That's just conspiracy theory guessing, not evidence.

Every serious investor knows that past performance doesn't tell anything about future performance. There's no sense in saying BTC will go up x20 next year just because it performed so well this year. On the contrary it may be overpriced at current price because of the CME futures market that's coming on 18 December. When people see futures market won't how such an impact on the price as they expected BTC price might even crash. Nothing guarantees you that holding BTC in next year will make profit. After such gains this year in theory there's even more chance for the price to crash, than to make x20. The more the price rises the more risky it is to hold. So putting half of earnings just in one investment? I'd rather not.

If ICO has too high hard cap (like $100 million+), so anyone interested can already buy on ICO, there's less chance there will be demand for the token on exchanges. But that's usually not the case with sub $30 million hard cap ICO's.

INS has sub $30 million hard cap. And I think it's very reasonable for such a vast project. With such a low hard cap for such a project, there' no way they could collect too much ETH.

It's the same with 95% ICO's. They are afraid American Security And Exchange Comission will recognize their tokens as security and they aren't allowed to sell securities. So to avoid any trouble it's easier for them to ban US citizens from crowdsales.

The price on Binance has been pretty stable for the last 3 hours somewhere between 0.00026 and 0.00027 ETH. The amount of sell orders is larger, that's true, but sell orders don't always tell the truth. If noone wants to fill those buy orders, buyers loose patience and buy sell orders. I've been watching it closely for the last 3 hours and much more sell orders than buy orders get filled. If it continues this way sell orders will get eaten. Sell orders seem pretty low to me right now so I believe it's mostly people who bought it discounts once their sell orders are bought it will release the price to go up.

But I wouldn't compare it to rise of OMG in a month. OMG have Vitalik for advisor and it seems everything with Vitalik's name moons. And OMG marketing team seems also very capable, every time the price started to fall they launched some braking positive news to drive the price up and it lasted about a month before they ran out of news ideas. If Quanstamp manages to do the same it can go to 1 billion in a month yes, but OMG was really outstading at marketing for the first month, can't say this can be achieved easily.

That would make the marketcap of about almost 1 billion, making it close to top 10 coins. I don't think it's impossible but can't say it can hit it easily.

They closed the sale at about 97,6% sold tokens, because price of ETH has risen. The remaining tokens were burnt, so total amount of tokens sold was reduced to about 634,400,000 I think.

https://medium.com/quantstamp/thank-you-all-for-the-overwhelming-support-96-7-complete-closing-announcement-e378076e9526

I know many people that don't trust or hate Etherdelta user interface and are afraid to use it. I guess some of them would rather pay more on ICO. But I admit I did rather buy them at 0.00018 on ED. And you're right that tokens should have been locked until the end of the ICO. But I think they didn't want to rip off investors, they just didn't think of possibility someone could add them manually to ED. Because it also hurts amount of funds they collected. I'm sure if they didn't make the mistake the ICO would reach hard cap in a few days, but now they'll stay short of reaching it.

In theory every time a hard fork happens there's some chance of getting a new coin. It depends on the miners. If some miners refuse to start mining the new fork, they can always stay mining the old fork and give the old coin they mine a new name. But that's just in theory. There's no different groups with different ideas fighting over future of ethereum. So unlike with Bitcoin it's very unlikely for Ethereum some miners will continue to use the old fork. Especially because the fork will make mining difficulty lower. Why would any miner hater mining more ethereum with the same hardware and power consumption and rather stay on the old fork.

JP Morgan aren't against Bitcoin. They like anything that makes profit. Their CEO just manipulated the market by saying it's fraud and later JP Morgan bought huge amount of some Swedish BTC fund for cheap.

But it's true they're part of Ethereum Enterprise Alliance. And they also have agreement to build their private sidechain on ethereum.

I'm looking into buying some OMG to hodl too. I think it will be amongst top coins in the future. The only reason I don't hold it yet is It was overhyped and too expensive to buy. But now it's getting close to a good entry price. I believe it might drop a little more and then I'll buy it.

Maybe IOTA could be good replacement. They still have prove their tangle technology can stand the test of time. But transactions are totally free and fast. And there's no scalability problems. The more it's used the faster it gets. That might make it the ultimate coin to buy alts.

I don't know that project to every detail. But from what I know it's legit project with dedicated team. They just don't do any marketing so not many potential investors know about them. And I expect them to have hard time collecting neccessary funds for the project to succeed.

Usually very small amount of tokens is used for bounties so I don't think even if those people dumped their tokens that would make any impact on the price. You'd be surprised how many people are there that don't have a clue about the ICO they invest in. But for real investors that do their due dilligence I think they don't cause any damage. And for projects more important than number of interested audience is the funds they collect. I analyze traffic to ICO websites and it seems successful ones do get a lot of traffic from bitcointalk and social media, than those that are unseccessful. So I guess bounty campaigns help with attracting money to ICO's.

It's obivous they spend money on advertising. Not only on ICO rating sites, they also pay youtubers and statistics of their website show they also use every possible way of advertising including news sites, display adds, e-mails, social media. I don't think that's but neccessary for successful ICO. There are legit projects out there that will fail to collect enough funds just because noone knows they exist. So I think investing in marketing is important.

