eMusic

A decentralized music distribution and royalty management system to better reward artists and their fans.

About eMusic

eMusic (owned by Triplay) will implement tokenized credits to their existing music service platform, allowing artists to gain a significantly larger share of the service provider’s revenue and will enable “a new self-publishing and distribution platform”. Revenue will be split 50/50 between artists/labels and service providers. EMU tokens are used to purchase content and gain access to services offered on the platform.

Token Economics Product

Documentation

3.5
Documentation
Comprehensiveness

Does it cover the full scope of the problem and solution?

4.0
N/A
4 - Satisfactory coverage.
Readability

How easy is it to read and understand the documentation, comprehend the project's goals and trajectory.

5.0
N/A
5 - Clear, comprehensible, coherent, consistent, concise. Professionally organized and well articulated.
Transparency

Level of disclosure of pertinent information regarding the company and the project, including current stages of development, issues that have been identified and how to address them, potential problems, access to resources and repositories (github repository, patent applications). Honesty with regard to what the project can (vs. wishes to) achieve.

3.0
N/A
3 - Basically honest, but hyped up or potentially misleading.
Presentation of Business Plan and Token Model

What stages are to be achieved, how are they to be carried out and according to what timeline, what is the long-term plan. How well thought-out is the token model and how well does it fit into the company's overall business model.

3.0
N/A
3 - More information required. Discussion is based on unverified assumptions, business and token models are are not fully laid out, or some key issues remain unaddressed.
Presentation of Platform Technology and Use of Blockchain

What are the platform's core and additional features, how are they to be implemented and according to what timeline, what is the long-term plan. How well thought-out is the use of blockchain technology and how integral is it to the platform.

2.0
N/A
2 - Missing critical information; discussion is brief or very basic, does not address the underlying issues.
Legal Review and Risk Assessment

How professional are the disclaimers, risk assessments, terms and conditions, etc. Is the company working with respectable law/accounting firms? What about due diligence and smart contract auditing? Is a SAFT structure being used (and is the SAFT accessible)?

4.0
N/A
4 - Professional legal documents are provided, project employs professional legal counsel and financial auditing services.

Documentation

Comprehensiveness: The whitepaper is extensive, primarily discusses the market landscape of the music industry with respect to streaming services and outlines the proposed capabilities of the platform. Although Technical content is lacking some details about implementation, the business plan and usecases is well presented. The team is included on the company website and whitepaper. The company. Legal content is available in the whitepaper.

Readability: The document is well articulated, simple to read, and organized.

Transparency: The current stage of development is not adequately discussed. Furthermore, details of the technology development plans, with respect to both the details of implementation and expected timeline is not thoroughly presented. Current and future features of the platform are adequately covered.

Presentation of Business Plan and Token Model: An overview of the business plan and the market landscape is included. The platform will utilize a 50:50 split between artists/labels and plan to work with other service providers to include more content on the platform (service providers that would like to receive eMusic content but will not support blockchain technology will receive a 70:30 split, in favor of the artist). It is stated that “independent artists today can distribute their content through any number of distributors and receive up to 70% (occasionally more) of revenue from sales/streams of their music” but getting more of the proceeds has not translated into more plays or promotions”.
The fee structure for various aspects of the platform are mentioned vaguely. For instance, artists should expect to be “paying a small fee to cover costs involved in the storage/hosting of files, as well as the administrative costs involved in maintaining and updating blockchain infrastructure”. However, the cost structure is not specifically outlined.

Presentation of Platform Technology and Use of Blockchain: There is little content with respect to the technical details of the platform. The project utilizes blockchain technology for the creation and distribution of tokenized credits in order to make transactions and assessing ownership rights on the platform. Vague discussions regarding smart contracts is included, which mainly consist of the desired outcome of utilizing the smart contracts as opposed to discussing its technical implementation/development.

Legal Review and Risk Assessment: There is a brief disclaimer included towards the beginning of the whitepaper. Risk factors are also discussed towards the end of the document. Furthermore, a legal memorandum can also be found and is fairly comprehensive and spans approximately 25 pages. In the document it is stated that “TriPlay expects to convert a substantial portion of the proceeds of the Token Sale that are denominated in BTC or ETH into fiat currency”. eMusic’s token company is incorporated in Switzerland, where the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) published official guidelines for ICOs in February.

Documentation Market

Product

3.2
Product
Differentiation

What are the product's unique features / attributes / advantages? How is it different from other, similar products or projects? What makes it stand out or gives it an edge?

3.0
N/A
3 - Some; has a certain edge or angle.
Readiness

Readiness of the full platform, including blockchain/smart-contract/token infrastructure; based on what's publicly available (not just claims).

4.0
N/A
4 - Beta or initial rollout of full product; Traditional platform exists, blockchain integration in testing or proof-of-concept.
Concreteness of Development Plans

How detailed is the roadmap? How well defined is the timeframe? How concrete and detailed are the milestones and how well are they correlated with the business and technology development plans, as well as with funding goals (i.e., fundraising dependent)?

3.0
N/A
3 - An overall plan, major milestones stated with some relevant details.
Current Position within Roadmap

How far along is the project as a whole relative to the plans and roadmap (including growth, not just platform development)?

3.0
N/A
3 - Getting there.
Feasiblity

Are the project's development plans reasonable? Does the long term vision align with core objectives and current development efforts? Does the timeframe make sense?

4.0
N/A
4 - Realistic.
Blockchain Innovation

What is the level of innovation and development particularly with regard to blockchain technology and its utilization? Do the project's blockchain-related developments have value beyond the company's particular platform or network?

2.0
N/A
2 - Limited added value, some additional smart contract functionality.

Product

Differentiation: Compared to existing music streaming services, the largest differentiating aspect of the platform is that is provides artists with a a much larger share of the company revenue. This is the core aspect of the ecosystem. The company also lists a crowdfunding platform that will allow fans to directly fund their favorite artists and recieve rights for future albums.

