What are the 3 thing you look for in an ICO?

[Custard81]

As the question reads.  For me:

-  The concept/vision - is it innovative?  does it solve a real world problem?  is the problem it solves something I am interested in?
-  The team - Size and experience.
-  How the coin relates to the concept.  Is the coin a key part of the platform?  Are other payment methods available to users, etc.

[1714092246]

1714092246

[1714092246]

1714092246

[1714092246]

1714092246

[1714092246]

1714092246

[1714092246]

1714092246

[coingrow]

I cannot stress this more, No.1 is the whitepaper. Always look at the whitepaper. If you can understand what the team wants to do, and like the concept, consider putting money - else no use. No2. is the team. Look at the engagement that they are having with the community, also look at how old are their public profile like linkedin. QUtm CEO changed his name recently before doing qtum, he has been known for doing frauds in past- so do look into the history of people involved. No3 thing that I check is the community around the project.

[phoenixdowndee]

I cannot stress this more, No.1 is the whitepaper. Always look at the whitepaper. If you can understand what the team wants to do, and like the concept, consider putting money - else no use. No2. is the team. Look at the engagement that they are having with the community, also look at how old are their public profile like linkedin. QUtm CEO changed his name recently before doing qtum, he has been known for doing frauds in past- so do look into the history of people involved. No3 thing that I check is the community around the project.

This is bang on the money in my eyes. Here is what i would look for in an ICO, a little more than 3, but they are all interconnected.

- Strong team - Both in development team and also the CEO's / marketing (People focus too much on the developers which is important but not everything. no point having a great team to create something, if nobody can advertise it and push the startup in the right direction.)
- Realistic vision - not aiming too high or if they do not reach their target everyone who invested will be disappointed
- Solid whitepaper - Well thought out, shows realistic goals, a strong good vision and a plan of action
- Strong social media presence - A social media that shows they are connected with everyone
- Good customer support - Shows they care, and they have invested time and money into making sure the average investor can ask questions
- Good website - A business who is willing to throw time and effort into a good website are less likely to be a scam
- finite supply - ICO's with no cap can be dangerous and can simply just damage their own coin by releasing more for more investment.
-Market they are getting involved with - Is this a new market? or a dying one? who controls the market?

Finally
- Good concept and catchy name - A good ethos and a name that makes them stand out. Personally i would avoid anything that is something "coin".

If these are in place, then it's a good sign. I am looking at Crowdholding at the minute, seems like a good upcoming ICO (They are in their pre-sale). I like this one because it is about co-creation (Which i am interested in, which also helps and i would advise) and also you can get more for your investment as they are in their pre-sale.

https://ico.crowdholding.com/

[prakashghai]

Thank you .. these are good points to remember...

Especially point No. 2 Does it solve a real world problem?

Some people just ignore this and blindly invest in ICO's

[Zadicar]

I cannot stress this more, No.1 is the whitepaper. Always look at the whitepaper. If you can understand what the team wants to do, and like the concept, consider putting money - else no use. No2. is the team. Look at the engagement that they are having with the community, also look at how old are their public profile like linkedin. QUtm CEO changed his name recently before doing qtum, he has been known for doing frauds in past- so do look into the history of people involved. No3 thing that I check is the community around the project.

Basing on whitepaper isnt really reliable itself since there are good projects out there who do have the potential to progress is they are being funded well but there are really instances which the interest of people isnt there on which they do end up on failing inspite on having a good project. This is also my main concern or being seek it up first when i do decide to join or invest on an ICO. Next would be the experienced developers and next its roadmap, marketting strategy/partners and experiences.

[ruffles2016]

I look for people. Are there lot of people wanna support this project or not? That is good enough to make some money over speculation. Also projects' dev team is important.

[harimauagam]

Surely everyone wants a gift from ICO if not a gift then much less. I work in this bitcointalk would want a very nice gift of a project.

[Svelto]

I cannot stress this more, No.1 is the whitepaper. Always look at the whitepaper. If you can understand what the team wants to do, and like the concept, consider putting money - else no use. No2. is the team. Look at the engagement that they are having with the community, also look at how old are their public profile like linkedin. QUtm CEO changed his name recently before doing qtum, he has been known for doing frauds in past- so do look into the history of people involved. No3 thing that I check is the community around the project.

Totally agreed the 3 points mentioned are important. To my surprise, I came across some projects without white paper. I totally ignore these projects.

[blockchainmarketus]

As the question reads.  For me:

-  The concept/vision - is it innovative?  does it solve a real world problem?  is the problem it solves something I am interested in?
-  The team - Size and experience.
-  How the coin relates to the concept.  Is the coin a key part of the platform?  Are other payment methods available to users, etc.

Roadmap and the coin distribution, team and is it rational or not. If not rational I won't invest in ICO.

[Morphling]

the team, the market cap, usually the two will determin to participate in or not, for more, i will look for the project its self, for example, is there already exited in the similiar project

[Spoetnik]

You are fucking retarded idiots.
These are not "startups" nor are they companies.. nor are you investors.
ICO's are scammy .. every single one of them period .
You are participating in new age digital ponzi / pyramid schemes for profit.
You are NOT "investors".. but scammy idiots.

do i need to explain why yet again ?  



Go fund yourself assholes.

[Maveth13]

The team is definitely a priority. They should give backgrounds, social media links or linkedin so you could personally check.
I think it is important to be sure first if the ICO is not a scam before trying to evaluate if it will be successful.

[nrvasquez]

yes. I also like you in looking at an ICO. Usually I see how the ICO will run with their vision, want where the project and how the team handle it. make sure they are really a professional team in their field. the last I saw their allocation of funds. If they think they have allocations and that are unreasonable or unrealistic, I choose to avoid them.

[owocki]

Team. Market. Product.  In that order.

[cp_underground]

As the question reads.  For me:

-  The concept/vision - is it innovative?  does it solve a real world problem?  is the problem it solves something I am interested in?
-  The team - Size and experience.
-  How the coin relates to the concept.  Is the coin a key part of the platform?  Are other payment methods available to users, etc.

for me, im looking is the concept that ico, what is developer offering for me, the team and their experince in blockchain

[TheFriends]

As the question reads.  For me:

-  The concept/vision - is it innovative?  does it solve a real world problem?  is the problem it solves something I am interested in?
-  The team - Size and experience.
-  How the coin relates to the concept.  Is the coin a key part of the platform?  Are other payment methods available to users, etc.

For me it's, something new, innovative, disruptive.

[sulendra12]

The first one is the whitepaper, you have to read whole white paper before invest your money to these projects. Because most of them just scammer with nonsense whitepaper which looks promising but fail at the end.

Team and Escrow should consider before invest, if famous team involved to their project (like CEO of Ethereum, Dash) and using ESCROW !! . Your funds probably safe even the scammer is out, your funds still safe on escrow and Coin Supply.

[nonlinearboy]

I think the team is the most important, a experienced team can bring out creative ideas and useful products and a powerful advisors can make good market performance. That is enough.

[gaming-stars]

For me, the most important aspect is the whitepaper and how the technology will solve a problem.

Second is the team and that they have experience.

The third is for me the potential of the project.

However, there are occasions when it makes sense to invest even when the team is not experienced or unknown but the rest is great.

Also, I am also analyzing who else is investing. If good advisors with industry knowledge are on board, it is a huge plus point....

[hansbans]

First of all i look investors thinks. Second, team.
Third, whitepaper and potential of project.