Forex is very tough market. Estimates are only up to 5% traders are able to make profit long term. And not all of them are managers. It think most managers would lose their clients if they used Genesis Vision or not just because clients would leave them because of bad performance anyway. Making bad performance of managers transparent is actually good for their clients. It would make competition between managers tougher and only those who would be best of the best would remain giving clients top notch performance on markets, probably much better than an average client receives now. that might be one of possible scenarios too. But noone can know for sure what will happen with the project. Will they succeed to deliver? Will their model realy work? There's many things that could go wrong with every project. All startups even those funded by VC have more than 90% chance of failure and ICO's aren't any different. So investing in long term is very risky. But Genesis Vision at least seems legit and serious project that is trying hard to succeed and stand out of the crowd of below average ICO's. I think investor has still some chance investing in such a startup, but investing in some crappy unserious project he has no chance at all.

I think many people investing in ICO's aren't in for the long term profit anyway, but looking for quick profit after an ICO is listed on exchanges. They also managed to get some kind of permit so US citizens can participate. There's hardly any such ICO so I expect this will bring in a lot of investors from the US. And I think Genesis vision is marketing themselves well, they already have arrangement with their first exchange and they're not crappy project. This seem very good combination for some quick profit and they probably won't have trouble reaching hard cap.

About the tokens. They probably could have done the project without issuing their own tokens that's true. But then they couldn't make their ICO, they would have to get funded the harder, slower and more expensive way gathering VC funds. Many projects collect their funds this way. I know many people think that's bad. But I don't think that's always the case. It can be good business decision. Why would someone company choose to spend more resources than they have to achieve their goal. Well there are ICO's that incorporate tokens in their projects in a stupid way like CarTaxi for example, that makes their model worse than if there were no tokens at all. But I think Genesis Vision use of tokens makes at least some sense and doesn't hurt operation of the platform. And it also gives us opportunity to invest with possibility of quick profit (mind this is not investment advice or prediction, it's just my humble opinion). If they took the VC root we wouldn't even have the possibility to invest.

Do you have any links to those sources that explain why Genesis Vision is to be avoided? I checked them myself and really don't see any reasons to avoid them. In fact I think they're legit and one of best ICO's this month. One of few worth participating. I don't blindly trust other sources I always check ICO's myself. And that check takes a few hours. But maybe some of your sources points out some important red flag I might have missed.

And I agree on the Stratis part. They have nothing to offer Ethereum can't. Oh well, besides C#. But I don't think C# really is a huge advantage because any developer can learn Ethereum Solidity in a few days. They were pumped when they appeared on the market because of great marketing on how C# is great, how Microsoft will like them because of that and how they're better than Ethereum because they'll have sidechains. Microsoft is member of EEA that supports Ethereum, so they're not only supporting Stratis. And Ethereum can and will do sidechains too. And if someone thinks C# is really thah big advantage there's also NEO which is better technology than Stratis, has C# and has cooperation with Microsoft too.

Bitindia seems attractive at first glance. Making an exchange for huge Indian market and offering 10% of profit to token holders and buybacks seems promising for long term investment. But their whitepaper isn't good. Hoe of the whitepaper explains obvious stuff about blockhain and blockhain markets, most of investors already know and don't tell anything about their project. Their team is quite large, but they don't really tell anything about their expertise they just list their names. John Macafee is a big name, but he's just partner and advisor. They don't tell if they have done anything besides the whitepaper. Or anything about how they intend to become the largest Indian exchange and what actions will they take to make cryptocurrencies adopted in India. The only relevant info is holders of tokens will make profit and how to participate in ICO and that's it. Nothing else of the 30+ pages really tells anything about their project. Looks like they're just trying to collect money and all the rest of whitepaper is there just because they can't publish single page stating give us your money and will give you some of the profits. There's not any interest for this ICO on these forums. Their ANN thread has been started on 25 September and has only 1 page. Statistics of their website visitors show most visitors come from websites that list ICO's so it seems most of the marketing they did was to get listed on those sites. They also get some traffic from social networks and adds. But it seems there's not much interest in participating in this ICO. In my opinion just being grom a large country, giving some profits back to token holders and John MacAfee doesn't make them an ICO I'd invest in.

I have no idea if there's place for a project like CarTaxi in car towing business. Maybe there is but I don't really see any use for it. Car towing for broken down or crashed cars is usually cowered by car insurance, so the insurance company covers the costs of towing. An app like this is useless in such cases because driver has to phone insurance company anyway if he wants the expenses of towing to be payed by them and they dispatch the closest towing company that has contract with the insurance company. Their whitepaper isn't that good either. And according to the diagram, everything will be still running centralized on servers, the blockchain seems to be there just so that the tokens can exist. And I also don't like that they will accept fiat and other crypotcurrencies besides their token. That doesn't really make any demand for the token to make the price go up. Imagine your car breaks down would you use your phone to find some exchange that sells CarTaxi tokens, buy BTC with your credit card, send it to that exchange and buy CarTaxi tokens? Wouldn't you rather just pay with the credit card avoiding exchange fees and wasting your time and smart phone data connection? There's just no incentive to use the tokens. There's incentive to hold them because of 25% bonus and buybacks, but the project has to be successful so holders will be able to receive anything. And I doubt they can be successful.

