ICO Reviews, trust them or NOT?

[talenthone.io]

Video Reviews, ICO mailers, Listing websites, Telegram Groups, Can you trust them?

Before expressing my opinion about this I would like to mention that the statement made by me is not regarding any particular blogger, vlogger or a listing website. These are all my individual opinions.

Coming back to our topic. I strongly believe that

Most of the ICO reviews made by vloggers on youtube, bloggers on websites, ICO review websites and Telegram channels and groups created by so called “Gurus” have absolutely no value associated with them, are “useless”.

Here is why I think these reviews mislead people more than they help:

They are all paid reviews

The fact that most of the reviewers take money from the company to write about them makes the first point. Why would you write bad about somebody who is paying you to write. That would be best idea to close your shop, isn’t it? :-) lol!. They get money to attract people to make an investment. It’s their job or business model and if they have to be successful they have to deliver well on that.

A good article or a video is the one which brings more people to buy the product

Think about this, A good review article or a youtube video has nothing to do with the success of the product. Usually, Success of the product will come long after you had watched the video and most of the time when you will see the result of your investment you would have forgotten the research you did to figure out if the ICO was good or bad. But, If the video or that content is not entertaining or engaging enough you would not like it which would mean less business to the paying party. To summarise, Reviews are 100% focused towards engagement rather than success of the product.

Have you ever seem a player who represent his country for football as well as Rugby?
Most of the reviewers will speak and write about every industry, product originating from every country, product using every technology and with the token economics as difficult to understand that a qualified economist will struggle. I mean, They say and write those things for which even Warren Buffet would have said “I don’t know” :-) but these guys know everything ( I don’t know why I am thinking about my wife while writing this content :-)).

They should be themselves made billions by now

Can you imagine a person knowing so much about the whole business field that he has a following of 10,000 or 100,000 people and not making billions. I mean, He is like the person who touches anything and that turns out to be gold, Isn’t it?. Don’t get me wrong, They make very good money from the companies who want them to attract traffic for their websites. The point is, A person who is super expert of a segment like “blockchain ICO” (It’s true that many ICOs have given more than 100,000X returns) must have invested his $500 into those 100s of successful ICOs, right? :-). Somehow, That’s not the case and they keep on freelancing or working for very big marketing companies.

So, To whom should you listen? Who can give you the correct information? How can you trust that information?

I will share my thoughts about it shortly. If I am thinking on correct lines or saying something completely incorrect, I would let you to decide.

In the meantime, Please checkout our ICO at www.talenthon.io, We are a very genuine team based out of UK trying to disrupt an industry which is desperately looking for change with a unique vision. Invest if you like the whole business proposition.

[1714506673]

1714506673

[1714506673]

1714506673

[1714506673]

1714506673

[1714506673]

1714506673

[VasiloviKola]

I am looking at www.icoguide.com and it seems that they have very realistic reviews.

[gostop]

These ICO rating websites do not think they are very objective. They may give you a better rating when you spend some money. So I think the key to investing in ICO is not to refer to the ICO rating website, but to rely on your own experience and judgment.

[OuterTech]

IMO, do not over-reliance on any ICO review page. There should be an objective comparison between ICO review websites such as ICObench, ICOreview, and ICOrate to find the most accurate results. Each site has its own consequences and should aggregate websites to produce results according to their own wishes.

[sourish]

Isnt this what commercials and adverts do all the time, the intention being to reach consumers, the decision and the choice, whether through experience, gullibility or reviews, is all our own responsibility.

[sud]

Never trust someone elses reviews 100%, you should always do your own research to check the facts before you invest money in a project. Those popular ICO sites mostly highlights those projects that pay them for promotion. Check this recent article about ICObench and their experts, it will open your eyes about this business - https://www.tokenicide.com/opinion/icobench-warmer/

So the point is that you should check opinions from many sources and make your own conclusions.

[Tytanowy Janusz]

Guys your research is worth the same as those payed rewievs on icoreviews pages. Why?

You need to realise that you will base on whitepaper/team/your expirience/code.

1- whitepaper - do you realise that you can write there anything? literally anything? You can read there that they wil do that and that and that in 1 month 2 month 3 month but is it true? Or maby they copied whitepaper of other currency not even changeing it and not going to do what they write there.

2- team - You dont know those people. Even if they work in google, they coomade firefox or java it dasnt metter. It is possible that those people dont even know that they are in team. Those name was just put on website.

3- your expirience - How many ico did you see from begining to hit market and 1 year after to see wich comes to be scam, moon or consodates much lower then ico price? You are realy that experienced to put money into something that can be in majority scam?

4- code - well i'm not that smart to see if code is ok. I think that 99% of you guys too. Also most of ico are just concept without code.


If ICO pay for rewiev to ICOrewiews pages at least they can affort that they are putting money to invest money. It makes it a little more safe to invest i guess Icoreviews page also puts his neck under that rewiev. After few scam reviews for 5 out of 5 point makes it unreliable.

[Soccernet344]

Do not depend on ico review sites. Do your own due diligence to find out projects you believe in

[Tytanowy Janusz]

Do not depend on ico review sites. Do your own due diligence to find out projects you believe in

As you write in this topic i assume you readed whats in it. Tell me then how would you do your own review seeing my post abow. Or you just jump here to write anything to make your activity better?

[Jeff-reY]

Indeed, it seems that many ICO reviews are paid reviews.
This is not fair, so I also like to research myself to get as much information as possible about the project.
I use the sites more to discover some new icos, as we always say DYOR. 

[danbitcoin1]

Literally 95% of people are just doing it for the cash, even people on here for bounties. The big websites are making serious cash, so normally best not to trust them.

[askmecrypto]

I agree with the OP on most of the points, but I will not say that everyone is a shiller.
IMO, investing in any ICO from the paid reviews is actually the worst idea to do so. But again, these are the advertisements and hence paid reviews. Treat them as an add campaign, get the news about it and do your own research. Dont rely on what the so called "Gurus" says , instead spend a little time in reading the whitepaper, do research about the people involved in the project as in TEAM/Advisors/etc.

[An0nyMoose]

Everything in the cryptocurrency market right now seems like it is paid for so as long as they are getting their money these people who are doing the reviews will write something good and promote an ICO even if they know it's not a good one. This is where the concept of do your own research comes in. After you're done doing your research, you can decide to compare it to the reviews on the ICO and see if they correspond but mainly, your decision on an ICO should be based on your own research and what you have found out for yourself.

[chris200x9]

So, To whom should you listen? Who can give you the correct information? How can you trust that information?

These days it is very hard to believe any reviews on a site or youtube channel because most of them are paid reviews. If you want to see the real reviews then you should visit to the forum where normal people are discussing it there you may get real opinions about the product.

I have stopped wasting my time in researching the good ICO to invest instead buy them when markets are down at same price or slightly higher price or even lower than the ICO price.

If you know any person personally who is an investment adviser and he/she can give you a advice then you can trust that information to some extent otherwise no.

[udayantha11]

for the last year i have invest based on ICOdrops , its the no1 platform to see a ranked ICO. they are very independent. no paid listing. i invested Wabi , Power ledger , libra, Credits.

those are brilliant ico's and best Return of investment gave to me

[chickenfacts]

I think we shouldn't trust them at all because most of them are paid for reviewing those ICOs.

[Pa1n]

Never cant trust %100. But if you research these all topics  you have a result for idea.Than, its individual decision for people.

[Harriti]

Don't trust any sources which you think can help you finding out good ICO project to invest in . You should know that they don't list ICO project in their system for free ). All ICO project need to pay for these websites or groups to make their ICO project listed with high rate . Just find out good ICO project by yourself is the best option IMO

[plontacia]

Some of the information can be taken into account, these articles are written by analysts, but they are also people and they can also be wrong, so rely more on yourself

[itsv]

I used to check icobench but lately some projects get ratings likes 5/5 or 4.9/5 which surely depicts paid rating and reviews.. infact if you search you will find ico's that have bounty campaigns allocated for reviews on icobench or other ico tracking websites so now old school method is back you have do some digging on your own check the white papers .. check for plagiarism in white paper see some reviews from the trusted youtubers (NOT SUPPOMAN) and eventually you will some really good projects.

[Archibaldos123]

Off-topic, but who participates in the bethereum.com project?  In my opinion, he has a great future!  In the ICO topic you need to be very careful, now there are a lot of projects of deceivers 

[frowsiter]

I knew it that they are paid once! Off course who would do that job for free anyway as everyone here is to earn bucks for themselves. ICO reviews are literally paid one and this can be proven from the fact that every other ICO that I see on the forum has rating over 4.5/5 or whatever scale they use but its always more than 90% good auditable score. Thats the fishy thing there. If they all had the same score then why we get scammed in the alter stages of the ICO? Why such high rates people run away with our money. Because they make investment on the ICO rating, attract people to put their money.

[gabagandalf]

I did not know that. i thought the reviews on the ico rating sites are legal reviews and not paid reviews. now i see these websites with different eyes.  

[Cryptoboss255]

Always do your own research before investing in any project . remember everyone is fighting for their own pocket

[HadadC]

Nowadays , I cant trust any ICO.They are usually bothering.At the end of ICO , you just surprised.For me , I dont trust them.

[Bim abk]

I believe with some big websites that review an ICO project some of their analysis is successful although not all of them. maybe for better things you should analyze yourself about ico. but you must understand how to analyze it

[Kettle255]

They are good to.an extent but I do not trust them

[googs84]

Off course they are just cheesy reviews and nothing. Thats why I keep telling everyone and my friends also who are always very confident about such ICO reviewing sites and thats why I dont like it. I tried to save them from the scams like that many times and now they thank me for that today. To be frank you just make your own research about the projects and then take the step forward to invest our money. I mean they are getting paid for it but we are loosing our money for the scams and illegal projects. So its better to think twice, thrice and then make decisions about the ICO's. No need to depend upon them at all.

[blu.storm]

i to choose a new ico i entrust myself to the site icobench.com where i find realistic and truthful reviews, so far has always made me choose well

[MISS_nSTASSY]

There is no surprise that all videos about ICO are paid. Just because if you run YouTube channel, monetizing it only by built-in instruments you got much less than if you advertise projects to your subscribes.
And every youtuber understands this, somebody earlier, somebody after time. And all we see is bounty material. But there is nothing criminal if the person who advertise it did the research and decided to invest in it.

[lelangsabun]

sometimes ico reviews are just doing a review just by a project plan after all, and with a few people to vote the review, so at least read it all with your effort and jsut belive yourself and your data

[Vova.vova]

I’m a modern and successful person, therefore I think that using ICOs is a good investment in my future. I use ICO Vireo. In my opinion, this project is very safe and promising!

[Xelpherpolis]

I do not believe rating sites, because I believe that these estimates are easy to buy and people with money can manipulate it. Recently I read an interesting article about the popular icobench site with exposure. I think there's more truth to it.

[idioma1]

Trust to yourself. Before perticipating in any ICO I often deeple research the project. My advice is to pay attention whether the projects has a ready-made product as it is some kind of guarentee that it is not a scam as well as  long termed activity before ICO. It is an indicator that team goes stright to thir goal and will not give up.

[ICOBountyPrograms]

it's like watching the news, make you want of it but do your own research. Can't just take people's word for it

[Bolivar_Tony]

I am looking at www.icoguide.com and it seems that they have very realistic reviews.

You can use this site: tokenmarket.net. There is an ongoing list of ICOs and many ICOs are on the way. There is a lot of analysis in this site and I think this is a secure site

[CryptoJoop]

People are even getting paid to review ICO's on ICOBench. Obviously, not all the reviews are paid, but the incentives for both company and reviewer are too high to remain 100% integrity. Other ICO rating sites I hardly even look at, your own research and gut feeling is worth way more than somebody's (paid) opinion. Read WP, research team and maybe follow some people who have proven to have made the right calls before and their advice has been proven solid.

[Dinsdendo]

I don't trust reviews. because they could have been paid for. I always do my own research and choose a project.

[BZingerB]

I would like to believe that their assessment is really professional and objective.
But experience has shown that projects that gave a bad evaluation fell on the stock exchanges and traded. Projects with high ratings on the contrary, remained on the purse and are not traded anywhere.
I do not know what they are guided by, but I would not trust them blindly.

[zhekinsp]

I don't trust reviews. because they could have been paid for. I always do my own research and choose a project.

Yes,we need to do our own research because it is our money and anyone can be bought so most of them were just paid advertisement for that project so invest on your own risk.If someone really knows the good project then they will invest on them and can be a millionaire.

[Pencha]

Yes they are all corrupt ...

[karramov]

It all depends on the project. If this is not a necessary deception to anyone then all who promote it are deceivers. And if it is a worthy product that all who helps to draw attention in it are worthy respect.

[xOdiumNostrumx]

I have some trusted channels when it comes to deciding if I should invest in the ICO or not. But there is a sea full of shillers and people who are being paid for presenting a project in better light than it deserves to be presented. Avoid most of the Youtube reviewers, those tend to be the worst (with some bright exceptions). 

