Never invest no product ICOs

[murinked]

What can I say is that product is the most important part of the project for me. I do not invest in ICOs without a ready-made product and only with airy promises to do it in the future. So, in my opinion existing of the product increase the chances of the project to conduct sussesful ICO and prosper in the future

I agree.  If you plan to invest in a company without a product, it is better to invest a small part of the money.

[dasniz888]

Good luck to the kick city project. By the way, you are right with a product, but the idea of the ICO is to raise some funds for the idea realization. not only for the future development

[buonngu.miendo4]

I think that ico will be successful only when the project is will be needed by society. so my choice fell on the project Yumerium, if you have not heard about it, then I advise you to get acquainted and you will understand why I think so.

[thaoco.codai865]

Your argument is too one-sided. Although most of the ICOs are not worth investing a lot of money, you can still find those ICOs with potential. When you find a good ICO,

[thaoco.codai865]

I think that not all ICOs are so bad and in some of them you can invest money, but you need to carefully select a project and everything to check out, his team and other aspects.

[coin-investor]

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 but there are a lot of successful ICO that started with no product or platform at all but they go on to become one of the top coin in the market, if the ICO is legit and good it is ok to invest in their Ico if they can come out with a useful platform that people will want to invest on it.

[husanlarisa]

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.

Yes, a product shows that the team is really working and we may trust in it.
Mostly, when there's no product, it's a higher probability that team will fail or project is a scam.
Hopefully, I don't participate in ICOs, because it's a highly dangerous.
Better to buy market.

[uwouw0]

Most of the successful ICOs had a complete product behind them. Ideas can be interesting but no one knows how the implementation will be done. I also feel that one should invest in ICOs having a product backing them.

[blissben930]

we do have to consider a lot when wanting to invest in a product including an ico product. because now this investment is also very vulnerable. better we are equally patient to see the ico review is good or not

[opeakande]

That is right. No product ICO to me is like a market with not goods to sell. How can you claim you want to conduct an ICO when you project does not have a product to offer? Although there are series of tokens with now ICO nowadays and they turn out great because the have products to offey

[la.sala]

this is a wonderful overview and its actually what I keep telling my friends, working product is one of the criteria i always look for whenever i want  to invest in an ICO. no working product no investing for me.

[haipzh99999]

I think that's a good statement. a good and big ICO should have a clear direction. Including also proves its achievement in real. Not just a work plan or project plan. But if it is realized in the form of a product or something like that I think it will be more convincing. Society will also be easier to believe. rather than a project that only pledges this promise, but there is no real evidence.

[PeterCarlos]

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 to this. Companies with already made products are the ones to watch out, the don't depend on our funds to start working rather need them to buy sophisticated tools for empowering their platform  operate on the blockchain.

[darkr]

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.

The popularity of ICO has certainly helped to bring attention to the blockchain sphere. The amount of funds collected through ICO worldwide is more than $ 6 billion over the last seven months. That's great result.

[magaramged3f2]

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.

There are good companies without a product, but such companies are very difficult to find, because now there are a lot of scam projects.

[Stormyblue]

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.

The product or service that the project offers is usually the first thing that every investor look out for. So the product of the project must be real and the vision must be feasible.
Preexisting companies usually do well with ICOs beacise they may already have recognition and this ensures trust.

[hihitao50]

ICO with a product in development are usually safer but sometimes also ICO still with "idea on paper" can be very profitable if the idea is brillant and project is valid...

[inding]

Maybe some exchanges' tokens are still a good choice, because the exchange is a very profitable institution, and their tokens can be distributed, so the exchange's tokens are usually not too bad.

[Godpikin]

This is quite true. How would an ICO hit the space without something to offer? How do they intend to market? What product are the marketing? Once an ICO like that is spotted, never waste your energy to invest at all...

[kaylinmaxx]

I agree, I only invest into ICOs that have some sort of a working model as I can see what is going on. I would advise others to do this as well. Working product icos are the best to invest into