Before You Jump on Any ICO Bandwagon, Read This First

深潮Published on 2025-12-16Last updated on 2025-12-16

Abstract

Before participating in any ICO, it's crucial to understand that most projects fail, and only a few achieve success. The recent hype around ICOs, driven by projects like MegaETH and Plasma, often leads to impulsive investments without proper due diligence. Here are key points to consider: 1. **Product Fundamentals**: Evaluate if the product solves a real problem and has genuine innovation. Avoid projects based on future promises or testnet data without a working product. 2. **Team Experience**: The team's track record matters. Experienced teams can adapt to market changes, while weak teams may disappear when hype fades. 3. **Investors and Valuation**: Check if reputable VCs are involved and assess the valuation. Avoid projects where insiders have low valuations, leaving retail investors at risk. 4. **Authentic Data**: Look beyond surface metrics like TVL or user numbers. Ensure data is genuine and not inflated by incentives or fake activity. 5. **Marketing and Narrative**: Strong projects control their narrative and attract organic attention. Poor projects rely on buzzwords without substance. 6. **Tokenomics**: Understand token unlock schedules, vesting, and fully diluted valuation (FDV). Avoid structures that favor insiders and shift risk to retail. 7. **Market Conditions**: Market cycles significantly impact valuation and returns. The same project may perform differently in a bull vs. bear market. ICO investments are not free money. Avoid FOMO-driven decisions and p...

Written by: Ola Ξlixir

Compiled by: AididiaoJP, Foresight News

ICOs are the hottest topic on crypto Twitter right now, and everyone is talking about them.

Everyone thinks they've found the next MegaETH or Plasma.

But most people are overlooking one key point:

Only a small fraction of these ICOs will actually make money; that's how the crypto market has always been.

One project pioneers a model, and it succeeds.

Then ten teams copy it, thinking they can replicate that success, but it's hard to duplicate, and eight or nine out of ten will fail.

Right now, every team wants to do an ICO, just because MegaETH and Plasma are hot.

They figure, instead of giving you an airdrop, why not have you pay to "get in."

However, those two projects succeeded because they were well-planned before execution.

So, before you invest in any ICO, consider the following points.

1. The Product is Fundamental

Ignore the flashy PowerPoints and the hype posts from KOLs.

Just ask a simple question:

Does this product actually solve a real problem today? Does it have genuine innovation? Why do they need to issue a token?

If the product only exists in a "future story" or requires a bunch of assumptions to work, that's dangerous.

Good ICOs usually have something actually running, not just empty promises or testnet data.

If they can't explain what the product does in one sentence, that's your first red flag.

2. The Team Matters

The quality of a project depends on the strength of the team behind it.

Look at the team's track record:

Have they built products before, in crypto or elsewhere?

Experience is a plus; it shows they've been down this road.

An anonymous team isn't necessarily a bad thing,

but they must deliver exceptional results to earn trust.

When the market shifts, strong teams adapt;

weak teams vanish as soon as the hype dies down. This is an "attention economy."

3. Investors and Valuation

Who invested in this project? Top-tier VCs or third-rate funds?

How much did they raise? What's the valuation? This is more important than many think.

If insiders and early investors got in at extremely low valuations, you're likely their "exit liquidity."

A good ICO's valuation makes sense even without hype;

a bad ICO relies on buzz and vanity metrics to justify its price.

4. Look at Real Data, Not Surface Numbers

Do they have real revenue? What are the active user numbers and Total Value Locked (TVL)?

Most importantly, the quality of this data—any data can be faked.

Testnet data is meaningless if it's easy to manipulate.

A dashboard full of fake activity won't magically turn into real usage—Monad is a prime example.

See if user demand is organic: are people willing to use the product without incentives,

or are they just there for a potential airdrop?

5. Marketing and Narrative Power

Marketing is more important than many realize.

MegaETH's marketing was executed masterfully.

The team controlled everything, perfectly steering the narrative.

Everyone was actively discussing MegaETH.

In the Web3 world, attention is everything.

If an ICO gets no attention before launch, don't expect miracles afterward—again, think Monad.

Good projects know how to tell their story clearly from the start.

Bad projects hide behind buzzwords: "We're building Web3's next ChatGPT + Nvidia + prediction market..." Nice story.

