Hardcap ICO is no guarantee that the project will succeed

[DarkIT]

Of course, I agree with your words since the achievement of the hardcap is not the main indicator of the success of the project, since the market is very full of similar projects that after the successful implementation of the ICO simply went to the bottom. The main goal of any project is to create a product and support it, and funds can always be raised.

yes, many projects are almost similar out there. when a project is hardcap, it doesn't guarantee whether they can survive or not. because all depends on the superiority of their products. many hardcap projects, however, lose competition in the market and fail.

[dainoran]

I agree with your opinion, because I have experienced this. a project that I followed hardcap was achieved, but when entering the market the project price dropped rapidly and I suffered a loss.

[Tosyn2]

ICO is not a guarantee that the project will be successful, because most ICO projects are still limited to concepts and do not have clear references,
but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?

Reaching hardcap of a project will turn out to be an advantage for the project if the fund raise is being utilised in the best interest of the investors. There have been cases of project with huge fund raised which turned out to be unsuccessful in the long run. Competent and experienced team are needed when handling projects.

[Mcmich]

ICO is not a guarantee that the project will be successful, because most ICO projects are still limited to concepts and do not have clear references,
but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?

I agree with you on this 100%. When I see some people showing interest only for projects that claim to have reached softcap, I just shake my head. That is no guarantee at all. Many projects even fake this hardcap stuff so what's the fuss about it. I prefer projects on low key yet they do marvelously well.

[Mikcik]

ICO is not a guarantee that the project will be successful, because most ICO projects are still limited to concepts and do not have clear references,
but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?

I think that in the market of crypto currencies nothing gives any guarantee. Participation in the ICO is a big risk. Each participant assesses risks according to its criteria. But even the combination of positive moments doesn't give you any guarantee that the project will be successful.

I think only a few percent of all ICOs are currently active and growing. Of course, thanks to ICO, currently the market is very busy, I can mention some big ICO projects up to now such as Qtum, Tron, ONT, Bat, ... They have been successful compared to ICO prices. In the past, despite a year of bear market

[EXtremeAEX]

ICO is not a guarantee that the project will be successful, because most ICO projects are still limited to concepts and do not have clear references,
but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?

I think that in the market of crypto currencies nothing gives any guarantee. Participation in the ICO is a big risk. Each participant assesses risks according to its criteria. But even the combination of positive moments doesn't give you any guarantee that the project will be successful.

I think only a few percent of all ICOs are currently active and growing. Of course, thanks to ICO, currently the market is very busy, I can mention some big ICO projects up to now such as Qtum, Tron, ONT, Bat, ... They have been successful compared to ICO prices. In the past, despite a year of bear market

This is not about the projects that carried out the ICO can not be successful. Any project can be successful if you have a good idea, an excellent team of developers with strong funding and some other aspects. The problem is that being successful is all just an opportunity, not a 100% option. Therefore, no one will ever give you real guarantees, and if someone says that this project will definitely be successful, then this person obviously will not cover your damage if his words prove to be false.

[Yukyzu]

ICO is not a guarantee that the project will be successful, because most ICO projects are still limited to concepts and do not have clear references,
but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?

I agree with you on this 100%. When I see some people showing interest only for projects that claim to have reached softcap, I just shake my head. That is no guarantee at all. Many projects even fake this hardcap stuff so what's the fuss about it. I prefer projects on low key yet they do marvelously well.

maybe hardcap doesn't guarantee the success of a project, because what can make the success of a project run is the team or developer. we know that out there are so many projects that have reached their hardcap, but when they enter the market, the price is really unexpected. sometimes it is due to products that are not very good at competition. some projects also fake their hardcaps. well, because of that we must be careful.

[Ekyfitri]

maybe hardcap doesn't guarantee the success of a project, because what can make the success of a project run is the team or developer. we know that out there are so many projects that have reached their hardcap, but when they enter the market, the price is really unexpected. sometimes it is due to products that are not very good at competition. some projects also fake their hardcaps. well, because of that we must be careful.

