Icocountdown charges $1000 per week. I think a lot of ICOs will not be listed there.
Exactly, but do you think that's a lot of good ICOs, bad ICOs, or both and it is not as meaningful? I mean, is there any correlation between whether an ICO can afford being listed on such a website and whether it is worth following, supporting, about to succeed?
I don't think there is a strong correlation.
There could be some ICO project started by 25 year old geeks, laden with debt, that won't be on that site. But they're brilliant developers.
There was an ICO project started by a doctor earlier this year, who knew little about software or technology, but he would've been able to afford to pay $1000 per week. Now, there are people such as Paris Hilton and Floyd Mayweather (a boxer) getting involved, who can pay to get on that site. But does Paris Hilton or Mayweather know how to pick the best crypto/blockchain project? Do they know the difference between POW, POS or POI? Do they know what Raiden, Lightning Network or Segwit mean?
Well, yeah, I got your point, but to be fair, if Paris Hilton and Floyd Mayweather can afford to pay websites for listing their projects - we know they can - then they also can afford to hire real masters and experts to elaborate on their ideas and transform them into, like, a real project.
However, I think I agree that there is no such a strong correlation and we should always look into a certain project we potentially want to participate in, not the amount of money the developers have to pay for anything from the very beginning. Well, at the same time, not enough money at the beginning makes it harder to quickly attract 'the first' attention of people who are supposed then to push your project by simply spreading the word.