[ofeefee]

I don't trust ICO reviews. I may use them for an idea, but always do my own research and have my own opinion.
A lot of reviews are made for money and they are not so truthful and honest.

[Loveydovey04]

Though ICO ratings and reviews are the basis of most investors i dont rely on it personally. I have seen how developers boost ICO ratings. Sometimes by pushing the bounty hunters and airdroppers to vote for their ICOs in the ICO rating and reviews site. I was even asked to vote.

[CryptoAlphaStar]

I don't like ICO reviews and ratings because a lot of them are paid and we can't know which are paid and which are not.
I like the ICO aggregtor sites, because they list all the information about the project in a convenient way though.

[rainezerr]

Video Reviews, ICO mailers, Listing websites, Telegram Groups, Can you trust them?

Before expressing my opinion about this I would like to mention that the statement made by me is not regarding any particular blogger, vlogger or a listing website. These are all my individual opinions.

Coming back to our topic. I strongly believe that

Most of the ICO reviews made by vloggers on youtube, bloggers on websites, ICO review websites and Telegram channels and groups created by so called “Gurus” have absolutely no value associated with them, are “useless”.

Here is why I think these reviews mislead people more than they help:

They are all paid reviews

The fact that most of the reviewers take money from the company to write about them makes the first point. Why would you write bad about somebody who is paying you to write. That would be best idea to close your shop, isn’t it? :-) lol!. They get money to attract people to make an investment. It’s their job or business model and if they have to be successful they have to deliver well on that.

A good article or a video is the one which brings more people to buy the product

Think about this, A good review article or a youtube video has nothing to do with the success of the product. Usually, Success of the product will come long after you had watched the video and most of the time when you will see the result of your investment you would have forgotten the research you did to figure out if the ICO was good or bad. But, If the video or that content is not entertaining or engaging enough you would not like it which would mean less business to the paying party. To summarise, Reviews are 100% focused towards engagement rather than success of the product.

Have you ever seem a player who represent his country for football as well as Rugby?
Most of the reviewers will speak and write about every industry, product originating from every country, product using every technology and with the token economics as difficult to understand that a qualified economist will struggle. I mean, They say and write those things for which even Warren Buffet would have said “I don’t know” :-) but these guys know everything ( I don’t know why I am thinking about my wife while writing this content :-)).

They should be themselves made billions by now

Can you imagine a person knowing so much about the whole business field that he has a following of 10,000 or 100,000 people and not making billions. I mean, He is like the person who touches anything and that turns out to be gold, Isn’t it?. Don’t get me wrong, They make very good money from the companies who want them to attract traffic for their websites. The point is, A person who is super expert of a segment like “blockchain ICO” (It’s true that many ICOs have given more than 100,000X returns) must have invested his $500 into those 100s of successful ICOs, right? :-). Somehow, That’s not the case and they keep on freelancing or working for very big marketing companies.

So, To whom should you listen? Who can give you the correct information? How can you trust that information?

I will share my thoughts about it shortly. If I am thinking on correct lines or saying something completely incorrect, I would let you to decide.

In the meantime, Please checkout our ICO at www.talenthon.io, We are a very genuine team based out of UK trying to disrupt an industry which is desperately looking for change with a unique vision. Invest if you like the whole business proposition.

In my own opinion, you should always look at the platform if the ico is really promising or not so in this way you will knew if the coin is really good for long term investment or not depending on the project.

[VenturaBro]

I only trust them if most, if not all, review sites say the same thing.

[BeruchN]

Yes they are all corrupt ...

Most of them are probably bought but I wouldn't go so far as to say they're all corrupt. At least some try to be unbiased.

[Ogman22]

Video Reviews, ICO mailers, Listing websites, Telegram Groups, Can you trust them?

Before expressing my opinion about this I would like to mention that the statement made by me is not regarding any particular blogger, vlogger or a listing website. These are all my individual opinions.

Coming back to our topic. I strongly believe that

Most of the ICO reviews made by vloggers on youtube, bloggers on websites, ICO review websites and Telegram channels and groups created by so called “Gurus” have absolutely no value associated with them, are “useless”.

Here is why I think these reviews mislead people more than they help:

They are all paid reviews

The fact that most of the reviewers take money from the company to write about them makes the first point. Why would you write bad about somebody who is paying you to write. That would be best idea to close your shop, isn’t it? :-) lol!. They get money to attract people to make an investment. It’s their job or business model and if they have to be successful they have to deliver well on that.

A good article or a video is the one which brings more people to buy the product

Think about this, A good review article or a youtube video has nothing to do with the success of the product. Usually, Success of the product will come long after you had watched the video and most of the time when you will see the result of your investment you would have forgotten the research you did to figure out if the ICO was good or bad. But, If the video or that content is not entertaining or engaging enough you would not like it which would mean less business to the paying party. To summarise, Reviews are 100% focused towards engagement rather than success of the product.

Have you ever seem a player who represent his country for football as well as Rugby?
Most of the reviewers will speak and write about every industry, product originating from every country, product using every technology and with the token economics as difficult to understand that a qualified economist will struggle. I mean, They say and write those things for which even Warren Buffet would have said “I don’t know” :-) but these guys know everything ( I don’t know why I am thinking about my wife while writing this content :-)).

They should be themselves made billions by now

Can you imagine a person knowing so much about the whole business field that he has a following of 10,000 or 100,000 people and not making billions. I mean, He is like the person who touches anything and that turns out to be gold, Isn’t it?. Don’t get me wrong, They make very good money from the companies who want them to attract traffic for their websites. The point is, A person who is super expert of a segment like “blockchain ICO” (It’s true that many ICOs have given more than 100,000X returns) must have invested his $500 into those 100s of successful ICOs, right? :-). Somehow, That’s not the case and they keep on freelancing or working for very big marketing companies.

So, To whom should you listen? Who can give you the correct information? How can you trust that information?

I will share my thoughts about it shortly. If I am thinking on correct lines or saying something completely incorrect, I would let you to decide.

In the meantime, Please checkout our ICO at www.talenthon.io, We are a very genuine team based out of UK trying to disrupt an industry which is desperately looking for change with a unique vision. Invest if you like the whole business proposition.

this is a long one though but you are very correct. you have just drawn the thin line between 'review' and 'advertisement'. i like to go with icobench in most cases though they might be not so accurate.

p.s. have you heard about the 'fight' between foever has fallen ceo and icobench review. icobench labelled forever has fallen a scam because it failed to reveal it tokenomics...

[Yasman]

I only trust them if most, if not all, review sites say the same thing.

You shouldn't trust them because there is not that much people looking to help people, they just want to make as much cash as they can. So yea....that's what you should do.

[paxmao]

I would rather not trust any paid review, it is common sense that these are surely going to be biased. I would rather go for ICOs like Qurrex that have independent reviews that are really good.

[LancelotRay]

I trust a select few with good reputations and that try to remain unbiased.

So IMO there are still a few good ones out there.

[Mahanton]

IMO, do not over-reliance on any ICO review page. There should be an objective comparison between ICO review websites such as ICObench, ICOreview, and ICOrate to find the most accurate results. Each site has its own consequences and should aggregate websites to produce results according to their own wishes.

We should not fully rely into those informations or reviews being posted and as you mentioned differentiating or comparing review websites will really took too much time and we know most investors would really be lazy enough not to take such step which is actually helpful.You would able to point out which is biased and which are not but still even you do see informations about the project the final decision would still depend on you as long you don't go all in or fully depend on reviews and just basing with your own knowledge and research then review would just be an add up to justify something.

[jimrome]

You really cannot trust any review sites completely because there are chances that they will be paid to endorse their project, if you are planning to invest in any projects make sure you take time to learn about them, visit their development team telegram channel and as questions according to their development rather than trusting to some reviews.

[AdamRay]

I think it's a good idea to test your ICO projects yourself with your knowledge, as you say most ICO reviewers are hired to PR for those projects. Just refer to their reviews but decide to stay with you because I think the projects they are evaluating are good enough.

[aceptamosbitcoin]

ICO reviews are like commercials lately.  They are not to be trusted, because they are not made in the interest of the investors. If the ICO pays good will have good review.

[fmboyzz]

Not everyone will make positive reviews for money. Reviewers are getting paid for their honest opinion. A review about an ICO by experienced and experts may help to all investors and they can value their investment by it. To maintain a long-term relationship with users, ICO reviewers and rating platforms are doing their best.

[somebadger]

First of all, almost all the ICO reviews are fake, i only trust in a few of them, but sadly, most of them are paid ones (we can not trust in anyone) that is the reason of why i am always doing my own research, i never heard the opinion of anyone else when i have to invest

[dobolspeed3]

I certainly still believe in ICO because not all ICO's are scammers or scams. There are still plenty of good potential ICOs. You can just see in bountyhive many of which ICO is still successful and good. And of course it is a trust. ICO is one of the best investment places if we want to invest long-term.

[saycryptohello]

ICO reviews are like commercials lately.  They are not to be trusted, because they are not made in the interest of the investors. If the ICO pays good will have good review.

But is there any among the rating sites that are as close as possible to the real evaluation of projects?

[Dreamchaser21]

ICO reviews are like commercials lately.  They are not to be trusted, because they are not made in the interest of the investors. If the ICO pays good will have good review.

I see this on some ICO's and when I make my own review it failed for me so basically this is really happening. The better way to know if the project is good is through your own analysis and research, don't trust ICO reviews easily because sometimes its just a hype.

[Huskarls]

Video Reviews, ICO mailers, Listing websites, Telegram Groups, Can you trust them?

Before expressing my opinion about this I would like to mention that the statement made by me is not regarding any particular blogger, vlogger or a listing website. These are all my individual opinions.

Coming back to our topic. I strongly believe that

Most of the ICO reviews made by vloggers on youtube, bloggers on websites, ICO review websites and Telegram channels and groups created by so called “Gurus” have absolutely no value associated with them, are “useless”.

Here is why I think these reviews mislead people more than they help:

They are all paid reviews

The fact that most of the reviewers take money from the company to write about them makes the first point. Why would you write bad about somebody who is paying you to write. That would be best idea to close your shop, isn’t it? :-) lol!. They get money to attract people to make an investment. It’s their job or business model and if they have to be successful they have to deliver well on that.

A good article or a video is the one which brings more people to buy the product

Think about this, A good review article or a youtube video has nothing to do with the success of the product. Usually, Success of the product will come long after you had watched the video and most of the time when you will see the result of your investment you would have forgotten the research you did to figure out if the ICO was good or bad. But, If the video or that content is not entertaining or engaging enough you would not like it which would mean less business to the paying party. To summarise, Reviews are 100% focused towards engagement rather than success of the product.

Have you ever seem a player who represent his country for football as well as Rugby?
Most of the reviewers will speak and write about every industry, product originating from every country, product using every technology and with the token economics as difficult to understand that a qualified economist will struggle. I mean, They say and write those things for which even Warren Buffet would have said “I don’t know” :-) but these guys know everything ( I don’t know why I am thinking about my wife while writing this content :-)).

They should be themselves made billions by now

Can you imagine a person knowing so much about the whole business field that he has a following of 10,000 or 100,000 people and not making billions. I mean, He is like the person who touches anything and that turns out to be gold, Isn’t it?. Don’t get me wrong, They make very good money from the companies who want them to attract traffic for their websites. The point is, A person who is super expert of a segment like “blockchain ICO” (It’s true that many ICOs have given more than 100,000X returns) must have invested his $500 into those 100s of successful ICOs, right? :-). Somehow, That’s not the case and they keep on freelancing or working for very big marketing companies.

So, To whom should you listen? Who can give you the correct information? How can you trust that information?

I will share my thoughts about it shortly. If I am thinking on correct lines or saying something completely incorrect, I would let you to decide.

In the meantime, Please checkout our ICO at www.talenthon.io, We are a very genuine team based out of UK trying to disrupt an industry which is desperately looking for change with a unique vision. Invest if you like the whole business proposition.

Its okay to following on some site review of the ICO project you want to join. But what you need to know is, dont use ico review site as a guarantee that all of that ICO is great

just as like when altcoin first launched and its want to listing to the exchange, no one knows the real price, they just expect its going to be a good one.

[aileen393332xe5157]

Actually, the ICO rating websites have helped a lot of investors. That is the foundation, the basis is the goal ... to choose potential ICO. But sometimes the reviews are not objective. So, in my opinion, you should not rely entirely on these reviews, but you must constantly monitor the market, use your knowledge, experience and sometimes the community to take care of the project to Carefully analyze the project you are interested in. Decide on yourself. Because your decision will create opportunities for you that risk is also for you.

[BettingTips]

The ICO website has a specific result, so you should not put your trust in a website because the results may be wrong or wrong. Therefore, there should be an objective comparison between the ICOs review websites to provide the most accurate results to make investment decisions.

[ipbitrung01]

ICO reviews provide investors with a variety of means for research and selection. But sometimes those reviews are not really objective, the evaluators sometimes do the job, you do not know the value and capacity of the evaluator ... In my opinion, you rely on into knowledge, experience, community based and regularly monitor and analyze information about previous projects that ultimately decide. It is you who is responsible for your decision to contain no one else.

