1/ # 3.7 What to look for in the project and its investors

- Who are the team. Do they sound like they know what they are doing?, do their resumes look impressive?. If you can, find technical peoples comments on the team. Do people think they pull off what they say they will?

2/ Why does this matter if its all BS? Because of risk. When you're researching you're not only looking for gains but also trying to identify risks/unknowns.

The team contains one of the biggest unknowns and risks you will find in crypto.

3/ Something can look like a great opportunity but if the team don't apply the correct token strategy and LISTEN to the community and advisors (Who know more about the token game than they do - otherwise they wouldn't be working in a job), then its all for nothing.

4/ - Shilling/Marketing

Theres people out there who say "I don’t like shilling" Good luck with that. If nobodys hearing about why they should buy it, chances are they won’t buy it. Without this the price isn't going to go up. Speculation needs to be cultivated.

5/ They need to "play the crypto game" and crucially have good crypto advisors onboard. If you see that the team is indirectly interested in price action its a positive, the more the better.

6/ If they demonstrate direct interest in the price action, such as them talking referencing the price or it going up, then its a red flag. It shows they are clueless about this game and will likely make further bad calls.

7/ If you find a team who says outright "We are not in this for gains, we are building a long term tech project" or something similar. Get out. Whatever it is that they are doing, does not align with what you want. You need a team who will play the game.

8/ - Anon teams

Be extremely cautious of investing in any project that is anonymous. Not only is there a high chance of it rugging, but when dealing with anons you don't know how long their interest in the project will be.

9/ People can quit a company, but usually the company has to take responsibility for doing the sale, and it'll follow them. With anons, they can just disappear. There was instances of this in 2021 with projects that in all other regards looked like promising investments.

10/ - Backers, Advisors and Funds

Find out who is backing them financially. Who are their investors. Do they have the funds and resources to realistically build what they are saying they will? Do they have the funds to finance the cultivation of an ecosystem?

11/ Its important to realise the difference between VC's and "VC's". By VC's im referring to investment groups such as a16z and Coinbase Ventures.

12/ By "VC's" I'm referring to the groups that call themselves VCs which are just some guys from CT who have gotten themselves a bit of funds, made a business together and began calling themselves a VC outfit in order to get access to private sales.

13/ When you look at investors you have to look at the quality of them. Check them out. See what else they've invested. Look at how well those projects have done, what exchanges have they got on, partnerships, hows the price action.

14/ With many of the "VCs" you will see awful performance. This is because these 1-2 CT guys don't care about their reputation or name and they can just disappear with with their millions of dollars.

If its a company such as a16z however, its a different story.

15/ It isn't just a few people but a business that needs to maintain its reputation. It is in the interests of these groups that the project does well and they are very selective in who they will invest in.

16/ If you go to the websites of the reputable VCs you will see the kinds of criteria they impose on their crypto investments to ensure a high standard and that the project can and will follow through on their project plan and how they use the funds.

17/ Recently theres an idea come around that not having VC's involved is a positive. This idea is mostly manufactured by people looking to shill a project who skew the above info and the performance of 1-2 projects high profile projects such as ICP.

18/ In reality the early buyers of those "No VC" projects (who often are the ones shilling the 'no VCs' message, are probably more of a negative than any VCs.

19/ A big part of looking into the investors of a project is working out if it has the financial backing to do what it claims it will. An example is a blockchain platform. To do one of these they require 10's of millions of dollars at a minimum.

20/ Without it, and the doors the VCs and advisor open, the project cannot realistically go on to be successful. Look at the type of project, the plan and ask yourself these types of questions.

21/ If its a big project with major backers then they will have advisors as part of the deal, however, with smaller projects its critical they've brought people in who know the crypto game. Don't just think its a positive because the advisor is a 'known-name'.

22/ Go look at what else they've been involved in and check the performance of those projects.