Whts more important? Tech used in making the coin or the project behind it?

[Razor007]

Hey guys,
just curious about whats more important and valuable?
Lets take an example of Steem, lbry etc. I think its the project thats making those coins valuable.

Most of the coins we see are usually the same in specs.

Lets say tomorrow I start developing another shitcoin which basically provides nothing new, but it will be used by apple, amazon, or google (hehe , lets just assume this for a second), so is it the tech (specs of the coin) that matters or the projects (google, amazon, apple etc)?

[chaser15]

Hey guys,
just curious about whats more important and valuable?
Lets take an example of Steem, lbry etc. I think its the project thats making those coins valuable.

Most of the coins we see are usually the same in specs.

Lets say tomorrow I start developing another shitcoin which basically provides nothing new, but it will be used by apple, amazon, or google (hehe , lets just assume this for a second), so is it the tech (specs of the coin) that matters or the projects (google, amazon, apple etc)?

Then you provided something new with the coin and you are wrong that you just developed it without anything else.

Apple , Amazon and Google are big institution and no way they will just approved the system of using your coin. It's impossible they will just easily implement using your coin if they don't see something special into it. So both matters.

While on the other hand, if there's really nothing new then even we think of this for a second, no way those companies you mentioned will accept your coin.

[Razor007]

Hey guys,
just curious about whats more important and valuable?
Lets take an example of Steem, lbry etc. I think its the project thats making those coins valuable.

Most of the coins we see are usually the same in specs.

Lets say tomorrow I start developing another shitcoin which basically provides nothing new, but it will be used by apple, amazon, or google (hehe , lets just assume this for a second), so is it the tech (specs of the coin) that matters or the projects (google, amazon, apple etc)?

Then you provided something new with the coin and you are wrong that you just developed it without anything else.

Apple , Amazon and Google are big institution and no way they will just approved the system of using your coin. It's impossible they will just easily implement using your coin if they don't see something special into it. So both matters.

While on the other hand, if there's really nothing new then even we think of this for a second, no way those companies you mentioned will accept your coin.

I agree that there's no way those companies would start accepting the coin.. Although i mentioned the word "suppose" but maybe I couldn't explain correctly, let me simplify the question this time Lets say I start a coin with the same specs provides nothing new (within the coin itself), however it is supposed to be used for a very innovative project, something that doesn't exist for now. I mean the project is *Something Special* but not the coin. So, what would matter at this point? the tech behind the coin or the project?

[chaser15]

Hey guys,
just curious about whats more important and valuable?
Lets take an example of Steem, lbry etc. I think its the project thats making those coins valuable.

Most of the coins we see are usually the same in specs.

Lets say tomorrow I start developing another shitcoin which basically provides nothing new, but it will be used by apple, amazon, or google (hehe , lets just assume this for a second), so is it the tech (specs of the coin) that matters or the projects (google, amazon, apple etc)?

Then you provided something new with the coin and you are wrong that you just developed it without anything else.

Apple , Amazon and Google are big institution and no way they will just approved the system of using your coin. It's impossible they will just easily implement using your coin if they don't see something special into it. So both matters.

While on the other hand, if there's really nothing new then even we think of this for a second, no way those companies you mentioned will accept your coin.

I agree that there's no way those companies would start accepting the coin.. Although i mentioned the word "suppose" but maybe I couldn't explain correctly, let me simplify the question this time Lets say I start a coin with the same specs provides nothing new (within the coin itself), however it is supposed to be used for a very innovative project, something that doesn't exist for now. I mean the project is *Something Special* but not the coin. So, what would matter at this point? the tech behind the coin or the project?

I already mentioned my answer.

Both matters for me. First, technology used in making the coin will show investors how strong the coin is. It will also include what is the benefit and advantage of using this coin. Second, the project behind the coin also really matters because like I mentioned above, no way a project will be backed up by big institution if they sees a poor roadmap and lack of seriousness on the goals of a certain project.

[NorrisK]

People want you to believe it is the tech behind the coin.

In fact, the "new" tech offered is usually just a marketing trick to gather more money.

[Razor007]

People want you to believe it is the tech behind the coin.

In fact, the "new" tech offered is usually just a marketing trick to gather more money.

That's what I was thinking.

[aoluain]

is it the tech (specs of the coin) that matters or the projects (google, amazon, apple etc)?

for me its the specs of the coin which is firstly important.
if the specs allow the coin to provide viable functions
which provide solutions to real world problems and
requirements, then its value will follow as will its adoption

[vrathamon]

You need both.  There's alot of coins with good tech that never got off the ground because of bad (or non-existent) marketing.  The sad part is that those coins have all been superseded by newer coins with better tech.

[aoluain]

You need both.  There's alot of coins with good tech that never got off the ground because of bad (or non-existent) marketing.  The sad part is that those coins have all been superseded by newer coins with better tech.

Actually thats a good point, MARKETING is the key.
Unless an idea or creation is exposed to potential investors etc...  Its not going to go anywhere