[heureca]

My personal opinion that we can trust ico reviews, criptocurrency rank websites and etc. However, we need to check several sources of information to find out necessary and more correct information

[abduljacklu]

Nope,those websites shouldnt be trusted most of these reviews are paid, i dont trust others when it comes to my review i usually do a lot of background research,searching for facts and if i do have noticed some red flags i wont going to join that ICO,i would spread the word to the whole forum so that people would be more aware of these scams.

[DrGuns4Hands]

Not all ICO review is trusted some of them if you put a lot of money then they will give you a good review about the project even if it is a scam project they will give a positive feedback so sometimes don't trust about the review of some people.

[jimskiy]

Videow review of Ico it will be manipulated by their team where they can use fake information about their icoa and their team, telegram channel it easy to get and visited by more people by giving an airdrop will be more added of person to invited telegram channel group of ico. But trust or not on ico is based on respond form the member on telegram channel ico where we can see more people will say everything about the ico.

[geyayy]

We can't take them off from the system because basically, they are advertisements from the projects itself. I myself don't believe in reviews that are publish in the presence of mass media it is possibly an advertisement but I do believe in ICO rating sites like ICObench which I testify as a very reliable source of ICO rating and review.

[Way2Paradise]

i trust them till today. after i find this thread i think different about it.

i thought these pages would be reliable, but apparently not.

[sinachy]

Well there are some reviews that are paid and there are some reviews which are not paid, they do their own review without seeking any monetary value. For now I know icodrops don't collect money to do review or list project on their site, Ian balina doesn't collect money too to do his video reviews, though i will agree with you that 99% of the reviews are paid reviews.

[kriticko29]

Video Reviews, ICO mailers, Listing websites, Telegram Groups, Can you trust them?

Before expressing my opinion about this I would like to mention that the statement made by me is not regarding any particular blogger, vlogger or a listing website. These are all my individual opinions.

Coming back to our topic. I strongly believe that

Most of the ICO reviews made by vloggers on youtube, bloggers on websites, ICO review websites and Telegram channels and groups created by so called “Gurus” have absolutely no value associated with them, are “useless”.

Here is why I think these reviews mislead people more than they help:

They are all paid reviews

The fact that most of the reviewers take money from the company to write about them makes the first point. Why would you write bad about somebody who is paying you to write. That would be best idea to close your shop, isn’t it? :-) lol!. They get money to attract people to make an investment. It’s their job or business model and if they have to be successful they have to deliver well on that.

A good article or a video is the one which brings more people to buy the product

Think about this, A good review article or a youtube video has nothing to do with the success of the product. Usually, Success of the product will come long after you had watched the video and most of the time when you will see the result of your investment you would have forgotten the research you did to figure out if the ICO was good or bad. But, If the video or that content is not entertaining or engaging enough you would not like it which would mean less business to the paying party. To summarise, Reviews are 100% focused towards engagement rather than success of the product.

Have you ever seem a player who represent his country for football as well as Rugby?
Most of the reviewers will speak and write about every industry, product originating from every country, product using every technology and with the token economics as difficult to understand that a qualified economist will struggle. I mean, They say and write those things for which even Warren Buffet would have said “I don’t know” :-) but these guys know everything ( I don’t know why I am thinking about my wife while writing this content :-)).

They should be themselves made billions by now

Can you imagine a person knowing so much about the whole business field that he has a following of 10,000 or 100,000 people and not making billions. I mean, He is like the person who touches anything and that turns out to be gold, Isn’t it?. Don’t get me wrong, They make very good money from the companies who want them to attract traffic for their websites. The point is, A person who is super expert of a segment like “blockchain ICO” (It’s true that many ICOs have given more than 100,000X returns) must have invested his $500 into those 100s of successful ICOs, right? :-). Somehow, That’s not the case and they keep on freelancing or working for very big marketing companies.

So, To whom should you listen? Who can give you the correct information? How can you trust that information?

I will share my thoughts about it shortly. If I am thinking on correct lines or saying something completely incorrect, I would let you to decide.

In the meantime, Please checkout our ICO at www.talenthon.io, We are a very genuine team based out of UK trying to disrupt an industry which is desperately looking for change with a unique vision. Invest if you like the whole business proposition.

Well mostly all reviews are inaccurate since just like the cryptocurrency market, no one knows what will happen in the market day by day. Also your point that most of them are paid reviews so that makes it unreliable. But the dev team is commended also that they are making a move in promoting their point or project.

[aehsj]

I think most reviews of some of the rating websites can only serve as a reference and cannot be completely believed. The rating information provided by those rating websites that are not charged will have greater reference value. To make a big investment or to understand, review, and research on your own.

[AK47-]

There are so many ico review websites and not every website is reliable. There have been times when I was misguided into buying a coin rated 4.5/5 in ICO but it actually turned out to be a scam. The company ran away with people's money and I was one of the investors. So now I only rely on icobench for all my information.

[mariayaz]

ICO are not scam, most of them are genuine and they pay what they promise. However sometimes it takes alot of time for ICOs to get listed on exchange which is frustrating.

[briton]

If you don't trust the ICO's review, and would like an analysis of where? I think there is no other way again. ICO ranking or review same. If I believe it, for reference in the analysis, whether this is a good project or less nice. However, on second thought logically should remain as well.

[macchiato]

Not all ICO reviews are true. Remember that there are media campaigns (blog, article or video campaigns). These are paid services which means the developer will most probably pay the participant that endorses their project. There are websites where you can rely on but blogging sites and social medias are not the place you should trust.

[azvn]

make your own research, don't trust them. It used to be trusted but at the moment, when a lot of ICO, they can not rate all of ICO correctly.
Now, investing on ICO is like gambling. Just make your own research to reduce rate of loss. See Denaro and Bitpenta before, they got high mark on ICO review, get a lot of fund then run away.

[Btc_1856]

make your own research, don't trust them. It used to be trusted but at the moment, when a lot of ICO, they can not rate all of ICO correctly.
Now, investing on ICO is like gambling. Just make your own research to reduce rate of loss. See Denaro and Bitpenta before, they got high mark on ICO review, get a lot of fund then run away.

Yes, it is good to research before concluding on investment because based on other rating it is not good to invest. Many ICO spend some money for ICO reviews, so it is bad idea investing based on the reviews, we have to find and research about the company whether it is potential or not.

[MCDForm44]

I've found very few unbiased ICO reviews.  Most are for some off the books bounty or even for a discounted allocation into the private sale. 

[crypto4hope]

Most ICO reviews are biased or paid or type of some kind of advertisement. It is always good to do your own research before trusting.

[Katashi]

this is to just sum it up, your question to trust them or not is really up to you. i mean just imagine if you are a girl having a lot of suitors, then sadly you have a past with a single men who ruin your trust. Does it mean you will end up being a single lady sitting in an old fashioned rocking chair knitting handkerchief for nephews because you don't trust men anymore. Same thing with selecting ICO's all you need to do is do a background check before investing or participating to advertise them online.

[saycryptohello]

i trust them till today. after i find this thread i think different about it.

i thought these pages would be reliable, but apparently not.

you made the right choice, the more I look at the ratings, the more I understand that now it's rather advertising platforms

[criptoman83]

I like to watch different Video Reviews and read articles, but I can't believe them 100%. We need to do our own research, because the information on the project website or promotional articles will always tell about the strengths of the project. Makes sense to talk about weak? This won't attract investors.

[WhyBit]

I have not too much experience in this but I can say most of Reviews are biased and not near to reality because most of times companies pay some good amount for this they want some good intention of investors so in this case better do your own research and then invest in any project its case of your hard earned money

[shulern]

There are many good and many bad ico's .And here all your attitude to them will consist only in what most of them you will get .I don't particularly trust ICO

[BlockpassIDN]

There are some websites that can be trusted, the trick is to find the right ones. Maybe start by doing some reviews of your own and then seeing which review websites match your opinions - then you can trust those websites.

[ashao1015]

Dont believe anybody or anything. Check everything yourself. Ofcourse it is very difficult and takes
enormous quantity of time, but good ICO can make you really rich and all the work will be rewarded.

[p i e c e]

I watch reviews of many kinds of things. ICO is one of them. But I try don’t pay close attention to the thoughts represented in such videos and articles. My own intuition and experience are decisive in case of making choice.

[kobe24]

I think most ico reviewers are being paid i can see so many projects that collected so much funds but they are rated with low ratings and they have a good team

[Naficopa]

They are certainly helpful. They allow you to pre-evaluate the project. There is never 100% certainty about the reliability of the data contained there. You always have to do your own research on the project, team, innovation etc.

[o48o]

Trust is maybe a wrong word for it since everything is biased, but i am trying to collect the facts and form my own opinions.

[sockpuppet1911]

They are certainly helpful. They allow you to pre-evaluate the project. There is never 100% certainty about the reliability of the data contained there. You always have to do your own research on the project, team, innovation etc.

Yeah, and there are multiple places to collect information from, some of them are paid sure but it helps to check the links yourself

[zero4five]

The well-known fact that most of all reviews on any topic are written by order. Paid reviews are available on any site where there is an opportunity to leave comments. This is Hidden Marketing.
Before investing in the ICO, conduct your own serious analysis in order to make your own decision.

[indobitcoin.tk]

but do not trust completely. use the analysis and discussion of their own in order to understand about whatever he does. Furthermore, if you only rely on the opinions of others only private of course we will not be able to flourish in the crypto. therefore do not be too trusting with the reviews given.

[Arlibtchunt2018]

Well, I think we don't have to give our 100% trust to those reviews. Since those knowledge or idea they share are only their thoughts and own research. They just give information for us to know about that campagin but it is our duty to thoroughly research and find fault if the certain ICO if it has.

[Swati Kapoor]

Hi, Never trust someone else reviews 100%, you should always do your own research to check the facts before you invest money in a project. From my opinion i believe on scidex, it's really great project- fits to market needs perfectly.

[Megashaw]

I think the reviews can still be used as part of the yardstick  or tool to draw your conclusion but you still need to use your own discretion and do not be 100percent reliant on them because some projects still fail despite high ratings.

[Blackhammer321]

Video Reviews, ICO mailers, Listing websites, Telegram Groups, Can you trust them?

Before expressing my opinion about this I would like to mention that the statement made by me is not regarding any particular blogger, vlogger or a listing website. These are all my individual opinions.

Coming back to our topic. I strongly believe that

Most of the ICO reviews made by vloggers on youtube, bloggers on websites, ICO review websites and Telegram channels and groups created by so called “Gurus” have absolutely no value associated with them, are “useless”.

Here is why I think these reviews mislead people more than they help:

They are all paid reviews

The fact that most of the reviewers take money from the company to write about them makes the first point. Why would you write bad about somebody who is paying you to write. That would be best idea to close your shop, isn’t it? :-) lol!. They get money to attract people to make an investment. It’s their job or business model and if they have to be successful they have to deliver well on that.

A good article or a video is the one which brings more people to buy the product

Think about this, A good review article or a youtube video has nothing to do with the success of the product. Usually, Success of the product will come long after you had watched the video and most of the time when you will see the result of your investment you would have forgotten the research you did to figure out if the ICO was good or bad. But, If the video or that content is not entertaining or engaging enough you would not like it which would mean less business to the paying party. To summarise, Reviews are 100% focused towards engagement rather than success of the product.

Have you ever seem a player who represent his country for football as well as Rugby?
Most of the reviewers will speak and write about every industry, product originating from every country, product using every technology and with the token economics as difficult to understand that a qualified economist will struggle. I mean, They say and write those things for which even Warren Buffet would have said “I don’t know” :-) but these guys know everything ( I don’t know why I am thinking about my wife while writing this content :-)).

They should be themselves made billions by now

Can you imagine a person knowing so much about the whole business field that he has a following of 10,000 or 100,000 people and not making billions. I mean, He is like the person who touches anything and that turns out to be gold, Isn’t it?. Don’t get me wrong, They make very good money from the companies who want them to attract traffic for their websites. The point is, A person who is super expert of a segment like “blockchain ICO” (It’s true that many ICOs have given more than 100,000X returns) must have invested his $500 into those 100s of successful ICOs, right? :-). Somehow, That’s not the case and they keep on freelancing or working for very big marketing companies.

So, To whom should you listen? Who can give you the correct information? How can you trust that information?

I will share my thoughts about it shortly. If I am thinking on correct lines or saying something completely incorrect, I would let you to decide.

In the meantime, Please checkout our ICO at www.talenthon.io, We are a very genuine team based out of UK trying to disrupt an industry which is desperately looking for change with a unique vision. Invest if you like the whole business proposition.

Personally, I believe on ICO reviews all aroubd the internet and most of the time became my standard when it comes ro deciding which ICO I would invest on. However, as a intelligent investor, I only believe information coming from credible evidences abd datas that have been systemically gathered. Otgerwise I would deem it as bogus. Abd wouldn't believe it obvipusly. Most of the times an investor needs to become observant and curious. Don't just settle ob hearsays.

