the cake including some not very honest business that's why in my opinion the responsibility falls on the investors to do their due dilligence and research and not fall victim to the hype since the market is not regulated enough to take care of cases like that.

Ico for real developments those icos should list separately so we can assume the price growth on the specific time frame so icos will have good reputation for long term growth

It would be best but there is another option. If they need sources for developing the product they can raise money with couple of rounds.

That's how ICO is supposed to be since from the start to attract more investors and even make the project successful. That's one of the things that i am also looking for before i invest in ICO or even participate in their bounty campaigns. I've been into ICO with working product already and it always went successfully.

I am sure that ICO projects were created primarily in order to maximally simplify the process of investing money in profitable projects for both sides. Additional regulation and tightening of laws will not lead to progress in this area. All investors voluntarily choose the ICO project for investment and should only blame themselves. The only most appropriate way to protect against scammers in ICO is insurance.

I thinkthe same way. Competition is high nowadays and prior to launch ICO, spend your time on MVP development. Investments in ICOs without product are too risky. Even in venture investments stopped reviewing applications without MVP.

I support this call for the assurance of everyone whos being involved in ico investing and bounty hunters,actually I’ve been seeking for this topic for long now .to some people that will eagerly push this idea and give justice to all concerns

I have been part of many project,i use to invest in ico and I participated in many bounty hunting projects but all i got is scams or shitcoins,only few who has a potential

I agree that this would help in the future to strengthen the community.But locally now everyone has come to this sphere for profit.

I do agree with this idea that tokens should be created with working product. This will help to create trust among the investors to come forward and make investment. I guess this will reduce scam as well.

I think it is high time the tokens changed in this way with working products. Many ICOs available out there have simply nothing but paper works. This type of practice have created scammers in the market.

100% agree, I believe there must be a good use case for the token otherwise its solely an investment tool, which does not really justify the ICO in itself.

Investors often find it quite difficult to figure out which ICO they should invest on. It is actually hard to find out the reliability based on some papers. But tokens with working products will be much helpful I hope.

yes I completely agree with you,  thing which is so much important for our future ,this thing should be qualified otherwise it will not last till our future, your idea is very useful

Of course, when a project has appeared on the market and it has a working product, this is very good, and this greatly increases the chances that investors will invest in it, but some projects have a good idea, but do not have the means to do so, they carry out the ICO.

Having an existing product/technology will not give any guaranteed that you will succeed on your ICO, you still need to prove the importance of you business in this market. Though its a plus factor for your project, and investors might see potential on that so I suggest to have a great marketing team, they can really help your business grow.

people have now begun to realize it, ICOs that do not have real products will be more difficult to get investors, because investors have started to know that such tokens will not have value, investors will choose tokens that have value in the future

In icobench there are many ICOs that have a working product or a product that is in the development phase and that we can see a demo or a MVP which is called there.
Those project that have a working product are much better than those who expect to developer a product in the near future but even with a working product this does not guarantee that the project wont be a scam.

it’s a amazing concept and each ICO will definitely came under some guideline. The each firm raises in the practical world through this IPO will have some work done to make the product and service while the ico started a sample template.

i am agree with you. token should stand behind it really work product. you need to create tokens relevant to the society's needs. i think  Without this token will not survive for a long time.

This is actually true. token should stand behind it really work product. you need to create tokens relevant to the society's needs.it will be doing something good in future.

This is actually true  you need to create tokens relevant to the society's needs. it will be doing something in future. it will be long live and provide better service.

Survive only those projects in which initially poured a lot of money or have available a product for people who decide their needs .The rest of the coins just forget

But how then is investing in an idea, because people collect money for a project, I understand that people are tired of investing in an idea, because nothing happens afterwards, but then where will the developers take the money for product development?

This should the solo purpose of cryptocurrency. The market is expanding day by day and we expecting to adopt this by the nations and general peoples but if we don’t offer them there purpose or make it in use of their use why would they get into it. If there isn’t anything new so how will be there any development?

There are many tokens out there which makes it even difficult to trade them It would have been a good idea to have a regulatory agency that could help to streamline the new ICOs and check the viability of their products that back up their tokens and how relevant is it to solving societal problems this measure will help potential investors.

If a token has a usage then it will surely survive in any market conditions. But recently most of the tokens and ICOs are being launched for the sole purpose of making money like the OP said. I think that trend formed after seeing the rise in the price of the coins last year.

There are many coins just doing nothing. They are just in the market idle they don’t have any contribution in the system they are reason that there are confusions. It`s not the time to be confused for crypto market I also recommend that just trading money shouldn’t be the solo purpose for the crypto market.

