80% of ICOs are Scams

[Milana Gerson]

At this stage of the development of the industry, the scam is not more than 30% of the projects. The fact that projects are poorly developed does not mean that they are not viable.

[gathingbrus]

Because there are no rules governing the ICO, more and more new ICOs are emerging every day. I also feel that most of them end up failing or even scam. But of course some of them still have a legit ICO. It seems there needs to be a regulation on ICO in order to minimize scam or shit coin.

[chengyinoing]

One of the world's largest block chain platform etheric fang founder Joseph Lubin has said that most of the ICO project are lying, and said "these copycats, do not give investors to create real value"; Brad Garlinghouse, the founder of the digital currency, also believes that ICO is now in a regulatory grey area and that the government will soon introduce policies to regulate the market.

[BlackPanda]

Because there are no rules governing the ICO, more and more new ICOs are emerging every day. I also feel that most of them end up failing or even scam. But of course some of them still have a legit ICO. It seems there needs to be a regulation on ICO in order to minimize scam or shit coin.

Yes it is because there are so many ICO that appear every day, even I see one day there are about 10 new ICO. This is certainly a very remarkable thing, but as you can tell, there are many ICO Projects that end in failure. yes there needs to be a regulation that regulates it all, because with the regulation it is not arbitrary an ICO made. The ICO project is interesting, but again if that ICO is just a garbage then it would be useless.

[Gribovski]

Now there are a lot of scam projects, but they are less than 80%.  I advise you to be careful.

[TheSmo]

it is this percentage of scaffolds that occurs when projects have collected money, but have not fulfilled their obligations to investors

[jeron31]

Maybe not scams but i a gree that 80%+ of icos have no potential to achieve something big.

[aizkicaumania]

Most ICOs are fraudulent. This is why we should all be aware of the ICO we are joining. Do some research first. Try to check out the ICO team / developers and their ratings on websites like icobench or icorating

Although bitcoin values from day to day are reduced but people sell less coin value. So they have less chance to make a profit

Hence the bottleneck in the Bitcoin and crypto markets, many ICOs have difficulty getting enough investment in bitcoin

[dmty.0809]

If indeed many ico are scam, how the fate of the bounty hunter? is this the end of the bitcoin hunters? And how to know a scam project?

[xyzone]

Not all ICO scams. it depends on the ico developer whether it works hard in ico project development and promotion team so that when token sales very good.

[skiorf]

Yes, many ICOs are scams, but I really don't think that the number percentage is around 80%. I think it may be fifty-fifty. But, if that is true based on the real data, we must be more careful. It is the time to choose the most trusted ICO to participate. I'm sure that there are still many good ICOs with a real product. therefore, it is better to analyze them carefully based on the data and our research of the information on their web, whitepaper, and community.

[Sir Legend]

Can be said like that, currently there are hundreds of live ICOs, and with a very tight competition of course makes all the projects difficult to achieve the target, and this is what used a lot of ICO to look for big profits.

[teddyppap]

Saw this study on twitter... https://twitter.com/Zeex_me/status/978981735101878272

I've seen a lot of people asking about how many legit ICOs there are, so I thought I'd share

Quote from the article: "The study begins by breaking down ICOs into 6 groups: Scam, Failed, Gone Dead, Dwindling, Promising, Successful. “On the basis of the above classification,” they wrote, “we found that approximately 81% of ICO’s were Scams, ~6% Failed, ~5% had Gone Dead, and ~8% went on to trade on a exchange.”

"Scams were defined by researchers as “Any project that expressed availability of [an] ICO investment (through a website publishing, ANN thread, or social media posting with a contribution address), did not have/had no intention of fulfilling project development duties with the funds, and/or was deemed by the community (message boards, website or other online information) to be a scam.”


DYOR people ...

Scam was identified by the researchers as "Any project that demonstrates the availability of ICO investments (via web publishing, topic ANN, or postings on social networks with contributor addresses), It is not intended to complete the task of developing the project with funds, and / or be considered fraudulent by the community (bulletin boards, websites or other online information). " Few studies, however, have attempted to quantify the opinion of the community, and this may be their attempt.

[terzy]

Those are devastating results! The study defines Scam ICOs as those that expressed usual availability like any standard ICO with no apparent red flags during the normal promotional activities. The Failed ICOs were those which managed to raise full/partial funding during the ICO process, but they did not complete the entire process and were abandoned mid-way, and/or refunded the investors’ money due to inadequate ICO funding. The Gone Dead also managed to raise money as required through the standard ICO process but failed to list on the exchanges for the necessary trading due to other challenges and complexities.

[TYPEcoin]

Unfortunately,  I feel like the percentage of fake projects is even worse and looks like 95 to 5 which is why you should invest only after a very proper reserach of a project.

[Good Bo]

Its very big percentage about 80%. I dont think its true amount although i dont know the real answer. I think only a few ICOs are true scams where they only set out to steal money and run. The other is legit but just they can not reach hype and soft cap. If they are scam, they will run with the money if they can nkt reach soft cap but in reality, there are many ico return the money if they dont reach the soft cap. What is this meaning? I think they are legit but they collect not enough attention from investors.

[btctop1]

I think the percentage does not exceed 30-40. 80 percent is very much. And in the case of 30-40 much depends on the further actions of the team. Immediately weighed the label "scam" because the project did not collect the softcap, it's not entirely correct.

[gabmen]

If indeed many ico are scam, how the fate of the bounty hunter? is this the end of the bitcoin hunters? And how to know a scam project?

Though there are a lot of scams definitely with icos, I think 80% is a bit too much. There are as much legitimate icos with real.projects as those that are just after investors's money. Legitimate icos can generate real money for investors so we have to be thorough in studying which ico we want to place our money on

[KTChampions]

Maybe not scams but i a gree that 80%+ of icos have no potential to achieve something big.

This proportion is fair for start-ups in any field, so in fact the situation here is the same as in other areas. Because of the relative freedom and small volume of regulation, all processes occur quickly and efficiently. But the media prefer to focus on failure. But it seems to me that those people who have already met with the crypto and the corresponding ideology will not let the media deceive themselves.

[steve321]

I don't believe in the theory of deception about crypto currencies and especially ICO. ICO is a new way to raise funds and make encrypted money useful for tasks. We must understand nature and see where these new economies take us.