[EL-NIDO]

As a first step of my research I am using ICO rating sites only. But I never trusted them. You don't know if they were manipulated. Better to take some time to read the whitepaper, check their website, social media and discussions here in bitcointalk forum. We have to analyze the ICO that we will participate. Just trust your own research. But icobench seems to be good and informative.

[newbie-hero]

make your own research, don't trust them. It used to be trusted but at the moment, when a lot of ICO, they can not rate all of ICO correctly.
Now, investing on ICO is like gambling. Just make your own research to reduce rate of loss. See Denaro and Bitpenta before, they got high mark on ICO review, get a lot of fund then run away.

I've seen soooo many fake reviews, paid reviews, scammy and deceitful reviews, that I do not trust the reviews at all now. Of course, I check review websites regularly, but I try to filter the information I read and, of course, rely more on whitepapers, techpapers, some information about the developers, etc.

[carlisle1]

Well maybe many are being paid to make positive feedbacks to the project paying them but i still believes that this is not 100% ,because there are some sites that making their own research and reviews for the icos just to build their names to this community,though maybe there still accepting payments for public reviews

[simon_kenyuru@gmail.com]

Eternal trust will be the world’s first blockchain platform for the pending acquisition of goods or services that aren’t yet available, including cloning or the restoration of the human neural network after cryonic preservation – whenever this becomes available both legally and ethically. To ensure this, Eternal Trusts (ET) creates discretionary purpose trusts for their clients, as well as legal structures protecting its clients’ assets.
The projects of the people that are signed with the company are named as trusts and these financial trusts will be stored in the decentralized Blockchain platform.

Join ICO NOW

[cryptonad]

Don't rely on ICO reviews itself as there are possibilities that project team are paying the sites to give them high score in order to catch the attention of investors. Better take a look on the potential of the project itself through your own research.

[David Vo]

Always do your own research before investing in any project . remember everyone is fighting for their own pocket

[Aleksey1958]

I trust the ICO rating. But this is not the only criterion of choice.. You get acquainted with the products of this ICO, whether it will be useful, whether it will find application in the world... You look at the team's goals, you get to know the road map...

[bjmpoker001]

please try not to only rely a review from others. It is good to see the review, but you yourself must take a research about the project too.
Not every review are 100% true, they are paid, so there is a possibility for being subjective in review. Always do your own research because it
is your money that you want to invest, not others.

[Dowrich80]

At the rate where most of her initial coin offerings in the market are scams, it is not wise to trust any of them no matter how attractive the concept of the company is unless they provide you with some technology or proof of concept which is written in the ICO reviews

[Yolikerum]

ICO surveys furnish financial specialists with an assortment of means for research and choice. However, at times those surveys are not by any means objective, the evaluators some of the time carry out the activity, you don't have the foggiest idea about the esteem and limit of the evaluator ... As I would like to think, you depend on into learning, knowledge, network based and consistently screen and dissect data about past activities that at last choose. It is you who is in charge of your choice to contain nobody else.

[darkwiz1417]

Im using them to search for ICO then review them with myself because mostly they are paid to do reviews that are bias . Verifying the company members and advisors are necessary and as possible invest to projects that are tested in the market or been used already like Trustedcars they secured many partnership within Germany , dealership that will be available in their online shop and also as car rentals within their dealership inventory ! You can check their whitepaper their Partners are top notch in Automotive Industry

[organelles]

Do not trust ICO reviews. I think there was a post up a couple of days ago where people were even talking about how the ICO websites get paid to give projects good reviews even when they know that the projects are not good. Something to the tune of about 10 eth if I remember correctly. Trusting anyone but your own research is a mistake that you do not want to make.

[gemnuryu]

You truly can't confide in any audit locales totally on the grounds that there are chances that they will be paid to support their venture, in the event that you are wanting to put resources into any undertakings set aside a few minutes to find out about them, visit their improvement group wire channel and as inquiries as indicated by their advancement instead of trusting to a few surveys.

[Trustor]

If you don't go through these reviews, then how else are you going to know whether a coin is worth investing? There's no other work around. I myself feel little suspicious of some ico reviewing people, but at the end of the day it is only because of them that I'm able to make an informed choice. Over time you will eventually find a few sources which give reliable information, so start following them.

[Alex Foman]

Well, my opinion, now it's hard to talk about something. Since ICO is now in a difficult situation. And many are afraid to invest. But it is unconditional for now! I think that in the future the situation will improve, and we will continue to work.

[nekorakoeora]

believe it or not, it is often the thing that's pretty reasonable. It could be that ICO would be able to promise and deliver results and of course to believe it will be good things. but sometimes it is also a pretty ICO banya fails and it also makes the ICO impressed into ugly and unnatural when it does not believe.

[sergey1301]

I stopped trusting sites, with a rating of ico. Ratings on such sites, bought (there are exceptions). The Neyronix project is a rating Agency.

[5hoursaday]

I'm in between with this. I am a huge fan o ICO reviews, but I also stand for doing your own analysis. So what happens when I have gotten reviews on a coin?  still go on to do my own analysis regardless. I think that one should not be put away for the other. ICO reviews are a thing, and I stand for it.

[NakiRR]

i think that if you see that someone praises any ico then it is payed shilling and nothing more, another case if you reading neutral reviews and only for information about the team, technologies, token metrics etc. and making a decision on your own, that is good position.

[Viklopot]

I do not trust the ICO reviews, and I always study the project in which I am going to take part

[worldofcoins]

I think when it comes to reading through the ICO reviews you have to look at them with a critical eye since these can easily be manipulated.

[LuaKT]

I never trust any ico reviews. Always i am doing my own review because i dont believe the other people who doing reviews. They are doing only reviews some of them doing that for money some of them doing that for advertising. But we are investing our hard earned money so i cant trust anybody about my investment choices.

[Harkorede]

ICO ratings and surveys in my opinion are platforms that should be used just to garner basic informations about a project, such as Token price, ICO timeline, Project roadmap, among other informations, but their ratings shouldn't be used as a basis for investment as it has been proven in recent times that these ratings can be influenced and manipulated. To me, they are more or less just like an index or database you can refer to just get to know what project is currently available after which investors should endeavor to make personal in depth research before investment in any project in order to avoid investing in a scam or an unworthy project.

[Lumada]

I think when it comes to reading through the ICO reviews you have to look at them with a critical eye since these can easily be manipulated.

Yeh there are bounties for reviews so always checked the ideas team structure. We will might see something wrong or notice some faults, always study on our own, take some points to consider in investing.

[Gatsby club]

The reviews that make many sites are not always the professional opinion of a good specialist. Sometimes this is just a private opinion of a person and it needs to be rechecked.

[Sarastiche]

The cryptocurrency space is now filled with several fake ICO Review site, most are more like an advertising platform for ICO  developer, Majorly in order to earn recognition and earn from thedevelopers, Most cannot be trusted, I do my own research and use the  ICO Review site as a guide before investing, I check out some that can be trusted and decide an average base on my research and the site review.

[TonixGaming_14]

Somewhere I have already read the investigation, which describes the whole situation with ICO projects and rating agencies that evaluate them. They're crooks.

[Twinkledoe]

Somewhere I have already read the investigation, which describes the whole situation with ICO projects and rating agencies that evaluate them. They're crooks.

Most ICO reviews are just your guidelines about what's in store for each project. You need to do your own research also. Don't rely on ICO reviews. Most of them are paid or better yet, they really don't know what's going on inside the system of the project.

[kiansantan]

They only review some of them for money, some of them do it for advertising. But we invested our hard-earned money so I couldn't trust anyone about my investment choices.
I never believed ico's review. I always do my own review because I don't trust other people who do reviews.

[Ravenangel]

And it's so absurd that not even the prices are standard to have a kind of promote ICO, I have friends who have different projects and they all were asked different amounts, it seems they evaluate how much can you pay and so they charge you "fair" but everything happens behind the scenes so no one really knows where they get those rates.

[carrascos]

I do not trust startups in this market and will not trust them until they start regulating them at the right level and there will be some guarantee that they will not be scam

[Checkoi]

No, I do not trust such sites because my friends personally paid one of the admins to promote their project. it's all corrupt

[ugr_erkn92]

I can't say I'm impressed with the ICO reviews, I'm just looking them. I rely more on my own criteria and this way I invest or not do.

[kerzhake]

I trust this all in part because there are really very sensible guys who make a qualitative review on a quality project and I don’t see why they don’t believe it

[chokomenia]

ICO reviews is about the reviewer having his own opinion about the project, and me as a viewer, I can choose to believe in what the person says or not, so what i do about reviews is that i normally do a further research and if my research is inline with the reviewer opinion then I will trust it but if it is not then i won't trust it. The problem is that they believe in everything the reviewer says without making their own research, making your own informed research is a good idea to form your own opinion.

[trofim21]

There are a lot of scams. You must be very vigilant and carefully analyze the projects in which you want to participate. I found one of these projects for myself, I will give you an example of #swachhcoin. The project will pay people for their trash. At the moment there is a bonus of 12.5%, you can buy coins by the end of October. I advise you to see the project.

[Handsome Boy]

if I personally don't trust ICO reviews, because I think ICO reviews can't make the ICO really successful, it's because ICO reviews can be paid to make reviews from the ICO can high.

[tobatz23]

There are many ICO research group sites that focused on blockchain technology and digital currencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum. Only few are unpaid or mandated to do any of their reviews and do not provide any promotional or advertising services and only rely on donations. Their content is based on their own research, analysis and personal opinion, and the projects that they choose to review are based on their discretion. So still, it's up for the investors whether to believe or trust this ICO review sites or not.

[vrabac68]

Well it really hard to be 100% sure if the ICO is real or fake but with big research you can find out the truth . You should not just check review web sites but also search in the forums and ask question . Its normal that is risky but can be also great investment

[Burogh]

We should not give all our trust on every review or analysis. We take that as our second opinion and our decision depending on our self. Some ICOs reviews are good and we can use it before make decision to invest

[BoxerRobert]

Don't believe all those reviews blindly. Because there is lot paid review also is there. All ICO review website and video mostly they are giving a good rating for paid project. Few weeks back I saw some article in Linkedin with proof. One project got a bad review in ICOBeanch within a few weeks they got a good review from ICOBeanch and many more scam review also is there. You do your own research.

[marksayson]

It is good to build trust in the ico review sites since they give further research about the project. But you should also make your own research about the project and the decision of making investment relies in your hand.

[nreal]

In fact, many ICO rating websites receive money to conduct reviews. So, I never completely trust a site, I will refer to a variety of sources to choose the best project.

[cpoer2011]

There are Some of ICO reviews you can trust them but some of it you can not trust it. You must be careful to choose the right ICO Reviews as your indicator for you to invest on the right ICO. You have to make your own research sometimes.

[Mpamaegbu]

Trusting ICO review sites in totality is like trusting one's goat to take a stroll with a hoard of lions. There is always a streaming caveat. I speak from experience as one who had also fallen victim to these overrated ICO reviewers. Although, once in a while now I take a peep at the mmncrypto channel to see what reviews they have. Then I wait for the crypto to hit the market before buying.

[seyola89]

Many ICO rating and review websites a d set uses are truly paid. But I ask myself that is it possible for then to do it for free? I don't think so though coz they are also providing a service, so maybe they have to be paid for their work. But the problem comes when they are not genuine with their assessment and ratings and are paid just to chill and inflate the ratings of the project.

[warning_btc]

I am try one time income to the project by ico review.
Its also lottery how any other experts predicting.
In crypto world many depends from moneys. Who have more money they win.

[waterproof]

Now it is very difficult to choose a real project. Even the site, the roadmap, the team, the demo version does not guarantee you that the project will work.

[grifinmch]

review of ICO could not fully objective and judge based on what it is. Sometimes it's just an assessment from the outside only and certainly not very specific. better do his own analysis because this certainly would be more satisfactory, however despite having to also build on knowledge as well. never to believe in this sort of thing because often it is surely trapping.

[Goodnuel]

A lot of times, the ico ratings are not very reliable.. They get high reviews and ratings when they pay them more to do reviews... Icos that were rated highly by ico sites have gone on to be scams or shit projects. Its in your best interest to invest in icos based on your own sound researches and guts.

[basici]

I stopped trusting start-ups in this market because there are so many scams and unfortunately the opportunities for earning have become much lower compared with last year

[zabir.brutov]

It is hard to believe in them, because there are so many stories, that it costs a certain sum of money to get a good rating. But when I look at 10 different websites and all of them are giving the highest marks, I should say, that I believe in such ratings.

[Gastonic]

Of course not. It is a very basic rule that dont trust anyone except yourself. Do your own research about the project, the team, token metrics etc. You know ICO reviews are paid and they can manipulate it to make believe the public that the project is good.

[Sid3d]

If the review on ICO was done by people whom I trust and with whom I have already worked, then I will definitely pay attention to the project that they are reviewing. Otherwise, I’ll rather pass by the ICO unknown to me.

[FirstCryptic]

Investors should only trust their opinion. An investor as an experienced player must build his own tactics and strategy in selecting ICO projects for investment.

