Quality Projects Revival

[optimisticcm]

I was thinking about it so i thought to post about it here and discuss about this matter. Actually I have seen many good projects that either paused or cancelled there projects due to long bears market and decline of ICOs, I am talking about 2018 and onwards.
There were some good projects that got discouraged and closed the projects due to low or no funding in the bear market. My personal suggestion would be that the teams should consider reviving their projects now, modify them according to new market needs and then come up with a MVP and then start IEO or ITO as the market conditions seems to be improved now.
So what do you guys think about it?
Which projects or coins come to your mind that could have done well if they were able to raise decent funds?
Also if someone from the team of such projects reads this, he/she can share his thoughts and opinion too.

[1714498683]

1714498683

[1714498683]

1714498683

[1714498683]

1714498683

[judeafante]

I was thinking about it so i thought to post about it here and discuss about this matter. Actually I have seen many good projects that either paused or cancelled there projects due to long bears market and decline of ICOs, I am talking about 2018 and onwards.
There were some good projects that got discouraged and closed the projects due to low or no funding in the bear market. My personal suggestion would be that the teams should consider reviving their projects now, modify them according to new market needs and then come up with a MVP and then start IEO or ITO as the market conditions seems to be improved now.
So what do you guys think about it?
Which projects or coins come to your mind that could have done well if they were able to raise decent funds?
Also if someone from the team of such projects reads this, he/she can share his thoughts and opinion too.

As long as they did not run with investors money and if they launch an ICO and failed to reach the soft cap and return investor's money I don't see any reason why should proceed with their project they can try again now that the market is better and there are a lot of fo investors coming in but they have to compete with fresh ideas now, and it's not going to be easy.

[mersal]

Maybe they will got success of they rename their projects into DEFI because that much hype is getting on those projects.But I will say they have less chance of getting reveived into a successful one and also they need investors to give funds for the IEO process which isn't going to happen anyways.

[Denongels]

ITO is too bad because of the several ITOs running this year there have been many failed ITOs, IEO itself is still promising, for example in binance launchpad a few days ago, the sandbox project it could quickly get 10x more in a short time, but when this looks like another model on sale is on the rise but mostly the ones that did it were DeFi projects.

[Kupid002]

Maybe they will got success of they rename their projects into DEFI because that much hype is getting on those projects.But I will say they have less chance of getting reveived into a successful one and also they need investors to give funds for the IEO process which isn't going to happen anyways.

so you mean they need to follow the hype?

For that they don't need to continue the project they create before and  they need to start a new project change the name and whitepaper completely  new that will only focus in DEFI since the last project they make is focus or have a different roadmap .

[shadowduck]

Cartesi is one of the most obvious examples of successful ICO projects in recent years. there were also many projects that made strong development and brought a large amount of profit. the main thing is to do a good analysis

[stealth.money]

Anything with hype is no good as they will disappeared again

[AbuBhakar]

ITO is too bad because of the several ITOs running this year there have been many failed ITOs, IEO itself is still promising, for example in binance launchpad a few days ago, the sandbox project it could quickly get 10x more in a short time, but when this looks like another model on sale is on the rise but mostly the ones that did it were DeFi projects.

DeFi project is able to get attention these times that some project before uses this to be involve in DeFi circle or community. IEO projects will still depend on what their projects aim and what exchange will support them. ITO didn't gain much attention unlike what ICO did, there are many projects look promising by 2018 but it was already hard to distinguish that time if they will succeed or not a scam as the project overflows with same thoughts and uses like the bounty campaigns run by top bounty managers before.

[Sterbens]

Maybe they will got success of they rename their projects into DEFI because that much hype is getting on those projects.But I will say they have less chance of getting reveived into a successful one and also they need investors to give funds for the IEO process which isn't going to happen anyways.

The project with the name DeFi is now getting a lot of interest and even a big hype is happening there. Is this really what investors now believe in the name DeFi? Of course, in the selling process IEO is still used because some investors always want to be in the stock exchange to feel safer.

[Rodeo02]

Cartesi is one of the most obvious examples of successful ICO projects in recent years. there were also many projects that made strong development and brought a large amount of profit. the main thing is to do a good analysis

cartesi is one of the example of one of the successful  project we have this year and OP is looking for failed pause or cancelled project because of low funding . A project  that doesn't have enough attention because of long  bear market season.


