Would ICO scene succeed if it was organized like crowdfunding not investing?

[shinratensei_]

It's not about the greed of investors, but this is a speculation zone when everything is about profit. If you are saying like that and that's not correct at all. I ask you how you can feel if you give thousand dollars worth of money to the someone who you didn't know about and then that person is running away with your money? You like that person doesn't mean you are having all of the knowledge about that person.

It has no difference to give our money as a charity. It's not a problem when I can give that person a few pennies from my pocket, but that doesn't make sense to provide a few dollars as a charity.

You can't apply the crowdfunding mechanism in this case. If you are thinking that's better and why don't you just try to use gofundme or something else?

In this case, you are putting everyone on a significant risk by giving their money without getting any return. You should not expect to get a hundred or even a million dollars from there.

[boltz]

That's true , if they somehow approach that idea they would have had more success. My personal thinking is that in order to have success you need to invest money to make money so ICO's should learn to come with at least 50% of the the starting capital and maybe after they could attract further funds and investors.

[Kyraishi]

What would happen if people didn't follow greed and projects didn't promise crazy gains? If this was not main theme of ICO craze, but instead - true and honest support?

If you support someone for example through Patreon - you give him money and you don't really think much what will happen with this money - it's lost for you anyway and you feel good for supporting someone you like.

If all ICOs went that route, sure, we wouldn't see such crazy gains but we wouldn't also see such falls. People supporting projects that would fail would probably don't scream "scam scam!" all the time.

If you give a dollar on a street to someone begging, you usually don't follow him later and check what he bought in a store - liquor or food. Yeah, you are dissapointed probably if you see him drunk next day but you simply don't give him more money.

If ICOs was organized more like that, I think it would be much more healthy environment.

It might actually work - people would need a completely different mindset towards ICOs and they can't just expect crazy profits and no issues with the project - they'd need to expect delays and expect long waits for them to get their money back.

It's nice to speculate what could happen with that, but unfortunately the ICOs had to advertise like instant profit opportunities and won't really get sales without advertising these profits.

[BlackFor3st]

What would happen if people didn't follow greed and projects didn't promise crazy gains? If this was not main theme of ICO craze, but instead - true and honest support?

If you support someone for example through Patreon - you give him money and you don't really think much what will happen with this money - it's lost for you anyway and you feel good for supporting someone you like.

If all ICOs went that route, sure, we wouldn't see such crazy gains but we wouldn't also see such falls. People supporting projects that would fail would probably don't scream "scam scam!" all the time.

If you give a dollar on a street to someone begging, you usually don't follow him later and check what he bought in a store - liquor or food. Yeah, you are dissapointed probably if you see him drunk next day but you simply don't give him more money.

If ICOs was organized more like that, I think it would be much more healthy environment.

There is no crowd of investors to support something like this one, if someone will not gain a profit then they will not bother themselves to be part of it.

That is why it cannot be converted to crowdfunding. Investment is a good option for the project starters to gain some fund from investors as they can promise a return of investors so the investors will trust their money to the project owner.

[Ailmand]

The problem is, most investors are investing their money on a project that would promise them income. They are not after the product, solution, service or the purpose of the project. It is all about money, that is why investors leave a project easily of they see no potential on it.

[NathanJB]

More than half of the ones which ended up successful would have all failed to even gain a single trust from someone like that. They need to convince in much more ways than what they actually did during their ICO. Most ICO investors would only look for a factor or two before they decide to invest. Most of the time, a CEO or a president that has experience with the likes of Google or Microsoft is enough reason for them to invest. In a crowdfunding, the game is different. For sure, only the best will gain the money.

[Aabcde]

Basically there are already many investors who do not believe in the way to raise funds, be it ICO or crowdfunding.
What do you want to do, greedy dev will always be there. One thing that is most trusted by investors today is PROFIT. They searched it all in any way. In IEO, it is the same. Most developers cannot guarantee their investors' profits, so I can say no matter what, if there is no definite profit, investors will think a thousand times to put money on you.

[setialovers]

Basically there are already many investors who do not believe in the way to raise funds, be it ICO or crowdfunding.
What do you want to do, greedy dev will always be there. One thing that is most trusted by investors today is PROFIT. They searched it all in any way. In IEO, it is the same. Most developers cannot guarantee their investors' profits, so I can say no matter what, if there is no definite profit, investors will think a thousand times to put money on you.

Agree, investing in new projects is in my opinion like speculation. All investors ultimately only want profit or value growth in their portfolios so sometimes investors don't need to look deeply about a project. A good team developer will always communicate with investors to provide development projects or products and this will maintain the confidence of investors who in the end will attract new investors

[o48o]

They wouldn't have to get completely nothing in return. They could get lots of things for free, like special account on their platform, some "free" preloaded credits to use their services or something like that. They would get something, just not promise of crazy gains. I can bet most "investors" were thinking they are investing in next bitcoin. They read that it went up from 1 cent to 20 000 USD and they calculated that if they invest 500 usd or 1000 or 5000usd, they will get millions in same way. Even if it was not officially mentioned on most ICO pages, I'm pretty sure most ICO and altcoin investors considered such scenario as realistic, since bitcoin already paved such way. Which was of course naive.

Anyway - If they were donating to a company and company could give them back something in return (maybe exclusive materials same like on on different crowdfunding platforms), they would actually donate less and there would be less "scam" accusations, less dissapointment and maybe truly valuable projects wouldn't have such problems to gather *any* money as they have now.

Seriously. If the ico page would promised crazy gains or gains of any sort it would just be a scam. This is all highly speculative investing. Only thing the project can promise on gains is the interest rate, but the interest rate is paid with the coins that might not have value at all.
On icos, we are just mostly funding protocols, companies or just services. There is no guarantee on anything and the sad thing is that most of them are either a scam or a failed attempt. If investing was easy and bitcoin-like profit was guaranteed everyone would do it. It doesn't mean it would have to stop all together.

[Aabcde]

Basically there are already many investors who do not believe in the way to raise funds, be it ICO or crowdfunding.
What do you want to do, greedy dev will always be there. One thing that is most trusted by investors today is PROFIT. They searched it all in any way. In IEO, it is the same. Most developers cannot guarantee their investors' profits, so I can say no matter what, if there is no definite profit, investors will think a thousand times to put money on you.

Agree, investing in new projects is in my opinion like speculation. All investors ultimately only want profit or value growth in their portfolios so sometimes investors don't need to look deeply about a project. A good team developer will always communicate with investors to provide development projects or products and this will maintain the confidence of investors who in the end will attract new investors

Yes, we speak according to reality. In this unfavorable situation many people are careful about putting their money in. It's a lie if they are not looking for profit. Studying a project in depth with more time is sure to look for profit. You are right, this is like gambling or trading itself where we can only speculate alone without any clear certainty from the fundraising actors.

[Beparanf]

If you give a dollar on a street to someone begging, you usually don't follow him later and check what he bought in a store - liquor or food. Yeah, you are dissapointed probably if you see him drunk next day but you simply don't give him more money.

If ICOs was organized more like that, I think it would be much more healthy environment.

Donations like in charity just budget what ever they have to provide needy and sometimes unable to give what they really plan due to short of budget. If it will be like a donation, how can a project plan and execute their project? They need  a budget to be able to start their project and that's why investors are needed. They will need a detailed timeline how they propose the project outcomes. It will be more bothersome to investors since we can't react anytime since we just give and the favor is always in the developer as if they are capable to just do anything or do nothing at all.

[alexsandria]

What would happen if people didn't follow greed and projects didn't promise crazy gains? If this was not main theme of ICO craze, but instead - true and honest support?

If you support someone for example through Patreon - you give him money and you don't really think much what will happen with this money - it's lost for you anyway and you feel good for supporting someone you like.

If all ICOs went that route, sure, we wouldn't see such crazy gains but we wouldn't also see such falls. People supporting projects that would fail would probably don't scream "scam scam!" all the time.

If you give a dollar on a street to someone begging, you usually don't follow him later and check what he bought in a store - liquor or food. Yeah, you are dissapointed probably if you see him drunk next day but you simply don't give him more money.

If ICOs was organized more like that, I think it would be much more healthy environment.

Investments is not something you donate without worryig much in return. You have to monitor, do research about the project as much as possible 'cause the money you invest in it isn't as much as something you donate to someone begging. Yes, it would be healthy in a sense that there aren't much complaint about not having money in return, and fraud but the reason you invest in a certain project 'cause you wanna gain more than you invest. Besides, it would be a bad idea for investor not to complain 'cause it would turn out to be a thing that would drag them down financially.

[Herbert2020]

that can no longer be called "ICO" because by definition it is called a donation. if you like any project then you can donate to the developers of that project to support them. but ICO is "coin" offering and you receive something in return. it is not even supposed to be used for fund raising, it should instead be used for offering actual coins in early stages to people who want to get in early on. the problem is not solvable either because the problem is with the projects being shitty and their tokens being useless and that won't change by changing how the developer gets his money.

[mintme.com]

that can no longer be called "ICO" because by definition it is called a donation. if you like any project then you can donate to the developers of that project to support them. but ICO is "coin" offering and you receive something in return. it is not even supposed to be used for fund raising, it should instead be used for offering actual coins in early stages to people who want to get in early on. the problem is not solvable either because the problem is with the projects being shitty and their tokens being useless and that won't change by changing how the developer gets his money.

It doesn't have to be pure donation, there could be promise of a reward like high rank account created on their platform or some other reward like preloaded credits to spent on their platform. Enough to keep it interesting but not enough to throw money in hope of getting huge returns.

