Altcoins Difficulties

[ausbit]

Of course, reading whitepaper is one of the important criteria when choosing an ICO. But in my opinion it is better to first study the project team and then do the rest of the analysis of the project.

To me, whitepaper is just basically there to understand more about the project and its business solutions, and trust me, whitepaper can be boring.

Now, considering the fact that whitepapers are easily cloned these days, I really would not want to bother myself too much when it comes to picking the whitepaper first. What is most important is that this project I want to read about, how legitimate is it? This is where the scrutinizing of the team as well as availability of minimum viable product comes in. With these ones, you will know if a project is worth digging in further into or not.

[sateyaam]

I agree with you, but it would be better if there is an institution that selects the ico-ico, because often I see there are good ico that don't get a place while fake ico or ico scam take the chance that good ico doesn't get, the institution can also filter so that no more ico scams are circulating

[Sifon]

A whitepaper remains a fancy document with ideas and solutions, but the actual implementation of those concepts is in the product. It's enough to conclude an ICO is good just by reading the whitepaper alone, even though it's equally essential. There are professional whitepaper writers out there now and their job is to make the document very attractive and worded appropriately. A lot of other parameters need to be evaluated by concluding the project is worth giving a shot

[colenax]

    In crypto world there are many peoplo who are lauching ICOs, but many of us dont know how difficult its, maybe because in the pass we look at for ICO trash o fraud, however there are many projects which have o are thinking in good purpose, it depends how do you look. And we need to remember that there a team who are pushing a project, I think the best way to verify if its good or no is whitepaper, or what do you think??

overall I always check and make research for research, after that I separate it from a few ico that I have done before. and lastly I did. analyzing is the thing that most investors must do and not to be affected by the white paper, we must still use healthy logic.

[NeuroticFish]

My guess is that transparency is the key. And public figures.

Public ledger with all the funds, in and out, clearly stated where everything went. Clearly stated persons in the project, persons willing to also write that in the facebook/linkedin/whatever profiles. Adding some known credible figures to the team helps. Brainstorming/scrum meetings recorded/available as possible. The code, if possible, available too (GitHub or other).
It won't hurt to have at least some steps of the project done (and recorded in a way or another).
Recordings with offices, people working on your project.

Some of these can be available for everybody as teasers, some can be available only for the ones that actually acquired your tokens.


There are a lot of things that can be shown. Of course, very few will check them out, but they'll add more credibility to the project.
Every missing thing can create a conspiracy theory.
Yes, I know, this means overhead and it means the competition may find out things you didn't want to show. It's a balance you have to find.


But I think that the best 2 things for a good ICO are the public figures and the transparency.
Good idea, whitepaper and so on are also a must, but even the scam projects give the impression they have that.

[Harkorede]

I think the best way to verify if its good or no is whitepaper, or what do you think??

A Whitepaper is only meant is to provide you an insight and better understanding about a project and how it works.

"A white paper is an authoritative report or guide that informs readers concisely about a complex issue and presents the issuing body's philosophy on the matter. It is meant to help readers understand an issue, solve a problem, or make a decision. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_paper"

A Whitepaper is only relevant if the project isn't an outright scam to begin with, because any project could hire someone or firm to design its whitepaper and get a perfect one, So don't be surprised if a scam project has a very concise and detailed whitepaper. However, an experienced Investor might be able figure out if there are some discrepancies in the whitepaper.
Whitepaper might be one of the ways to find out but, cannot be solely relied upon to know if a project is legitimate or just a scam.

[nebuch]

Excuse me, there are more people who know ethereum difficulties at this moment and just few who doesn't care of its decline. Actually, it is too long struggle of price to get back on track again. In order to determine altcoins if potential should have complete information in whitepaper, in website and the roadmap is good enough. Ethereum is the common alt that basis of more ICO due to its popularity and profitable advantage.

[wojteks102]

    In crypto world there are many peoplo who are lauching ICOs, but many of us dont know how difficult its, maybe because in the pass we look at for ICO trash o fraud, however there are many projects which have o are thinking in good purpose, it depends how do you look. And we need to remember that there a team who are pushing a project, I think the best way to verify if its good or no is whitepaper, or what do you think??

Whitepaper mainly is providing something like idea behind the whole project. You need to connect few sources to have a good analytics base how good is the project. These sources might be - whitepaper, linkedin of the team, reddit or subreddit of the project, ann thread and opinions other users about this.