Readiness: The current stage of development from a technical perspective is not adequately discussed. The product is projected to have a rather low technical complexity. The core functionality of the platform exists and blockchain integration/functionality is planned to be implemented after the token sale.

Concreteness of Development Plans: The roadmap spans to the end of 2019 with milestones that are not thoroughly detailed. A description which further discusses each milestone is not presented with the roadmap. The milestones that are presented are fairly vague (for example, one of the milestones is displayed as “token/blockchain testing”). There are a lack of technologically-focused milestones. Plans with regards to business and technology development are not outlined with thorough detail. Approximately 30% of the fund allocation is planned to be used for marketing and PR purposes, yet specific details with regards to the organization’s marketing/growth strategy is presented with vague details.

Current Position within Roadmap: Thus far, it does not seem as though the organization has reached significant milestones with respect to the technological development of the platform, even though existence of the organization dates far before the company’s plan for implementing blockchain technology. As such, obstacles are ahead as blockchain technology is still to be implemented and other aspects of the platform (publishing platform, royalty management, etc) have yet to be developed, which are planned to be rolled out during 2019.

Feasibility: The goals of the organization with respect to the platform from a blockchain technology perspective do not seem particularly complex, considering most of the infrastracture was developed throughout the years. The proposed business model is unproven considering the current market landscape and existing solutions have a strong hold of the market share. However the goals outlined for Q3 2019 seems feasible as milestones seem within the capabilities of the current team. Smart contract development with respect to the rights and royalty management system will be more challenging but is expected to be accomplished by Q1 2019.

Blockchain Innovation: The organization does not provide innovation from a blockchain technology perspective. A brief assessment on the smart contracts that will be implemented in the platform are discussed in the whitepaper.

Product Company and Team

Market

3.5
Market
Target User Base

How big is the project's target user base, how large is its potential market?

4.0
N/A
4 - Large audience / wide market.
Market Penetration Potential

How easy or difficult will it be to penetrate this market sector on the scale proposed by the project? How dominant is the hold of current market leaders, and are they maintaining a competitive edge? For reviewers (not for tooltip): This should be generally with regard to both traditional and emerging blockchain solutions (assuming that in most sectors, there are no leading blockchain solutions as of yet, but there may start to be). Also, token regulatory issues that apply equally to all should not be stressed here, unless the project has an extra regulatory issue, or (in the other direction) if the regulatory measures taken help it considerably with market penetration...

3.0
N/A
3 - Moderate, a good strategy is essential.
Direct Competition

How many direct competitors does the project have (that are already known or can be easily found with a simple search), and how much further along are they? This should focus on blockchain-related competition but can include established or notable traditional (non-blockchain) competitors with a strong hold.

3.0
N/A
3 - Some normal competition (e.g., 5-7, similarly positioned). Blockchain solutions already evidently present in the sector.
Solution Advantage

How strong is the project's unique selling proposition (i.e., its stated advantage over similar or comparable ones)?

4.0
N/A
4 - Clear, evident.
Blockchain Disruption

How strong is the potential for disruption of the market sector due to the introduction of blockchain technology, as it is utilized by the solution?

3.0
N/A
3 - Moderate.
Long-Term Vision

What are the long term goals and plans of the project? (In terms of concrete plans, not just hype or vague assertions.)

4.0
N/A
4 - Long term market dominance / leadership. Development of the sector's flagship solution.

Market

Target User Base: The target use base for the platform is broad, targeting labels, artists, other service providers and listeners. The main value proposition is focused on content creators and allowing them to receive a high portion of the revenue comparing to existing solutions.

Market Penetration Potential: Market penetration will be challenging considering that the value proposition is primarily directed towards artists as opposed to listeners. The company intends to entice users with exclusive content and discounts related to the token, as current existing music streaming platforms are competing for listeners. The company aims to also work directly with the streaming services “allowing to enter more profitable agreements with existing content providers.”

Direct Competition: Most music-related blockchain projects are yet to show market domination, highlighting eMusic’s potential among its competitors, though traditional companies such as BandCamp, SoundCloud may challange eMusic’s user acquisition. Potential (blockchain-based) competitors include:

– Musiconomy
– Ujo Music
– Emanate
– Younk
– SOUNDEON
– BitSong

Solution Advantage: It is explicitly stated that the goal of the organization is to “not to compete head-to-head with others, rather better serve our customers”. Nearly all platforms that focus on a blockchain-powered service provider aim to provide a larger share of the revenue to artists. However, the organization already has a working product and a large user-base, which may be a signal for better position to sign new lables and artists.

Blockchain Disruption: There is potential for disruption in the music industry with the introduction of blockchain technology in order to decentralize the music industry. There are no fundamentally successful music-related blockchain products to date. eMusic is well positioned in terms of company stage, though blockchain development is still in early stages.

Long-Term Vision: The organization believes that there is a critical flaw with respect to the business model of current music streaming services. As such, eMusic offers an alternative which offers artists a larger portion of the service provider’s revenue. The platform has existed long before blockchain technology and the organization aims to develop a service that can better serve its users. It is acknowledged in the whitepaper that music streaming is unlikely to go away, but the organization aims to cater to a more specific audience which would like to further support artists. The company lists several features for future development:

– Rating & Reviews System
– Rights management & Exchange
– Crowdfunding platform for Artists
– Clearing House for Large Labels

Market Token Economics

Company and Team

3.7
Company and Team
Company Stage and Foundation

When was the company founded, how mature is it? Has it raised significant funds? Where relevant, this should address the parent company. For reviewers (not for tooltip): Check company LinkedIn and Crunchbase profiles. Impression summary should list basic information such as founding date, location/s, previous fundraising rounds (via crunchbase), maybe number of employees (via linkedin).

5.0
N/A
5 - Well established, has raised significant funds.
Team Assembly and Commitment

What is the structure of the team (core members, advisers, contributors)? Are all necessary positions filled or is the company still looking for key team participants? Are the team members fully committed to the project (or involved with other projects simultaneously)?