6. Offering Terms and Valuation

Read the terms carefully:

  • Token unlock rules

  • Vesting schedule

  • Circulating supply

  • Fully Diluted Valuation (FDV) at listing

Understanding the full tokenomics is crucial. If you can't, use AI tools to help analyze it.

If the ICO structure heavily favors insiders and dumps all the risk on retail, stay away.

A fair launch doesn't mean cheap; it means the interests of the project and participants are aligned.

7. Market Conditions are Key

This is the most easily overlooked point.

In a real bull market, a decent project can hit a $500M to $1B FDV on narrative alone.

Right now, even the hottest projects often cap out at $100M to $300M valuations.

This directly impacts your risk-reward calculation.

The same project can have wildly different outcomes in different markets.

Timing isn't everything, but it's never irrelevant.

Final Thoughts

ICOs are not free money; they never were.

The current trend will create some winners and leave a long list of lessons.

Don't buy just because everyone else is, or because a KOL you like is shilling it.

Don't assume every promoted project will be the next MegaETH.

The worst projects will just exploit your FOMO and hype-chasing mentality, with zero substance.

Related Questions

QWhat is the main reason many ICOs fail to replicate the success of projects like MegaETH or Plasma?

AMost ICOs fail because they are merely copying a successful model without proper planning, execution, or innovation, unlike the original projects which were well-planned from the start.

QAccording to the article, what should be the primary focus when evaluating an ICO?

AThe primary focus should be on the product itself—whether it solves a real problem, has actual innovation, and has a working product rather than just promises or testnet data.

QWhy is the team behind an ICO important, as mentioned in the article?

AThe team's experience and track record are crucial because a strong team can adapt to market changes, while a weak one may disappear when hype fades. Anonymous teams need to deliver exceptional results to gain trust.

QWhat does the article suggest about ICO valuations and investor alignment?

AThe article warns that if insiders and early investors get in at very low valuations, retail investors might become 'exit liquidity.' A good ICO should have a logical valuation and fair terms that align interests between the project and participants.

QHow does market timing affect the outcome of an ICO, based on the article?

AMarket timing is critical—the same project can have vastly different results in a bull market versus the current environment. Valuations and risk-reward ratios are heavily influenced by the overall market conditions.

Related Reads

Bankless Co-founder: Why I Sold All My ETH

Author David Hoffman, founder of Bankless, explains his decision to sell all his ETH, despite being a prominent figure in the Ethereum ecosystem. He clarifies that his move is not a bearish take on Ethereum itself, which he remains highly optimistic about as a network. His core argument is that the "ETH is money" thesis, which he helped popularize, has largely played out. Hoffman argues that ETH has achieved the market valuation it deserves based on Ethereum's current success and competitive position. He details several reasons for this view. First, the path for ETH to become global money required nearly flawless execution and sustained dominance across Ethereum's entire technical and social stack—a coordination challenge he now believes had a narrower window for success than anticipated. Second, market data shows a strong correlation between L1 chain activity/fees and the price of its native asset; Ethereum's fee dominance has been challenged by competitors like Solana. Third, the "strong version" of crypto (decentralized, native crypto economies) that ETH's monetary thesis relied upon has struggled to maintain a positive mainstream narrative and stable adoption beyond a brief period. Finally, Ethereum's architecture as a "giver"—providing secure block space and tokenization capabilities at cost to L2s and applications—means it doesn't capture premium value directly. Its rollup-centric roadmap further directs most profits to L2s and applications ("fat app theory"). In conclusion, Hoffman believes the opportunity for ETH to be revalued significantly upward as money has diminished. He sold not because ETH will fail, but because its monetary thesis has matured, and he seeks to allocate capital to other opportunities he finds more compelling.

链捕手19m ago

Bankless Co-founder: Why I Sold All My ETH

链捕手19m ago

From Issuer to Infrastructure Owner: Circle's Arc Strategy and the Fatal Gap in the GENIUS Act

