We should stop promoting ICOs who ask huge money for their soft/hardcap!

[dark08]

Hello Everyone,
Recently I have analyzed that most of the big raised ICOs are valueless or nothing but a pump dump token! No Major updates but they asked huge money to run their technology/project smoothly! Look at the HDAC, Bankex, Pumapay, Online, Cryptosolartech and so on ICOs! They gathered huge money from the sale but then what happened? Their developments mean just listing on some exchanges that's it! Many low cap ICO projects are doing far better than those highly earned ICO projects. Look at the countinghouse ICO, how happy their investors are!

So, My Opinion is, we should stop promoting those ICOs who asked more than 10-20 Million USD as a soft cap goal! what do you think?

People will not stop promoting even the scam exchanges when they are getting paid with useless tokens which is also scamming the participants but still bounty hunters were doing that even after many failures.But if they can stop promoting these projects which can really help the investors to find the real projects.

100% right people will never stop promoting scam project for a token that have no value or real exchange in the market, people are too greedy to earn money hahaha even they dont know whats the real project objective or goal in the market.

[MBMauL]

100% right people will never stop promoting scam project for a token that have no value or real exchange in the market, people are too greedy to earn money hahaha even they dont know whats the real project objective or goal in the market.

they and we might just think of getting more assets from promoting new projects. it's true we don't know whether it will be traded or not. what is clear is that we only try our best and strive to choose the best.

[Anonylz]

Different project requires different financial weight to execute and successfully implemented, the hardcap of project "A" is not the same hardcap of project "B" because of different factors involve,
however, it is still very necessary for project owners not to deliberately inflate the required finance required to complete the project, because nowadays, many project just comes up unrealistic hardcap which at the end will not be utilized appropriately. So i think it's good idea to check such project that intentionally inflate their soft/hardcap just because they can.

[royalfestus]

A good idea about startups is to know how to start with minimum amount. ICOs may not be able to raise the size of money by projects mentioned in the OP again,now or maybe in future, they were able to exploit investors confidence in the space then. More also the difference in the softcap and hardcap should not be too large, it calls for concern. Some projects, most especially in energy sector may demand high amount of money, I think private sale and government should be committed for a certain percentage of funding

[valek.bruno]

Yes, in general, today it looks very terrible, because there are real opportunities to complete the fundraising processes for such a large investment. I hope that sooner or later the whole thing will end. But I think that it will not be so fast. We need to create a platform for this.

[Yemolou]

I think every ICO is free to decide how much money they need to move their development forward. It does not mean that every ICO with a big soft cap is a scam, maybe they really need this sum of money. A much more important aspect is the working product or an MVP.

[hahahafr]

Well you are right mate, i know most of the ICOs you have mentioned and i can also testify to the fact that those who actually raised huge amount of money are not doing anything better on the market. And yeah Counting House is really doing great.

[thaliaand]

Softcap and hardcap can not be an indicator of a failed or success project with valuable price in the market. The amount of the soft/hard cap depends on what project the ICO is going to do and we can evaluate the value is reasonable or not.  But it is can be an initial sign for us to learn more and do our dilligence to research the project.

[Dasha88fed]

I agree, projects that have installed Soft Cap for more than 10 million dollars today will probably not be able to collect this amount and will never start. But I noticed that the success of the project depends on the actions of the team and only slightly depends on the amount collected. Therefore, I try not to participate in projects whose team does not inspire confidence, and their professionalism and activity are at a too low level.

[DeathGrasp]

I agree, projects that have installed Soft Cap for more than 10 million dollars today will probably not be able to collect this amount and will never start. But I noticed that the success of the project depends on the actions of the team and only slightly depends on the amount collected. Therefore, I try not to participate in projects whose team does not inspire confidence, and their professionalism and activity are at a too low level.

If Only you are a professional in this business, namely there is an experience to evaluate what are trying to create developers who try to do ICO, then you can estimate the necessary costs for this project.
For Example, the IBM department or other well-known company, if wants to do ICO easily sets and will collect softcap in the amount of 10 mil $.

[Perfect35]

I think it s high time we started neglecting such ICOs. Every project team should be responsible for the major part of the fund needed to develop their product. If they do not have the fund, there is no need for them to lunch their project, but wait until they have at least 50% of the fund from them and the remaining from investors that may be interested.

[cryptolidus]

Some projects needs more funds for development and some other needs less. It is impossible to categorize
ICOs on this way by soft/hard cap.

[cryp24x]

At first glance of your post, we may agree with you but what is the difference of other ICOs with lower softcap and hardcap if they really want to scam people? I don't think that should be the basis of identifying the culprits. There are projects that are reliable and in reality, they really need good funding which makes their softcap and hardcap higher.

[jakelyson]

Some projects are really costly to develop that is why they are asking a large of money.