4.0
N/A
4 - Sufficently assembled and committed.
Background of Lead/Core Team Members

Are LinkedIn (or Github, or other professional) profile links provided, and do they show involvement in the project and relevant previous experience? For reviewers (not for tooltip): If the team is quite large, C-level and certain key team members (such as lead tech/blockchain developers) should be looked at, while other than that, a sample is fine (but this should be mentioned or reflected in the language ["It appears as though..."]).

4.0
N/A
4 - Verifiable relevant experience.
Relevance of Team's Previous Experience and Skill Set

How relevant are the team members' backgrounds and experience to the project and its requirements? Do they come from related industries and have in-depth knowledge of their respective fields?

3.0
N/A
3 - Correlated to project requirements.
Team Skill Set Balance (biz / tech / blockchain)

Do the team members' backgrounds and experience appear to collectively cover the project requirements? This includes but is not limited to blockchain expertise.

3.0
N/A
3 - Somewhat uncertain, probably okay.
Strategic Partnerships

What kind of launch partners and early adopters does the project have?

3.0
N/A
3 - A few SMB's; may include founder or advisor related ventures but shows ability to expand beyond.

Company and Team

Company Stage and Foundation: Based on the company’s LinkedIn page, it was found that the privately-held organization is based in New York and was founded in 1988. The company is owned by Triplay, Inc. According to the company’s Crunchbase page, eMusic was acquired by TriPlay in 2015 for $26MM USD. The company currently has around 1 million unique users a month, according to the CEO Tamir Koch.

Team Assembly and Commitment: The core team of 18 individuals and 11 advisors. According to Linkedin, TriPlay has 38 employees working on in the company. The CEO/President of the project is concurrently the Founder/CEO of Triplay, eMusic’s parent company. The CMO of eMusic is concurrently lists as an advisory board member MedPower eLearning Services. Most of the other team members show their involvement with the project. Many of the lead team members concurrently have the same role at Triplay, an company that manages services alongside eMusic, including eStories, MyDigipack, and MyMusicCloud. As such, the overall commitment to eMusic compare to Triplay’s other services (as well as unrelated organizations/projects for some team members) is uncertain.

Background of Lead/Core Team Members: Tamir Koch, TriPlay’s Founder & CEO since 2004, serves as the CEO of eMusic. Michael Juskiewicz, eMusic’s CFO, previously worked on investment banking, mergers & acquisitions and capital markets at groups such as Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Nomura and CyndxOn. Advisors to the project include the likes of Bill Campbell, the former head of digital for Sony Music, and Jeff Van Driel, the former CEO of classical music label Naxos of America Inc.

The company states that “our core team and advisors have collectively been responsible for over $1billion in exits and funding and have been involved in over 30 blockchain projects including:
Wepower, Adhive, Elysian, Wemark, INS.world, Cool Cousin, Tron, Change Bank, iOlite, Blackmoon, Zeex, Tatatu, Wings, Bancor, Firmo network, Matchpool, Flixxo, Orbs, Cartesi, Blox, Coinstarter, Liberdy, MW, Adex.network, HighIOT, Capitalise.”

Overall, background of core team members and advisers seems to be fairly profound.

Relevance of Team’s Previous Experience and Skill Set: Most of the individuals on the team, as well as the management, are concurrently involved TriPlay, a “mobile life” company which includes services including eMusic, along with eStories, MyDigipack, and MyMusicCloud (TriPlay has acquired eMusic in 2015 for $26MM). The company has been working in the music ecosystem for over 20 years. Ori Erez, listed as “Blockchain Expert” and advises the project, concurrently serves as the CEO/founder for a different organization, Lendoit, a P2P lending platform that utilizes blockchain technology.

Team Skill Set Balance (biz / tech / blockchain): There seems to be some lack of individuals with technical expertise, especially with regards to blockchain technology. Verifiable relevant experience demonstrating expertise in blockchain technology development is not evident among those with a technical position. The team skill set aligns more closely with business-development.

Strategic Partnerships: Notable partnerships/launch partners for the token sale are not evident in the Whitepaper or website. Partnerships seen online include companies such as 7digital, AT&T and Universal Studios, some of which date back 10 years or more hence the relevance is not clear. According to an article on Ctech, eMusic “has an agreement with almost 600,000 independent labels for new content”.

Company and Team Documentation

Token Economics

3.0
Token Economics
Value Proposition of Token

How much of a need is there for the token? What is the token's utility value, and what is its value as a security?

3.0
N/A
3 - Limited or uncertain; some risk with regard to actual value, but issuing a custom token is justifiable.
Token Economy

How well defined and sustainable is the token economy? This should include circulation, fees, earn/spend mechanisms, inflation/deflation mechanisms, etc.

3.0
N/A
3 - Some aspects stll undetermined, or potentially but not necessarily problematic.
System Decentralization (besides token)

How decentralized is the solution other than the token (e.g., data collection, storage, access, and use, or decision making processes, etc.)? The purpose here is not to penalize use of centralized components per se, but to assess how decentralization is incorporated.

2.0
N/A
2 - Centralized with some vague plans to decentralize, or decentralization treated more as trend than as a paradigm shift.
Fundraising Goals (Min/Max Raise Amounts)

How sensible are the project's min/max raise amounts or soft/hard caps? (Related to Use of Proceeds but broader).

4.0
N/A
4 - Reasonable, funding goals make overall sense.
Use of Proceeds (Fund Allocation)

How well-defined and sensible is the planned use of proceeds / fund allocation?

3.0
N/A
3 - Rough estimates, but looks okay.
Token Allocation

How well-defined and reasonable is the token allocation (including vesting, what's done with unsold tokens, etc.)?

