[sanderjd]

Is this also true of all startups that take funding and then fail? That would be one reasonable definition of "scam" I think, but personally I think it is more useful to have different terminology for speculative high risk ventures that make a good faith effort but fail vs. malicious schemes designed only to take money and run. I think there are lots of both things in this cryptocurrency space, but I think it's reductive to throw your hands up and say they're all the same.

[sanderjd]

Debating myself a bit: the reason startups tend to attract fewer scams is that only accredited investors can invest in them. There is definitely something to be said for that!

[arcticbull]

Generally you're only going to get decent money from bigger names (or at least one leading the round) - and a bad reputation will make it quite unlikely you'll get to play again. This helps avoid many straight-up scams like Dentacoin (lol).

Then, your future rounds of investment are conditional on demonstrated success. Your A can be a bridge round based on traction or a materialized idea. However, your B is generally based on hard numbers.

ICOs tend to get series F/G money up front on a hope and a prayer.

Circle CI raised $100M in a Series F. Check out this whose-who of token failure that all raised the same amount or much more on day 1 (https://decrypt.co/53950/the-10-biggest-icos-heres-where-the...).