Since you come over here to shill with 18 pt colored text and emphasize the importance of the views of other past ICO sellers (what software has this guy ever accomplished?), let's at least quote him more accurately:
Altogether, I get a very positive feeling
Feelings are nice. How about specific objective points that we can sink our teeth into instead of nebulous gut intuition.
Like many other blockchain projects, it is very hard to correctly identify the potential size of the markets they are going after. Just limiting ourselves to the potential ROSCA market, the crypto based ROSCA market is $0 as far as I know today
A dose of objective reality.
The potential here is huge ($450 billion in the markets listed in the whitepaper), but it’s also very important to not get trapped in the 1 percent fallacy (“if we only get 1 percent of the online search market from Google, we’ll get rich”)
The bolded is an important warning. However, it is also incorrect to state that the potential is $450 billion. The potential is closer to $0, because none of that $450 billion market knows anything about crypto or has any significant incentive to use a crypto system.
Many of your "potential" users don't even use computers!The "build it and they will come" delusion.
But you as a speculator don't really care about adoption. What you care about is if they can do some really good bullshit marketing like Vitalik et al did for Ethereum.
Ethereum was selling a dream. But that dream was actualized by producing virtual machines and research.
WeTrust has a marketing problem because the dream actually has to be actualized in adoption. No amount of press releases about endorsements by NGOs and other bullshit will really matter or will it?
What is the go-to market strategy? 2/5
This is one area I think is clearly lacking in the whitepaper.
The only clear market strategy communicated is a focus on collaborations with NGOs and other organisations in order to drive user adoption to the platform. This sounds like a good strategy, but there should be testimonials and preferably commitments that this product is interesting and needed by them, otherwise investors will have no way of knowing whether the go-to market strategy has any merit.
The other major drawback is that the product as it stands now requires users to be fully crypto literate.
He has the same criticisms I made which I formed after glancing at the project for about 2 minutes for the first time.
The barrier to entry is obvious and huge.
It is a reasonably interesting idea. But they don't need $6 million to get to the next stage. They are not even coding a blockchain, as they are using a smartcontract on top of Ethereum. They should be more modest and set their maximum at $2 - $3 million, so that their ICO investors have better ROI and there is more upside demand from investors who wanted to buy but could not get into an oversubscribed ICO.
Besides Ethereum can't scale. So anything built on Ethereum can't scale. Casper is fundamentally flawed and will never work.
It is an interesting idea. And they could in theory transition their idea to any better blockchain that might come in the future. It is a worthy research. But less hype and more sober presentation would be more respected. And stop trying to cash out $6 million for a smart contract and some mobile app. Work hard boys on a minimal salary as all dedicated founder startups do.
One of the "potential" reasons the ICOs set a large maximum is so they can borrow BTC and buy tokens from themselves. So they make it look like they raised more $ than they did and then they have this huge hidden premine.
Poll