Circle raised $222 million for its proprietary Layer-1 blockchain, Arc, positioning itself not just as a stablecoin issuer but as the owner of the settlement infrastructure USDC relies on. This move, backed by investors like BlackRock and Apollo, highlights a significant structural conflict unaddressed by the GENIUS Act of 2025. While the act focuses on stablecoin reserves and issuer oversight, it remains silent on the market structure implications of an issuer controlling the underlying network—a scenario akin to a currency issuer also owning the payment rails. Traditionally, financial regulations separate issuers from settlement infrastructure to ensure neutrality. With Arc, Circle gains control over transaction ordering, fees, and network rules, potentially favoring USDC over competitors. The article argues that this creates a permanent structural temptation, even if no abuse occurs. The solution lies in applying established market infrastructure principles: mandating neutral transaction ordering, transparent fee schedules, and governance separated from Circle’s commercial interests. The current pre-mainnet phase offers a critical window for regulators to establish these rules before Arc becomes entrenched. Once operational, enforcing changes would be costly and disruptive. The core question remains: should a regulated stablecoin issuer be allowed to own the settlement network its competitors must use? The GENIUS Act doesn’t answer this, but Circle’s Arc strategy makes it urgent.

marsbit24m ago

From Issuer to Infrastructure Owner: Circle's Arc Strategy and the Fatal Gap in the GENIUS Act

marsbit24m ago

What Are the Key Variables Determining the AI Bull Market?

Title: What Determines the AI Bull Market? Key Variables Revealed Despite rising oil prices above $100/barrel, persistent inflation, and fragile Fed rate cut expectations—a traditionally hostile environment for high-valuation tech stocks—the AI sector continues to drive the market to new highs. According to analysts, the current AI boom is in a phase of "rational fervor": while bubbles exist, they are not yet out of control. The crucial shift is the emergence of Agentic AI, which is evolving from an assisting tool (Copilot) to an autonomous execution tool (Autopilot), creating a clearer commercial path from investment to revenue. This shift accelerates Token consumption and inference computing demand while boosting revenue forecasts for leading firms. The market is now rewarding capital expenditure as it transforms from a burden into a competitive moat, supporting hardware chains like GPUs, optical modules, and storage. However, valuations have already priced in growth expectations for 2027-2028. The forward P/E ratio for the "Magnificent Seven" tech giants is about 35x, compared to 25x for the rest of the S&P 500. This premium implies AI adoption must occur 5 to 8 times faster than past technological revolutions—a scenario with little room for error. The sustainability of the AI bull market hinges on three key variables: 1. **Short-term liquidity shocks**: Risks include sustained high oil prices, resurgent inflation, rising interest rates, and potential unwinding of the yen carry trade. The critical question is whether the upward revision speed of Annual Recurring Revenue (ARR) can outpace the rise in interest rates. 2. **Mid-term industry realization**: Can the actual pace of AI adoption and commercialization match the current lofty valuations? Historically, general-purpose technology revolutions follow a non-linear path with periods of acceleration and deceleration. 3. **Long-term structural constraints**: These include energy and power grid limitations, employment displacement and consumer purchasing power, social acceptance and potential backlash, and potential hardware technology breakthroughs that could disrupt current supply chains. While the long-term prospects for AI remain optimistic with potential for significant productivity gains, the stock market's pricing depends not just on the vision but on the actual speed of realization amid these growing constraints. The direction is clear, but the pace of execution will determine whether the bubble remains controlled or spirals out of control.

marsbit25m ago

What Are the Key Variables Determining the AI Bull Market?

marsbit25m ago

The AI Industrial Revolution: Where Are We Now?

This article explores the current stage of the AI industrial revolution, arguing we are still merely attaching new tools to old workflows rather than fundamentally redesigning production. The author compares this to the early Industrial Revolution, where factories simply replaced waterwheels with steam engines without changing their core structure. Similarly, today we embed AI chat windows into existing software but leave organizational processes unchanged. While massive investment floods into AI infrastructure (data centers, chips), akin to railway manias of the past, the real transformation lies in "dismantling the old workshop"—reorganizing companies around AI. Examples include Notion's use of hundreds of AI Agents and Y Combinator's experiments with self-improving AI systems that operate autonomously. The author notes a critical gap: while China has vast AI user growth, few companies have rebuilt core workflows. AI is beginning to impact entry-level jobs, and early adopters are gaining a compounding advantage. The conclusion is that the pivotal moment will not be the invention of better models, but when organizations decide to tear down old structures and rebuild around AI, shifting the bottleneck from human coordination to computing power. The future workplace and job titles are yet to be defined, but the imperative is to move away from legacy processes and position oneself where the new "railway" is being built.

marsbit57m ago

The AI Industrial Revolution: Where Are We Now?

marsbit57m ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片