You are right, even though the Ico project is successful in the sales they do, but it does not guarantee that the project can survive on the market. because many Ico projects were successfully sold but they failed to maintain their value in the market. wouldn't it be very difficult to build their market again.

[OptimusPrime_3]

This has been well proven that irrespective of the amount raised from a project does not determine its success. I have seen many projects in this form and I totally agree with you

[StatesManG]

Well I must say you are right, and that is yet another problem which we face in crypto that is yet to be addressed. Many projects that has raised huge funds turn out to be trash while projects with good value can't raise enough funds.

[MaiQwaN]

Cryptocurrency investing is a high-risk event. No matter how good the product / idea of the project is, no matter how experienced and well-known the team and advisers are, no matter how real or transcendental hardcap would be - nothing gives any guarantees of a successful result.

[joshy23]

Cryptocurrency investing is a high-risk event. No matter how good the product / idea of the project is, no matter how experienced and well-known the team and advisers are, no matter how real or transcendental hardcap would be - nothing gives any guarantees of a successful result.

Exactly, there's  no sure thing unless the developers are really keen to succeed, even those who so called project who reached the target funds to implement the progress of their tokens have no assurance that they've be able to deliver, it's needed to wait if what fate will bring them and how they
will provide good things to their investors.

[redsun114]

I agree with this view. Hara project can be given as an example. It made a hard cap by taking $ 30 million investment in just 4 hours. But the project is still stable and counting.

First of all an ICO is not going to achieve its full hard cap until it convinces the investors as why should they put in money in the ICO. We have had some bad days with ICO and that has been enough to alarm investors of the fact that a blind investment could be painful. SO if ICO with weak project cannot raise the full hard cap, how come people consider it s guarantee for success of the project?

[UniversityCoin]

ICO is not a guarantee that the project will be successful, because most ICO projects are still limited to concepts and do not have clear references,
but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?

Developers of new projects going to ICO generally do not provide any guarantees for people carrying money to their projects. This is primarily due to the lack of legislation concerning ICO. There were several cases when the project collected Hard Kap and deceived its investors without having fulfilled the assigned tasks.

[MUG1WARA]

of the 10 ico that reach hardcap only 2 will have good prices when the list is on the market because most of the ico don't use funds seriously, only SOON news announced by the team at the telegram makes prices fall further

[odukoyaewatomi27]

I personally think the success of a project to a great extent depends on the effort and expertise of the team and not whether the hardcap was raised or not. I have seen projects that raised there hardcap but still failed to deliver and also projects that were not able to raise their softcap but still did very well. so the hardcap is not a yardstick for success of the project but the ability of the team to create demand for the project token and also meet the milestones on their roadmap on time.

[Gabteb]

There is a big problem some ICO shows wrong numbers i mean they lie to investors live they have raised big money to get more but then afther end of ICO  cant make any product as there are no money so projects like Moozicore will have much more success than others say they raised 5-6 mln.

[delarossa]

I agree with what do you say, but i think the hardcap of ICO can make the project development better than project that did not reach the hardcap, because more much money will be in for the operational development and long term planning for the future.

[terrong]

ICO is not a guarantee that the project will be successful, because most ICO projects are still limited to concepts and do not have clear references,
but projects that don't make ICO or premine are usually serious and good projects.
and I also agree on this, what about your opinion?

that's right, because actually succeed is not about how much money is used to develop the project, 80% success is determined by the hard work and innovation of the development team, that's why hardcap ICO is no guarantee that the project will succeed, so we must really consider our decision to join the ICO, the project must have good long-term planning so that its sustainability is maintained.

[tisoysoy]

Most of the ICO aimed to reach hardcap before they will undergo listing into differnt exchanges but only minmal projects reach this thing. And its not guarantee that they totally succeed after they reach the hardcap because they can't even reach their ICO  price after they had list into different exchanges site.