[max fray]

I especially liked your idea about "if the project described is so good why won't the reviewer make millions himself?".
All in all, I don't trust ICO reviews and prefer doing my own research.
ICO rating sites can sometimes be helpful if you quickly need some basic info like the availability of bounty campaign, token price, links to project team and such like.

[fulled]

only if profesional analys leave a comment in review, but if the review come from internal site reviewer i regularly avoid that ico or atleast wait till my favourite analys leave a comment there

[kravas86]

I personally don't see the point in trusting them. All work and write reviews for the sake of some achievements. They can be both monetary and spiritual.

[Sponsoredby15]

ICO review cannot be trusted because all of them are bias and many of them are paid to get a good review in their website. I prefer to do your own research if you don't want to lose like what happened to those investors who relied on ICO reviews.

[Doging]

If you invest money in a popular ICO that is advertised everywhere, you won’t earn anything. You must be able to find small and promising projects.

[igor.vanyutin.83]

It depends on the author of this review. If the review is made by a bounty hunter, it is not always objectively. Because these guys are writing only good things, because they aren't allowed to write something negative. If the review is made by a third party (no bounty), it could be useful.

[Adhichan]

ICO review cannot be trusted because all of them are bias and many of them are paid to get a good review in their website. I prefer to do your own research if you don't want to lose like what happened to those investors who relied on ICO reviews.

good point mate, we should have make our own analisys on ico project.not all of ico review sites give us good advice.some of them give high rating caused paid by dev team.

[sergei1703]

You can trust these reviews made by professionals like Ian Balina and others. The other reviews are reviews by bounty hunters, where each project is brilliant.

[NeverSop]

I do not believe in reviews like Trackico, icobench, etc. They have the expertise to analyze and make objective judgments. (A number of projects are highly appreciated but also failures and even scams.) So, it only makes sense to refer. Actually, to invest your money into any ico, you need to do your own research and follow up the development of the ICO regularly.

[bxipp]

ICOs review are important thing that might can be use as an extra imformation gathering for our use to determined the project are good or not. We can make our own research and to gathering the information we need ICOs review site so we can save more time to digg imformation.

[dicaprio]

It seems to me that the more transparent the project and the more we learn about the project and the developers of this project, the more we begin to understand that this project can be trusted because the project really has huge chances.

[ynatopak14]

Some of them can be trusted but most of them are not trustable.
there are so many website now who done their reviews depending on the payment they receive.
Some platform are really genuine and making a good and transparent feedback.

[francedeni]

Ico reviews can provide information with regards to the Ico’s these days. Aside from the fact they provide info we should still do research on our own to verify which is reliable Ico to joined and invest. So I do not trust this much the icoreviews site.

[OneCoinMan]

If you invest money in a popular ICO that is advertised everywhere, you won’t earn anything. You must be able to find small and promising projects.

I do not agree with you. On the contrary, you need to look for ICO on ICODrops (IMHO, the best ICO-tracker). Campaigns where you need to get into the whitlist, usually the most successful.

[Dorvei]

I treat each ICO as a normal business project, and ICO itself is only a way to collect money for the implementation of the tasks set .. I consider that many ICO organizations initially set too great impracticable goals. I do not trust any observers and bloggers, their opinion is very easy to buy.

[GERMO COIN]

I personally would not believe in ICO reviews because I think ICO reviews can be paid to get good reviews, but if you trust ICO reviews it is your own decision, because there are also successful ICOs because ICO has a good reviews.

[Evolver]

ICO review cannot be trusted because all of them are bias and many of them are paid to get a good review in their website. I prefer to do your own research if you don't want to lose like what happened to those investors who relied on ICO reviews.

good point mate, we should have make our own analisys on ico project.not all of ico review sites give us good advice.some of them give high rating caused paid by dev team.

The ICO rating page is good as it brings more insight into ICO projects than to investors. It is also a good source of information when looking for projects, but the weak point is that as you said, they take the money to appreciate the fact the project should have.

[mahilchii]

Ico reviews can provide information with regards to the Ico’s these days. Aside from the fact they provide info we should still do research on our own to verify which is reliable Ico to joined and invest. So I do not trust this much the icoreviews site.

Well, ICO broke the popularity of cryptocurrencies as most them are scammers most of the investors lose trust, as you said project of a coin is foremost important in crypto market.

[Leenwar]

Most of those directory and listing sites are straight up shakedowns, many of them just scraping data from wherever, not updating info (unless you pay), and/or waiting with their hand out for you to buy a "premium" listing.

[Altero]

Not totally we can trust that ratings cause it sometimes high ICO ratings also fails. It is just a 50-50 scenario, only our own understanding will help to decide and invest on it. And if you feel it's satisfaction rates, then you better not give doubt on it.

[MrPiggles]

Not totally we can trust that ratings cause it sometimes high ICO ratings also fails. It is just a 50-50 scenario, only our own understanding will help to decide and invest on it.

At this point most of the ico projects are lacking in capital by investors and people are feeling down on this market. I believe that in the coming time this market will recover and we can expect a new future for ICO projects. Just wait and time will answer them all

[sulis sudibyo]

indeed we cannot hide the fact that the average review circulating on the internet is on average made by bounty hunters and the ICO website, and it can be said that they are never objective because they are definitely paid. so it's better to believe in analyzing personally than others.

[anamie]

In choosing ICO's you have to research in your own, Don't trust any ICO's review because most of them are paid review, they gave good reviews to attract investors especially if the projects gave them commission if how much they sold in a token sale event. Its all about business!

[Zhenka]

I personally would not believe in ICO reviews because I think ICO reviews can be paid to get good reviews, but if you trust ICO reviews it is your own decision, because there are also successful ICOs because ICO has a good reviews.

I also think that it is better to spend time and study the ICO yourself, than to trust some review. Only when you'll see the integrity of the project can trust him completely. Besides learning project takes a lot of time.

[said666]

Actually, the ICO rating websites have helped a lot of investors. That is the foundation, the basis is the goal to choose potential ICO. But sometimes the reviews are not objective. So, in my opinion, you should not rely entirely on these reviews, but you must constantly monitor the market, use your knowledge)

[BTCmasterVM]

There are enough useful resources where you can learn useful information about ICO, but you need to understand that in the end all responsibility for the choice belongs only to you.

[arjuna BTC]

Actually, the ICO rating websites have helped a lot of investors. That is the foundation, the basis is the goal to choose potential ICO. But sometimes the reviews are not objective. So, in my opinion, you should not rely entirely on these reviews, but you must constantly monitor the market, use your knowledge)

yep.. ICO reviews are help us to know a little bit about the ICO project..
but, the best way is,, do your own research my friend,,,

[auroboros]

Believing and not depending on each individual, they have predictions we also have predictions so why should believe in others if we ourselves can find predictions that we need, not always they are right in concluding and not always they are wrong, because the point is they only share predictions

[ngano ba]

Ico reviews are only some sorth of a guide , we can trust them or either we do not believe in them but for a guidance to choose they may help a little but not as hundred percent it is true , you may still even end up to ICO scams , so just be careful in choosing ICO nowadays.

[Lilmon]

I had also noticed this kind of "scam", even though they are not stealing someone directly,they take advantage of the ingenuity of the people and use their reputation to guide them to incorrect ICOs, so I have long stopped following this type of pages, thanks for the exhaustive research.

[fortunecrypto]

I don't go for this rating sites anymore they do not add value to the project, investors are more wiser now, they know what projects are legit or had a sign of fraud, some fraud projects are getting a good rating, if the project is good it's should be reviewed free and not paid to look like it's a good one.

[Koobtcgal]

I think the best place to find better ICO is bitcointalk as at now. The review than here by some hardworking members is good enough to help you escape scam ICOs. There are ICOs with legit team yet, they ended up to be a scam so a team may have 100% legit team but still end up to be a scam. I think the solution is to invest what we can afford to lose because the reviewers are not responsible for your losses.

[Muzika]

I think the best place to find better ICO is bitcointalk as at now. The review than here by some hardworking members is good enough to help you escape scam ICOs. There are ICOs with legit team yet, they ended up to be a scam so a team may have 100% legit team but still end up to be a scam. I think the solution is to invest what we can afford to lose because the reviewers are not responsible for your losses.

Good point because lots of ICO review site has no good basis for their ratings they are basing on the papers that the team provides, reviews from the users are most likely much appreciatee rather than the other forms of review.

[Naficopa]

I agree with your opinion. If these "Gurus" themselves believed what they say about the projects and were sure of what they are saying, they would borrow money from their families and invest in these projects to become millionaires in a short time. They, however, chose the way of making films or writing articles for money. Some opinions are true, but I do not believe anyone who does it for money.

[akungagal]

I don't go for this rating sites anymore they do not add value to the project, investors are more wiser now, they know what projects are legit or had a sign of fraud, some fraud projects are getting a good rating, if the project is good it's should be reviewed free and not paid to look like it's a good one.

i think so,
at this time investors will be very careful and smarter in choosing a good project for the future. Indeed, there are many projects that are not so good in the future, but there are also many projects that have good potential in the future.

just need to learn more one by one to get a good ico, i think investors also know that. I am sure investors still trust ico, it's just that they are currently choosing too much.

[Aponkye1]

It is better to trust the review of ICO Rating sites such as ICObench and other prominent rating sites. The reason why i say this is to avoid the rating sites of fake rating sites that only seeks to promote projects not based on the qualities of the project but just for the money they would receive after the review. This has resulted in the coming up of a whole lot of scam projects who have high rating scales.

[Menawi12]

Make it as second opinion before we investing on some project. Some web are paid for good review and some give good review based on profesionalism. We should not give bad judging to all reviewer because many are profesional

[Yaunfitda]

I think the best place to find better ICO is bitcointalk as at now. The review than here by some hardworking members is good enough to help you escape scam ICOs. There are ICOs with legit team yet, they ended up to be a scam so a team may have 100% legit team but still end up to be a scam. I think the solution is to invest what we can afford to lose because the reviewers are not responsible for your losses.

Good point because lots of ICO review site has no good basis for their ratings they are basing on the papers that the team provides, reviews from the users are most likely much appreciatee rather than the other forms of review.

And not only that reviewer as we all know are getting paid as well. As for me, I just look at those reviews but I still do my due diligence to research more and not just depend on what others are saying. Majority are scams so we need to do everything before taking part on any ICO's. Much better to be prepared not to be sorry later.

[koralan]

The evaluation site ico very useful for me in choosing ico to invest. But I do not fully trust that site, it only has reference effect in my selection and making investment decisions.

[Blamsud]

The evaluation site ico very useful for me in choosing ico to invest. But I do not fully trust that site, it only has reference effect in my selection and making investment decisions.

Still double check whether the statement provided by the review is true, it can help to filter ICO among the many numbers of ICO around. It's my way to choose what to research.

[andeonnut]

Most of the ICO reviews and ratings sites are paid or incentivized. Best not to put too much stock in them.

[feehannah]

ICO reviews are not trusted because most of them are paid. But sometimes it could be true,all you need to do is to do more research regarding the project. Make your own ratings by yourself to make sure and find good and reliable ICO to invest.

[larkinvain]

I Don't believe in any kind of video review, Email about ICO and any other sources. I believe in the research and some ICO rating website. And I am sure, you can't ignore Icobench ICO rating system. There have many blockchain experts, who verify about Legit ICO Project. So, I think You can't ignore their verification and rating. ICOalert also good, but when you have ICOBench then you don't need so many sources.

[Anicasalar]

So far I have no significant experience with the crypto market. But already picked up several thematic sites with ratings and reviews of promising ICO. I regularly use these sites to pre-select promising projects, but in any case I need to study the information on my own - whitepaper, the development team, technology and project strategy.

[dimonarka]

Watching what reviews. But in general, I understand the essence of the project and draw conclusions based on various reviews presented by different types on different sites. but the main information is contained in the project documentation and on the main site

[furball64]

So far I have no significant experience with the crypto market. But already picked up several thematic sites with ratings and reviews of promising ICO. I regularly use these sites to pre-select promising projects, but in any case I need to study the information on my own - whitepaper, the development team, technology and project strategy.

I do not trust the rating sites. I have repeatedly seen how representatives of rating sites appeared in telegrams of the projects, told about the assigned rating and suggested writing to them in the PM if you want to increase the rating.
Here, even the most foolish person understands that in the PM they called the amount of money necessary for payment.
Perhaps there are honest sites, but you should not look for a button in a barrel of shit.

[Pffrt]

I don't like them at all. They are biased and paid review. As far as I know, they get 4-5 ETH at least for reviewing an ICO and that's why they provide bias review. I think everyone should research more and more for avoiding fake and scam ICO.

[daenarys_stormborn]

my advice do not be too trusting with the ico reviews website like that, because most ico websites reviews are paid websites, so ico organizers pay for the website to get good reviews

[Ozero]

Certain reviews about the prospects of ICO, of course, can not be trusted. It is necessary, if possible, to get acquainted with other reviews, and the opinion should be compiled all the same. We invest in ICO projects our money or our efforts and time, and only we must objectively evaluate the relevance and prospects of each project we are interested in.

