bad developers have tarnished ICO!

[GGmith]

It seems you are right that most developers and teams cannot use the ethereum platform to function properly, precisely in 2018 there are many projects that end with fraud and almost all tokens generated from their projects do not match the project road map.

[Jating]

that in the past ICO projects performed very well if they used ERC20 tokens or projects built on established platforms. because it has the potential to grow well and reduce risk when compared to creating new technology. but now on the contrary I don't see ICO functioning properly even though it's built on an existing platform like ERC20.

No problem with ERC20 tokens, however, majority of projects are being run by scammers in 2018 up to the present that's why the whole picture has suddenly change this year. There are still a lot of functioning project, but the tarnished it made in 2018 stick out and it has a hard time trying to change the perception of investors.

I will not blame the platform because the platform has been built in such a way, but I will blame the developer, Why? because most developers have misused this for crypto schemes to get rich and most project failures are based on the background of developers who do not have extensive knowledge and deliberately tarnish the ICO project's bad image.

Whatever you may want them to call, developers, CEO they are just the same. If they have a honest intention about their project then I'm sure it will be a success, but just like the rest of people here, they are in the business of making money that's why scammers are still in the ICO business and projected a bad image on the business model.

[fzatni]

that in the past ICO projects performed very well if they used ERC20 tokens or projects built on established platforms. because it has the potential to grow well and reduce risk when compared to creating new technology. but now on the contrary I don't see ICO functioning properly even though it's built on an existing platform like ERC20.
I will not blame the platform because the platform has been built in such a way, but I will blame the developer, Why? because most developers have misused this for crypto schemes to get rich and most project failures are based on the background of developers who do not have extensive knowledge and deliberately tarnish the ICO project's bad image.

we will see now that the project which has been in that stage for a long time does not have any significant development, only a few percent are still added while the ICO program is still very many scam projects. You are right they only came to make the crypto image worse and enrich themselves. I only hope that the existence of IEO will not only protect investors' funds, but their projects will be seriously developed

[Rikotin]

that's true but not only the developer, even the crew or team behind the project is also included. most investors now prefer IEO over ICO, and that's because ICO's reputation is currently gone and it's not as good as in 2017

[wheelz1200]

What did you expect to see happen once you give free bitcoin to the tunes of (b)millions.  Every scammer was bound to start "the next best thing".  Awhile back we used to slam projects with even 5% premine, then all of the sudden it became socially acceptable to start icos which is essentially a 100% premined coin.  Did you think this would ever be a successful way to start new projects? 

[fapar]

that in the past ICO projects performed very well if they used ERC20 tokens or projects built on established platforms. because it has the potential to grow well and reduce risk when compared to creating new technology. but now on the contrary I don't see ICO functioning properly even though it's built on an existing platform like ERC20.
I will not blame the platform because the platform has been built in such a way, but I will blame the developer, Why? because most developers have misused this for crypto schemes to get rich and most project failures are based on the background of developers who do not have extensive knowledge and deliberately tarnish the ICO project's bad image.

The main problem is not in the developers (they work), but in the strategists and marketers of projects or in their absence.
ICO passed and no matter what platform/blockchain for use - ERC20(ETH)/TRX/EOS. Now is the time of cryptocurrency exchange IEO.

[Pamadar]

ICO projects built using the ERC20 ethereum platform are currently experiencing a setback, because many projects are moving to newer platforms by mainnet. actually the ERC20 platform is very good if it is well developed. The developers who hold the ICO at this time only prioritize revenue and override the function of the project being built. There are also many ICO SCAMs that make investors fooled and suffer a lot of losses. ICO is increasingly fading and replaced with IEO, because IEO is considered safer and more effective in the sale of tokens.

Investors are moving to this new venue of investment since most of those ico process turned into a bad outcomes, developers becomes scammers and runaway with collected funds instead of developing as what they've promise from each investors and supporters who participated to thier project, IEO's become popular due to the fact that results can be acquire right after the sales period being done, investors loves not to wait for longer time.

[wheelz1200]

that in the past ICO projects performed very well if they used ERC20 tokens or projects built on established platforms. because it has the potential to grow well and reduce risk when compared to creating new technology. but now on the contrary I don't see ICO functioning properly even though it's built on an existing platform like ERC20.
I will not blame the platform because the platform has been built in such a way, but I will blame the developer, Why? because most developers have misused this for crypto schemes to get rich and most project failures are based on the background of developers who do not have extensive knowledge and deliberately tarnish the ICO project's bad image.

The main problem is not in the developers (they work), but in the strategists and marketers of projects or in their absence.
ICO passed and no matter what platform/blockchain for use - ERC20(ETH)/TRX/EOS. Now is the time of cryptocurrency exchange IEO.

IEO's is the next scam out there.  These wont stop until people stop buying them, but I see that as unlikely anytime soon.  Most people will get burned and its holding back mass adoption imo.

