Shit Exchanges, an end to good projects.

[inanilujimi]

if the project is good, it will not be included in the garbage exchange, so the conclusion is not the problematic exchange, but the project is not good.
sometimes there is a project that promises to be listed on a popular exchange but in reality they can't.
what is clear is that there have been many popular exchange feasibility tests putting new projects on their altcoin list.

[1715249706]

1715249706

[1715249706]

1715249706

[1715249706]

1715249706

[1715249706]

1715249706

[Edraket31]

Developers should focus on listing their tokens, their project are becoming shit if they got listed on a exchange that doesn't have enough users. There are only exchanges that are good so the developers should focus on listing their coins in these kinds of exchanges.

Sometimes, dev and team are not focus on a good exchange as they know how much cost it is worth, and it is too expensive. For some team, they would prefer using their money in developing their platform rather than having a good exchange but no real use case, if the project is good, the good exchange would really like to list them at very cheap price and sometimes for free.

[10c]

Developers should focus on listing their tokens, their project are becoming shit if they got listed on a exchange that doesn't have enough users. There are only exchanges that are good so the developers should focus on listing their coins in these kinds of exchanges.

Pay attention to the coins that conducted IEO on such large exchanges as Coinbene / Bitforex. all projects that fell on these exchanges also fell very deep in price. I think that only a Binance can withstand such fall, but after some time delists some pairs as it was with BTT

[Palider]

It is almost impossible to believe that after developing a good project which might likely succeed because of the product, some so-called developers and teams will still go ahead and list in a shit exchange all in the name of reducing the listing fund or all in the name of no fund to list in the big exchange, if you cannot afford good exchange, why not continue with the development of the project to be able to attract the right investors, why rush to a shit exchange. So many projects that could have succeeded have been buried by shit exchange, and if you care to know, you are the reason why we still have shit exchange because the owners of shit exchange knew that some daft developers and team will surely come and list their projects. Why will someone prepare a good meal and then decide to keep it in a cabinet full of cockroaches? Wake up.

Yes, I have seen many such instances where the project is so wonderful that it suddenly turns into shitcoin.

To be aware of you I will also give the names of these tokens as per

Buddy, Araw, Sapien Network this is this great project that was ruined by shit exchanges.

Latoken big listing fee, fake volume. p2pb2b fake volume with many bots.

[DDante]

Seriously i don't expect all new projects to met their hardcap and if they don't there will be problem to list on big exchanges but even mid rated exchanges are plague with problems like fake volume and bot trades, really most times i don't blame devs who can't list on better exchanges

[Kersh768]

Why are you so sure that the only reason behind the fate of those projects is having been listed on a bad exchange? I'm not so sure that is the only reason, maybe those projects are not so attractive to investors for any reason, or maybe the altcoin bear market is pushing them down, it's possible that having been listed on a big exchange would not have changed anything.

I do agree.
It seems that it is not on the exchanges no more where problem arise but to the bear market itself. Right now, no matter what exchanges they list a new coin, its market value will still fall as being influenced by the market behavior. This implies, in my opinion, that this is not just the right time for projects. The proof to this I think, are those numerous huge projects which had good exchanges, huge potential and popularity but the coin still ended up with a market value far from its ICO price, perhaps.

[Xxmodded]

There are many reasons that make developers put their coins / tokens on shit exchange, for investors to be calm because they have entered the market even though it is shit or small exchange. It could be that the exchange itself included it without first asking the developer for permission.
Or it could be that developers are getting frustrated by market conditions but continue to be urged by investors to immediately put them in exchange.

Developer want toe earn much profit with ICO investment by listing with sit exchange because very lower paying fee than listed coin with big exchange market have higher cost for listing, Developer not asking or want to get vote from investor after ICO success which one better exchange for listing? shit exchange wavailable to make price down or not, how if listed on big exchange market and price will raise up or not.

[Fredomago]

I think every project is moving as it can and you need to take into account the characteristics of different people who manage the company. I think that many will understand the error of listing on shitty exchanges but it will be too late)

The company that will list the project inside shit exchange and let the project be dumped without anything to do are developers who are aiming only for money. It's not good practice to allow your hard work being completely crashed after being added to a shitty exchange, developers ho have long term plans will delayed the listing instead. They will not forsake the project just to satisfied dumpers but they will find possible ways to secure the survival of their project.

[IvugeoEvolutionCoin]

It is almost impossible to believe that after developing a good project which might likely succeed because of the product, some so-called developers and teams will still go ahead and list in a shit exchange all in the name of reducing the listing fund or all in the name of no fund to list in the big exchange, if you cannot afford good exchange, why not continue with the development of the project to be able to attract the right investors, why rush to a shit exchange. So many projects that could have succeeded have been buried by shit exchange, and if you care to know, you are the reason why we still have shit exchange because the owners of shit exchange knew that some daft developers and team will surely come and list their projects. Why will someone prepare a good meal and then decide to keep it in a cabinet full of cockroaches? Wake up.

It's always a sad time for investors after investing in a project with mind-blowing features, and successful token sale, ends up listing on shitty exchanges. Well, some team members may have in mind to list on bigger exchanges with time but that's a terrible approach. I'm not saying they should do more than their listing budget, but at least they should list on a reputable exchange provided they raised enough funds during token sale. I won't blame projects which barely hit softcap anyway, since it will be clearly funding issues.

[erickastella]

maybe for them (the project owner) if they add to the list of tokens / coin market exchanges they will be increasingly recognized by the masses.
compared to serious projects they will continue to develop these projects until they get a quality investor and in the end the developer buys a good market exchange too, so that there is a good trade-off between investors and developers.

