Never invest no product ICOs

[fempat]

I support your ideas. There have been many projects that have come up and when I checked their timeline and roadmap, they revealed that they conceptualized the project barely less than two months. The idea may look fantastic in theory but they're nearly impossible to actualize.

[1715693550]

1715693550

[1715693550]

1715693550

[1715693550]

1715693550

[dicklerick8]

This is my new rule for 2018. I want to see actual substance in the ICO community instead of what we have. Even if they are simple projects i'd choose those over these "change the world" projects that overcommit from the beginning. There is a cool US based one that's like AirBnB for vehicle storage. https://stowittoken.com

[HashieNewb]

This is my new rule for 2018. I want to see actual substance in the ICO community instead of what we have. Even if they are simple projects i'd choose those over these "change the world" projects that overcommit from the beginning. There is a cool US based one that's like AirBnB for vehicle storage. https://stowittoken.com

Actual substance within the ICO?
Unless they have a product that is working already there is nothing but pictures/text on their website.

[aleksandra_kickcity]

Fully agree. If they already did something - that mean they have the real team, something can without investment. If you've never heard about ICO with the released product does not mean that they do not exist

Hah, true =)

[crypt0heaven]

I completely agree. Make sure you invest into something that is far beyond just a concept. A concept alone is really not worth any type of amount in millions.

[wxxyrqa]

I completely agree. Make sure you invest into something that is far beyond just a concept. A concept alone is really not worth any type of amount in millions.

but you see what means today are working in the market of ico companies. This is a very huge market and big numbers. Therefore, I would not categorically speak about all these projects with negative.

[neymarjunior50]

This time there will be no investors are buying no good project ICOs and Altcoins because there would be no profit in it. That's why every ICO have different unique project like decentralization of everything.

[housebtc]

I think this point divide opinion, to me I have no issue with a solid team asking for right amount of money to develop their platform, Ethereum did and we all know the result, but even with some projects claiming they have a prototype, just look at Credits team what they did, it was later found out that the alpha platform do not do what they claim on their website, so to me as long as I am comfortable with the team and the idea, I am good to go

[aleksandra_kickcity]

I use the money from the Bitcoin and Ethereum trade to get tokens from the Ico projects. If the scam of the Icp project I bought is scam, it will not be my loss. Because I invested in the money I earned from trading.

That is true

[bramgg.crypto]

I use the money from the Bitcoin and Ethereum trade to get tokens from the Ico projects. If the scam of the Icp project I bought is scam, it will not be my loss. Because I invested in the money I earned from trading.

But then again, you will lose your profit, which you could also have withdrawn and went on a nice vacation with to name an example. So it would still be a bummer.


Back to the question, When Ethereum was in ICO phase, it also wasn't a real functioning product yet (please correct me if I'm wrong). But it has turned out to be really profitable when you've participated in the ICO. So I don't think all ICO's without a product are useless. It is just very important to do the research and really believe in a product before you throw your money at it. Just my 2 cents..

[ocid]

I was wondering, why a lot of projects don't have such an important thing for a successful ICO as a product.

When a company has a product it means they have it to develop. In such case, a company shows why they need ICO and how the company will be growing. What is more, there is more trust because a company has experience in a field they are working.

For example, KickCity company that exists two years. KickCity an event platform that generates revenue and has a Helsinki government grant. KickCity needs ICO to make business bigger and to become a decentralized platform where every user is rewarded for ticket promotion.

On the other hand, no product ICOs can prove their success just in theory. There is no proof base that product will be developed and will be working right.

In such unstable industry as ICO everything has to be under control. The product is one of the things that shows the campaign is not a scam. That is why I believe it is better to invest in ready-made products ICOs.

I agree with you because in the case of promoting a project it should be supported by a product. ie as you mentioned for example is at KicK City company which is indeed a revenue generating event platform. but now we as investors who will join to do an investment sometimes just given a fantasy that is very promising and in the end not a few who just end up with a scam.

[De_nis]

I am agree with you, the finished product is an ideal condition for investment, but greater volatility and greater income can be obtained by investing in a promising idea that will later become a ready product! And Yes investment is always a risk!

[visiblehand]

Some requirements you should have for considering investing:
1.  Either a somewhat finished product or a publicly detailed plan for the product and an experienced team that has launched other successful products.
2.  A detailed explanation that makes sense for why the token will be necessary for the product.
3.  Some indication that as much time and money are being spent on marketing the product and running the business as promoting the token and developing early versions of the product.