[rdewilde]

Ethereum as well as other blockchains made it possible for many projects to be created thus ICOs where some did well others scammed their investors. So in each case, it wasn't the fault of these platforms rather the developers creating the projects; many came with the mindset of scamming and not to built anything, therefore accompanied with hype they succeeded. However, today, the failing of ICOs led to IEOs which have had a considerable record of success, although on major exchanges.
Furthermore, just like ICOs used hype to scam their investors, some IEOs will still do same, so in each case the only way to reduce scam be it in ICO or IEO is through carrying out the neccessary research.

[carter34]

More scam projects made the ICOs to be a scam scheme

I think that was the situation of ICO two years ago, not that it was the developers really. Just very few didn't have the intention of running away with people's money. They garnished all they wanted to do with white paper but they ran off at the end.

[SolarWindMiningCompany]

These developers took advantage of the decentralized and obscure features of the Blockchain and cryptocurrency to feed their greed. My worry is that not enough measures has been put into place yet by the regulatory bodies such as SEC to checkmate their activities and I believe something should be done in that regards as quickly as possible to save face for crypto now that we want global adoption more than ever

[chanler]

That is true. Commonly, there will be some developers that only focus on the result of token selling. They make the projects as interesting as possible without offering any good concept of the projects. Exactly this may deceive when we don't analyze them. And here, developers must be the people with high professionalism, having a good track record, and also have great performance. Of course, a bad developer will mak the ICO tarnished. Moreover when we know that they are scammers or fake developer teams. It is really sad to know this.

[maxreish]

The reputation of ICOs now are really bad unlike before. I do have an erc 20 tokens in my MEW but they are useless and no value. Creating tokens that are left behind by investors and the team will always become coins that have no used at all. There are thousands of erc20 tokens but only few has an impact and use and has still surviving in the crypto market. The truth is that well established coins are the main choice of most of the investors.

[brilly17]

without good product developer might lose of chance to gains with decision as offering option on qualification as attaining field of business with the ico scheme of examination
as different investors that they have with distinctive on personal qualification the those give with reference as investors to looks of way to collect with spares on excessive as preparing plan on design with the terms of completion.

[Ozero]

that in the past ICO projects performed very well if they used ERC20 tokens or projects built on established platforms. because it has the potential to grow well and reduce risk when compared to creating new technology. but now on the contrary I don't see ICO functioning properly even though it's built on an existing platform like ERC20.
I will not blame the platform because the platform has been built in such a way, but I will blame the developer, Why? because most developers have misused this for crypto schemes to get rich and most project failures are based on the background of developers who do not have extensive knowledge and deliberately tarnish the ICO project's bad image.

Bad ICO project developers are not the most pressing issue for these projects yet. Since everyone is allowed to this process, it is clear that even half of them cannot be great specialists. This is just normal and the task of investors is to identify promising projects and invest in them. Bad projects must die on their own, leaving only the necessary and useful.
The main problem of ICO projects still remains in a large level of fraud among them. This issue can only be resolved by state regulation. This is what we expect this year. Then the popularity of ICOs may rise again.

[slaman29]

ICO projects built using the ERC20 ethereum platform are currently experiencing a setback, because many projects are moving to newer platforms by mainnet. actually the ERC20 platform is very good if it is well developed. The developers who hold the ICO at this time only prioritize revenue and override the function of the project being built. There are also many ICO SCAMs that make investors fooled and suffer a lot of losses. ICO is increasingly fading and replaced with IEO, because IEO is considered safer and more effective in the sale of tokens.

Personally, I don't think projects moving to mainnet is a bad thing for Ethereum. They'll always be needing ETH later on when they want to test dapps (and they will always be using Ethereum for mature platform testing). And if all projects use ETH platform to launch, so be it. One day when 2.0 is good enough they may just decide to stay and not migrate.

I really don't see how migration is a bad thing or how it is related in any way to ICO reputation.

[thiscomm]

yeah right, I think all ICO programs are successful because of the good development team. and most ICO programs today where the development team is dishonest, they take the opportunity to get rich in an improper way. yes, they took away project funds that should have been accumulated for the program development process. my friend is one of the victims of the scam team, he experienced it twice and who knows where his money was taken away.

[Kezacky]

Team and developer background One of the important points for the success of a project, if the developer does not have a good background or does not have a positive experience in managing the previous project, I doubt that. in this case it is true that bad developers cannot run their programs correctly.

[bitcoinposts]

more than bad developers it is market slow down which caused most of the coins to see 98 drop down in prices hopefully with this bull run we expect ico prices to come back

[labenea]

The reputation of ICOs now are really bad unlike before. I do have an erc 20 tokens in my MEW but they are useless and no value. Creating tokens that are left behind by investors and the team will always become coins that have no used at all. There are thousands of erc20 tokens but only few has an impact and use and has still surviving in the crypto market. The truth is that well established coins are the main choice of most of the investors.

the fact is that tokens that cannot be developed properly will end up being junk, because I also have the same token generated from the ERC20 platform and it doesn't even have a sale value. At present the ICO reputation has been destroyed and many developers have abandoned the projects they have run.