Hardcap ICO is no guarantee that the project will succeed

[Malamok101]

Without money ico projects can work up. So many of ico turn to ieo to gain up some money and reach soft cap to hardcap because other says once they reach hardcap the projects goes successful. But until now they can reach hardcap unless the project is not good in futher ways because of many scam ico projects and investors are worried to invest up sometimes.

[1714832653]

1714832653

[1714832653]

1714832653

[1714832653]

1714832653

[1714832653]

1714832653

[ufaiz50]

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, after all some projects also use fake hardcaps where the investment is made by the developer themselves.
In my opinion the making of ICO aims to be more attractive to investors from cryptocurrency users so that the goal range is slightly wider. Then regarding if the project uses ICO and doesn't use ICO, who more seriously? it depends on who the developer is, and I don't think its the main thing to say that project is serious or not.

[imstillthebest]

Cryptocurrency projects, most especially ICOs now hardly reach hardcap, but when it comes to IEO, everything can be sold off within seconds, depending on the exchange on which it is held.
Reaching hardcap is actually a good thing, because genuine projects will be able to utilize the fund to meet up with the project development.

If the project reaches hardcap it is actually very good. Because they can develop and run a project roadmap. But most projects cannot even run their projects, even though the project gets a lot of funding from the ICO. That's why hardcap is no guarantee that the project will succeed.

i dont get them . why would they postpone the project even if they already have the funds to keep the project going ? are the freaking lazy or they are just scamming thier investors  ? but i see that some ico's have a money back guarantee offer which means investors gets a refund if something bad happens but the one that will suffer are the bounty hunters because they dont get anything from thier hardwork if ever the project only promise to pay a token after the completion dates  .

[keziakusayang]

it all depends on the concept of the project itself. if it reaches hardcap, but their concept is less interesting, it can even be said that it doesn't develop in the future, it won't affect anything. but if a project is in a good hardcap concept and not of course they will succeed. I gave one example. oyster. they did not reach the selling price of tokens but the concept was good and the project was developed. and the price of their coins soared.

[Bay_Harbour_Butcher]

yes I agree with you, the quality of an ICO project is very difficult to assess, even though the ico project managed to reach a hardcap, it does not mean that the price of coins distributed will go up in the market, even the coins will drop dramatically after entering the exchange

[RockDJ]

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?

Actually, gone are the days you judge the success of a project by its ability to reach Hardcap. Even sparkster reached its ICO sale Hardcap but did x-100 on listing on IDEX and it was delisted in less than two weeks. I belive the team makeup, as well as token allocation has alot to more offer towards the success of any project in my opinion

[GGmith]

yes I agree with you, the quality of an ICO project is very difficult to assess, even though the ico project managed to reach a hardcap, it does not mean that the price of coins distributed will go up in the market, even the coins will drop dramatically after entering the exchange

yes, because the one who determines the value or price of a coin on an exchange is the investor or user. even though the project succeeded in reaching a hardcap but the price of an unstable coin will also affect the development of coins in the future. so now many projects are repeating their programs to attract new investors so that the price of coins remains stable in the market.

[bitladen]

The most important thing in the project is not how much money the project has raised, but the most important thing is how the developers treat their project and how it is developed

[m.rifki]

The most important thing in the project is not how much money the project has raised, but the most important thing is how the developers treat their project and how it is developed

you are right, after successful sales, what must be considered is their product. whether the product is acceptable and active on the market or not. it is very important, because if there is no product from the platform developed it will be the same as there is no real evidence of the project that has been carried out.

[regalis]

it all depends on the concept of the project itself. if it reaches hardcap, but their concept is less interesting, it can even be said that it doesn't develop in the future, it won't affect anything. but if a project is in a good hardcap concept and not of course they will succeed. I gave one example. oyster. they did not reach the selling price of tokens but the concept was good and the project was developed. and the price of their coins soared.

Exactly, but most of the project don't really give an assurance that they will have a good future in the crypto world. Getting the hardcap is a big improvement of the project but it doesn't mean that it will provide a good future for us crypto hunters.

[whyrqa-1]

It was only possible to talk about the hardcap of the company ico about those projects that had conducted the company’s ico before 2018.  Over the past year and a half, I almost never came across such projects that at least exceeded Softcap.  but in 2017, the projects that collected Kharkov really showed good results in the market, although today these projects are also in a bearish trend.

[kevinzxz]

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?

we can't see it from that, because in my opinion there are some projects that use ICO but the project is still running and serious to develop the project, so what determines this project seriously and good is the team of project, because even though the project doesn't have ICO but the project has a bad team, so I'm sure the project will fail too and if the project has an ICO but the team from the project is good, then I am sure the project will grow rapidly because this project has additional funds from investors to be able to make the project have a fast progress, therefore I think the project will look serious and good, not from the project having an ICO or not, but the team on the project is good or not.

[fuer44]

all will depend on team performance. because of whether or not hardcap is achieved, it is no guarantee of success atico. the team can just do a scam and then leave. but if the atim who works in it is solid, not even reaching hardcap can be successful.

[sidkz]

It seems to me that sometimes the project team is deceiving, about the funds raised, I met projects that collected the maximum amount, but did not take the token for a good exchange, only very bad exchanges, if they had money, everything would be different

[BitTraderCute]

It seems to me that sometimes the project team is deceiving, about the funds raised, I met projects that collected the maximum amount, but did not take the token for a good exchange, only very bad exchanges, if they had money, everything would be different

good exchanges not only talk listing fee.for binance, they will not list a projects if they have no good quality although they pay alot of bitcoin as listing fee.some projects able to maximize their crowdfunding , but they could not developt projects well.and this is be their main obstacles to list in good exchanges.

[ancafe]

many investors are careful in investing in an ICO project even though it has reached hardcap but as you say that's it has not determined success. the ICO project is only sweet at the beginning and after that it can end in fraud or become a rubbish coin, and if it is listed on the market the price of a coin is not in accordance with the ICO price.

well, even though ICOs that achieve their hardcap have great potential to develop, but, I think the real development depends on the honesty of the team, and of course their strategy. hardcap projects prove that the project has a concept, and high prospects. but, not a few projet still fail when they reach their hardcap.

[Menawi12]

it all depends on the concept of the project itself. if it reaches hardcap, but their concept is less interesting, it can even be said that it doesn't develop in the future, it won't affect anything. but if a project is in a good hardcap concept and not of course they will succeed. I gave one example. oyster. they did not reach the selling price of tokens but the concept was good and the project was developed. and the price of their coins soared.

I agree, everything goes back to the concept of the project itself. If the project is good and the developer team uses the money to build and develop the products, I think it will affect investor confidence, but many projects that once the target is achieved, communication is no longer intensive with the community

[adam1230]

Yes i agree there are many ICOs which failed after hardcap and all money gone to scammers.
This is how they continue their luxury.
Team is the key of all ICOs check the team very detailed and decide if they are real and honest.

[Stanlo]

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 remembered Greenlink project in 2017,they made millions of dollars from ICO hardcap with ease and they just disappeared into thin air,their website stop working

[Nnuego]

Am totally in support of what you just said. Some ICO lack ideas to continue refracturing of their project to move to the moon. They are so adamant to have a clear vision of their goal and target. ICO's takes years to plan to get the team organized for a successful and continuity project