[crudpuppy]

Certain reviews about the prospects of ICO, of course, can not be trusted. It is necessary, if possible, to get acquainted with other reviews, and the opinion should be compiled all the same. We invest in ICO projects our money or our efforts and time, and only we must objectively evaluate the relevance and prospects of each project we are interested in.

I think the review depends on the reviewer because if the person is not well-known then the rating is useless.

[kethan]

Video Reviews, ICO mailers, Listing websites, Telegram Groups, Can you trust them?

Before expressing my opinion about this I would like to mention that the statement made by me is not regarding any particular blogger, vlogger or a listing website. These are all my individual opinions.

Coming back to our topic. I strongly believe that

Most of the ICO reviews made by vloggers on youtube, bloggers on websites, ICO review websites and Telegram channels and groups created by so called “Gurus” have absolutely no value associated with them, are “useless”.

Here is why I think these reviews mislead people more than they help:

They are all paid reviews

The fact that most of the reviewers take money from the company to write about them makes the first point. Why would you write bad about somebody who is paying you to write. That would be best idea to close your shop, isn’t it? :-) lol!. They get money to attract people to make an investment. It’s their job or business model and if they have to be successful they have to deliver well on that.

A good article or a video is the one which brings more people to buy the product

Think about this, A good review article or a youtube video has nothing to do with the success of the product. Usually, Success of the product will come long after you had watched the video and most of the time when you will see the result of your investment you would have forgotten the research you did to figure out if the ICO was good or bad. But, If the video or that content is not entertaining or engaging enough you would not like it which would mean less business to the paying party. To summarise, Reviews are 100% focused towards engagement rather than success of the product.

Have you ever seem a player who represent his country for football as well as Rugby?
Most of the reviewers will speak and write about every industry, product originating from every country, product using every technology and with the token economics as difficult to understand that a qualified economist will struggle. I mean, They say and write those things for which even Warren Buffet would have said “I don’t know” :-) but these guys know everything ( I don’t know why I am thinking about my wife while writing this content :-)).

They should be themselves made billions by now

Can you imagine a person knowing so much about the whole business field that he has a following of 10,000 or 100,000 people and not making billions. I mean, He is like the person who touches anything and that turns out to be gold, Isn’t it?. Don’t get me wrong, They make very good money from the companies who want them to attract traffic for their websites. The point is, A person who is super expert of a segment like “blockchain ICO” (It’s true that many ICOs have given more than 100,000X returns) must have invested his $500 into those 100s of successful ICOs, right? :-). Somehow, That’s not the case and they keep on freelancing or working for very big marketing companies.

So, To whom should you listen? Who can give you the correct information? How can you trust that information?

I will share my thoughts about it shortly. If I am thinking on correct lines or saying something completely incorrect, I would let you to decide.

In the meantime, Please checkout our ICO at www.talenthon.io, We are a very genuine team based out of UK trying to disrupt an industry which is desperately looking for change with a unique vision. Invest if you like the whole business proposition.

Today there are some thematic sites that I can completely trust. They can give preliminary information for choosing an option for investment. But you do not need to 100% believe these reviews and opinions. Because often there are placed custom-made articles and fraudulent information. Therefore, the investor must always conduct a thorough assessment of the selected project.

[anisoptera]

No you can't trust them at all, in this industry everything is about money. If you have paid you will get a good review, if you haven't then a bad review; but if you will pay they will take the bad review out and replace it with a good one instead.

[Barbatos]

Video Reviews, ICO mailers, Listing websites, Telegram Groups, Can you trust them?

Before expressing my opinion about this I would like to mention that the statement made by me is not regarding any particular blogger, vlogger or a listing website. These are all my individual opinions.

Coming back to our topic. I strongly believe that

Most of the ICO reviews made by vloggers on youtube, bloggers on websites, ICO review websites and Telegram channels and groups created by so called “Gurus” have absolutely no value associated with them, are “useless”.

Here is why I think these reviews mislead people more than they help:

They are all paid reviews

The fact that most of the reviewers take money from the company to write about them makes the first point. Why would you write bad about somebody who is paying you to write. That would be best idea to close your shop, isn’t it? :-) lol!. They get money to attract people to make an investment. It’s their job or business model and if they have to be successful they have to deliver well on that.

A good article or a video is the one which brings more people to buy the product

Think about this, A good review article or a youtube video has nothing to do with the success of the product. Usually, Success of the product will come long after you had watched the video and most of the time when you will see the result of your investment you would have forgotten the research you did to figure out if the ICO was good or bad. But, If the video or that content is not entertaining or engaging enough you would not like it which would mean less business to the paying party. To summarise, Reviews are 100% focused towards engagement rather than success of the product.

Have you ever seem a player who represent his country for football as well as Rugby?
Most of the reviewers will speak and write about every industry, product originating from every country, product using every technology and with the token economics as difficult to understand that a qualified economist will struggle. I mean, They say and write those things for which even Warren Buffet would have said “I don’t know” :-) but these guys know everything ( I don’t know why I am thinking about my wife while writing this content :-)).

They should be themselves made billions by now

Can you imagine a person knowing so much about the whole business field that he has a following of 10,000 or 100,000 people and not making billions. I mean, He is like the person who touches anything and that turns out to be gold, Isn’t it?. Don’t get me wrong, They make very good money from the companies who want them to attract traffic for their websites. The point is, A person who is super expert of a segment like “blockchain ICO” (It’s true that many ICOs have given more than 100,000X returns) must have invested his $500 into those 100s of successful ICOs, right? :-). Somehow, That’s not the case and they keep on freelancing or working for very big marketing companies.

So, To whom should you listen? Who can give you the correct information? How can you trust that information?

I will share my thoughts about it shortly. If I am thinking on correct lines or saying something completely incorrect, I would let you to decide.

In the meantime, Please checkout our ICO at www.talenthon.io, We are a very genuine team based out of UK trying to disrupt an industry which is desperately looking for change with a unique vision. Invest if you like the whole business proposition.

Yes, it can be very useful and important information for a preliminary suitable project for investment. But you need to understand - today many ICO buy reviews on thematic sites, so there is a danger of deception and fraud. Therefore, in any case, you need to carefully study the specific project yourself.

[pocketfullofpoke]

I don't usually trust ICO reviews because as what i have know, some ICOs are just paying the ICO rating websites just to gain hype of their ICO in order to draw investors in. I only believe in the ratings or reviews once i got to check on their website, team, and of course its impact to the community involvement of the ICo.

[jefcasidy]

There are some people I can easily trust their ICO reviews because they have build reputation for themselves over years and there are people who i don't trust their ICO reviews especially most of the ICO rating sites, most of those sites review is bias and incentive. So I don't trust most them and most of the I trust.

[ligerti]

Video Reviews, ICO mailers, Listing websites, Telegram Groups, Can you trust them?

Before expressing my opinion about this I would like to mention that the statement made by me is not regarding any particular blogger, vlogger or a listing website. These are all my individual opinions.

Coming back to our topic. I strongly believe that

Most of the ICO reviews made by vloggers on youtube, bloggers on websites, ICO review websites and Telegram channels and groups created by so called “Gurus” have absolutely no value associated with them, are “useless”.

Here is why I think these reviews mislead people more than they help:

They are all paid reviews

The fact that most of the reviewers take money from the company to write about them makes the first point. Why would you write bad about somebody who is paying you to write. That would be best idea to close your shop, isn’t it? :-) lol!. They get money to attract people to make an investment. It’s their job or business model and if they have to be successful they have to deliver well on that.

A good article or a video is the one which brings more people to buy the product

Think about this, A good review article or a youtube video has nothing to do with the success of the product. Usually, Success of the product will come long after you had watched the video and most of the time when you will see the result of your investment you would have forgotten the research you did to figure out if the ICO was good or bad. But, If the video or that content is not entertaining or engaging enough you would not like it which would mean less business to the paying party. To summarise, Reviews are 100% focused towards engagement rather than success of the product.

Have you ever seem a player who represent his country for football as well as Rugby?
Most of the reviewers will speak and write about every industry, product originating from every country, product using every technology and with the token economics as difficult to understand that a qualified economist will struggle. I mean, They say and write those things for which even Warren Buffet would have said “I don’t know” :-) but these guys know everything ( I don’t know why I am thinking about my wife while writing this content :-)).

They should be themselves made billions by now

Can you imagine a person knowing so much about the whole business field that he has a following of 10,000 or 100,000 people and not making billions. I mean, He is like the person who touches anything and that turns out to be gold, Isn’t it?. Don’t get me wrong, They make very good money from the companies who want them to attract traffic for their websites. The point is, A person who is super expert of a segment like “blockchain ICO” (It’s true that many ICOs have given more than 100,000X returns) must have invested his $500 into those 100s of successful ICOs, right? :-). Somehow, That’s not the case and they keep on freelancing or working for very big marketing companies.

So, To whom should you listen? Who can give you the correct information? How can you trust that information?

I will share my thoughts about it shortly. If I am thinking on correct lines or saying something completely incorrect, I would let you to decide.

In the meantime, Please checkout our ICO at www.talenthon.io, We are a very genuine team based out of UK trying to disrupt an industry which is desperately looking for change with a unique vision. Invest if you like the whole business proposition.

I like to watch various reviews and read articles. They can provide additional useful information for a promising choice. But you don’t need to believe them completely, because there is always the risk of mistakes and fraud. Therefore, be sure to independently explore the potential of a particular project.

[gerbas]

I believe that not all of ICO reviews are to be trust, we still need to be careful in believing on an ICO review, also we have to gain more information from another source to get the best info as possible.

[juragankambing]

ico reviews is one way to find out about an ico, both in terms of products and teams, but in my opinion currently ico review is no longer a benchmark in choosing an ico, because most ico reviews are paid by an ico and we never know how they review and rate a ico,

[KHCGlobal]

It really depends on the project on whether it is a solid project with backing or just a fund collecting project

[Mikell556]

Watching what reviews. But in general, I understand the essence of the project and draw conclusions based on various reviews presented by different types on different sites. but the main information is contained in the project documentation and on the main site

Of course, I read various reviews of coins and tokens. Sometimes I look through ratings. But I never trust them, because the first place can be bought for money. You need to trust only yourself.

[castiloros]

No one can be provided with information that is entirely true it is. even myself who analyze himself about the ICO also experienced several inaccuracies. but this is better because of the want of trying and trying, at least well-informed about crypto and ICO though not completely. such sites rely on rating articles, and much more is not a guarantee. even what they value too much.

[hengha]

I certainly won't trust those comments and telegraph groups, although I will check out some information about ICO before investing, but I am only using it as a reference material!

[niublity]

Most of these ratings are not believed. We all know that they only need to pay some money to get a good evaluation. This kind of evaluation doesn't make any sense to us, but even so, I think these ratings can be used as part of the reference because it can't be completely wrong and there must be some real information.

[bravehearth0319]

Promotional informations including the videos, websites, posters, reviews, and many more are part of the marketing strategy to attract investors. For sure these promotional informations are paid materials. Since these are paid, another part of due diligence is searching the personality behind the projects.

[sergeykravchenko1959]

To eliminate the risk of fraudulent projects and losing their investment you should carefully select projects for investment. To use reviews on rating sites to examine the white paper of the project and to draw attention to the team . Still it is desirable that the project had its basis in a real product .

[baconlike]

I certainly won't trust those comments and telegraph groups, although I will check out some information about ICO before investing, but I am only using it as a reference material!

Nowadays, the information on the internet has a way to splinter through them, and they beautifully paint their numbers. So we should not trust them much, just for reference and analysis of our own factors would be better, safer for us.

[bboyjohn]

Ico projects that allocate a specific budget for advertising. If you give money to the ico rating sites or reviewers, they will show you as a good project and give you a high rating. so I can say that the ico rating sites are not safe, dont trust anybody

[Genemind]

You can listen to them but do not rely on them. ICO reviewers such as comments from known people and vlogers are not fully reliable, it is either they are paid to give positive feed backs to an ICO or they are one of the big investors of it. They will not do something that will not benefit them, remember.

[Bharathi13]

Very nicely expressed thread about how this service prey ICO TGE business as well as investors, all this services effects cryptocurrency community members too who rely on influencers and this paid reviews. But as a responsible investors once should do their own research too as it's their money they will be going to invest and they will have to bear the losses.
Watch this excellent vedio by cryptobeadles who exposed the same points in his vedio
https://youtu.be/b_fFCdxkHGM

[Mypanara19]

These ICO rating websites do not think they are very objective. They may give you a better rating when you spend some money. So I think the key to investing in ICO is not to refer to the ICO rating website, but to rely on your own experience and judgment.

I agree with this post. I could say that not all ico rating website are reliable and most of them I really do not know the basis of their rating since I have this 1 crypto project previously where few of them had rated this one particular project but it turned out to be a scam. It is always much better to rely with our own research and be ready with the consequences of our decisions when it comes to investing with cryptocurrencies.

[Ociwiw]

I absolutely agree sometimes the projects do not correspond at all to what is written about them or shown in the review.  I have been haunted by the idea that everything on ICO-rating websites has been paid for a long time!

[dentolas]

I see your points and mostly agree with them... the main problem is that reviews are paid per order, so imagine an ICO review site or a guru blogger saying that an ICO project that paid the fee is shit or not thrustworthy...
There are surely some which reviews are more valid than others... this is why we should always look at this with a critical view and not give away our trust easily...~cheers

[timmmers]

It is hard to find independent reviews, almost impossible because crypto market is pretty new and everyone wants to earn as much as possible before it will be too late.

[Temmy007]

Most of ico reviews of new ico popping up everyday are paid reviews;
I don't know why this ico's are not tired yet;

[MegaPost]

Video Reviews, ICO mailers, Listing websites, Telegram Groups, Can you trust them?

Before expressing my opinion about this I would like to mention that the statement made by me is not regarding any particular blogger, vlogger or a listing website. These are all my individual opinions.

Coming back to our topic. I strongly believe that

Most of the ICO reviews made by vloggers on youtube, bloggers on websites, ICO review websites and Telegram channels and groups created by so called “Gurus” have absolutely no value associated with them, are “useless”.

Here is why I think these reviews mislead people more than they help:

They are all paid reviews

The fact that most of the reviewers take money from the company to write about them makes the first point. Why would you write bad about somebody who is paying you to write. That would be best idea to close your shop, isn’t it? :-) lol!. They get money to attract people to make an investment. It’s their job or business model and if they have to be successful they have to deliver well on that.

A good article or a video is the one which brings more people to buy the product

Think about this, A good review article or a youtube video has nothing to do with the success of the product. Usually, Success of the product will come long after you had watched the video and most of the time when you will see the result of your investment you would have forgotten the research you did to figure out if the ICO was good or bad. But, If the video or that content is not entertaining or engaging enough you would not like it which would mean less business to the paying party. To summarise, Reviews are 100% focused towards engagement rather than success of the product.

Have you ever seem a player who represent his country for football as well as Rugby?
Most of the reviewers will speak and write about every industry, product originating from every country, product using every technology and with the token economics as difficult to understand that a qualified economist will struggle. I mean, They say and write those things for which even Warren Buffet would have said “I don’t know” :-) but these guys know everything ( I don’t know why I am thinking about my wife while writing this content :-)).

They should be themselves made billions by now

Can you imagine a person knowing so much about the whole business field that he has a following of 10,000 or 100,000 people and not making billions. I mean, He is like the person who touches anything and that turns out to be gold, Isn’t it?. Don’t get me wrong, They make very good money from the companies who want them to attract traffic for their websites. The point is, A person who is super expert of a segment like “blockchain ICO” (It’s true that many ICOs have given more than 100,000X returns) must have invested his $500 into those 100s of successful ICOs, right? :-). Somehow, That’s not the case and they keep on freelancing or working for very big marketing companies.

So, To whom should you listen? Who can give you the correct information? How can you trust that information?

I will share my thoughts about it shortly. If I am thinking on correct lines or saying something completely incorrect, I would let you to decide.

In the meantime, Please checkout our ICO at www.talenthon.io, We are a very genuine team based out of UK trying to disrupt an industry which is desperately looking for change with a unique vision. Invest if you like the whole business proposition.

Most reviews are paid. The only difference is that promotional reviews are marked and others are not. You may see a lot of videos about it.

[cryptolord2077]

For me, everything depends on the reputation of the resource on which the project analyst is located. There are a number of reputable sites and groups that can be trusted, but even their analytics should be criticized and rechecked.

[ricatop]

No, of course, I don’t trust them because all these reviews are fully paid and people say good words to the projects only because of their potential profit.

[petrcoin]

Don't trust them or don't think they are fraud.

Listen or read it with spectical mode on later make your own research. Even they are the most trustworthy people doing the review, it is your money and you should only trust yourselves.

[yingfeng]

No, I do not trust such reviews. Many videos and articles are made only because of advertising. If I am going to invest in some project, I myself study this project.

[Prettymie]

I still read those reviews from them but not to the point that I will decide base on them. Ratings is just a numbers it's not a guarantee that people will invest since they get a higher ratings. I seen many high ratings ICOs but they failed to collect good amount of money to start the project.

[Kotone]

Video Reviews, ICO mailers, Listing websites, Telegram Groups, Can you trust them?

Before expressing my opinion about this I would like to mention that the statement made by me is not regarding any particular blogger, vlogger or a listing website. These are all my individual opinions.

Coming back to our topic. I strongly believe that

Most of the ICO reviews made by vloggers on youtube, bloggers on websites, ICO review websites and Telegram channels and groups created by so called “Gurus” have absolutely no value associated with them, are “useless”.

Here is why I think these reviews mislead people more than they help:

They are all paid reviews

The fact that most of the reviewers take money from the company to write about them makes the first point. Why would you write bad about somebody who is paying you to write. That would be best idea to close your shop, isn’t it? :-) lol!. They get money to attract people to make an investment. It’s their job or business model and if they have to be successful they have to deliver well on that.

A good article or a video is the one which brings more people to buy the product

Think about this, A good review article or a youtube video has nothing to do with the success of the product. Usually, Success of the product will come long after you had watched the video and most of the time when you will see the result of your investment you would have forgotten the research you did to figure out if the ICO was good or bad. But, If the video or that content is not entertaining or engaging enough you would not like it which would mean less business to the paying party. To summarise, Reviews are 100% focused towards engagement rather than success of the product.

Have you ever seem a player who represent his country for football as well as Rugby?
Most of the reviewers will speak and write about every industry, product originating from every country, product using every technology and with the token economics as difficult to understand that a qualified economist will struggle. I mean, They say and write those things for which even Warren Buffet would have said “I don’t know” :-) but these guys know everything ( I don’t know why I am thinking about my wife while writing this content :-)).

They should be themselves made billions by now

Can you imagine a person knowing so much about the whole business field that he has a following of 10,000 or 100,000 people and not making billions. I mean, He is like the person who touches anything and that turns out to be gold, Isn’t it?. Don’t get me wrong, They make very good money from the companies who want them to attract traffic for their websites. The point is, A person who is super expert of a segment like “blockchain ICO” (It’s true that many ICOs have given more than 100,000X returns) must have invested his $500 into those 100s of successful ICOs, right? :-). Somehow, That’s not the case and they keep on freelancing or working for very big marketing companies.

So, To whom should you listen? Who can give you the correct information? How can you trust that information?

I will share my thoughts about it shortly. If I am thinking on correct lines or saying something completely incorrect, I would let you to decide.

In the meantime, Please checkout our ICO at www.talenthon.io, We are a very genuine team based out of UK trying to disrupt an industry which is desperately looking for change with a unique vision. Invest if you like the whole business proposition.

Since the start of socials and influencer era, you can no longer rely on most of them as they can be as well bias. The main thing that you should always rely on is yourself. Your own research. You will also prevent yourself from blaming others as well.

[jony35490]

In my opinion, it is better not to fully depend on the ico review site. Because many sites like to take money for promotion So they make good review on the bad projects for money. So it is better to do your own research before any investment.

[basici]

There are really adequate and honest reviews, but unfortunately there are very few of them on the market, so I do not believe them

[CEOKEY]

ICO assessments only give me valuable reference before deciding. I believe in more research, reasoning and decisions of myself.

[hanomnom]

Video Reviews, ICO mailers, Listing websites, Telegram Groups, Can you trust them?

Before expressing my opinion about this I would like to mention that the statement made by me is not regarding any particular blogger, vlogger or a listing website. These are all my individual opinions.

Coming back to our topic. I strongly believe that

Most of the ICO reviews made by vloggers on youtube, bloggers on websites, ICO review websites and Telegram channels and groups created by so called “Gurus” have absolutely no value associated with them, are “useless”.

Here is why I think these reviews mislead people more than they help:

They are all paid reviews

The fact that most of the reviewers take money from the company to write about them makes the first point. Why would you write bad about somebody who is paying you to write. That would be best idea to close your shop, isn’t it? :-) lol!. They get money to attract people to make an investment. It’s their job or business model and if they have to be successful they have to deliver well on that.

A good article or a video is the one which brings more people to buy the product

Think about this, A good review article or a youtube video has nothing to do with the success of the product. Usually, Success of the product will come long after you had watched the video and most of the time when you will see the result of your investment you would have forgotten the research you did to figure out if the ICO was good or bad. But, If the video or that content is not entertaining or engaging enough you would not like it which would mean less business to the paying party. To summarise, Reviews are 100% focused towards engagement rather than success of the product.

Have you ever seem a player who represent his country for football as well as Rugby?
Most of the reviewers will speak and write about every industry, product originating from every country, product using every technology and with the token economics as difficult to understand that a qualified economist will struggle. I mean, They say and write those things for which even Warren Buffet would have said “I don’t know” :-) but these guys know everything ( I don’t know why I am thinking about my wife while writing this content :-)).

They should be themselves made billions by now

Can you imagine a person knowing so much about the whole business field that he has a following of 10,000 or 100,000 people and not making billions. I mean, He is like the person who touches anything and that turns out to be gold, Isn’t it?. Don’t get me wrong, They make very good money from the companies who want them to attract traffic for their websites. The point is, A person who is super expert of a segment like “blockchain ICO” (It’s true that many ICOs have given more than 100,000X returns) must have invested his $500 into those 100s of successful ICOs, right? :-). Somehow, That’s not the case and they keep on freelancing or working for very big marketing companies.

So, To whom should you listen? Who can give you the correct information? How can you trust that information?

I will share my thoughts about it shortly. If I am thinking on correct lines or saying something completely incorrect, I would let you to decide.

In the meantime, Please checkout our ICO at www.talenthon.io, We are a very genuine team based out of UK trying to disrupt an industry which is desperately looking for change with a unique vision. Invest if you like the whole business proposition.

You post is very reasonable, but this advirtisment in the end of it makes me unsure about your true motives. Please, delete it and it would be great article for newbies.

[TastyChillySauce00]

ICO assessments only give me valuable reference before deciding. I believe in more research, reasoning and decisions of myself.

Their reference including the reviews aswell and giving a score rating based on various reasons whether it's objective or subjective but just not quite reliable.
As you said, it's better to make an observation based on our own rather than relying to stranger.

[Alijiindahaus]

ICO assessments only give me valuable reference before deciding. I believe in more research, reasoning and decisions of myself.

Their reference including the reviews aswell and giving a score rating based on various reasons whether it's objective or subjective but just not quite reliable.
As you said, it's better to make an observation based on our own rather than relying to stranger.

In any case, the analysis of ico companies requires not only more time, but also a lot of effort, and you need to use large amounts of data. The analysis consists not only in the study of technical documentation, but also in the verification of each member of the project team. If a person does not possess certain experience for this, then in any case he will rely on the results of research of other people or on information of rating resources.

[universal3ee]

I still trust them but not 100% it can still be a reference for you to choosing the ICO you are investing in. Some of the ICO reviews site do take money but they cannot be giving money to a few reviews site maybe one or two so you can cross reference or through sites like YouTube is also a good avenue for your cross referencing.

[silver23]

ICO review, yes i trush it.
because they explain so good and many feture from different ICO.

[lovesybitz]

Giving our trust into any ICO project is depend in our decisions. If we do make some research properly about the project,
where in the end we find out it is good or has a potentials to give us profit and has a capability to make it happen, of course
we will decide to partake on it and support through promoting their project as well.

[copyfile]

I do not really trust such resources that put an assessment of certain ICO projects. But sometimes I consider their opinion when choosing a project. But other than that, I'm evaluating the project myself. Study site, white paper, team, advisers and vast

[anatolij.shishkin]

  Well, I often look at YouTube ICO reviews. A convenient way to find out the minimum information about the project. You need to search only those blogs where they make a qualitative analysis. It helps to navigate faster.

[spngebob]

ICO review, yes i trush it.
because they explain so good and many feture from different ICO.

Don't rely on ico reviews to much, most of them are taking money to write reviews. ICO bench, one of the biggest ico rating site got their experts catch in taking money for giving high ratting to ico, better do own review of project because speaking off investment in ico no one is really an expert.

[KuromaYoichi]

Most of them is paid to shill the project and it's rare to find some review that are not biased so if you want to read an ico review you should have your own view of the project and treat the review as additional information. Personally i don't use ico review that much because they don't highlight the point which i considered important for a project.

[megaplage]

Video Reviews, ICO mailers, Listing websites, Telegram Groups, Can you trust them?

Before expressing my opinion about this I would like to mention that the statement made by me is not regarding any particular blogger, vlogger or a listing website. These are all my individual opinions.

Coming back to our topic. I strongly believe that

Most of the ICO reviews made by vloggers on youtube, bloggers on websites, ICO review websites and Telegram channels and groups created by so called “Gurus” have absolutely no value associated with them, are “useless”.