I also agree with you that there should be some rules for the new coins to come in the market cap. The new coins also serve new unique purpose and they must have actual use otherwise what is the need of them there are already plenty with no works. If its not possible then everyone should work on the development of the existing.

It is really a matter of concern for the industry that many of them are creating projects to raise funds only rather creating value. So, ICO process must have some minimum criteria to enter into the industry.

I agree with you but how can we be sure that only functioning product based ICO will succeed and others will not?

Yes Indeed most of ICO now are just focus on raising funds first and the product or plan services will add later on!  thats why there is no demand for that particular token and ending on dump and no value at all. 

for me altcoins are based on bitcoin because they can not be high because the male is also the value of each tax fee per transfer of altcoins to another wallet. so they do not have the same value but I know you know the trading strategy for more money to get.

I alos agree with you but If only working products get the opportunity to enter into ICO, how new ideas would be dealt with?

Their are Based platform that really test their project first before it get listed. However the same as before the Ethereum blockchain objectives are to create tokens easily and sell their project to attract investors, while the other platform that i'm talking is they have community budget for them to create a new one.

yes from a reputed project like ICO people expect a lot so they also should provide qualified products , otherwise it will not last till the future which will be very fall negative effect on the reputation

I understand you are  upset nowdays they are creating many useless project which is very disappointing so it is high that they should use productive things to create tokens otherwise it will effect on our future

Considering the investors... Yes it will be good to create ICO'S with working products. But come to think of it, do all businesses actually deals on products?....I'm just thinking!

I totally agree with what you said. Working prototype or product is very important for a good project because it shows the project is not just an idea but already reality. Most project just launch there ico without being ready for it. I think projects without a working product shouldn't be allowed to conduct ICO.

So, the essence of this topic is that the ICO must have a new token product from the token created.
Suppose the token product is for holidays on the moon or vacation to space, because ICOs like that do not exist for now.

Very soon, this will be the standard of the industry, investors are getting smarter and people not ready to invest in a project that is only on paper.

I agree with your statement. Because this is actually true. Most people only make this token because it trades in this Crypto World. Even if we look deeper, many tokens that don't all really have good value in this Crypto World.

This is perhaps the reason why most cryptos don't last. They only created junk tokens.

What are the best places to find ICO ratings you can trust? So you can avoid the scams...

I have come across a lot of tokens from ICos  that are just for the sole purpose of making profit. Some of the developers would dump without a second thought to it. Which is why one needs to do a thorough research before investing.

We should have gotten to a stage where we discard every ICO that does not have a working product. Some may even lie that they have. Which is why you need to do every findings that are needed. Ensure that the team can be trusted.

I agree. Although trading is enough to keep the coin alive, services that are useful for others will attract more people to be invested on the coin and it can also attract big investors that could potentially increase the number of coins sold in the ICO. Demand determines price and if the product is not useful for others, I don't think the coin will increase its value. It will be just another lost investment, a bottom dweller coin.

And investors, in turn, should not invest in projects without a product, if everyone follows this advice, the projects simply will not have a choice, they will first have to make the product, and then raise the funds.

Last year you had super fly by night projects with websites created in 10 minutes raking in millions. I'll put on my thinking cap... "This is SoccerCoin for fans of soccer aka football!" And then it'd get pumped and dumped. I'm glad we're seeing fewer of those kinds of "projects".

I really agree with you, that the ICO project must be more real and not offer short profits.
because most of the ICOs are now only concerned with profit, rather than their initial project.
after getting what they wanted most of them left the project and made the ICO project die.

In business not all are products alone so we can not limit that ICO should only make tokens with working products, because there are business that are not product alone but there are services also offered that that can be made with ICO tokens ,so cryptocurrency will not be limiting only to that working products but also to differrent services.

Totally agree with you, the purpose of creating a new coin or token is by creating something new in technology or with a good working product. Many of ICOs only wants to make profit by promising their product after ICO but when the ICO ends they start to work slow or sometimes they run and sell all of their remaining coins. But I learned now, I support the ICOs that have working products or MVP.

Most of the time this is the real scenarios after an ico finished and collect investors money a short pumped will happen and after that it will be dumped all the way, leaving the project without any sense, it's much better to have a working project and real usage before starting the project, if there's already a working system chances to be more successful is much higher than those who needs funds first before the development.

They should have a working product before they lunch their ICO to insure the legitimacy of the project, this is our common problem here now because mostly of the ICOs don't have and just full of promises and you can see it thru their roadmap.

