Don't be too quick to judge ICOs

[spydee1522]

True talk is, despite the fact that most ICOs end up unsuccessful does not mean all ICOs will fail or the fact that most ICOs ends as scam does not mean all ICOs are scam. A project not doing well in it few years in the market does not mean the project is a scam or dead. Just as you need to crawl before walking and walk before running in infants, same way we have to give some projects time to go through that process. Bitcoin started from somewhere before getting to where it is now. Don't be too quick to judge a project with its current state.

[1714702039]

1714702039

[1714702039]

1714702039

[1714702039]

1714702039

[1714702039]

1714702039

[anatolij.shishkin]

I personally do not believe this statistics that 99% of ICOs are scam, because some ICOs fail do not mean they are all scam. I usually tell people that starting an ICO is like starting a new business, it might succeed immediately, it might fail presently but have a great future and it might fail totally beyond redemption. So because a project is failing to perform presently or fail totally do not mean it is a scam. Don't get me wrong here, I never said there are no scam projects but the rate is not as high as alleged. Judging a project based on its first few years is wrong, give it time to realize its potentials.

What a naive novelty. They tolerate no luck. Well, we collected 36 million, well, it did not work out. We have nothing to create, sorry. No money left. You're just too naive. There are cheaters 99.9% There are too few real companies working in the market.


They should not promise anything. That they will change the world. And do what they can realize. Then they will not turn into another Shitcoin.

[vit05]

Mostly of ICo doesn't have anything. They have only some papers with an ideia that they could not prove or that uses another main net. 70% of ICo are tokens that have as goal centralized the decision and profits in a company. They use ethereum main net and make a lot of promises without any kind of garantiees for the investors.

[kingpin4321]

You have no other choice but to believe it. A huge percentage of initial coin offering icos has turned out to be pure scam and that's just the honest truth. And unless a strict law is enforced on initial coin offering projects the trend would definitely continue and would slowly decapitate the initial coin offering sectors

[Convery]

I am here for about 3 years in this industry (ICOs, in cryptocurrencies for much longer time) and I have to say that all ICOs are just hype. You have to choose that one that will give you quick profit and then leave. It is something like gamble.

[94K]

Its not people's fault to be too quick to judge ICOs. Its the truth. ICOs these days all appear to be scam only few. Aside that, its like gambling. You invest in what is profitable then you leave it after getting the profit.

[Backupnime]

where you get statistics data, like your title thread, you are just make some analyzed without validation data.
do you know for now are hype IEO beside your invest in ico why not to try invest in IEO

[chatedha]

In this month I saw several ICO still have a good token sale and hardcap raised, but to take part in ICO we must be more careful.

[Capt00]

I personally do not believe this statistics that 99% of ICOs are scam, because some ICOs fail do not mean they are all scam. I usually tell people that starting an ICO is like starting a new business, it might succeed immediately, it might fail presently but have a great future and it might fail totally beyond redemption. So because a project is failing to perform presently or fail totally do not mean it is a scam. Don't get me wrong here, I never said there are no scam projects but the rate is not as high as alleged. Judging a project based on its first few years is wrong, give it time to realize its potentials.

It sometimes we accept that they are trying to pretend themselves that are legit one but in the later part, they do an exit scam. What do we call that one? Still a scam project which they are trying to hide their real intention and I don't see any reason to believe them now.
ICO projects now are quite different from those created before, I don't see a huge number of failures but now, almost all of them.

[bitcoindusts]

Well, I cannot agree more, everything you’ve said is true. I’ve witnessed several projects like this. They been successful in their ICOs but then the project didn’t come out as planned so the future hope for the token value became dim too. Sad that some projects really do fail, I don’t know if it is because they’ve set too high expectations or unreachable goals or just lack support. Whatever but it is true.

[billyhaleym]

I think you raised a legit case here but let's look at the long run when most project owners cash out and abandoned projects

[odukoyaewatomi27]

I really agree with you on this issue. I get pissed when i see different post on this forum about people complaining about icos or advising people not to participate in icos. The truth is that not icos are scam and because you had a bad experience with one scam ico does not mean that you should stereotype all icos are bad. There are actually some icos that might not do well immediately they get listed on the exchange but they have a very promising future.

[cytpoway121]

I personally do not believe this statistics that 99% of ICOs are scam, because some ICOs fail do not mean they are all scam. I usually tell people that starting an ICO is like starting a new business, it might succeed immediately, it might fail presently but have a great future and it might fail totally beyond redemption. So because a project is failing to perform presently or fail totally do not mean it is a scam. Don't get me wrong here, I never said there are no scam projects but the rate is not as high as alleged. Judging a project based on its first few years is wrong, give it time to realize its potentials.

