Do you pay attention on advisors when choosing a good ICO project?

[deviltasha]

I think if ICO has strong team advisers are not so important, but it makes sense when some experienced people are involved.

[xPASTELx]

I don't think advisors is the most significant criteria, anyone can be paid to say good things, every aspect of an ICO project is important. reading through the white paper makes you know more about the ICO and whether its worth investing in. if you listen o advisors and take action based on their views then there is a high chance of failure.

[xKARELx]

it is best to look at the idea, not the faces .. well, it is desirable that the company had at least more or less well-established people who can and do want to achieve their result

[kolesozw]

Actually I don't pay any attention to advisers on any ICO because their faces are almost always unknown for me, I guess and for the rest of regular users. Maybe I will make a quick run over their working placed but that's all.

For me most important is ICO to have MVP or being close to MVP. Or the conception must be extraordinary.

[Andruha1993]

Lately all the projects try to attract best faces onboard for their projects, I started noticing that they are almost the same everywhere. What things are more important for you? Are advisors one of the most significant criteria?

When choosing a project, I draw a lot of criteria, because for me everything is important and certainly one of the main criteria is the project advisor.