[Ucy]

What would happen if people didn't follow greed and projects didn't promise crazy gains? If this was not main theme of ICO craze, but instead - true and honest support?

If you support someone for example through Patreon - you give him money and you don't really think much what will happen with this money - it's lost for you anyway and you feel good for supporting someone you like.

If all ICOs went that route, sure, we wouldn't see such crazy gains but we wouldn't also see such falls. People supporting projects that would fail would probably don't scream "scam scam!" all the time.

If you give a dollar on a street to someone begging, you usually don't follow him later and check what he bought in a store - liquor or food. Yeah, you are dissapointed probably if you see him drunk next day but you simply don't give him more money.

If ICOs was organized more like that, I think it would be much more healthy environment.

This will really help eliminate greed and people will begin to support projects they're genuinely interested in. It'll also reduce the number of people investing in projects they are not knowledgeable in.

However, I do not think it is a good idea to invest and not "follow" the developers. People are more motivated to work and be honest when they know they are being watched.

[gunhell16]

The problem in ICO is not that way, investors will continue to come and invest in many ICO if and only if scammers are not in the community.
ICO died because of may projects that turned out to be a scam and run with the money of investors!
We are in cryptocurrency "CURRENCY" and if we will be here for just helping or what then we are not true on what we want.
We are here to gain and get more profit as long as we can and scammers ruin all of it.

[dimonstration]

that can no longer be called "ICO" because by definition it is called a donation. if you like any project then you can donate to the developers of that project to support them. but ICO is "coin" offering and you receive something in return. it is not even supposed to be used for fund raising, it should instead be used for offering actual coins in early stages to people who want to get in early on. the problem is not solvable either because the problem is with the projects being shitty and their tokens being useless and that won't change by changing how the developer gets his money.

It doesn't have to be pure donation, there could be promise of a reward like high rank account created on their platform or some other reward like preloaded credits to spent on their platform. Enough to keep it interesting but not enough to throw money in hope of getting huge returns.

It can help like having a premium account in a business, however there will still be a need for min or max amount to identify the rewards or credit an investor can received. And the project if still be called ICO should already have funds to start their project so they will still be able to attract investors to do it in a way that investors will gain credits and they get investors.

[#Darren]

I do not believe that the problem of ICOs is in the lack of trust from investors. For sure, such a fundraising method would attract more investors, but the biggest issue is postponed releases and bad exchange listings.

[carlisle1]

the question is who would  be the one  responsible for this to happen?we knew aside from greediness of investors as you said,is the greed of the team that initiate each project?lets accept the fact that this is all about money and no one has the HONESTY to make everything in good as it
stop looking for the good side because ICO and every related in this are scammers and nothing will change even if this will be crowdfunding or what ever you call this

[Anonylz]

I have never come across any ico that promise any crazy gains openly to investors, I don't know where you get that notion from, this grazy ideas was born from the experience of 2017,

Even if it was not openly mentioned, it was surely a background of 2017/2018 - crazy bitcoin gains, crazy altcoin gains. You want  to tell me it was not a factor when people invested?

ico's where successful because people invested in them willingly without being on any pressure, I bet most project owners back then where not expecting to see such financial support, some couldn't handle it and got greedy, others try to make meaning out of their's,  

no pressure? what about FOMO? you get one time life chance to get rich - is that not a pressure? From whole society, sometimes even family that expects you to succeed no matter what? That's enormous pressure right there, and you get a chance to be rich by investing in next bitcoin early. No pressure?? Huge pressure.

Yes, not North Korea type of pressure with gun pointed at your hand and someone telling you to invest, but also very very strong pressure.

Majority of projects turned out to be unsuccessful because there are no genuineness behind them, the teams saw unexpected money that they have no clue what to do with it, well except to squander  

The truth is everybody wants to give and get something in return, nobody will be give away money for what they won't get any back, if people are fed up with ico's because of lack of grazy gains - in your words - what makes you think they will be interested in given away money without caring what they do with it, you are still enriching the project owners nevertheless.

Probably there has to be some kind of reward promised, but not as high as it was. Even if it was not promised directly, I'm pretty sure 90%+ of investors hoped to get crazy rich.

Yes it was a factor but you should know that this does not just apply to investment in crypto only, anything that carries a lot of attention and hype normally attract people, lots of people where attracted to investing because of what they saw, but no project promise to anyone any grazy gains after investing, people just assume about it.

FOMO is base on choice, if you let it be a pressure to you is entirely up to you, it is nothing similar to the other kind of pressure where you are not left with any choice, so tell me where is the pressure there? just human greed to make more profit can't exactly be regarded as pressure, Nobody will ever push you to invest what you can't afford, people taking high risk investment is their personal choice, no pressure from the project owners or from the crypto community whatsoever.