Study by ICO advisory group finds 81% of ICO's are scams, 8% actually make it onto an exchange, and only 1.6% are promising.
medium.com/satis-group/cryptoasset-market-upd...
medium.comPosted Mar 25, 2018, 5:35 PM UTC
18459
medium.comam actually glad that google will start banning crypto ads coz ive seen so many fucking bunnytoken ads in the past few days
12
I'm seeing it everyday on youtube
1
same every 2nd-3rd video starts out with bunny token and how it can make you rich it screams scam from the ad itself its so bad
1
I don't think anyone should find this too surprising. There are definitely good projects out there but they seem to be moving further and further away from the traditional ICO Crowdsale type of fundraising and more towards accredited investors and institutional money.
I think we wil continue to see a lot of scams and cash grabs due to people trying to make their fortune before this space becomes heavily regulated.
Investing in crypto is high risk and ICO's are the highest risk of all but getting into one of those 1.6% projects is the dream.
9
Agreed. Scams are like viruses, they evolve in parallel to immune responses (regulations).
1
There are still ICO opportunities for unaccredited US investors under "Regulation CF" though it's significantly more complicated and expensive for the issuers/company.
1
100% this, i've seen lot of ICOs starting to KYC their investors on ICO, mainly if they are aiming at the bank amd institutions, that should be regulated standard in this market
1
So the nonsense that we see cluttering up exchanges is actually the cream of the crop? Scary thought.
7
If you missed it in the article, a more in-depth explanation of their methodology is linked here
3
the first sentence of this article has a comma splice and uses an apostrophe to denote a plural noun (apostrophe denotes the possessive, for example: bitcoin's peer to peer network vs bitcoins in my wallet). unforgivable!
the sources in this article are more useful than the data because adding up all obvious scams and saying 81% of ICOs are scams is meaningless. it would be actually useful to have a list of scams sorted by amount of money raised, because from there, people could at least learn what to look out for in seemingly-legit projects that turn out to be well executed scams
1
Lol. I get what you're saying but I think it would be unwise to treat any single study as definitive. The transparency of this study is part of what it makes it valuable for me, because the results can be independently verified.
As for the title, I will defend (to the death if necessary) my use of the oxford comma, as well as the apostrophe in "ICO's", which in this case I'm using to indicate the omission of letters in "Offering", as in a contraction (don't, can't etc). But I should probably stop doing that :) Good looking out
1
I'm with you on the Oxford comma.
2
[removed]
1
water is wet, fire is hot
3
[deleted]
0
Another article said 44% are scams. Meh, these studies are garbage or clickbaits, I have a hard time believing any.
Can't find that article tho, but I remember reading it
2†
Do you have specific criticisms of this particular study? I'm not sure how this study requires belief to be valid; they define their methodology and list their sources very clearly, so I'd be interested in hearing why you choose to dismiss it out of hand.
4
My statement of "these studies are garbage or clickbaits" is a general one and is not directed to this particular one. I am dissapointed that there is such a great difference between studies on the same topic.
And no, I have not read the article.
-5
Please read, especially the second-to-last sentence. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1395333/
3
It said 44% of 2017 ICO's have already failed
2
Makes you feel incredibly lucky when the ICOs you did invest in aren’t scams. GVT, MNX so far so good; and it remains to be seen whether my CRPT gamble will pay off.
1
Jesus. You must be happy with those GVT returns, what is it like 20x from ICO?
1
Just under 20x. I’m happy but I think we haven’t even scratched the surface. If the platform alpha is successful, I think it’s got a lot of room for growth.
2
[removed]
1
Where's the remaining percentage?
1
[removed]
1
"Promising" and "Successful" don't seem like they could be measured objectively. These numbers also seem incorrect, especially only 8% of ico's making it to an exchange. This ICO advisory group obviously wants to make the case that they are needed in the space so keep their bias in mind.
1
They can be measured objectively if the criteria is made explicit, which is exactly what this study does. The standards are arbitrary but the input is objective. "Promising" and "successful" are just how this study organizes the results, to make the information more digestible (or alternatively to support a narrative). The good thing about that is that the study's own subjective interpretation (narrative) can be dismissed and the results will still be objectively true and independently verifiable. That's the nature of any study that utilizes the scientific method.
So while you are free to reject the group's interpretation of the findings, you can't dismiss the findings themselves out of hand. You're conflating things here.
Secondly, if you reject their interpretation due to its subjectivity, you can't then turn around and reject the numbers based solely on your own subjective standard for correctness. If you reject independently verifiable information because it doesn't comport with your assumptions, that is the textbook definition of cognitive dissonance. And cognitive dissonance, unlike independently verifiable information, can be safely dismissed out of hand.