[Script3d]

some ico's dont have a product because they dont have fund to start developing their product thats the purpose of it there are alot of good coins that started on ico without any product and yet to be made remember ethereum made a crowdsale before and now its sitting on number 2 spot.

[djamielove]

I agree with this.

I think people get too fixated on the idea of the ICO, but sadly it needs to be able to work in real life. It is all great having the best idea, but if it cannot be made, it is a fools dream.

I also like to invest into ICOs with products because then I am able to see what I am investing into, I can see where they need to work on their platform and what the MVP is. I expect that ICOs will move more towards a product side as it builds investor's confidence.

[Ailmand]

I was wondering, why a lot of projects don't have such an important thing for a successful ICO as a product.

When a company has a product it means they have it to develop. In such case, a company shows why they need ICO and how the company will be growing. What is more, there is more trust because a company has experience in a field they are working.

For example, KickCity company that exists two years. KickCity an event platform that generates revenue and has a Helsinki government grant. KickCity needs ICO to make business bigger and to become a decentralized platform where every user is rewarded for ticket promotion.

On the other hand, no product ICOs can prove their success just in theory. There is no proof base that product will be developed and will be working right.

In such unstable industry as ICO everything has to be under control. The product is one of the things that shows the campaign is not a scam. That is why I believe it is better to invest in ready-made products ICOs.

Good point mate. I think there is value in this suggestion. Since there are so many ICOs being introduced daily in this market, I think that people should choose thoroughly and wisely to ascertain if an ICO would succeed or not. And an ICO with no product or new concept would be more difficult to market and be successful because people would not find anything appealing in it. People tend to gravitate on new ideas, concepts and products, if not, on those products that even if are not new but show clear and great improvement from its predecessors.

[Geenstijl]

I am agree with you, the finished product is an ideal condition for investment, but greater volatility and greater income can be obtained by investing in a promising idea that will later become a ready product! And Yes investment is always a risk!

+1, all investments are a big risk and you must always remember this. Sometimes ICO has a good idea and a ready product but despite this the project crashes. It depends on many factors. The availability of MVP will not give us guarantees that the project will be 100% successful.

[AfterTheFork]

The success of an ICO depends on the project structure the team of developers among other factors. just like not every ICO will succeed, not all will fail either, infarct some ICOs register high rates of success, it all depends on its focus, look keenly, compare and contrast and research well and you will know what works

[Kevin77]

It is a good analysis because ICOs tokens are based on the real value of a project so why then do anybody have to give his hard earned cash to a project without full understanding of the product or service been offered.

Just one single reason why they would do that is ignorance of how the whole cryptocurrency space operates, or the fact that they are just being enticed by some whitepaper and web graphics, that they leave out the product and the team, only to have some quick bucks at the end of it all.

It is funny to me how people will invest in a shit project when they can easily focus on the good ones and get a better and sustainable result in the long run. I was wondering why a lot of people invest in a project without a product and the only thing they are busy investing in are just some promises of some future or upcoming product.

I am not surprised since what most people are looking for now are the quick bucks and they really do not care much if the project sucks or not or if there is a product or not, which is the reason we have a whole lot of polluted atmosphere with shit  coins today.

[Crypto_lion]

I was wondering, why a lot of projects don't have such an important thing for a successful ICO as a product.

When a company has a product it means they have it to develop. In such case, a company shows why they need ICO and how the company will be growing. What is more, there is more trust because a company has experience in a field they are working.

For example, KickCity company that exists two years. KickCity an event platform that generates revenue and has a Helsinki government grant. KickCity needs ICO to make business bigger and to become a decentralized platform where every user is rewarded for ticket promotion.

On the other hand, no product ICOs can prove their success just in theory. There is no proof base that product will be developed and will be working right.

In such unstable industry as ICO everything has to be under control. The product is one of the things that shows the campaign is not a scam. That is why I believe it is better to invest in ready-made products ICOs.

It's not as simple as that.I get what you are trying to say.Crypto currencies are a risky entity in itself and ICO's are even more risky because they can be scams .But what you need to do is are you willing to take a big risk for potential bigger profits?
There will be always heavy competition for "established" ICO's which have working product , so you need to spot a Ico with a good team, sound idea . Yes you're talking a risk , the team may never be able to make it or might be possible that a competitor takes over, but the potential rewards can be huge as well.

Example : Eth,Neo