Never invest no product ICOs

[jdbao]

I do not agree with you,  it may be better for a company to have a product when you invest in them, but many icos have no products do not mean that they have no investment value.
For example, ETH just came out with only a white paper, but still very successful.

[aleksandra_kickcity]

I think there has to be a fine balance, never say never but with the current trends and plethora of project it makes sense to see some evidence that the team has the capability to deliver what has been promised at least a test Alpha of a product.

True! Also this is important to check everything out out the team and the project

[btc_love]

I do not agree with you,  it may be better for a company to have a product when you invest in them, but many icos have no products do not mean that they have no investment value.
For example, ETH just came out with only a white paper, but still very successful.

I know. You can't blame project without a product. They still can be good

[AgentZero23]

I would definitely agree with you. With a working product it gives the investors more confidence and assurance that a project is in the right track. A working product is always been in my check list before I invest in some ICO's.

[aleksandra_kickcity]

I would definitely agree with you. With a working product it gives the investors more confidence and assurance that a project is in the right track. A working product is always been in my check list before I invest in some ICO's.

yeah! I do believe it is important

[sebastianpenguen]

I do not agree with you,  it may be better for a company to have a product when you invest in them, but many icos have no products do not mean that they have no investment value.
For example, ETH just came out with only a white paper, but still very successful.

I don't agree with you. Some projects are just coming with ideas without realization and they collect millions of dollars. Only limited number of them are coming with really working products.

[Nivelir]

I completely want to support you In this thought, because I think that it is not worth investing in projects that do not even have an alpha version, and if the developers say that money is required for this, then probably it is necessary to say goodbye immediately with such a project.

[Daniel9140]

Yes, icos with no product have a slim chance of making it to the big stage .

Always invest in icos with working products

[Eddyc]

Regarding the post and the comment. I agree with your point of view, but not 100%, Everything may be relative, there are many frauds in the present day where many promises and stimuli are offered, so a good analysis and in-depth studies on the projects are fundamental. However there are ICOS that even without the product ready, can meet expectations and deliver what they promise, usually keep their investors and sympathizers on alerts, with information, with specific details about the project and even comstumam discuss several related subjects.

[Fatunad]

I do not agree with you,  it may be better for a company to have a product when you invest in them, but many icos have no products do not mean that they have no investment value.
For example, ETH just came out with only a white paper, but still very successful.

I don't agree with you. Some projects are just coming with ideas without realization and they collect millions of dollars. Only limited number of them are coming with really working products.

But talking about on the fact that we do see successful project which dont have actual or working product in the past which they do only have projected and assumption but yet some of them made it to their proposed targets which we can still able to trust project which dont have working product as long their goals is somehow realistic then its really worth to risk on since we do know ICO investment do still always have the risk on losing money.

[AlNu]

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 do not agree with you. Yes, if there is no product, this is a risk, but if this is a completely new product and no analogues, then it can show huge growth in the future. Therefore, I think that such projects should also be thrown in, and of course, diversification.

[rachelia13]

Yes, i'm absolutely agree with you. I think it's very important to create a great product, because there are many good icos out there as well, and we need to have something superior to be better than them so people will choose your ico than others.
But now, most ico only good in the theory, but in fact, they do nothing with their coins. After the sale, it's like everything's forgotten already, no futher moves or such. But not icos are like that though. I hope your statement will make everyone realized it and it will become better in the future.

[KXC247]

Icos generally are risky venture because , it has a lot of uncertainty.

Its more of a calculated risk to invest into icos that has a working product and also have a good team that are well experienced and know what they are doing .

Having a product means, the company has some degree of experience on what they are doing and can improve better with the help of the blockchain.

[Traderbtcc]

Icos generally are risky venture because , it has a lot of uncertainty.

Its more of a calculated risk to invest into icos that has a working product and also have a good team that are well experienced and know what they are doing .

Having a product means, the company has some degree of experience on what they are doing and can improve better with the help of the blockchain.

I get your point. Having a product or prototype isn't a guarantee of the project's success. That's correct. Even vaporwares succeed in this space. I wouldn't be too trusting with projects even with a working prototype. It literally means nothing in my opinion. Just another ploy.

[MISS_nSTASSY]

When you invest in no-product ICO you give your money on product development and you support dev team which tries to change the world(if you choose the right project). If the project already has product - why they need to handle ICO? What is the point? With product they can get money easier and another way

[BogdanGFTP]

The most growing tokens as I know have a product, so it's better to invest in product ICO's, you are right

[Kkhoailang]

Currently many ICOs are out side and there are 50%-50% is scam.
Investors should bear in mind following key elements discussed in this post to avoid throw money through the window.

1. Team Composition
2. Bitcointalk.org Thread
3. Stage of the project and VC investments
4. Community and Media
5. What do they need the token for? Is the blockchain necessary?
6. Unlimited / Hard cap
7. Token distribution – when and how
8. Evaluating the Whitepaper
9. Quality of the code – Meet Github
10. The Bottom Line

[SergiOLa]

I think there has to be a fine balance, never say never but with the current trends and plethora of project it makes sense to see some evidence that the team has the capability to deliver what has been promised at least a test alpha of a product.

[number37]

but what about those who have good ideas, but so far there are no products, there are not many such ones, but they are also for them, including those invented by ICO

[Cryptonimous]

not all ico are dump because it has no product, many ico have product but it still dump too, so just read the whitepepper, depend of my experiemce good coin have low suppy, fast transaction, and have active developer