I can't see anything interesting in WCX. In future all exchanges will be decentralized, so they're nothing special and will have huge competition. Their white paper doesn't even deserve the name whitepaper. They don't have any plan and don't explain how will they achieve their goal of being largest exchange. No explanation what's the use of the token. There's no description or diagrams of the technology they'll use. And so on. Their only point is they only have low fees 0.1%, but that's not something competition wouldn't be able to offer.  There's no team listed or company named behind this project. They do tell a bit more about themselves in their ANN thread. They're supposed to be professionals from Apple, IBM and Deutsche bank. Anyone can cIaim that. I don't believe them. Because if it was true why doesn't it state in the whitepaper with names of team members. There seems to be many interest in the project, their ANN thread has a lot of posts. So there might be some hype and quick profit after they get listed on exchanges, but they're hiding so much information they might even be scam. I would avoid buying this one especially if I considered it long term investment.

Webcoin has an interesting idea. Advertising market is huge and their approach of connecting advertisers with 300+ social networks could bring a lot of money from advertisers. And instead of mining using hardware power miners will be users who will visit websites and social media of advertisers and will get payed for it. Their whitepaper has the info it needs to have explained quite well. There are some typos though. They should have hired some lecturer. What makes me a bit worried is their alpha site has low number of visitors. If they can't attract traffic on their own website, will they be able to do so on advertisers' sites? Their project's website also receives very little traffic, but a lot of it comes from social networks. There's no traffic form display adds. Maybe they just don't do "classical" advertising, because they believe in their advertising model using social networks. They're trying to collect 98 million which is a lot. I doubt they really need this much money, but it's what most ICO's do. ICO has been running for two weeks already and they only managed to colletc about 100k so far. I think this ICO won't sell out, they might even not collect enough to fund the project. And what worries me is all the unsold tokens will be kept by the project. So they migh have huge amount left after the ICO. If they don't collect enough funds in ICO to work on the project, they might just dump all the tokens on an exchange ans leave investor with nothing. As much as I like the basic concept and I'd like to see such idea to work. There's also many things to worry. It least if their ICO was getting sold faster I might have considered investing. But with that low amount raised so far I'll rather pass.

Jobstoday's supposed to have very successful business already. But all of their four employees searching websites receive very little traffic. So I doubt they're as successful as they're stating in their white paper. There's no blockchain use case mentioned, they don't even have a developer on their team. Their github only has 4 commits in a month. Their sole goal seems to be to collect funds and they even admit it in the paper. In general I don't think it's neccessarily bad to try to collect funds the ICO way, because it's much cheaper and easier than VC or IPO way. So it can be good business decision. But they could run into some serious legal issues offering dividends to token holder, because it makes their token a security. And there's tons of job searching websites all around the world where work can get paid for in fiat so accepting payments in form of some unadopted token is actually disadvantage. And to my knowledge there's also several other similar blockchain projects, so the competition is really tough and it seems they don't have anything better to offer than the competition.

Artoken seems project with very good perspective. I'll think about investing in this one. Thanx for poinitg it out.I didn't know about it before. I do believe AR/VR is about to rise in the following years. I don't know much about developing AR/VR. But heir white paper is very good it makes sense and  makes me believe they thought out every detail of the project in advance.  And they convinced me the model of their project could really be very useful for the development of AR/VR. So it would get users and be profitable. The team also seems expert. Visits to their website suggest they get good amount of traffic and they are listed on major ICO listing sites and are also active on social networks. So it seems they do invest some resources in marketing too. 15 pages in their ANN thread isn't outstanding, but ain't that bad either. I think there will be a lot of interest for investing in this ICO, and long term they seem good project too. So they might be good investment short term and long term.

I think Genesis Vision will be one of the most successful ICO's this month.

They're building a decentralized trust management platform which will bring benefits to all participants - investors, managers and brokers. The team seems very experienced at developing financial software. They already have partnership with more than 400 partners, mainly from companies dealing with Forex. So it seems they already have large potential customer base. So I think they'll be interesting to long term investors.

They are also very good at marketing and creating a lot of hype around their ICO. And a day after ICO they will be listed on an exchange already. So this will also attract people looking just for some quick profit.

Being interesting to both kinds of investors, I think this ICO might get sold out very fast.

Even Bitcoin doesn't pump all the time. When this pump is over it will deep. It will be worth more than 5000 USD in the future, that's true. But why buy it at 5000USD, when you can get it cheaper after this pump finishes.

Good time to buy any coin even Bitcoin is when the price is falling and it's low, not when it reaches all time high. Maybe it will continue to rise over 6000USD and you'll still make some profit if you buy it now, but sooner of later it will fall down, probably to around 4000 USD. So why buy it now it's better to be patient and wait until the price is lower so you'll get more Bitcoin for your money and when the price rises again you'll make more profit than if you bought it now.