3.0
N/A
3 - Sufficient company/community interest balance.

Token Economics

Value Proposition of Token: EMU tokens are tokenized credits which are used to purchase content on the eMusic platform. Listeners “are contributing more directly to the long term success of their favorite artists and the overall sustainability of their artistic vision”. Token holders can exchange EPU tokens for store credit and receive bonuses when compared to purchasing store credit with fiat. Furthermore, tokens do not expire, unlike eMusic retail store credit. It is stated that “from a business perspective the eMusic Token represents, in part, the pre-purchase of music”. Furthermore, those with a predetermined amount of tokens (unspecified) gives users unlimited cloud storage for their music collections.

Immediately after the token sale, the following features will be available to token holders (according to the whitepaper):

– Á La Carte Purchase
– Subscription
– Convert to Credit ad-hoc
– Purchase Extra Credit
– Loyalty Rewards
– Referral Bonus
– Access Exclusive Features
– Royalty Payments
– Incentivize Fan Base
– Participate in Crowdfunding
– 3rd Party Integration

Token Economy: Details of the token economics are outlined broadly. The company states that “the tokens will be priced at approximately U.S.$0.35 each (or the equivalent at the time of sale in BTC/ETH). The minimum value of all tokens to be sold in U.S. dollar terms will be $20,000,000 and the maximum value will be $70,000,000 (known as a “hard cap”), so between approximately 60,000,000 and 200,000,000 tokens initially would be sold. It is stated that “eMusic will make available additional tokens for purchase at or near initial sale price”. However, specific details are not outlined (the total supply presented in the whitepaper is 500,000,000).

System Decentralization (besides token): The governance structure of the organization and the platform are not thoroughly outlined. It is stated that “eMusic token holders [will] be able to vote to help to choose the self-published content”. On an organizational level, it does not seem as though token holders have voting rights with regards to the project. It is mentioned that eMusic won’t move exclusively to a token-based service—users could continue to pay with fiat money for the content.

Fundraising Goals (Min/Max Raise Amounts): The company’s funding goals are as the following:
Soft cap: $20MM USD
Hard cap: $70MM USD

The product development seem to be fairly simple as the main product is fully operational. While the hard cap seems to be relativly high in compares to the average ICO, eMusic is an established company that was acquired by TriPlay in 2015 for $26MM USD and will now need to face a crowded ecosystem. The reasons above may justify the company’s ambitions in terms of funds.

Use of Proceeds (Fund Allocation): The company aims to dedicate collected funds mainly at marketing and content acquisition, allowing the company to attract artists, users and rights holders to the platform. The full distribution is as the following:

20-25% – Development
30-35% – Marketing & PR
30-35% – Content Acquisition
10-15% – Lege Expenses / Misc.

Token Allocation: Token allocation is presented in a similar manner as the use of proceeds. Allocations are outlined as the following: Public Sale (35%-45%), Artist Awards (5%-10%), Platform (35%-55%) and Advisors (5%-10%). According to such allocation, tokens will be distributed to the public includes the user incentivization that is mentioned under “Platform”. Also, a portion of the allocated tokens to “Platform” will be reserved for possible future sale. The vesting period for tokens allocated to advisors will be a 6-month schedule. Unsold tokens will not be burned.

Documentation

Comprehensiveness: The whitepaper is extensive, primarily discusses the market landscape of the music industry with respect to streaming services and outlines the proposed capabilities of the platform. Although Technical content is lacking some details about implementation, the business plan and usecases is well presented. The team is included on the company website and whitepaper. The company. Legal content is available in the whitepaper.

Readability: The document is well articulated, simple to read, and organized.

Transparency: The current stage of development is not adequately discussed. Furthermore, details of the technology development plans, with respect to both the details of implementation and expected timeline is not thoroughly presented. Current and future features of the platform are adequately covered.

Presentation of Business Plan and Token Model: An overview of the business plan and the market landscape is included. The platform will utilize a 50:50 split between artists/labels and plan to work with other service providers to include more content on the platform (service providers that would like to receive eMusic content but will not support blockchain technology will receive a 70:30 split, in favor of the artist). It is stated that “independent artists today can distribute their content through any number of distributors and receive up to 70% (occasionally more) of revenue from sales/streams of their music” but getting more of the proceeds has not translated into more plays or promotions”.
The fee structure for various aspects of the platform are mentioned vaguely. For instance, artists should expect to be “paying a small fee to cover costs involved in the storage/hosting of files, as well as the administrative costs involved in maintaining and updating blockchain infrastructure”. However, the cost structure is not specifically outlined.

Presentation of Platform Technology and Use of Blockchain: There is little content with respect to the technical details of the platform. The project utilizes blockchain technology for the creation and distribution of tokenized credits in order to make transactions and assessing ownership rights on the platform. Vague discussions regarding smart contracts is included, which mainly consist of the desired outcome of utilizing the smart contracts as opposed to discussing its technical implementation/development.

Legal Review and Risk Assessment: There is a brief disclaimer included towards the beginning of the whitepaper. Risk factors are also discussed towards the end of the document. Furthermore, a legal memorandum can also be found and is fairly comprehensive and spans approximately 25 pages. In the document it is stated that “TriPlay expects to convert a substantial portion of the proceeds of the Token Sale that are denominated in BTC or ETH into fiat currency”. eMusic’s token company is incorporated in Switzerland, where the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) published official guidelines for ICOs in February.

Category Breakdown
Comprehensiveness

Does it cover the full scope of the problem and solution?

4.0
N/A
4 - Satisfactory coverage.
Readability

How easy is it to read and understand the documentation, comprehend the project's goals and trajectory.

5.0
N/A
5 - Clear, comprehensible, coherent, consistent, concise. Professionally organized and well articulated.
Transparency

Level of disclosure of pertinent information regarding the company and the project, including current stages of development, issues that have been identified and how to address them, potential problems, access to resources and repositories (github repository, patent applications). Honesty with regard to what the project can (vs. wishes to) achieve.

