Should ICO have Advisors compulsorily?

[coinbirds]

Advisers with good reputation means a lot to a project in the sale phase.
Investors looking at the team experience but also the list of advisers is also important for investment decision making.

[pedpedped101]

Advisors are necessary for the success of a project. There are some advisors that are experts and are well respected when it comes to cryptocurrency and blockchain technology. Some of them have fans. Therefore, if they notice they are serving as advisor for a particular project, they would create interest in it, just because of them.

[ganeshramk]

For me it's not compulsory to have advisors of the team is very experienced in crypto. I always check that in the first instance. If not, then only I look for advisors information.

[RareFortune]

If the advisor is popular in crypto industry and have a succeeded project then it could make a big impact on a newly created project because of the connection of their advisor but the success of a project doesn't rely on the their advisor but the team itself and how they will make a working product.

[pacman7331]

No, we can't believe a project only by the advisors! Sometimes ICO projects use fake advisor's name or they lie with the advisor names. I don't think advisors are compulsory for an ICO project, but I think a good advisor can impact good support for the ICO project. If you want to pick a good ICO project then you have to research not only advisor but also the team, whitepaper, background, partners everything!

[ije07]

I don't think so, but the advisor is also important to be used as a reference in choosing a project or ICO because to determine the project or ICO that we will choose, then we have to evaluate it from many aspects, not only from one or two aspects, but everything is important to rated as concepts, advisors, communities, managers, total coins and more

[aioc]

I have seen many ICOs' having advisors for namesake and only a few have for real. Can we believe a project based on the Advisors?

Or is it necessary for ICOs' to have Advisors before Token sale? Seen some using Bounty campaign to get Advisors.

It is to increase the reputation on the campaign and the project, they don't necessarily have an overall decision to where the project is heading, some dev just want prominent name in their website it's part of the campaign, but I don't want my name in any project as an advisor, it's to risky if you do not meet the developers face to face.

[LbtalkL]

A good project doesn't need this advisor, they are paid and most likely will only tell good things about a certain project. Some project is using it as a marketing plan to get some exposure. I think it is better to run a btc paid signature campaign.

[cchub]

Now the new advisors thing is IEO because exchanges act like advisors do, renting credibility.

[coinsycrip09]

of course, i think the advisor is indeed needed.
their roles may look like they are not needed, but they are needed to control the sale of tokens.
with a great advisor, their sales will go as expected.

[smyslov]

I have seen many ICOs' having advisors for namesake and only a few have for real. Can we believe a project based on the Advisors?

Or is it necessary for ICOs' to have Advisors before Token sale? Seen some using Bounty campaign to get Advisors.

No these advisors have nothing to do with the platform, they want to make the project looks legit, some legit investment site has this and they think their project will look good if they have something like this, in their page.

[libert19]

Nah, most of  ICOs have advisors for name sake and I rarely see them doing anything. If advisors were any good then most of ICOs won't be getting failed.

[L A R A]

I have seen many ICOs' having advisors for namesake and only a few have for real. Can we believe a project based on the Advisors?

first I thought yes, but not for now
currently good advisor cannot be a guarantee for a successful ICO project, for a successful ICO project it is very difficult now even though they have a good team and partner

[xabre]

Ico should have advisor to make price is higher after listing on exchange market, an ICO owner have respect with investor with buy back after listing on exchange market to make their coin and asset will have higher price.

[jorenpo]

I have seen many ICOs' having advisors for namesake and only a few have for real. Can we believe a project based on the Advisors?

Or is it necessary for ICOs' to have Advisors before Token sale? Seen some using Bounty campaign to get Advisors.

i think its for the best. They are advisors for reasons. I thinks they're the one who plan the ICO and controls it.

[Ayobami99]

Advisors may sometimes mean the success or failure of a project. Advisors many times bring key investors into a project. They also facilitate partnerships... I mean great ones. The best you want to do is to have influential advisors in your project. Their name can fetch you millions.   

[Abal Abal]

yes, I strongly require an advisor in the ICO program, because with the presence of advisors they will have a minimum level of error, and mistakes cannot be made and should not occur in the ICO program.

[suzanne5223]

No, we can't believe a project only by the advisors! Sometimes ICO projects use fake advisor's name or they lie with the advisor names. I don't think advisors are compulsory for an ICO project, but I think a good advisor can impact good support for the ICO project. If you want to pick a good ICO project then you have to research not only advisor but also the team, whitepaper, background, partners everything!

Although, we have a situation where some scam ICOs used pick fake advisor which I think it better not to have one than using a fake advisors. However, ICOs having or using it not a must but ICOs need an advisors in other to successful because most of the advisors are usually crypto legal practitioner who's pros and influencer person.

[Wolfwar]

No, we can't believe a project only by the advisors! Sometimes ICO projects use fake advisor's name or they lie with the advisor names. I don't think advisors are compulsory for an ICO project, but I think a good advisor can impact good support for the ICO project. If you want to pick a good ICO project then you have to research not only advisor but also the team, whitepaper, background, partners everything!

Although, we have a situation where some scam ICOs used pick fake advisor which I think it better not to have one than using a fake advisors. However, ICOs having or using it not a must but ICOs need an advisors in other to successful because most of the advisors are usually crypto legal practitioner who's pros and influencer person.

I think that the whole system of the company's ico market is quite simple and reliable for all private users of cryptocurrency, including new companies. What security tokens and other projects offer today may invite some difficulties for users. Today, for the company’s ico market, there are two enemies. And the first is fraudsters, and the second is the poor state of the cryptocurrency market, when investors migrated from the company’s ico market to stock exchanges.

[rosezionjohn]

I do not think it's really compulsory especially if they have a big team that covers all aspects. It's on the team if they want another set of eyes to look into their project and if they want to attract more potential investors since most of these advisors are "influencers".