Would you Invest in Great ICOs but Anonymous Team?

[shone08]

Obviously, the term “Great ICO” is subjective, but let’s say that ICO has an excellent concept and product. They even have steady and growing stream of profit and revenue (and can be verified.) They also have big names and notable investors and experts supporting the project. However, the catch is that they are anonymous like the founder of Bitcoin. None in the public would be able to meet or see any of the team members. Would you still invest in this kind of ICO?

Anonymous team or not it always risky to invest in some ico project because 60% of them turn to scam and failed to success to the market.
A great project need a real developer and product if they want to survive in crypto world. If the team are legit even they are anonymous and have intension to create great project then I will go and invest in that project risky always in the market.

[1714122157]

1714122157

[1714122157]

1714122157

[1714122157]

1714122157

[allcryptominer]

Me personally would never invest if the team is anonymous. My resoning is, if you are collecting/raising money then investors need to know who they give their money too.

[DarkBullet]

That sounds super risky and a gamble. Everybody can manipulate a person using sweet talks or sugar coating right? I say no to invest to a platform if their team members are anonymous. There are lots of ICO around that offers greater service and a team member who are willing to risk their names to get their investors trust. Try investing to an altcoin that are listed in coinmarketcap, that are more secured than investing to an ICO.

[desi92]

Obviously, the term “Great ICO” is subjective, but let’s say that ICO has an excellent concept and product. They even have steady and growing stream of profit and revenue (and can be verified.) They also have big names and notable investors and experts supporting the project. However, the catch is that they are anonymous like the founder of Bitcoin. None in the public would be able to meet or see any of the team members. Would you still invest in this kind of ICO?

Investing in such a project is an obvious risk. But if he promises a huge profit and is really great, then you can take a chance. I would invest in such a project the amount that I can afford to lose myself. It's kind of a venture investment.

As the team is anonymous, i dont think you can not make sure that the project is great and promissing.
Need to know the team as well to make sure they can promiss the huge profit in the future.

[nhoj25]

Obviously, the term “Great ICO” is subjective, but let’s say that ICO has an excellent concept and product. They even have steady and growing stream of profit and revenue (and can be verified.) They also have big names and notable investors and experts supporting the project. However, the catch is that they are anonymous like the founder of Bitcoin. None in the public would be able to meet or see any of the team members. Would you still invest in this kind of ICO?

It is risky and possibly scam. If a team is unwilling to identify itself, token buyers should be very cautious about contributing to the project. While there may be valid reasons to desire this privacy, it is far more likely that their purposes are nefarious

[Crypto_trader87]

I think that was very risky for now since more and more hackers and scammers already around and they are using crypto currency as a beat to encourage more investors then scam. If you refer like satoshi did to bitcoin that was a long time ago and more people still still know about crypto currency.

[Briella18]

if I am in that position then I will search a lot of information about the ICO, if ICO is good, although his team is anonymous then I will follow the ICO

[doyayipaku]

I do not think if ico is managed by an anonymous team will attract investors. Investors need to understand how a product development team works. Bitcoin is the exception.

[sazon84]

When I invest in ICO, I first look at the composition of the project team, on their merits, past projects.  Therefore, the anonymity of the team is very troubling!  What is the reason to hide their names?  If they are very famous, they could make an additional PR by their own names.  But on the other hand, plus that they do not show frontmen.  It is important for to look at everything else in the project, and how the team goes to communicate.

[expert4knowledge]

That would be pretty stupid, when you know that even with a team shown it can be dangerous, no team shown is out of the question

[danjonbit]

If you say they have good concept, good white paper or even have a good road map at the end it is just a paper.!
there are sooo many ICOs right now that have it all but goes anonymous, and all end up as a scam!
So on me, I surely dont want to invest in ICOs when I dont know whose holding my investments! hope all are aware on it!

[antonio88s]

I think it still great to invest since we can't meet the team because the idea and product is real and can be verified. In some investment I don't care about I can meet the team or not but I always look the idea or product is great or not and have a future or not.

[Regar]

i still want to invest in "Great ICOs" of course even the team are anonymous , because how it can be a great ICOs if it is not a good project? but, still if it is have a transparent team it will be more cool.

[Fesatmas]

I will not spend my money on great ICOs with a Anonymous team. That team is the same as a suspicious team who run the ICOs. However the ICO rating we do not know what will happen later they will very easily eliminate the money of its investors.

[dilandanmilea]

Yes, why not? If there is already real evidence of profit flows to investors it does not matter.

[SamboNZ]

I will not invest in it because the team behind it needs to be good and trust worthy although most of the Ico's are just too risky to invest in. But known or anonymous teams/ members are just likely the same because it will all depend wheter the Ico will succeed or not.

[almtu]

Investors look for the assurance not of teams or whatsoever but just an assurance not putting the money in the wrong place. Personally I would invest if everything you stated is on the project then that project is true if it is proven already in the real world.

[Singwala]

It's risky, Even if it's a great ICO, it's their plan to collect money and steal it from investors. It's hard to trust now because we do not know what's going to happen so we should be careful. So its no for me.

[sourish]

Obviously, the term “Great ICO” is subjective, but let’s say that ICO has an excellent concept and product. They even have steady and growing stream of profit and revenue (and can be verified.) They also have big names and notable investors and experts supporting the project. However, the catch is that they are anonymous like the founder of Bitcoin. None in the public would be able to meet or see any of the team members. Would you still invest in this kind of ICO?

The kind of positives you are providing, make it hard to ignore the ico just because of anonymity, for comparing it to satoshi, you have yourself answered on behalf of almost everyone, as facts speak louder than words.

[acell101]

Obviously, the term “Great ICO” is subjective, but let’s say that ICO has an excellent concept and product. They even have steady and growing stream of profit and revenue (and can be verified.) They also have big names and notable investors and experts supporting the project. However, the catch is that they are anonymous like the founder of Bitcoin. None in the public would be able to meet or see any of the team members. Would you still invest in this kind of ICO?

Apparently no,  Some of the anonymous ICO is  a scam, though bitcoin is also anonymous but, bitcoin was tested and proven already to be a good and honest digital currency, while ICO has a long way to go.. So if ever I encounter an anonymous ICO I would probably not invest on it.