Fierce competition on blockchain market. Legal issues with card payment with crypto assets.
No focus of the product – all in one. No clear roadmap of product development.
Founder and co-founder of Newton Protocol already took part in ICO of Elastos just half year ago. Founders team does not have deep expertise in blockchain development.
The model implies extremely strong network effect, as a result, first mover grab the most of market. The model is typical for infrastructure projects.
No information has been announced. Project has at least 13 angel investors what is strange.
- The websites of Tora and Caspian look very similar.
- There is no link to GitHub to track the product development.
- It is unclear when the product development has been started.
- The motivation of blockchain integration into the system is unclear.
- The team claims that they already connected 10 exchanges to its system. The list of exchanges is unknown.
- The team is scattered between Hong Kong, Tokyo, San Francisco, and London.
- Most of the team members still work at Tora and have to work at two companies simultaneously.
- None of the core team members has blockchain related experience.
- The rationale behind issuing native token is unclear.
- The list of CSP token holders benefits is unclear.
A high competition on IoT market.
Integration with an exsisting IoT is the most important.
The most part of the current team has joined in Dec 2017 - Jan 2018.
There are 94 employees in Helium Inc. and Helium System Inc. The connection between companies is unclear.
Gateways will slow down the network deployment.
No financial information has been announced.
• No clear focus of the project.
• High competition on the public blockchain market.
• The rise of the platform will not lead to rising of the token price.
• Next level of funding could be too expensive.
• Equity investment would be highly preferable, but it is not available.
- High competition in the sphere of smart-contracts development tools.
- The most successful ICOs in this field were launched back in 2016 i.e. have early mover advantages.
- Testnet is not available yet.
- The motivation for the customers to issue tokens on Emotiq platform and not somewhere else is unclear.
- The development of a proprietary programming language - Ring - may not be adopted by communities.
- The team members are located in Moscow, Zug, Tucson, Mexico, Los Angeles, and Toronto.
- David McClain does not have any experience except Emotiq mentioned on his Linkedin page.
- Now there is not enough information available on the business model of the platform.
- Token economics is not given in a detailed manner.
- The unsold tokens will be kept in reserve by Emotiq, to be used for future funding needs.
- Post-ICO valuation will be equal to $120M which seems extremely expensive.
- There is no information on the use of proceeds.
• Tough competition among exchanges
• Not significant and vague edge on competitors
• Strategic goal is to outperform crypto exchanges in volumes thanks to the token model designed but this parament does not indicate a fundamental leadership
• Technical specifications are not available
• Prototype is not available yet
• Roadmap is not detailed and includes not relevant information
• Lack of experienced blockchain developers
• The model is likely to attract doubtful and questionable tokens for listing
• Token functions are poor and do not add significant and fundamental value to the project
• Maximum cap and Hardcap are overvalued
A lot of location data is freely available for most usecases. The biggest part of location data is owned and used within huge corporations.
Last information about numbers of transaction is dated Oct 2017. There is no opportunity to freely use the final product of Fysical or Fysical Labs. Only landing pages is available. No information of app, which provides an location data or about any buyers.
Not clear the role of founders of Fysical Labs in new project Fysical. Almost no technical team.
According to information on site, currently marketplace model is not balanced. (only 20 buyers and 1000+ suppliers)
There is no clear mechanism for token value growth.
Tough competition among successful blockchain projects
The product is not far different from competitors and does not have any significant edge Only developers are able to test the prototype
The team members are also engaged in Ovelock projects Lack of marketing and legal specialists Only 5 team members
Not sold tokens will not be burnt and will be held by the company for future sales Own token applied has poor rational grounds
It is not clear how raised funds will be distributed
There are several Blockchain projects that do not have the same features as Origin Protocol but aim to create similar products and already gained public attention and raised money, such as District0x and Openbazar. District0x, which creates a network of decentralized markets and communities, has already raised 10M USD during ICO last August. The market of protocols seems to be heavily dependent on the "first-mover advantage", as the protocols will grow faster if they are unified and comply with the current solutions on the market.
The team aims to create a complex product which requires vast amount of resources. That is why the feasibility of all the proposed features is unclear. Origin Protocol will have to compete with large, established marketplaces across different industries. It is unclear if the team will be able to scale the project so that it will be possible to compete with companies like Airbnb, Fiverr or Uber. Origin aims to expand its services globally but does not focus on any particular markets. As the prices will be shown in fiat currencies but will be paid in crypto, which is way more volatile than the former one, it may lead to price differences. This can harm the customer experience. The given roadmap is not enough detailed and only highlights some of the product development stages.
The team is spread between Colorado and California.
As the platform will require participants to deposit small amounts of token before creating a new listing or user profile, it might lower the attractiveness of the platform for the early users. As the users might be penalized if they falsely challenge legitimate listings or accounts, it may also decrease the attractiveness of the platform. There is no information on how Origin Protocol will earn its money, so the commercial viability of the platform is not clear.