The statistics could not be ignored. Most ICOs tank, and stay tanked, after the tokens get to the crypto exchanges, after the frenzy and ‘FOMO’ attending the crowdsale is over.Image result for ICO Race Lugano

Most watchers keeping track of the ICO Race phenomenon generally agree that the trend in the last few months has been for ICOs to lose value post-crowdsale, with many buyers waiting in vain for the ‘moon’ they were promised, once the cryptocurrency hits an exchange portal.

What is however not being discussed is the principal reason why we are witnessing this phenomenon, and what participants in a crowdsale, like the score companies almost all of us rely on to make a choice, must be doing wrong in picking which ICO have most value, or has the best likelihood of rising in value once the crowdsale is over.

While there are a lot of reasons one could legitimately proffer for the phenomenon, there is one fact that I think is probably more accountable for this than most other contending reasons: ICO token valuation and the misplaced emphasis on ‘blockchain experts’, ‘ICO advisors’ or ‘technical whizkids’ for erc20 tokens.

I possess always thought the need for blockchain technical experts or ICO technical advisors is overstated, or even outrightly misplaced, when a project is judged by that requirements, unless the project is actually seeking to create a brand new coin principle. For most ERC20 Tokens and copycat coins, the real important consideration should be the Business Strategy behind the token and the managerial antecedents and executive profiles of the Team leaders.

As anyone involved in the industry should know, creating an ERC20 token from Ethereum, or similar tokens from other cryptocurrencies, will not take any great technical skill or require any overrated blockchain advisor (as a matter of fact, with new software out there, an ERC20 Token can be done in less than 10minutes by a complete technical newbie.

So technological should no more even be a major deal for bridal party anymore). The key should be the business plan; level of business experience; competence of the project leaders and the business online strategy of the primary company raising the funds.

Frankly, as a possible Attorney and Business Consultant of over 30 years me personally to many companies globally, We cannot I cannot understand why people keeping looking for some Russian or Korean language or Chinese ‘Crypto Whiz’ or ‘Crypto Advisor’ to look for the strength of an ICO so that is basically a crowdfunding campaign for a BUSINESS CONCEPT…

We are of the strong thoughts and opinions that is one of the reasons why most ICOs never live up to their prelaunch hype. Inside an era where there is a wide variety of token development software, platforms and freelancer, the disproportionate concentrate on the blockchain experience or technical ability of the marketers is mostly misplaced. Is actually like trying to value the probable success of the company based on the ability from the staff to create a good website or app. That teach left the station sometime ago with the proliferation of technical hands on freelancing sites like Guru; Upwork, freelancer and even Fiverr.

People seemed too caught up in the hype and the technical certification of individuals promoting an ICO, particularly ERC20 Ethereum dependent tokens and then question why a technically superior Russian, Chinese or Korean language guy cannot deliver the business end of the company after the fund-collecting campaign.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *