- Tough competition and strong project with stable coin already on the market
- smart contracts are likely to be based on the fixed parameters supporting the Quantity theory of Money - this concept is questionable in its strict form, so we hope the parameters to be flexible
- The system is tied to Ethereum
- The system has a right to manage users' accounts, withdraw and add tokens - that may distract some users
- The volatility and uncertainty is nor removed - it is just replaced from the Prices to Volumed, and Inflation risk turns just Shrinknflation risk
- Financial information is not available
- High competition between stable coins
- Market glut of crypto projects, product doesn’t meet real business’ demand which is going to be the main driver in the industry
- Bad timing for further products (Decentralized Phase & Independent phase): Gartner Hype Cycle
- Sharp decrease of collateral value – no dividends for share token holders
- Bad valuation for Share token – lack of demand
- The absence of exact product view – potential pivot (usual for startups)
- Bloated staff (might be too big team for startup, but not critical)
- The absence of experienced portfolio managers, which is important for their collateral part of business
- Potential losing of money from bad investment in collateral
- The model tries to be less dependent on technology, than competitors' ones - that is the problem many new projects try to overcome - as a good stablecoin must avoid human intervention
- High valuation, according to gossips (over 50M USD)
- The product may become niche on market with the scalability obstacles
- Free centralized services may be more user-friendly for users
- unclear business plan
- the service may lose the competition with free centralized services, being non-free and slower
- the roadmap is unavailable
- it is unclear who will develop the project, and who will just support
- unclear adoptability on platforms with free authentication.
- unclear token specification
- no financial metrics available
- it is unclear, whether Binance participate in equity or not
At the current moment beyond the “crypto-hype” people looking with doubt to such global blockchain projects, the number of people who looking forward for large platforms sharply decreased. Also, main law and technological problems aren’t solved – Visa and MasterCard are still better and all countries have their specific view on blockchain-technology. Another risk – the absence of competitive advantages. Volatility on the crypto-market.
The main risk is presence of some technological imperfections, product is global and it is crucial to be available to service all your clients qualitatively. Also, we can’t determine their product, descriptions are too abstract, they want to build something global but it’s unclear what is their exact product.
Team isn’t very big and we can’t find any outstanding experience. If their product would be successful they will meet need to hire more people.
Their business model relates to the number of users (community) and token popularity which makes it sensitive to the market and product risks
They aren’t going to take fees from their users which isn’t okay for future cash inflows. Lack of description of their token further functions, which hinder to valuate this token.
- The project enters a practically monopolized market.
- ICANN is the only way to create a top-level domain right now. The entire market belongs to this organization.
- For wide distribution, the project needs implementation in large corporations and obtaining legal status in various jurisdictions.
- The team consists only of developers, no business representatives.
- The central organization does not exist.
- The legal component of the project is not clear.
- It is not clear whether large corporations and organizations will agree to move to the auction system.
- It is difficult to predict how such a technology will be taken by governments and ICANN, created by the US government.
- Legal issues are not covered. The project could face pressure or prohibition from centralized bodies such as ICANN and governments of different countries.
- $ 136 million of initial capitalization, which may lead to a strong fall in prices at the initial stage, in case of early listing.
- Experimental distribution system. It may turn out to be a strong point of the project or a trap for the project because it is very difficult to imagine how the network will be managed.
- The difficult idea for the market
- Politics risk due to the founder's manifesto
- Idealistic motives behind the project's structure and goals
- The founder background and vision may push away some partnerships and prevent the adoption
- The role of tokens is still not finalized
- The project is not going to accept additional funds
None of current DEXs have solved the main technical problem – low speed and liquidity.
The other problem is advantages of larges exchanges, which have huge number of users and it is easier for them to create a decentralized network.
In addition, there is a big law risk – SEC has not approved current DEXs, nut USA is the biggest market for such platforms. The situation is that the first good project is going to win the competition and capture the market.
Now Ferrum is developing two main products – DEX and wallet. Both of the products have many other already existing analogues.
There are 8 people and 5 advisors. Half of a team are from investment funds and the other half has some technical background. There is one important moment – most of the founders haven’t changed their main workplace in LinkedIn.
Ferrum Network has strategic partners - TLG Ventures, KOSMOS, Token Research Group. Some of their team members represent these funds.
Ferrum’s business and token’s cost fully depend on the number of users. During the communication with the team, they have mentioned that their main market is USA, but it is still big legal risk with American jurisdiction. In addition, business is built on cryptocurrency market and if it is going to fail this project will be unclaimed.
- Tough competition from other blockchain platforms
- No public release is available
- Team previous experience spans many not widely known Romanian companies
- Lack of outstanding features for tokens
- High valuation for main sale and private investors with the high potential of cost reduction in the budget
- The designed network see significant obstacles from the telecom industry, not prepared for an effective maintenance of such industries
- Tough competition in the blockchain industry
- No prototype available
- Token functions are not described in details
- No financial information available yet
- "Network effect" entry barrier
- The new OS may add more complexity to the blockchain infrastructure
- Uncertain need globally in the solution
- Lack of experienced staff from well-known companies
- Uncertain activity of users in vouching
- No financial information available
- Tough competition on the market of scalable blockchains
- Edge on competitors is not clear due to the lack of technology described
- No prototype
- No roadmap
- Lack of details in the technology description
- Unexperienced team with doubtful achievements
- No exceptional token functions (the traditional model is used)
- Unclear use-of-proceeds plan with no significant adjustments
- High token pool capitalization for the project with no prototype
- The market has not seen successful tokenization projects yet, raising the risk of remaining the idea only "theoretical"
- No prototype available
- The team may be involved in other activity in their companies
- No distinguished and outstanding background in the team
- High peaq token pool valuation - 62M USD
- No one on the market has solved the problems that ARPA aims to solve
- Fierce competition from the similar projects
- ARPA promises to solve significantly difficult problems of multi-computations and security
- No prototype
- No whitepaper
- Mainnet release may be considered as late - Q2 2019
- The core technology is only to be released in Q1 2020
- Lack of legal and marketing specialists
- Lack of strong managers with the proven track record in successful projects
- Token functions are not announced yet
- Financial info is not announced yet
- The offer is likely to give no significant edge on competitors
- No prototype available
- Team members achievement and profiles are hardly available for proofing
- Legal risks regarding security functions of the token
- No information regarding valuation
- Seed bonuses have no lock-up period that increases the risk of the mass sell-off
- Uncertain purpose of "Investors Protection Fund"
- The structure of the coming token sale is unknown
The large corporation highly dominates AI market.
Access to large amounts of data is crucial for development AI.
No prove of such AI conception in any other sources.
It is easy to create MVP, but almost impossible to develop industrial implication.
Team does not have blockchain and AI background.
Not clear role of tokens.
Blockchain does not create additional value.
The project is substantially overvalued.
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.