80% of ICOs are Scams

[Lilandra2006]

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 ...

I believe that 8% of ICO described above, this is the gold mine for investors at the moment and in the near future. You do not need to be a genius to understand that blockchain will change the world and make it more simple and effective.

[saycryptohello]

this is still a normal percentage of projects that are developing and launching their project, but of course, there are many projects that remain only titles

[Benarand]

This is complete nonsense. Recently, a study was conducted of all the launched ICO projects, then according to statistics about 18% are considered scammers. If it were the opposite, the cryptocurrency would not exist, people would stop believing in it.

[stasiulman]

In a smart contract, ICO conditions are formulated, may contain vulnerabilities or deliberate hidden conditions. Quite often, the presence of even limiting norms is better than their complete absence. This position is justified by the fact that the lack of legislative regulation predetermines the expansion of the limits of the discretion of law enforcement agencies.
Not 80% scams, less than 20% according to experts rate.

[Auto756]

Now less than 80% of scam projects.  Now a lot of projects that have not reached the soft cap.

[lelangsabun]

yeah many of ICOs right now are scams, that really awful to knowing it when many of people are really getting intrested to make ico are destroyed by their plan

[EL-NIDO]

Many ICOs are scam already and also many have failed. Most of them are just money grab. To do reasearch before participate in an ICO is a very important thing. Also reading the whitepaper and check the background of the team.

[BeruchN]

Wouldn't be surprised if it was more than 80%.

But yeah, a lot of ICOs are unfortunately scammy nowadays so this is why we have to take the 'quality over quantity' approach when it comes to ICOs.

[qomariah95]

Wouldn't be surprised if it was more than 80%.

But yeah, a lot of ICOs are unfortunately scammy nowadays so this is why we have to take the 'quality over quantity' approach when it comes to ICOs.

I personally think there is still a scam ICO but not all ico is also a scam. There are still many ico that have good potential. You could have seen some nice ico in bountyhive. Therefore many ico which I think is very potential like ico Velix.ID

[ronnis.gomes]

We should be aware as there are many scam projects, but I am not sure about the quantity.

[xbiv2]

80% of ICOs are Scams

100%

[Yudai]

Wouldn't be surprised if it was more than 80%.

But yeah, a lot of ICOs are unfortunately scammy nowadays so this is why we have to take the 'quality over quantity' approach when it comes to ICOs.

You are definitely right. Most of the ICO are scam but if you joined an ICO that is not scam, it is definitely a huge hit for the participants.

[hardalisas]

I agree with you that Most of the altcoins will die sooner or later.
Don't forget that there will be some altcoins that will become huge success.
Just do your own research and find these golden coins.

[mstfprcn]

yes agreed, so i am just invested to neo icos, nep5 tokens seems more trustfull than erc20. shw, efx, qlc, asura are great examples for this.

[KobeBriant 24]

I do not think that this is 100% accurate after all.
There are a lot of projects who end up scamming their investors because of bad manage of their funds, but nothing more.

[jokerblack]

Now there really is a lot of scam projects, but it seems to me less than 80%.  I think about 30% of scam projects.

[miejokky]

Of the approximately 200 bounty companies I've been involved in, only a few can be called scams. They were created for the purpose of deception. The rest were in various degrees successful, but scams, I would not call them.

[trudovik]

This is really a very terrible statistics that continues to move further in this direction and no one wants to create anything to change this, even the SEC that integrated KYC AML can not in any way affect this scam

[ROMANALADIN]

Satis Group LLC is a New York firm that calls itself the leading ICO consulting company. The company's research begins with the separation of all analyzed public placements into several groups: "fraudulent," "unsuccessful," "dead," "falling," "promising," and "successful." Based on this classification, the researchers found that 81% of all ICOs are "fraudulent", 6% are "unsuccessful", 5% are "dead", and 8% are ultimately on the stock exchange

[kkerrex]

Scam was and will be, as long as there are people, unfortunately, and even the rules of 100% guarantee will not be that you do not fall for money or waste your time. From the scam projects can not be saved, except for developers, no one knows this and at the time of collecting money no one will know.