3.0
N/A
3 - Basically honest, but hyped up or potentially misleading.
Presentation of Business Plan and Token Model

What stages are to be achieved, how are they to be carried out and according to what timeline, what is the long-term plan. How well thought-out is the token model and how well does it fit into the company's overall business model.

3.0
N/A
3 - More information required. Discussion is based on unverified assumptions, business and token models are are not fully laid out, or some key issues remain unaddressed.
Presentation of Platform Technology and Use of Blockchain

What are the platform's core and additional features, how are they to be implemented and according to what timeline, what is the long-term plan. How well thought-out is the use of blockchain technology and how integral is it to the platform.

2.0
N/A
2 - Missing critical information; discussion is brief or very basic, does not address the underlying issues.
Legal Review and Risk Assessment

How professional are the disclaimers, risk assessments, terms and conditions, etc. Is the company working with respectable law/accounting firms? What about due diligence and smart contract auditing? Is a SAFT structure being used (and is the SAFT accessible)?

4.0
N/A
4 - Professional legal documents are provided, project employs professional legal counsel and financial auditing services.
Documentation Score:
3.5

Product

Differentiation: Compared to existing music streaming services, the largest differentiating aspect of the platform is that is provides artists with a a much larger share of the company revenue. This is the core aspect of the ecosystem. The company also lists a crowdfunding platform that will allow fans to directly fund their favorite artists and recieve rights for future albums.

Readiness: The current stage of development from a technical perspective is not adequately discussed. The product is projected to have a rather low technical complexity. The core functionality of the platform exists and blockchain integration/functionality is planned to be implemented after the token sale.

Concreteness of Development Plans: The roadmap spans to the end of 2019 with milestones that are not thoroughly detailed. A description which further discusses each milestone is not presented with the roadmap. The milestones that are presented are fairly vague (for example, one of the milestones is displayed as “token/blockchain testing”). There are a lack of technologically-focused milestones. Plans with regards to business and technology development are not outlined with thorough detail. Approximately 30% of the fund allocation is planned to be used for marketing and PR purposes, yet specific details with regards to the organization’s marketing/growth strategy is presented with vague details.

Current Position within Roadmap: Thus far, it does not seem as though the organization has reached significant milestones with respect to the technological development of the platform, even though existence of the organization dates far before the company’s plan for implementing blockchain technology. As such, obstacles are ahead as blockchain technology is still to be implemented and other aspects of the platform (publishing platform, royalty management, etc) have yet to be developed, which are planned to be rolled out during 2019.

Feasibility: The goals of the organization with respect to the platform from a blockchain technology perspective do not seem particularly complex, considering most of the infrastracture was developed throughout the years. The proposed business model is unproven considering the current market landscape and existing solutions have a strong hold of the market share. However the goals outlined for Q3 2019 seems feasible as milestones seem within the capabilities of the current team. Smart contract development with respect to the rights and royalty management system will be more challenging but is expected to be accomplished by Q1 2019.

Blockchain Innovation: The organization does not provide innovation from a blockchain technology perspective. A brief assessment on the smart contracts that will be implemented in the platform are discussed in the whitepaper.

Category Breakdown
Differentiation

What are the product's unique features / attributes / advantages? How is it different from other, similar products or projects? What makes it stand out or gives it an edge?

3.0
N/A
3 - Some; has a certain edge or angle.
Readiness

Readiness of the full platform, including blockchain/smart-contract/token infrastructure; based on what's publicly available (not just claims).

4.0
N/A
4 - Beta or initial rollout of full product; Traditional platform exists, blockchain integration in testing or proof-of-concept.
Concreteness of Development Plans

How detailed is the roadmap? How well defined is the timeframe? How concrete and detailed are the milestones and how well are they correlated with the business and technology development plans, as well as with funding goals (i.e., fundraising dependent)?

3.0
N/A
3 - An overall plan, major milestones stated with some relevant details.
Current Position within Roadmap

How far along is the project as a whole relative to the plans and roadmap (including growth, not just platform development)?

3.0
N/A
3 - Getting there.
Feasiblity

Are the project's development plans reasonable? Does the long term vision align with core objectives and current development efforts? Does the timeframe make sense?

4.0
N/A
4 - Realistic.
Blockchain Innovation

What is the level of innovation and development particularly with regard to blockchain technology and its utilization? Do the project's blockchain-related developments have value beyond the company's particular platform or network?

2.0
N/A
2 - Limited added value, some additional smart contract functionality.
Product Score:
3.2

Market

Target User Base: The target use base for the platform is broad, targeting labels, artists, other service providers and listeners. The main value proposition is focused on content creators and allowing them to receive a high portion of the revenue comparing to existing solutions.

Market Penetration Potential: Market penetration will be challenging considering that the value proposition is primarily directed towards artists as opposed to listeners. The company intends to entice users with exclusive content and discounts related to the token, as current existing music streaming platforms are competing for listeners. The company aims to also work directly with the streaming services “allowing to enter more profitable agreements with existing content providers.”

Direct Competition: Most music-related blockchain projects are yet to show market domination, highlighting eMusic’s potential among its competitors, though traditional companies such as BandCamp, SoundCloud may challange eMusic’s user acquisition. Potential (blockchain-based) competitors include:

– Musiconomy
– Ujo Music
– Emanate
– Younk
– SOUNDEON
– BitSong

Solution Advantage: It is explicitly stated that the goal of the organization is to “not to compete head-to-head with others, rather better serve our customers”. Nearly all platforms that focus on a blockchain-powered service provider aim to provide a larger share of the revenue to artists. However, the organization already has a working product and a large user-base, which may be a signal for better position to sign new lables and artists.

Blockchain Disruption: There is potential for disruption in the music industry with the introduction of blockchain technology in order to decentralize the music industry. There are no fundamentally successful music-related blockchain products to date. eMusic is well positioned in terms of company stage, though blockchain development is still in early stages.

