A good investment option? ICO's pitched on a PRODUCT, not a White Paper

[FinanceX]

Although there are many good ideas out there, aren't you safer to invest in an ICO which already has a functioning and proven product? ROI is much more likely in this scenario

I think so too, if they have a good product that has been used by many people, for what else we invest in ico which is not necessarily certainty, is it successful or not?

That's right. You really don't know these people you are giving your money to. It's a very blind investment but a proven product that is growing provides an enormous amount of confidence in comparison

[FinanceX]

There are very few avenues in the world where you can pitch an idea and be successful in fundraising to give that idea life. But in the world of ICO's it's normal   

[Vikingkong]

Yes, this is true, ICO's with proven track record and a already introduced product or service that up and running is likely to be a good source for getting a lucrative ROI. However, the investment also depend on the feasibility of it, as most of the cases they are not cheap or available to the small investors.

[SmallFish]

There are ICOs with products and services launched on the market already but even then there are chances for them to fail. Not calling it a failed ICO but EOS recently faced scrutiniy because of a massive bug that was found on their smart contracts and now their prices are falling again.

[PoliteHyena]

Positively more secure, yet there are none. Undertakings can demonstrate an MVP, which in actuality has no esteem. Financial specialists need to just stop and don't purchase tokens of unusual ventures, and afterward, the circumstance in the market willpower to change the disposition towards ICO.

[DimHorse]

Putting resources into an ICO that as of now has a working item is a smart thought that can get enormous benefits what's to come. The dangers of losing cash are limited, and the chance to benefit increments. That will be a smart action.

[HiddenPrincess]

Having a genuine item is certainly a change on being requested to contribute exclusively on the back of a whitepaper yet I would alert that a considerable lot of those that are fund-raising with an item are ventures that collected their first cash from another source. It is less hazard yet doesn't be tricked into suspecting that implies no hazard.

[danbitcoin1]

Some have a product but most with a successful product won't bother having an ICO. I prefer to look for ones with a good idea and a good team.

[Doging]

I completely agree with you, why risk your own money. It is better to invest them in a reliable, working project. For example, KamaGames, they will soon have a token seil. I want to invest 30% of my bank there.

[conevenibary]

I think it will not be a bad idea investing in a ico already having a functioning product. I think it will bring a large amount of profit in future. Beside that Ico like this are quite safer than others.

[cryptohunter]

Although there are many good ideas out there, aren't you safer to invest in an ICO which already has a functioning and proven product? ROI is much more likely in this scenario

Yes 1000% now ... people are wising up after 80% of the white papers from 2017 were actually bog roll

that will rise to 99% or greater as time goes on and even those that were serious at the time realise they are not nobel prize worthy and can't pull off the unrealistic fantasy they could dream up for bct members to cling on to

you will not find the 1% that can pull it off before you run out of money

stick to btc or projects that are complete or have completed the vast majority of their project to a functioning standard with a certain use case

In other words stick to btc unless you are an expert in many fields that are required to make an educated gamble

[MOSADDEK HASAN]

All ICO projects that are currently present in the crypto market or had been existed in the past, all of them have whitepaper of their own. Without whitepaper no ICO projects are real.

[martina14]

still we need to see the whitepaper and understand it.
this will give us more security. product maybe in the public but how sure we will have the tokens running in the market?
product are products and they can focus on that as they have no white paper declaring what they will do with the investors token.

[Rosyanroid]

I completely agree with your thoughts if we talk about investment so we have  to be more and more careful otherwise all of our investment on wealth, money and time will go in vain that is not good. It will be wiser to spend In renowned one rather than a new one. It is better to trust in the one who is already trusted by others.

[scooby_doo23955]

For ICO,whitepaper is must.The full information of the ICO and the company is presented by whitepaper.Even if an ICU have their product from before,they must need whitepaper.The community will choose those ICU’s as scam which don’t have whitepaper.

[r1s2g3]

Check ICOs at www.icoguide.com they have realistic rates and not paid ones, so it might help.

Stop reading all these bullshit and use your brain, I just found a high rated ICO in there site that I totally believe will turn into multi million dollar scam in future. (I do not have proof but sometime scams are very easy to smell.)

For ICO,whitepaper is must.The full information of the ICO and the company is presented by whitepaper.Even if an ICU have their product from before,they must need whitepaper.The community will choose those ICU’s as scam which don’t have whitepaper.

All ICO projects that are currently present in the crypto market or had been existed in the past, all of them have whitepaper of their own. Without whitepaper no ICO projects are real.

I am not sure but I feel more comfortable in investing something that is working and now just need marketing instead of something that have a beautiful looking document and no idea whether team will able to deliver according to document.

[tailor.and]

Hope ICO with a  good working products will able able to fund and collect more profit  than than the ICO which has only the whitepaper. So it should be good for investors.

[Wabri]

All ICO projects that are currently present in the crypto market or had been existed in the past, all of them have whitepaper of their own. Without whitepaper no ICO projects are real.

A whitepaper is important, but for now it is not enough that a project have only a whitepaper. Personally I look only at new projects with a MVP and can show something real.

[cvpwy]

How a ICO can be promising without  awhitepaper. Whitepaper describe ICO properly and without ICO it's seems like a scam ICO. So can be ICO be promising without any whitepaper?

[althiche]

If any ICO really have working products then that's very good news for investors. But there many hype sometimes and that's occurs badly.