I will put it to you firmly that any business without a product or service is not a legal business and I standto defend it anywhere. If you know of any 'legal' business without a product or service, kindly let us know. So therefore, the ICOs must have a good product or service to cater for.

The industry is still very young and as time goes on, we will surely reach the stage where most project will have a working product in  which they will only be raising money for further development. Very soon, this will be the standard of the industry.

There are really a lot of such tokens, and there are also a lot of monotonous projects. Some are copying others, where the project previously was also copied.

I completely agree, ICOs without the product have zero value and there is no way how to get value later. This is one of the signs that the project is a scam, just my opinion.

I fully agree with the topic starter. Over the past year, many unnecessary tokens have appeared. And everyone says that they are doing a brilliant project. Although in fact most people have nothing but a roadmap and whitepaper.

that is why most of the coins will not be able to survive in the upcoming year. It will be replaced by some real useable cryptocurrencies. In my opinion, people even should not invest those kinda coins because there is a great chance of losing your whole investment.

Product is the second thing im looking when I see an interesting project. A project with MVP that have a unique idea or already finish is one of the investors looking.

I don't know why people investing in ICO who doesn't even have product to begin with those kind of project mostly survive just a few years if they don't do some direct support with the company project.

Ok,how about ICOOWP? Initial Coin Offering of Working Products.Oh wait,there are IPO´s already.But i think i know what you want to say.We all hate scam ICO´s

Actually this is the reason why market is strugling right now. We have too many projects with no product or infinite delays or similar problems. People started to see this as a big scam and tend to avoid it.

ye, it's mostly true, but there are some cases when without a product an ico still has a lot of potential

Really product or service the most important thing. Even after ICO ends also it's a matter how well product going in the market or how people like the service. Many time ICO gets the good investment with a working product but after that product isn't able to get strong user-base and coin become just shitcoin.

Of course! - I personally like to support ICOs somehow for the projects behind them mostly. Just like any business they should be made to be useful for society like you said. That way a lot more confidence will be drawn towards the Cryptocurrency world, especially if we find a way to minimize the number of scammers out there. How? Maybe leaving easy to find resources for people to see where to look at ICOs that are trusted.

Some people just want a quick profit and don't care about bringing something of value, but both can be done without too much problem and with possibly a lot more benefit.

There are situations when a project team has a good idea and a big experience in its area but there are no resources for a development of at least a prototype. Or it can be that an idea requires a too big seed capital. ICO definitely, is the fastest way for reaching new achievements and tops of success. But risks are inevitable here.

It's not the token that has a working product but the project itself. Tokens are just payments from ICO for their products. I think you mean that ICO should make a working product and services to have their tokens valuable.

90 percent of the projects that can be seen are exactly like this, and this does not include scams. The funny thing is when there's a hard cap of $ 20 million. The project successfully collects this money, and then the tokens appear on the exchange at a price of 10 times less.

True. An ICO that has already a real-world implementation will last long. One should always consider checking if an ICO has a viable product.

Most ICOs doesn't have that though. They promise big but they can't show anything to support what they're claiming that's why I'm being careful on ICOs I'm choosing.

And what shoudl we do with the all existing projects? Even single unified database does not exists, how can you control a thing without it?

We all have similar point of view of the situation, but history shows that governments are only organizations that abble to control something, so let's wait for their turn.

cryptocurrencies were created to provide all the people with alternative way, which is different to way that is proposed by government. we do not need regulation

Society needs could not be described as certain terms. For instance, part of sosciety needs tokens for staying anonimous while buying adult toys and videos. Does it worth creating token? And who to decide it?

You are right in something, it would be ideal, but some developers do not have start-up capital to implement at least a beta version or a prototype of the product, for which ICO will be held. The problem really is only that most want only easy money.

This is it, if they were creating tokens with working products and services people would not be having a problem with them but they are making tokens with products and services that are either already being offered by another token or they are bring in unsustainable products, it should not be so. We should be having coins we can be sure will survive for the long term.

Yeah right, they should have a minimum viable product (mvp) in their project, so peoples who want to invest will know they are really developing their project. If the Mvp is able to be used, more peoples will have interest about their ICO because they have a real product already.

This could happen in a perfect world, but we are not in a perfect world, just look at other markets, do you see only one company manufacturing one type of product? Of course not you have ten or even twenty companies creating the same product, this competition is good for the economy and the same happens with icos, I do not have problems with repetitive projects but I do have problems with scams.