Technical Experts And ICO Advisors

The data could be dismissed. Many ICOs tank, and stay tanked, after the tokens get into the crypto exchanges, after the frenzy and ‘FOMO’ attending the crowdsale is finished.

Most watchers keeping tabs on the ICO phenomenon agree that the trend in the past couple of months has been around for ICOs to lose value post-crowdsale, with many buyers waiting in vain for the’moon’ they had been promised, when the cryptocurrency strikes an exchange portal coinmarkets.net.

What is however not being discussed is that the main reason why we’re seeing this phenomenon, and what participants at a crowdsale, including the rating companies the majority of us rely on to make a decision, must do wrong in choosing which ICO have most value, or has the best probability of climbing in value when the crowdsale is finished.

While there are a whole lot of reasons one can legitimately proffer for the phenomenon, there’s one fact that I believe is probably more responsible for this than many other contending reasons: ICO token valuation and the misplaced emphasis on’blockchain specialists’,’ICO advisers’ or’technical whizkids’ for erc20 tokens.

I’ve always thought the demand for blockchain technical specialists or ICO technical advisors is exaggerated, or even outrightly misplaced, when a project is judged by that criteria, unless the job is in fact attempting to create a brand new coin idea. For many ERC20 Tokens and copycat coins, the actual important consideration should be the Business Strategy behind the token as well as the managerial antecedents and executive profiles of the group leaders.

As anyone involved in the industry should know, creating an ERC20 token from Ethereum, or similar tokens from different cryptocurrencies, doesn’t take any amazing technical ability or need any overrated blockchain adviser (as a matter of fact, with new applications on the market, an ERC20 Token can be completed in less than 10minutes by a complete technical newcomer.

So technical needs to no more be a big deal for tokens anymore). The key should be the business plan; degree of business experience; competence of the project leaders and the company marketing strategy of the primary company increasing the funds.

Frankly, as an Attorney and Business Advisor of over 30 years to many companies globally, I can’t I can’t understand why folks keeping looking for some Korean or Russian or Chinese’Crypto Whiz’ or’Crypto Advisor’ to ascertain the strength of an ICO for what’s essentially a crowdfunding effort for a BUSINESS CONCEPT…

I’m of the strong opinion that’s among the key reasons why many ICOs never fulfill their prelaunch hype. In an era where there’s an abundance of token creation applications, platforms and freelancer, the disproportionate focus on the blockchain expertise or technical ability of the promoters is largely lost. It is like trying to appreciate the probable success of a business dependent on the ability of its employees to make a fantastic website or app. That train left the station long ago with the proliferation of specialized hands on freelancing sites like Guru; Upwork, freelancer as well as Fiverr.

People seemed too caught up in the hype and the technical qualifications of individuals promoting an ICO, especially ERC20 Ethereum based tokens and then wonder why a superior Russian, Korean or Chinese man can’t deliver the business end of the company following the fundraising campaign.