Here is why I think these reviews mislead people more than they help:

They are all paid reviews

The fact that most of the reviewers take money from the company to write about them makes the first point. Why would you write bad about somebody who is paying you to write. That would be best idea to close your shop, isn’t it? :-) lol!. They get money to attract people to make an investment. It’s their job or business model and if they have to be successful they have to deliver well on that.

A good article or a video is the one which brings more people to buy the product

Think about this, A good review article or a youtube video has nothing to do with the success of the product. Usually, Success of the product will come long after you had watched the video and most of the time when you will see the result of your investment you would have forgotten the research you did to figure out if the ICO was good or bad. But, If the video or that content is not entertaining or engaging enough you would not like it which would mean less business to the paying party. To summarise, Reviews are 100% focused towards engagement rather than success of the product.

Have you ever seem a player who represent his country for football as well as Rugby?
Most of the reviewers will speak and write about every industry, product originating from every country, product using every technology and with the token economics as difficult to understand that a qualified economist will struggle. I mean, They say and write those things for which even Warren Buffet would have said “I don’t know” :-) but these guys know everything ( I don’t know why I am thinking about my wife while writing this content :-)).

They should be themselves made billions by now

Can you imagine a person knowing so much about the whole business field that he has a following of 10,000 or 100,000 people and not making billions. I mean, He is like the person who touches anything and that turns out to be gold, Isn’t it?. Don’t get me wrong, They make very good money from the companies who want them to attract traffic for their websites. The point is, A person who is super expert of a segment like “blockchain ICO” (It’s true that many ICOs have given more than 100,000X returns) must have invested his $500 into those 100s of successful ICOs, right? :-). Somehow, That’s not the case and they keep on freelancing or working for very big marketing companies.

So, To whom should you listen? Who can give you the correct information? How can you trust that information?

I will share my thoughts about it shortly. If I am thinking on correct lines or saying something completely incorrect, I would let you to decide.

In the meantime, Please checkout our ICO at www.talenthon.io, We are a very genuine team based out of UK trying to disrupt an industry which is desperately looking for change with a unique vision. Invest if you like the whole business proposition.

I even saw the case, when one single team was trying to kill all the competitors by posting negative reviews about that. I am not sure that such strategy paid off.

[oioioi]

honestly, for the time being I still believe in ICO reviewers, and see some recommendations from them, but seeing a lot of ICOs that have fallen lately, this makes me a little scared and pauses to believe in ICO, enough to be a bounty hunter

[Vit83]

I still believe only in one source in crypto world and this is https://icodrops.com/ they still doing a great job and talking about projects really what they think. 

[Hiylchis]

It is pretty easy to define whih review is genuine and which is fake, so I still use ICO rating websites to find good solutions for the investment in long term run.

[MirandaGreen12]

It depends on information resource .. If it's coinscedule or token data it's okay. Sometimes I believe in icodrops and icibazaar.. because there I saw many true evaluations of projects.

[siorapokk]

If these reviews are not made by bounty hunters than yes. Because bounty hunters are not allowed to write any negative things about the project, so be advised and look if the article was written by a third party person.

[vasilisc555]

Guys, remember one thing! In this world, money solves 99% of your problems and needs. I would not trust any sites.

[jhache]

Although I can't say that they are all paid, users like tvpluss have ICOreviews sites and so far they have been very reliable, there are also sites like ICOdrops that I use regularly and still maintain the same transparency, but those are the only two sites I'm guided by, certainly the others don't give me much confidence.

[pinoy.bolanon]

I don't trust that much when it comes to ico rating sites etc. But what make decide to participate in a particular ico is the number of people supporting the project, for example the number of page likes in their social media channels.

[modmalaney]

reviews of realistic and what it is I think it's just nonsense. What is the rating on many sites naturally flavored with how big the project is able to pay. It is evident from many of the ICO and not yet not provided an overview and assessment as in fact there are. This certainly makes the trust becomes bad and only a personal analysis that can be trusted.

[Sarastiche]

At the onset of the ICO  review site, they usually give an objectives and realistic ICO review, but presently most are  now paid to review ICO, you will observe that most do give positive reviews this days, My strategy is that I use ICO review site as a guide after my own research.

[Aponkye1]

This has been a great concern in the crypto community off late as these days you can see the review about a project which looks almost perfect but upon further review from their website or whitepaper you realize that they have nothing really to offer the world but just to steal the funds of investors who come on board with their projects.

[edmundo]

Trusting any ICO Review site is like being led by a blind man. Most of them know absolutely nothing about the projects they claim to review and usually collect huge sums just to paint a good picture about a project. If they were so trustworthy with their reviews, how come several scams have infiltrated the crypto industry? It is far better doing your own research and going along with your instinct.

[Rengganis]

to analyze the project really run ICO well and already registered there will certainly be a lot of information explaining that, you can also search or rate using www.icoguide.com, there are many tools to check ICO like analytical ICO, all of that will help someone to know the ICO is running or not

[jcarlo]

Hard to trust ICOs review these day after many ICOs are scam. But i think many website objective with their review and sometimes, scam ICOs happen because developers team already intent to scam people

[bagikoin]

This has been a great concern in the crypto community off late as these days you can see the review about a project which looks almost perfect but upon further review from their website or whitepaper you realize that they have nothing really to offer the world but just to steal the funds of investors who come on board with their projects.

Indeed sometimes find this is where bad projects are rated good and this will be very proud when not analyzing themselves. have confidence in the site rating ICO could yet ensure good indeed its own assessment as to whether it actually became better and better. many scam and analysis capability will be very useful.

[otong]

I made it a medium to be able to provide information more clearly. actually not recommended because of course there are also many issues that say that the rating itself can be bought to get it

[ipsec]

There were many cases that showed us that these aggregators are unreliable. People buy high ratings, raise money for ICO and deceive depositors.

[lipoicChin]

Video Reviews, ICO mailers, Listing websites, Telegram Groups, Can you trust them?

Before expressing my opinion about this I would like to mention that the statement made by me is not regarding any particular blogger, vlogger or a listing website. These are all my individual opinions.

Coming back to our topic. I strongly believe that

Most of the ICO reviews made by vloggers on youtube, bloggers on websites, ICO review websites and Telegram channels and groups created by so called “Gurus” have absolutely no value associated with them, are “useless”.

Here is why I think these reviews mislead people more than they help:

They are all paid reviews

The fact that most of the reviewers take money from the company to write about them makes the first point. Why would you write bad about somebody who is paying you to write. That would be best idea to close your shop, isn’t it? :-) lol!. They get money to attract people to make an investment. It’s their job or business model and if they have to be successful they have to deliver well on that.

A good article or a video is the one which brings more people to buy the product

Think about this, A good review article or a youtube video has nothing to do with the success of the product. Usually, Success of the product will come long after you had watched the video and most of the time when you will see the result of your investment you would have forgotten the research you did to figure out if the ICO was good or bad. But, If the video or that content is not entertaining or engaging enough you would not like it which would mean less business to the paying party. To summarise, Reviews are 100% focused towards engagement rather than success of the product.

Have you ever seem a player who represent his country for football as well as Rugby?
Most of the reviewers will speak and write about every industry, product originating from every country, product using every technology and with the token economics as difficult to understand that a qualified economist will struggle. I mean, They say and write those things for which even Warren Buffet would have said “I don’t know” :-) but these guys know everything ( I don’t know why I am thinking about my wife while writing this content :-)).

They should be themselves made billions by now

Can you imagine a person knowing so much about the whole business field that he has a following of 10,000 or 100,000 people and not making billions. I mean, He is like the person who touches anything and that turns out to be gold, Isn’t it?. Don’t get me wrong, They make very good money from the companies who want them to attract traffic for their websites. The point is, A person who is super expert of a segment like “blockchain ICO” (It’s true that many ICOs have given more than 100,000X returns) must have invested his $500 into those 100s of successful ICOs, right? :-). Somehow, That’s not the case and they keep on freelancing or working for very big marketing companies.

So, To whom should you listen? Who can give you the correct information? How can you trust that information?

I will share my thoughts about it shortly. If I am thinking on correct lines or saying something completely incorrect, I would let you to decide.

In the meantime, Please checkout our ICO at www.talenthon.io, We are a very genuine team based out of UK trying to disrupt an industry which is desperately looking for change with a unique vision. Invest if you like the whole business proposition.

I don't think  that we should believe in ICO review. Don't believe 100% in anything. ICO review also can be faked. You should learn by yourself.

[D3m1r4wanti]

some time ago I heard news from a friend that it turned out that ICO Reviews and some ICO Rating websites could be paid so that their ICO Review would be good.
so in the end I can't believe the authenticity of some ICO Reviews.

[chabapok]

I dont trust any influencer or ico rating website or anything. Only i am trusting my own decisions because of that i learnt too many things about icos i did lots of research about icos and past good performed icos. Now i know too many things about icos and i can decide my own decision. I suggest to everyone . Do not trust any website or influencer. Only trust your own feelings.

[TomArayaSlaya]

I think the truth is that you have to make your own decision based on your fact finding from those review sites It help ease things up instead of blaming the review site because i dont they can detect some kind of scam even if they do is mostly after like half way so i think best is maybe research and the hold a little

[ahmed04]

I wouldn't trust them. All aggregators are engaged only in the fact that deceive us, ordinary users who want to read about a particular project.

[mulukey]

This is not what advertising and advertising do all the time, the purpose is to reach consumers, decisions and choices. Never trust someone elses 100% rating, You should always do your own research to check out the facts before you invest money in a project. Most people only do it in cash, even those here to receive bonuses. Your ICO decision must be based on your own research and what you have found out for yourself.

[Yamifoud]

This is not what advertising and advertising do all the time, the purpose is to reach consumers, decisions and choices. Never trust someone elses 100% rating, You should always do your own research to check out the facts before you invest money in a project. Most people only do it in cash, even those here to receive bonuses. Your ICO decision must be based on your own research and what you have found out for yourself.

Not eventually we give trust in ICO reviews even a certain project have a high rating with them. Cause it is something there is a sabotage around. Your right,  we better check our self and do look feedbacks which could signifies if a certain project is providing good or not.

[No Pain No blood]

I have never trusted ICO reviews from anywhere. it's better to do my personal observation than to trust others. and in my opinion my current ICO Rating cannot be a benchmark for judging that ico is good or not.

[RockHenki]

Not too dependent on any ICO evaluation page. There should be an objective comparison between the ICO rating sites. The ranking information provided by the rating websites that are not included will be of reference value. Larger projection. For large investments or to understand, consider yourself and study it. If you put a lot of money, then they will give you good reviews on the project even if it's a phishing project they will put up with. positive, so sometimes do not trust the evaluation of some people.

[suzukiy]

I believe ICO reviews, because in my opinion ico's review is important to determine whether I have a good or not, so far I've always followed the reviews of ico and the icon is always successful, it's very useful to choose a quality ico

[Robotbitcoin22]

For now, I don't believe in review sites. because there are indeed many articles that mention that reviews can be bought with money. and of course it is very dangerous because it can make many people fooled

[Artem57]

For now, I don't believe in review sites. because there are indeed many articles that mention that reviews can be bought with money. and of course it is very dangerous because it can make many people fooled

Such sites and do not believe. You need to apply the information that they contain for their own purposes. In many of these reviews contain information that will help you quickly understand the idea of the project and its financial component. You don't have to spend time learning white paper.

[iceblasto]

For now, I don't believe in review sites. because there are indeed many articles that mention that reviews can be bought with money. and of course it is very dangerous because it can make many people fooled

I also don't believe much even now I always follow my heart in choosing ICO.
I prefer to believe in myself in investing because if I succeed I will be very happy because of my own results.

[fayoling]

I think that very few people trust ico trakers and their rating of projects, I myself have repeatedly noticed when a scam gets there, but these trakers can be used to collect information about a project

[izay]

ICO Reviews just serve as a guide. I dont say not to trust them but dont just rely on their reviews. Make an observation by yours for you to say and trust a specific platform. Investing in an ICO is risky so we are not allowed to blame anyone with their failed reviews or whatsoever. Just be prepared to lose and dont just expect to gain.

[mistemb]

I only watch Crush Crypto for ico reviews. rest where shillers or paid reviews . invest that have big discount then dumps on their followers

[Kevinatin]

Believe it or not, this is your business. That's weird, when on the ico market there was a boom, the forum had units of such thoughts. As the trend changes, crowd opinions change too. This does not seem strange to you.

[Caesar-Giulius]

IMO, ICO review websites are good for reading as references when doing investment research. But you have to do your own analysis before deciding whether to invest or not.

[aces777]

Trust them but make sure that you corroborate the information that they are giving you with some research of your own. That will help you determine if the ico review site is actually giving out good reviews so you can be able to trust them in the future. What I think though is that everyone has a price and if someone paid them well enough, they would have no problem altering reviews

[terible.hunter]

I am sure only that each person should decide for himself what is important for him for the conclusion and decision on the project and what is not important. You forget that you need to analyze the project individually.

[caffu chino]

I don't believe it. but I always visit some websites that focus on ICO rating to see a list of new ICOs.

[nik9990]

I think that you should not choose iso from reviews, now they can be incorrect or written specifically to attract people