Long-Term Vision: The organization believes that there is a critical flaw with respect to the business model of current music streaming services. As such, eMusic offers an alternative which offers artists a larger portion of the service provider’s revenue. The platform has existed long before blockchain technology and the organization aims to develop a service that can better serve its users. It is acknowledged in the whitepaper that music streaming is unlikely to go away, but the organization aims to cater to a more specific audience which would like to further support artists. The company lists several features for future development:

– Rating & Reviews System
– Rights management & Exchange
– Crowdfunding platform for Artists
– Clearing House for Large Labels

Category Breakdown
Target User Base

How big is the project's target user base, how large is its potential market?

4.0
N/A
4 - Large audience / wide market.
Market Penetration Potential

How easy or difficult will it be to penetrate this market sector on the scale proposed by the project? How dominant is the hold of current market leaders, and are they maintaining a competitive edge? For reviewers (not for tooltip): This should be generally with regard to both traditional and emerging blockchain solutions (assuming that in most sectors, there are no leading blockchain solutions as of yet, but there may start to be). Also, token regulatory issues that apply equally to all should not be stressed here, unless the project has an extra regulatory issue, or (in the other direction) if the regulatory measures taken help it considerably with market penetration...

3.0
N/A
3 - Moderate, a good strategy is essential.
Direct Competition

How many direct competitors does the project have (that are already known or can be easily found with a simple search), and how much further along are they? This should focus on blockchain-related competition but can include established or notable traditional (non-blockchain) competitors with a strong hold.

3.0
N/A
3 - Some normal competition (e.g., 5-7, similarly positioned). Blockchain solutions already evidently present in the sector.
Solution Advantage

How strong is the project's unique selling proposition (i.e., its stated advantage over similar or comparable ones)?

4.0
N/A
4 - Clear, evident.
Blockchain Disruption

How strong is the potential for disruption of the market sector due to the introduction of blockchain technology, as it is utilized by the solution?

3.0
N/A
3 - Moderate.
Long-Term Vision

What are the long term goals and plans of the project? (In terms of concrete plans, not just hype or vague assertions.)

4.0
N/A
4 - Long term market dominance / leadership. Development of the sector's flagship solution.
Market Score:
3.5

Company and Team

Company Stage and Foundation: Based on the company’s LinkedIn page, it was found that the privately-held organization is based in New York and was founded in 1988. The company is owned by Triplay, Inc. According to the company’s Crunchbase page, eMusic was acquired by TriPlay in 2015 for $26MM USD. The company currently has around 1 million unique users a month, according to the CEO Tamir Koch.

Team Assembly and Commitment: The core team of 18 individuals and 11 advisors. According to Linkedin, TriPlay has 38 employees working on in the company. The CEO/President of the project is concurrently the Founder/CEO of Triplay, eMusic’s parent company. The CMO of eMusic is concurrently lists as an advisory board member MedPower eLearning Services. Most of the other team members show their involvement with the project. Many of the lead team members concurrently have the same role at Triplay, an company that manages services alongside eMusic, including eStories, MyDigipack, and MyMusicCloud. As such, the overall commitment to eMusic compare to Triplay’s other services (as well as unrelated organizations/projects for some team members) is uncertain.

Background of Lead/Core Team Members: Tamir Koch, TriPlay’s Founder & CEO since 2004, serves as the CEO of eMusic. Michael Juskiewicz, eMusic’s CFO, previously worked on investment banking, mergers & acquisitions and capital markets at groups such as Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Nomura and CyndxOn. Advisors to the project include the likes of Bill Campbell, the former head of digital for Sony Music, and Jeff Van Driel, the former CEO of classical music label Naxos of America Inc.

The company states that “our core team and advisors have collectively been responsible for over $1billion in exits and funding and have been involved in over 30 blockchain projects including:
Wepower, Adhive, Elysian, Wemark, INS.world, Cool Cousin, Tron, Change Bank, iOlite, Blackmoon, Zeex, Tatatu, Wings, Bancor, Firmo network, Matchpool, Flixxo, Orbs, Cartesi, Blox, Coinstarter, Liberdy, MW, Adex.network, HighIOT, Capitalise.”

Overall, background of core team members and advisers seems to be fairly profound.

Relevance of Team’s Previous Experience and Skill Set: Most of the individuals on the team, as well as the management, are concurrently involved TriPlay, a “mobile life” company which includes services including eMusic, along with eStories, MyDigipack, and MyMusicCloud (TriPlay has acquired eMusic in 2015 for $26MM). The company has been working in the music ecosystem for over 20 years. Ori Erez, listed as “Blockchain Expert” and advises the project, concurrently serves as the CEO/founder for a different organization, Lendoit, a P2P lending platform that utilizes blockchain technology.

Team Skill Set Balance (biz / tech / blockchain): There seems to be some lack of individuals with technical expertise, especially with regards to blockchain technology. Verifiable relevant experience demonstrating expertise in blockchain technology development is not evident among those with a technical position. The team skill set aligns more closely with business-development.

Strategic Partnerships: Notable partnerships/launch partners for the token sale are not evident in the Whitepaper or website. Partnerships seen online include companies such as 7digital, AT&T and Universal Studios, some of which date back 10 years or more hence the relevance is not clear. According to an article on Ctech, eMusic “has an agreement with almost 600,000 independent labels for new content”.

Category Breakdown
Company Stage and Foundation

When was the company founded, how mature is it? Has it raised significant funds? Where relevant, this should address the parent company. For reviewers (not for tooltip): Check company LinkedIn and Crunchbase profiles. Impression summary should list basic information such as founding date, location/s, previous fundraising rounds (via crunchbase), maybe number of employees (via linkedin).

5.0
N/A
5 - Well established, has raised significant funds.
Team Assembly and Commitment

What is the structure of the team (core members, advisers, contributors)? Are all necessary positions filled or is the company still looking for key team participants? Are the team members fully committed to the project (or involved with other projects simultaneously)?

