56% of ICOs fail and it's OK

[agga]

According to recent recearch, 56% of 2017 ICOs fail. And you know what? That's OK. 90% of startups fail but the rest grow so high that they compensate venture investors 90% loss and provide very high profits.

So the basic rules with ICOs are very simple:
1. Do the research before you invest
2. Diversify, diversify, diversify
3. Ignore news and HODL

Of course, the news should not be ignored. Well, as it was said above, they should be from reliable sources. In general I agree with the author of the topic.

[andrey755]

According to recent recearch, 56% of 2017 ICOs fail. And you know what? That's OK. 90% of startups fail but the rest grow so high that they compensate venture investors 90% loss and provide very high profits.

So the basic rules with ICOs are very simple:
1. Do the research before you invest
2. Diversify, diversify, diversify
3. Ignore news and HODL

It is correct that nothing terrible, in place of these 56% came even more new ones, which can also disappear. The market is a tough competition and if you can not show anything and give a new one you just throw it away.

[martin1221]

Yes mate,  even with so many icos that are not legit, doing our own research is a good way to hunt those good ico. For example, if many investors are there in that ico, that is a good sign that its good to invest there. But doing your own research is very important mate

[maxamus]

According to recent recearch, 56% of 2017 ICOs fail. And you know what? That's OK. 90% of startups fail but the rest grow so high that they compensate venture investors 90% loss and provide very high profits.

So the basic rules with ICOs are very simple:
1. Do the research before you invest
2. Diversify, diversify, diversify
3. Ignore news and HODL

Of course, the news should not be ignored. Well, as it was said above, they should be from reliable sources. In general I agree with the author of the topic.

This article can be true that's why we need to choose the right ICO because we can see new ICO everyday but we have to use our consciousness to select the correct ICO as anyone can start it with fake credentials to scam new.users by promising huge return on little investment

[senopratama]

last year the ICO is indeed still a corpulent impressed playfully but for the moment the ICO more serious and proven true in real payments. This is quite a concern and made investors keen to invest in ICO. increasingly in the future, this will make the ICO getting crowded and real projects will be more and more.

[LightSide]

Many big companies with history starting ICO...

[SeXy]

Most ICOs, like most start-ups, share one problem - a bad idea that nobody needs in the world

[iconoclast]

How you determine if an ICO "fails" is highly subjective. You are investing in startups that can take years before they really start to get traction. If you are counting ICO's as failures just because it is trading below the price you paid a month after the TGE, I think you may be premature in your judgement. I judge success by how well management are executing their plan and sticking to the timeline.

[Geor]

It is quite normal. Let's see, how many now around the different ICO. Every day their list gets bigger and bigger and what many fall is the norm. So be prepared that a certain percentage of your investment may fall.

[Freezingel]

According to recent recearch, 56% of 2017 ICOs fail. And you know what? That's OK. 90% of startups fail but the rest grow so high that they compensate venture investors 90% loss and provide very high profits.

So the basic rules with ICOs are very simple:
1. Do the research before you invest
2. Diversify, diversify, diversify
3. Ignore news and HODL

That number is lower than i expected and it's interesting to see what criteria they used to claim that the ico fail or not, below ico price or something else. I agree that we have to do some research before putting our money into some icos and it's not recommended to go all in on something. But i also think that we also have to read news to position ourself and can prevent loss because of some bad news.

[toddy47]

What is the defintion of fail? I wouldn't have even thought we had gotten to the stage where startups in Crypto have collapsed. I know many have had no progress, but they are able to string investors along for 12-18 months before abandoning.

[OriginTrain]

Right, most angel investors expect some 90% of their investments to fail. 10% they expect 1000%+ returns on. Nothing wrong with 56% failing.

[Nalbo]

Not necessarily for everyone. The one investing only on failing ICOs will have a loss and those finding out those gems would be in higher profit. So, it all sums up to the time you spend researching about the company you are investing on. Don't believe just what they show but try to find the facts using other sources about the legitimacy of the info they provide.

[xPASTELx]

According to recent recearch, 56% of 2017 ICOs fail. And you know what? That's OK. 90% of startups fail but the rest grow so high that they compensate venture investors 90% loss and provide very high profits.

So the basic rules with ICOs are very simple:
1. Do the research before you invest
2. Diversify, diversify, diversify
3. Ignore news and HODL

Of course, the news should not be ignored. Well, as it was said above, they should be from reliable sources. In general I agree with the author of the topic.

Most fail due to poor project plans and very unreasonable goals while others were just money grab plots. its true that researching well gives you an upper hand as you get to understand properly what you are dealing with

[chanpinchen]

The crypto community is in desperate need of some form of control, so if the big players in the crypto community can come together and work out with relevant authorities to impose some checks and regulations on new ICO, there should have fewer ICO failures as these requirements would stamp out lots of scams and weak ICO. As a result this will enhance investors' confidence and encourage more investors to crypto market.

[orka39]

Yeah, that's really true. I agree with you. I think it is best to invest in 7-9 ico, because thus risks become even less.

The risk become smaller and have more chance to win because we have more than 1 basket.
If people try this old trick, there is no more people will suicide because of losing in investing.

[BeruchN]

Another reason to take into consideration is that a lot of ICOs are scams, and that's why they fail.

So, that's why the % shouldn't scare you.

[nonlinearboy]

Yeah, that's really true. I agree with you. I think it is best to invest in 7-9 ico, because thus risks become even less.

That is true for investing more and the risk will go down, but the important thing is that there should be more than 50% of the ico projects get successful, or if the percentage is less than 50%, the more you invest in, the more you loss your money, this is a simple math calculation.

[AlphaWolf]

The last time I read it was 47% so I guess the failure rate has increased. None the less with the amount of copycat ICOs being launched no shit that these projects are failing. Many ICOs launching currently are nothing but ponzi schemes. One needs to do a thorough research before investing his money in ICOs now a days.

[ask]

Its a nice amount that they are success. Check the forex market 90% of people losing money on forex and this system continue to work.
We are doing great 56% is a nice ratio to keep up developing ICOs until 80% loss