 I don't remember any because there are too many of them to list here.

[electronicash]

if they really gonna go that path of reviving, they'd better release a product better than the last that they propose otherwise it will still fail for people will just think they now come back because they know the market if good and they can now effortlessly make money. good luck to them because even the 4 eyed cretin will insult them for leaving their community at worse time.

[jacafbiz]

Any projects that was not able to withstand the bear market and close down, even fail to continue to work on the project with no progress on Github then they are just in the space to make money and most projects that were unable to do ICO went to VCs and they received fund to help them through the bear period now the are prime for ICO because they already have a working product

[cryptoperkele]

...
There were some good projects that got discouraged and closed the projects due to low or no funding in the bear market. My personal suggestion would be that the teams should consider reviving their projects now, modify them according to new market needs and then come up with a MVP and then start IEO or ITO as the market conditions seems to be improved now.
So what do you guys think about it?
...

Can you point me to some of these "good" projects? Because all i saw was people were trying all sorts of scams and they didn't get funded anymore. And some good projects didn't have any problem having funding even during the bear run. Naturally they didn't get funded for hundreds of millions but that is insane anyway.

[irixo10]

You know there are upcoming projects right and with Defi around now, it is making other types of projects to have bad times booming. Now with this in play, no one will be willing or even ready to look towards a project that was once abandoned by the team. Yes the bear market did a lot of things to the market and yet there were many projects which survived hence there is no amount of reason that this type of projects team ( those that abandoned their project) will give that will make people invest in it again when knowing their past experiences. Instead of trying to revive an abandoned project it is better going for a fresh one.

[FanEagle]

I think there was a project that actually tried to find a way to get all the dead or almost dead projects to join them as a team and as a whole, that way they could create one big huge project.

The idea would have been like let's say there is a project with 100 million dollars worth of tokens, I know that is a crazy number for starters but I forgot what the price was, then they acquire a dead project which people do have money for, they contact the team of that project, they make a deal, they burn everyone's all tokens in that project and in return give tokens from the new big one, that way there is no more of that dead project but this new project maybe got some of the staff in the other and also the community behind it or whatever is left of it. Not a great idea, that project itself died.

[pathapoddo]

I remember one project called "Kirik" I think. The project was good, there team was active and did a good bounty here in the forum. But when the time came for their ICO the market turned into bearish. They lost their token value as ETH price was also felled. For that they had to pause the ICO that time. After that the project never started and I think they closed it also .

[Twentyonepaylots]

I must agree, I've been seeing a lot of good project these days and there are many projects that is worth to invest in, But I'm afraid that most of the investor would overlook these matter as it can be an open gate AGAIN for scam projects like what happened in 2017 where most of the investors got a negative revenue because of worthless projects. But don't get me wrong, still not all altcoins today is worth of your investment there are only worth to mention like chainlink, trustswap, and the short list goes on.

[Zeke_23]

If they are gonna revive their old project and modify it,
Isn't it much better if they will just create a new one to have a better start. Since they already failed before, it only means that the investors are not interested in the whole project, if they will just modify it, there is a higher chance that they will also fail today if they only modify it without changing the whole project's idea.

[kopijos]

maybe the presence of IEO will help a little increase in projects which, like in 2018, experienced a drastic decline. So I think maybe now this is the way to start the revival of the project to be like in the footsteps of 2018.

[Ginger Beef]

If they are gonna revive their old project and modify it,
Isn't it much better if they will just create a new one to have a better start. Since they already failed before, it only means that the investors are not interested in the whole project, if they will just modify it, there is a higher chance that they will also fail today if they only modify it without changing the whole project's idea.

We're all familiar with the flatline chart that ends in the slow death to 1 sat.  As a result there is no activity on behalf of devs, the core team, and the community moves on.  There's no coming back from that.  For me, a strong community is the #1 indicator for the health of any project.  Without it, projects die.  

I still hold a lot of legacy lottery tickets but to that point, most of those are based on hope and prayers. These days, my only ALT horses are ETH, ZEL, and RVN.  All three have the community, and drive to go next level, and are the only projects that I care about.