1
Guys, I am in project Sharpay.io and I monitor their news, they closely interact with the community, post many news and do roadshow - I’ve even met the team on the event, they don’t have any of scam attributes
1
[removed]
1
I saw a lot of interesting projects that went from being a legit to being a scam.
1
Just because virtually every ICO is shit does not mean that cryptocurrencies are overvalued. The majority of cryptocurrency market cap is not made up of these shitty ICOs.
0
Crypto is still mostly overvalued, though (even after this 'crash').
2
No. it's super undervalued, at least for a few like Monero. Still 100-1000x to go with Monero.
-2†
So what? Sounds similar to the TSX venture to be honest. How many penny stocks have I invested in that went belly up. Give me a break.
0
From a purely investment/trading standpoint, maybe. I trade pointless shitcoins too. For some of us, it's bigger than that. So studies about the ecosystem are important.
2
Bullshit, unless they`re going to list out all the icos they know to be scams then this whole article is bollocks.
0
Well, there a solution for that: Ignite Ratings - a decentralized platform for rating and reviewing ICOs and other coins/tokens. It's built in such a way to incetivise their users through rewards payed out in ETH.
-1
Where do you find all these scams? I rarely encounter one. Are they on Bitcointalk?
-3
There are tons of tracker sites, some of these ICOs are truly hilarious so i look from time to time. Check out Coinschedule.com, wear goggles and a respirator
6
At this moment it's impossible to run an ICO. Every listing site, every podcast, every newssite and YouTubers all ask a lot of money just to list your ICO or to mention your ICO. That's just not the way we want to do it.
We've been working for 6 months to make a working new US based exchange with fiat in/out, dynamic pairing, all with an easy interface for everyone, but nobody wants to do an interview or even listen to us.
Only thing these influences want is money.. They don't give a peep what your project actually is.
We just want someone to write about us, pro and cons, just honest opinions about our project. Is that too much to ask?
Just build your project and hunker down/do a dutch auction so that early investors get the benefit for doing their research and believing in you. You'll probably only raise a few million but you should end up fine. Ethereum only raised $18 million for their ico and they had a working product... nowadays EOS is raising $3 billion and they don't even have a mainnet... I think dragonchain only raised $7 million and they are fine. If you really can't raise any, then do an airdrop.
Meanwhile there are coins getting by, pumping out development without any money upfront, without premines, developer fees or ICO's.
mmm you dont need any of that. Make an ANN thread on Bitcoin talk, run a bounty campaign paying influencers with coins. If your project if good you dont even need a bounty. Get on Twitter, Youtube, Bitcointalk an announced your ICO.
I did listened, and so did the other 32 people the upvote your comment. If you already have the project/idea in mind and capable of making it come true then go and make it happen. The Internet is all you need.
Let me guess, Coss?
Which was being shilled to no end a few months ago, if he is referencing COSS then he is delusional because they have had a lot of coverage.
Me and a few friends are building a review site that avoids being a glorified promotion catalogue by specifically not asking money from projects but from reader tips and ads. I'd love to have your content on the site. It will take time to accumulate readership but you only need to tell me about your project. No strings attached. Ping me if you are interested. Let's help each other out.
I'll expect a 5% finders fee for hooking you all up
Traditional unfunded startups bootstrap, if your project is game changing, then you can always go to incubators and use their networks.
Interested in doing an AMA in r/CryptoTechnology? I'm a mod there, our purpose is exactly that: weeding out the bad and predicting that the ecosystem will eventually look like once the madness ends.
Yes, we are interested!
Wouldn't word of mouth be a better marketing strategy then paying some neckbeard to write obvious hype?
This subreddit proves the contrary. The coins with the biggest treasure chests get hyped the most.
Right now all the recent ICOs are dumping below ICO price aside from a few really big ones. Not good timing at all.
Graft ICO was .25, and they got dumped on the first exchange for .02!
IUNGO was $1.15. now $0.85
02! = 2
Die bot
What are the marketing budgets for a mid level ico?
Marketing cost can range from minimum of $25,000 to $300,000. Everyone is pay to play.
Check out Zack and Max at Crypto Coin Newz.
Then f..k them. Ask for details and prices those sites/youtubers, write an article or a post here with proofs. This way you will get some interest to you project, and idiots will lose some credibility.
Can I guess the exchange?
If its the one i think, you finished the beta tests a few weeks ago right?
That's just how it is and I don't think it will change.