Whitepaper alone is not enough to make you invest in an ICO

[Nexigen]

While studying the reliability of ICO, you need to pay attention to the team, its experience, availability and reality of the roadmap. The important thing is how much the project is active in the media, transparent or something is hiding.

[1715693880]

1715693880

[1715693880]

1715693880

[1715693880]

1715693880

[1715693880]

1715693880

[1715693880]

1715693880

[castiloros]

a lot of things to consider besides the whitepaper. analysis and consideration not only of the whitepaper only. the team and a lot of things more important to watch out for. Although it is indeed important the whitepaper still will not be able to generate fully confidence for investors.

[BlackandRed654]

This is partially true. Whitepapers are there to tell you what the project is about. It is okay to dream big, but the execution is done by the team, especially if these are experts.

[idex100]

Rightly so, I have seen some cleverly written white paper  with great promises but the practical aspect will be garbage, unattainable or even violates some legal requirements. We need more than that to invest

[TheBitcoinBadger10]

It is needed to keep an eye on the bounty related posts and threads for having more reviews related to the particular ICO project. And most important is to check the team members and their profiles.

[pimondcrypto]

Yep! Whitepapers or the roadmaps make a great appeal towards investors but these are not enough to determine the credibility of any ico project. Every investor should research the ins and out before going for investment.

[BlackandRed654]

You just spoke my mind. Just only reviewing the white paper of an ICO project cannot lead anyone to invest in a project. A strong team is the driving force of any ICO that can make them profitable.

[cryptocamacho4785]

I agree with your statement that only whitepaper is not enough for investment. It plays an important role of an ICO but only with a whitepaper investors can only learn about the project but not their credibility.

[Torps1]

Right.... It' would be ignorance on the part of anyone to rely solely on whitepaper. There are people who can write very good and appealing whitepaper yet no good/genuine reasons. Its high time investors do thorough scrutiny before making any investment.

[liripoop]

I agree with your opinion. Of course only whitepaper is not enough to make investment. Whitepaper only show their concepts. Its important to know the background and previous activities before trust them and investment procedure.

[Slimztee]

Beyond fancy whitepapers, the track history of the team is very important. If members of the team have been involved in any shady businesses or involved in any crime, they pose a risk already. I'll be skeptical investing in such ICO as the chances of them repeating same is very high.

[RecklessSerenade]

I personally pay attention to the whitepaper just after I am sure that the project's team is reliable and trustworthy, after all, in the first place you don't want to get into an scam, after that you can definitely start checking what the project is all about.

[take_off]

Whitepaper follows me in the same way as a delicious cake but just on paper, you just look at it and imagine it to be delicious, but the main thing is just imaginary and forever you will never taste the smell. its

[DikkieD]

The sum of all information regarding the project make it a project to invest in or not. That said, a bit of luck (for you and the project) is also in place. I normally don't believe in luck...but if you see what an ICO has to deal with.....

I mean, a great team, great whitepaper, great idea, great metrics, great momentum...and still some fud about it can make it all go down the drain. Even if all seemingly went well, even the ICO itself, there are no guarantees the team is able to deliver. Sometimes because of bad management, sometimes miscalculations, sometimes just experiencing some bad luck...

[Iykecollins]

I quite agree, have seen a project with an amazing white paper that eventually failed, white paper can be fascinating but without a good and honest team, loyal and and reliable community and favorable market situations, White paper can only be a just a mere write up

[flying_bit]

I have seen so many people focusing mainly on project whitepapers, and relying solely on the information contained in the whitepaper to participate in the ICO. It is very true that the most important document of an ICO project is the whitepaper, but what you should be far more focused on is the credibility of the project team. No matter how beautiful and well written a whitepaper may be, without an experienced and vibrant team, such project is bound to fail.

The most important research you should always carry out before investing in an ICO is the profile of the team starting from the head of the team to the least person. If the project has advisors, also research their full profile and experience as well.

With all these, you will be safer than the person who only read whitepapers before investing in ICOs.

What are your thoughts?

Whitepaper along with website is very important and must have for an ICO even if it's just in introductory phase. though I actually just browse over whitepaper and most of the time prefer to read one pager since WP seems very complicated to read and there's tech words regular people like me can't understand. I agree that looking at teams background is very important too and I personally like to checked their linkedin account to see their professional and educational background and it's important that they have more than 500 connection.

[GhostKnight]

white paper are good resource for get more information about ICO and project. everyone should justify before investment. then it will make your profit. it very good idea for a investor.

[blackwell77]

you are right if you want to make profit you should justify before investment. if you're that it is secure and potential for investor you should invest this project. which project ICO are good it will make your profit.

[asriloni]

a lot of things to consider besides the whitepaper. analysis and consideration not only of the whitepaper only. the team and a lot of things more important to watch out for. Although it is indeed important the whitepaper still will not be able to generate fully confidence for investors.

Whitepaper is not represent all of the idea and it can be changed anytime. Basically to determine how good that crypto is based on the whitepaper is the worst idea ever I seen. If you are seeing only from their proposal and concept and that I believe that will not give you a lot of accuracy.

[krenus]

I have seen so many people focusing mainly on project whitepapers, and relying solely on the information contained in the whitepaper to participate in the ICO. It is very true that the most important document of an ICO project is the whitepaper, but what you should be far more focused on is the credibility of the project team. No matter how beautiful and well written a whitepaper may be, without an experienced and vibrant team, such project is bound to fail.

The most important research you should always carry out before investing in an ICO is the profile of the team starting from the head of the team to the least person. If the project has advisors, also research their full profile and experience as well.

With all these, you will be safer than the person who only read whitepapers before investing in ICOs.

What are your thoughts?

you are right, whitepaper can't guarantee absolute safety. i agree with the point about researching people behind the project instead the project itself