It is true that not all icos are scam, so 99% of ico indeed can be scam

Also once a projects fails at the beginning; there is nothing like a great future

Even digitex with the whole softcap and good volumes and high prices is at the moment no where to be found

[Twinkledoe]

Though a large percentage of these ICOs are really not scams but I believe most of them are considered to be a failure. I've seen genuine projects as well but their success didn't materialize because they failed to catch users on their platform. Actually, some have very novel ideas, yet, the implementation didn't push thru. If the project haven't raised enough funds even if they have great concept, they can't do anything to proceed their developments.

[creeps]

I have often said that not all ICOs are scams. Because until now I have found a lot of good ICO and the possibility of great success. So, if a lot of people say that ICO scams don't really matter. But it must be remembered that "Not all ICOs are SCAMs"

We need to spend more time looking for that good ICO, and we should not be close minded because many good projects are still coming. Not all are scam but you must take care on investing. If you do bounty then the risk
might be lower to you, but profit is still not guaranteed. ICO is not totally dead, it will bounce back and will challenge the IEO.

[chaoscoinz]

I personally do not believe this statistics that 99% of ICOs are scam, because some ICOs fail do not mean they are all scam. I usually tell people that starting an ICO is like starting a new business, it might succeed immediately, it might fail presently but have a great future and it might fail totally beyond redemption. So because a project is failing to perform presently or fail totally do not mean it is a scam. Don't get me wrong here, I never said there are no scam projects but the rate is not as high as alleged. Judging a project based on its first few years is wrong, give it time to realize its potentials.

 Understandably, many people, including myself, have been scammed in one way or another by an ICO. I believe you're right about ICO'S. Every ICO isn't a scam. What started off as a decentralized means to raise money in the style of an IPO, has easily become a vehicle utilized by con artists to dupe unsuspecting investors out of their cash.
 However,  As with any new innovation involving finance, There will always be those who will utilize the sector for I'll intentions. I guess it comes with the territory. There are way too many successful projects that have passed, easily proving not all ICO'S are a scam. If I had practiced my due diligence correctly, I would not have joined a bounty that turned out to be a scam. Lesson learned!

[tabas]

It's an hyperbole when someone or we say 'all icos are scam' meaning to say that many or most of them are.

[Jrfranco]

I personally do not believe this statistics that 99% of ICOs are scam, because some ICOs fail do not mean they are all scam. I usually tell people that starting an ICO is like starting a new business, it might succeed immediately, it might fail presently but have a great future and it might fail totally beyond redemption. So because a project is failing to perform presently or fail totally do not mean it is a scam. Don't get me wrong here, I never said there are no scam projects but the rate is not as high as alleged. Judging a project based on its first few years is wrong, give it time to realize its potentials.

Not all ICO are scam, but ones the developer is a scammer and ended up all his project could be a scam, its always different, meanwhile talking about an ICO, yes it is not scam after all if its failed in ICO, remember that the life of the ICO depends on the token sale performance, many projects successfully done their ICO but ended up being scam, but also many ICO failed in their token sale, but continue to do their projects, ended up being the best coin in the CMC, i remember one time, where i participated a  bounty but only half of the tokens were sold, and they continued their projects, but now, the price of their token is much more higher than the rest., so we cannot judge the book by its cover.

[adzino]

I personally do not believe this statistics that 99% of ICOs are scam, because some ICOs fail do not mean they are all scam. I usually tell people that starting an ICO is like starting a new business, it might succeed immediately, it might fail presently but have a great future and it might fail totally beyond redemption. So because a project is failing to perform presently or fail totally do not mean it is a scam. Don't get me wrong here, I never said there are no scam projects but the rate is not as high as alleged. Judging a project based on its first few years is wrong, give it time to realize its potentials.

You probably don't know how these ICOs operate. ICOs failing and ICOs scamming are two different things. If the ICO after raising enough money, stops developing the project, isn't that a sort of scamming the investors? Again, there are ICOs that collect funds from the users and then run away with the users fund. There are ICOs where the developers behind the back of their investors dump the tokens they are holding causing the price to drop which also affects the current investors. True, not all ICOs are scam but most of them are. Failing to deliver what they promised is also a sort of scamming. Why make promises which you can not deliver?

[Palmaper]

I personally do not believe this statistics that 99% of ICOs are scam, because some ICOs fail do not mean they are all scam. I usually tell people that starting an ICO is like starting a new business, it might succeed immediately, it might fail presently but have a great future and it might fail totally beyond redemption. So because a project is failing to perform presently or fail totally do not mean it is a scam. Don't get me wrong here, I never said there are no scam projects but the rate is not as high as alleged. Judging a project based on its first few years is wrong, give it time to realize its potentials.

The problem is that many of these failures are due to the fact that such ICOs are unable to comply with the plans established in their roadmaps, despite having the necessary financing and a team of developers supposedly aware of the problems they address. And in that case, when a company is unable to fulfill the promises they used to convince investors, I think it is valid to talk about a real scam.