I think you are looking at it the wrong way. We should not base it on the amount of the soft cap. It should be base if the project can be a reality, if it has good probability to succeed. And also you should see if it is not a scam. Most projects do not succeed because of the developers lack or it was a scam at the first place. I think those are the basis you should spot not to promote an ICO. Amount generated is not one of it.

[stefany101]

Hello Everyone,
Recently I have analyzed that most of the big raised ICOs are valueless or nothing but a pump dump token! No Major updates but they asked huge money to run their technology/project smoothly! Look at the HDAC, Bankex, Pumapay, Online, Cryptosolartech and so on ICOs! They gathered huge money from the sale but then what happened? Their developments mean just listing on some exchanges that's it! Many low cap ICO projects are doing far better than those highly earned ICO projects. Look at the countinghouse ICO, how happy their investors are!

So, My Opinion is, we should stop promoting those ICOs who asked more than 10-20 Million USD as a soft cap goal! what do you think?

That amount that you had stated is too much for a softcap of an ICO, that amount is already a hardcap for some ICOs but in them they set it just a softcap. It is better to promote those ICOs with a low amount of softcap because usually, these ICOs are being successful once they are listed on crypto exchange/s. It doesn't matter if an ICO has a low softcap, what matter is on how the development team will use the funds raised to make their project better.

[smyslov]

Hello Everyone,
Recently I have analyzed that most of the big raised ICOs are valueless or nothing but a pump dump token! No Major updates but they asked huge money to run their technology/project smoothly! Look at the HDAC, Bankex, Pumapay, Online, Cryptosolartech and so on ICOs! They gathered huge money from the sale but then what happened? Their developments mean just listing on some exchanges that's it! Many low cap ICO projects are doing far better than those highly earned ICO projects. Look at the countinghouse ICO, how happy their investors are!

So, My Opinion is, we should stop promoting those ICOs who asked more than 10-20 Million USD as a soft cap goal! what do you think?

I agree the 10 to 20 million dollars is enough to build their platform from scratch, but with the current situation any ICO are having a hard time raising even 1 million, even good projects like LBX and OVO are paused because they are having a hard time raising the funds.

[angrybird3591]

So, My Opinion is, we should stop promoting those ICOs who asked more than 10-20 Million USD as a soft cap goal! what do you think?

I agree with this, so many ICO with high softcap or hardcap after listing they dont care anymore about the project, sometimes the team dont care anymore about the project roadmap. And i think 10-20 Million, they only set it to make profit, not for project. I think 5Million for hardcap, this is enough. Lets care about investor

That's right when not yet reached sotfcap. then the administrators are very enthusiastic and work on the right route. But when it comes to sotfcap then the team will not manage the community and development that the team has given, much ico then the team disappeared after reaching sotfcat.

[Opnsrc]

Just few projects that I know of, such as Pundix, who were able to raise huge money, by reaching their hardcap and are still able to deliver to their community, most especially the investors. This is more reason h should be very much concerned about the team of any project we intend investing in or plan to promote.

Actually, many ICOs have succeeded in reaching hardcaps, such as CTA, Yamzu and Karatcoin but they have not announced that their projects are still running according to the roadmap.

I beg your pardon, but have their investors got at least their first awards? What I see now is the situation when ICO are supposed to be successful projects "on paper" (on the web), but it does not bring profits to people who participate in them.

[Lawrenzoo]

Hello Everyone,
Recently I have analyzed that most of the big raised ICOs are valueless or nothing but a pump dump token! No Major updates but they asked huge money to run their technology/project smoothly! Look at the HDAC, Bankex, Pumapay, Online, Cryptosolartech and so on ICOs! They gathered huge money from the sale but then what happened? Their developments mean just listing on some exchanges that's it! Many low cap ICO projects are doing far better than those highly earned ICO projects. Look at the countinghouse ICO, how happy their investors are!

So, My Opinion is, we should stop promoting those ICOs who asked more than 10-20 Million USD as a soft cap goal! what do you think?

I agree the 10 to 20 million dollars is enough to build their platform from scratch, but with the current situation any ICO are having a hard time raising even 1 million, even good projects like LBX and OVO are paused because they are having a hard time raising the funds.

I think the amount being quoted by these projects are as a result of the high cost of leaving in their country, like in my country, 2 million dollars is far more than enough to create a project that will benefit the whole investors no matter how many they are. Where these projects are establish also contribute to reason why they get too much of exhorbitant quotations.

[macshad]

I guess you are right before most of the definitely dont live up to expectations i saw a bounty recently whose softcap is $20 million and hardcap is $150 million like when I first saw it i was just laughing and the ico is almost over and they have not even reached soft cap and the airdrop token is worth $111, could that project ever be successful