[Pearls Before Swine]

There are many reasons that make developers put their coins / tokens on shit exchange, for investors to be calm because they have entered the market even though it is shit or small exchange.

I won't even pretend to understand the process by which coins/tokens get listed on exchanges, but I would say that it would not matter to me what exchange a token is listed on as long as that exchange can be trusted not to scam you.  There are a bunch of lesser known exchanges that might be considered shit, but they are still at least honest.  SouthXchange is one that comes to mind, one of the only ones that sells gridcoin.

New projects probably just want to get their token or coin onto an exchange as quickly as possible, and they start with the ones offering the least resistance first, hoping to make it onto the bigger ones eventually.  Might that not be how it works? 

[bassbity]

There are many reasons that make developers put their coins / tokens on shit exchange, for investors to be calm because they have entered the market even though it is shit or small exchange. It could be that the exchange itself included it without first asking the developer for permission.
Or it could be that developers are getting frustrated by market conditions but continue to be urged by investors to immediately put them in exchange.

Developer want toe earn much profit with ICO investment by listing with sit exchange because very lower paying fee than listed coin with big exchange market have higher cost for listing, Developer not asking or want to get vote from investor after ICO success which one better exchange for listing? shit exchange wavailable to make price down or not, how if listed on big exchange market and price will raise up or not.

I think if the ICO succeeds and reaches the target I am sure the developer will put their tokens into a better exchange and if ICO sales only get a small amount of funds the developer will enter into a cheaper exchange and some are free, this is not the insistence of investors but from developers because the funds are not only for listing exchanges but for the progress of the project.

[Winscosinally]

After the qualifications of teams and developers the next big thong to be worried about is exchange, with new projects all i make sure i always do is try to know which exchange they are aiming for, if its like p2p2b2b i will move on, exchanges always affect the live of new tokens and coins

[key4co.in]

There are many reasons why team members list their coin on shitty exchanges, the first reason being greed. Some allocation of token on white paper is not real, you might see 5 percent for team but in the real sense it's 50%, this is bad for the project since fund allocation for product development, marketing, exchange listing will be small. When this happens, they can't meet up with listing on good exchanges with fair trading volumes, therefore listing on crappie exchanges which will dip the price of the coin most likely. Well, some will list on shitty exchanges and later list on bigger reputable exchanges and that's fair enough. It's all about management of funds and strategy anyway, listing on reputable exchanges after token sale is essential.

[Shasha80]

Actually, if a good project continues to choose shit exchanges for listings is not the fault of the developers alone, because Investors are also
wrong to keep pressing developers so that the tokens are immediately listed. So the developers finally chose shit exchanges for the destination
due to investor pressure. Because to be accepted at good exchanges is not easy because there are several requirements to be fulfilled. And it
takes a long time, so developers prefer shit exchanges for coin listing, because it is considered easier and faster procedure of course. But once
the listing on shit exchanges even though the ICO project is good, the price will still be dumped because fake volume. So my advice for developer
is to be more careful in choosing exchanges for listings. And advice for investors more patient and wait for Tokens to enter exchanges. Give
developers a chance to do its work.

[Crypto5060]

I know that why the major focus of projects is not to promise high returns on investment but most of them fail to understand that sustain the project and expand their community, their token has to be attractive which means it has to be profitable to invest in.

[ufaiz50]

If there is no clear reason why you are listed on the shit exchange listing, you can blame the developer and his team. Usually the shit exchanger and shit coin are in the same place, nothing is disadvantaged except investors. However the conditions are, I'm sure investors are also wrong in choosing where to invest.

In other cases why they are on the shit exchanger is because of pressure from investors themselves. Registering an exchanger with a low volume level is very easy, where only enough to pay for a place there. Whereas for large exchangers they usually vote and the number of communities determines the place.

[arimamib]

I know that why the major focus of projects is not to promise high returns on investment but most of them fail to understand that sustain the project and expand their community, their token has to be attractive which means it has to be profitable to invest in.

a big mistake if a project cannot survive and build trust in the community because if they don't do it their project could be destroyed. and to put coins in the market there are also a number of exchanges that do vote for the entry of a coin and this requires a lot of votes to win it. usually the coins that win them have a strong community

[10BTCaDay]

I know that why the major focus of projects is not to promise high returns on investment but most of them fail to understand that sustain the project and expand their community, their token has to be attractive which means it has to be profitable to invest in.

a big mistake if a project cannot survive and build trust in the community because if they don't do it their project could be destroyed. and to put coins in the market there are also a number of exchanges that do vote for the entry of a coin and this requires a lot of votes to win it. usually the coins that win them have a strong community

the most important thing is that the community must believe in the project. if the community believes the creators who constantly make updates on the project - then they always promote projects in all resources

[Insomnia family]

I know that why the major focus of projects is not to promise high returns on investment but most of them fail to understand that sustain the project and expand their community, their token has to be attractive which means it has to be profitable to invest in.

a big mistake if a project cannot survive and build trust in the community because if they don't do it their project could be destroyed. and to put coins in the market there are also a number of exchanges that do vote for the entry of a coin and this requires a lot of votes to win it. usually the coins that win them have a strong community

the most important thing is that the community must believe in the project. if the community believes the creators who constantly make updates on the project - then they always promote projects in all resources

I think that reason also makes sense, because support from the positive community will not make developers launch their tokens on bad exchanges. unless the developer does not plan to develop their product further or does not have enough funds there will only be 2 choices. including stopping the project or registering a token on a bad exchange, if the decision is really a must.