4.0
N/A
4 - Sufficently assembled and committed.
Background of Lead/Core Team Members

Are LinkedIn (or Github, or other professional) profile links provided, and do they show involvement in the project and relevant previous experience? For reviewers (not for tooltip): If the team is quite large, C-level and certain key team members (such as lead tech/blockchain developers) should be looked at, while other than that, a sample is fine (but this should be mentioned or reflected in the language ["It appears as though..."]).

4.0
N/A
4 - Verifiable relevant experience.
Relevance of Team's Previous Experience and Skill Set

How relevant are the team members' backgrounds and experience to the project and its requirements? Do they come from related industries and have in-depth knowledge of their respective fields?

3.0
N/A
3 - Correlated to project requirements.
Team Skill Set Balance (biz / tech / blockchain)

Do the team members' backgrounds and experience appear to collectively cover the project requirements? This includes but is not limited to blockchain expertise.

3.0
N/A
3 - Somewhat uncertain, probably okay.
Strategic Partnerships

What kind of launch partners and early adopters does the project have?

3.0
N/A
3 - A few SMB's; may include founder or advisor related ventures but shows ability to expand beyond.
Company and Team Score:
3.7

Token Economics

Value Proposition of Token: EMU tokens are tokenized credits which are used to purchase content on the eMusic platform. Listeners “are contributing more directly to the long term success of their favorite artists and the overall sustainability of their artistic vision”. Token holders can exchange EPU tokens for store credit and receive bonuses when compared to purchasing store credit with fiat. Furthermore, tokens do not expire, unlike eMusic retail store credit. It is stated that “from a business perspective the eMusic Token represents, in part, the pre-purchase of music”. Furthermore, those with a predetermined amount of tokens (unspecified) gives users unlimited cloud storage for their music collections.

Immediately after the token sale, the following features will be available to token holders (according to the whitepaper):

– Á La Carte Purchase
– Subscription
– Convert to Credit ad-hoc
– Purchase Extra Credit
– Loyalty Rewards
– Referral Bonus
– Access Exclusive Features
– Royalty Payments
– Incentivize Fan Base
– Participate in Crowdfunding
– 3rd Party Integration

Token Economy: Details of the token economics are outlined broadly. The company states that “the tokens will be priced at approximately U.S.$0.35 each (or the equivalent at the time of sale in BTC/ETH). The minimum value of all tokens to be sold in U.S. dollar terms will be $20,000,000 and the maximum value will be $70,000,000 (known as a “hard cap”), so between approximately 60,000,000 and 200,000,000 tokens initially would be sold. It is stated that “eMusic will make available additional tokens for purchase at or near initial sale price”. However, specific details are not outlined (the total supply presented in the whitepaper is 500,000,000).

System Decentralization (besides token): The governance structure of the organization and the platform are not thoroughly outlined. It is stated that “eMusic token holders [will] be able to vote to help to choose the self-published content”. On an organizational level, it does not seem as though token holders have voting rights with regards to the project. It is mentioned that eMusic won’t move exclusively to a token-based service—users could continue to pay with fiat money for the content.

Fundraising Goals (Min/Max Raise Amounts): The company’s funding goals are as the following:
Soft cap: $20MM USD
Hard cap: $70MM USD

The product development seem to be fairly simple as the main product is fully operational. While the hard cap seems to be relativly high in compares to the average ICO, eMusic is an established company that was acquired by TriPlay in 2015 for $26MM USD and will now need to face a crowded ecosystem. The reasons above may justify the company’s ambitions in terms of funds.

Use of Proceeds (Fund Allocation): The company aims to dedicate collected funds mainly at marketing and content acquisition, allowing the company to attract artists, users and rights holders to the platform. The full distribution is as the following:

20-25% – Development
30-35% – Marketing & PR
30-35% – Content Acquisition
10-15% – Lege Expenses / Misc.

Token Allocation: Token allocation is presented in a similar manner as the use of proceeds. Allocations are outlined as the following: Public Sale (35%-45%), Artist Awards (5%-10%), Platform (35%-55%) and Advisors (5%-10%). According to such allocation, tokens will be distributed to the public includes the user incentivization that is mentioned under “Platform”. Also, a portion of the allocated tokens to “Platform” will be reserved for possible future sale. The vesting period for tokens allocated to advisors will be a 6-month schedule. Unsold tokens will not be burned.

Category Breakdown
Value Proposition of Token

How much of a need is there for the token? What is the token's utility value, and what is its value as a security?

3.0
N/A
3 - Limited or uncertain; some risk with regard to actual value, but issuing a custom token is justifiable.
Token Economy

How well defined and sustainable is the token economy? This should include circulation, fees, earn/spend mechanisms, inflation/deflation mechanisms, etc.

3.0
N/A
3 - Some aspects stll undetermined, or potentially but not necessarily problematic.
System Decentralization (besides token)

How decentralized is the solution other than the token (e.g., data collection, storage, access, and use, or decision making processes, etc.)? The purpose here is not to penalize use of centralized components per se, but to assess how decentralization is incorporated.

2.0
N/A
2 - Centralized with some vague plans to decentralize, or decentralization treated more as trend than as a paradigm shift.
Fundraising Goals (Min/Max Raise Amounts)

How sensible are the project's min/max raise amounts or soft/hard caps? (Related to Use of Proceeds but broader).

4.0
N/A
4 - Reasonable, funding goals make overall sense.
Use of Proceeds (Fund Allocation)

How well-defined and sensible is the planned use of proceeds / fund allocation?

3.0
N/A
3 - Rough estimates, but looks okay.
Token Allocation

How well-defined and reasonable is the token allocation (including vesting, what's done with unsold tokens, etc.)?

3.0
N/A
3 - Sufficient company/community interest balance.
Token Economics Score:
3.0
Please elaborate on the details regarding the token economics, more specifically how eMusic plans to develop a platform with a "very robust token economy to prevent major token dumps and dips in prices" and how the "token is linked to a value of a song".

eMusic, a successful business with over 20 years experience, is taking extraordinary steps to protect its token purchasers. eMusic will not sell tokens to purchasers we believe to be investment funds or financial investment firms, such as venture capital funds, that would be purchasing tokens purely for speculative or financial purposes. eMusic token holders will also be able to start using their EMUs for music purchases on day one, selecting songs and albums from a catalog of over 26 million tracks. Plus, to encourage early adoption and engagement, eMusic will offer EMU token holders a number of unique benefits, including access to exclusive content and sales along with token rewards for friendly fan behavior like reviewing and referring music. As people spend and obtain rewards through the  platform, our token economy will grow and the value of the EMU token will increase, discouraging the propensity to “dump.” Further, during the six months following the ICO, presale bonuses will be locked-up and eMusic will continue selling EMU tokens at a fixed cost that equates to about 1 download per token. This ongoing sale enables our token economy time to develop and provides the eMusic team time to bring on new artists and launch additional features — all of which build token economy momentum that will further insulate eMusic from erratic sales behavior.

What is the current status with regards to technical development and blockchain integration?

On day one of the token generation event EMU holders will be able to purchase music credits and earn rewards for following and promoting their favorite artists on the eMusic platform.  We are meeting and exceeding our deadlines for our artist platform, and have uploaded the first draft of the token contract to GitHub.

What are the benefits of the 'eMusic for Artist' platform and how will it integrate with existing streaming/retail services?

The eMusic Blockchain project is designed to provide a solution for independent artists to distribute their music to any music service provider they want, including eMusic, Spotify, Deezer, Apple Music, Amazon, etc.  Our project is designed to address the problems being caused by today’s current “stream-onomics” – in which artists are earning fractions of a penny per stream and are struggling to make even minimum wage. In addition, an army of legacy agents and intermediaries continue to take an excessive cut – further squeezing the independent artist and pushing most popular streaming services into distress or even bankruptcy. The eMusic for Artist platform will use blockchain and a system of just 3 smart contracts to perform everything from tracking rights holders to managing metadata and crowdfunding, to logging sales and streams.  These simple contracts will displace the intermediaries that provide those services, delivering more revenue and complete transparency back to the artist that created the music and the music service that delivered the jam to the fan.  And with no more waiting for royalty checks, artists can withdraw what they earned whenever they want, so that they can invest into creating more music and make a real living while making music. At the center of this is the eMusic token economy, which will provide unique benefits to eMusic artists and fans, including access to exclusive content, rewards for loyalty, referrals and promotion, or crowdfunding opportunities to help fund your favorites and build up new artists.

While the artists will be able to distribute their music to any music service they want, the platform will also complement the existing eMusic Retail platform by bringing more music and more artist interaction to eMusic Members through rewards and loyalty programs, as well as the opportunity to support band/artist activities through crowdfunding.  Using the EMU token on the eMusic Retail Store will also provide fans with access to exclusive content and sales, loyalty programs, and other special offers.

What is the company's marketing/growth strategy and how the organization plans to attract artists to the platform?

Artists will be drawn to our platform because we are providing a music distribution and royalty management system that will cut out the vast majority of agents currently reducing the profits from streaming and purchases.  In addition, the platform will provide unparalleled transparency to what’s been purchased and streamed and where these activities occurred, which will expose artists to where they are making money and how they are getting paid — giving them insight they need to better connect with fans and grow their business.  And there will be no more waiting for royalty payouts. Daily, eMusic will process royalty payments in EMU or fiat as preferred, so that the artists can withdraw funds they need to keep making their music. As outlined in our whitepaper, 5-10% of the tokens will also be allocated to artists joining and promoting the platform.  EMU will allow artists to find value in the platform like no other currency can, providing a mechanism to activate fan loyalty or pay for other music or life-related activities, such as website design, financial services and tour support.

Why was it decided that eMusic should reserve the right to generate additional tokens instead of keeping a fixed token supply?

eMusic will generate 500,000,000 EMU tokens in total. The platform will keep up to 55% of the tokens generated for loyalty incentives, referral bonuses, community building and other promotional activity, as well as make portions available for future token sales.  Our primary concern is to make certain that the circulating supply meets the demands on the eMusic blockchain platform and in the eMusic Retail Store so that the artists population can scale and continue to use the platform services and fans can continue to purchase, stream, and promote their favorite music and artists.  As applications and use of EMU drive up the value of participation in the platform, new uses of the token will demand additional tokens be available, so as not to diminish activity through scarcity. In addition, a limited supply token become a de-facto store of value, but it also leads to speculation and volatility, leading to behavior that contradicts the utility we are trying to achieve on the platform.

Why will eMusic store credit still be used after the implementation of the token-based system instead of retiring the existing store credit system?

The eMusic for Artists platform will be powered solely through EMU tokens from launch.  The eMusic Retail platform, which was established in 1998 serving over 47 million users over 20 years, will transition quickly from a credit-based system to a token-based system, accelerating adoption of crypto currency by providing unparalleled value and access to fans that adopt the token system.  In addition, we will be able to provide consummate support through our highly regarded customer success team to accelerate adoption.

It has been openly stated by eMusic (https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2006/05/emusic/) that the decision to minimize the amount of DRM encoding greatly contributed to the popularity of the platform. Has this notion changed and how does the organization's current philosophy regarding DRM relate to the plans to introduce digital "watermarking"?

eMusic has always endorsed a DRM free catalog in so far as it provides users with the best music entertainment experience – our apps and service are agnostic to device or operating system.  Advanced watermarking will be a feature that we introduce in our eMusic Blockchain platform to protect against unauthorized use and prevent piracy, while not limiting users access and freedom to enjoy their music.

Are there any strategic partnerships you can disclose?

We are in talks with several multinational technology developers and music services, as well as global artists to be announced in the near future. We will disclose all new strategic partnerships to our community as available on our Telegram, Reddit, Discord, Facebook, Twitter and Medium channels.

Use this code to share the ratings on your website