Eligma is a platform that aims to allow users to connect their household items to a marketplace and “transform every household into a business”. Eligma aims to become a one-stop-shop for e-commerce and second-hand shoppers and allow users to manage all online stores from one account.
Curved Score
Overall Score
Is the product ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?
How appealing is the product? How good or necessary is it? Does it have a distinct edge?
Is it mass market or niche?
Are there many other similar solutions or is this one of just a few, or even one of a kind?
How innovative or inventive is the product, either conceptually or technologically?
The Eligma platform is comprised of three main components: discovery, inventory and loyalty. The discovery aspect of the platform will use AI in order to determine alternative products with ease and be able to use data analytics, price, and product quality to match potential buyers with products. The inventory module of the platform allows users to keep track of items. The belongings of users will be tracked and recorded while AI technology is stated to be able to predict the market value of the item based on a number of factors including demand, condition, age, and level of competition (details of the AI solution are not specified). The final component of the platform is loyalty, where users are rewarded for engaging with the platform. For example, users will earn ELI tokens by providing profile information, adding items to the inventory, and referring new users. Overall, the aspect that differentiates the platform is the intended use of AI technology. Online retail is a highly competitive market and without a comprehensive discussion of the platform’s AI solution, it is not clear as to whether Eligma will be able to overcome its competition.
Is blockchain technology essential? Does it make the solution significantly different and better?
How disruptive is the introduction of blockchain technology into the product's market space?
Is the token essential or could it be done just as well or better with fiat or Bitcoin?
How decentralized is the system architecture other than the token (e.g., data collection, storage, access, and use, or decision making processes, etc.)?
How compelling is the solution's contribution to the evolution of blockchain infrastructure and economy?
ELI is an ERC20 compliant token used as a means of exchange on the platform. It is stated that “Eligma will be sharing part of [its] revenue with the users”. Thus, as the platform grows the value of the tokens increases. As a result, the need to create a custom token is not necessarily due to the complexity of platform operation, but rather, it is a strategy for facilitating a loyalty program so as to incentivize growth. It is stated that the first phase of the online platform has already been developed and is currently in the testing phase. The platform currently allows users to purchase products offered by offline retailers. It is stated that the development of beta versions of the mobile wallet and the POS system have been completed.
Does it cover the full scope of the problem and solution?
Is it easy enough to understand?
Does it candidly describe and disclose where the project now stands, how much exists and how much still needs to be done, etc.?
Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?
Does it present a well thought out technological architecture? Does it address implementational challenges?
The whitepaper is quite lengthy at 74 pages. Much of the discussion regarding the technological aspects of the platform is presented in layman terms and lacking in detail for various aspects, such as the AI development strategy and consensus protocol. The business plan is quite thorough and discusses various aspects of the platform, including revenue streams, platform features, and scaling strategies. Overall the whitepaper is well organized and quite thorough with respect to Eligma’s business plan and token model, but lacking in technical details.
Is there a concrete and practical development plan (vs. just a conceptual vision)?
Is the development plan realistic? Is it based on reasonable goals and timelines?
Is there a larger, long-term vision?
How available, operational, or trusted are the other systems or capabilities on which the project relies?
Where is the project now, relative to its vision and plans?
The roadmap presented in the whitepaper spans from 2017 to 2022 and contains fairly high levels of detail. The first integrations for “real-life testing” in retail stores in the BTC City area will take place in March 2018, the beta version of the online platform is planned to launch in April 2018, and the public release of the platform, supported by a national marketing campaign, is planned to launch in September 2018.
How much use is there for the token itself (regardless of its value as an investment vehicle)?
How valuable is the token as an investment vehicle or financial instrument?
Is the blockchain infrastructure of the project ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?
How much attention is given to compliance (via token and ecosystem design, token sale participation, etc.)? Is this issue addressed directly and coherently?
What kind of legal documentation (reviews or agreements) and risk assessment are provided?
The whitepaper contains a disclaimer section that spans approximately two pages. It is explicitly stated that ELI tokens are not to be considered securities. It is stated that “no regulatory authority has examined or approved of any of the information set out in this whitepaper”. The token sale will use KYC and the token sale may be limited or restricted to the following jurisdictions: Canada, China, Singapore, South Korea, and the United States.
Is the company already established? Has it raised funds before? Is it mature?
Do we know who they are? Do they have LinkedIn profiles? Do they have solid, relevant backgrounds?
Is a solid, fully committed core team in place? Do they have online (e.g. LinkedIn) profiles showing sufficient relevant experience? Is their participation transparent?
Does the amount of talent and skill in each area seem to fit the project requirements?
Is the team well-rounded (biz/tech/blockchain)? Is there sufficient talent and skill in all areas of required development?
The company was founded in December of 2017. The 27 team members are listed on the Eligma website, along with their profile pictures, short descriptions, and links to social media profiles. It is peculiar that Eligma chooses to present only 24 team members in the whitepaper yet state that the team has 8 additional senior developers and 3 data scientists (without mentioning any names) – it is unclear why these team members are omitted from the whitepaper and website. The skill set of the team is heavily focused on technology as opposed to business. There are team members who have experience working with blockchain-related projects and organizations such as ChainX and Viberate.
Is there a clear cap? Is the maximum raise amount modestly sufficient (as opposed to either greedy or insufficient)?
Is the minimum raise reasonable considering the development plan? Are there raise-amount dependent milestones?
Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?
Is the ratio of tokens sold to those kept reasonable? Does it prevent the company from having too much control?
Is the sale being talked about in Reddit, Bitcointalk, Social Media, Medium, etc.? Is information available and accessible? Is there interest?
The total number of ELI tokens is 500 million (60% is for sale, 12% is for community and user growth, 4% is for future partners, 5% is for advisors, and 19% is for the Eligma team). Vesting periods for tokens allocated to the team, advisors, future partners, and the community are clearly outlined. The allocation of funds is described with a moderately high degree of detail. Fund allocations are segregated into thirds: development, scaling, and marketing. Each of these categories are further segregated into smaller components and contain descriptions of each allocation. The soft cap is $3MM USD and the hard cap is $24MM USD, where 1 ELI = $0.10 USD. The public token sale takes place on March 17, 2018.
The Eligma platform is comprised of three main components: discovery, inventory and loyalty. The discovery aspect of the platform will use AI in order to determine alternative products with ease and be able to use data analytics, price, and product quality to match potential buyers with products. The inventory module of the platform allows users to keep track of items. The belongings of users will be tracked and recorded while AI technology is stated to be able to predict the market value of the item based on a number of factors including demand, condition, age, and level of competition (details of the AI solution are not specified). The final component of the platform is loyalty, where users are rewarded for engaging with the platform. For example, users will earn ELI tokens by providing profile information, adding items to the inventory, and referring new users. Overall, the aspect that differentiates the platform is the intended use of AI technology. Online retail is a highly competitive market and without a comprehensive discussion of the platform’s AI solution, it is not clear as to whether Eligma will be able to overcome its competition.
Is the product ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?
3.0How appealing is the product? How good or necessary is it? Does it have a distinct edge?
2.0Is it mass market or niche?
3.0Are there many other similar solutions or is this one of just a few, or even one of a kind?
2.0How innovative or inventive is the product, either conceptually or technologically?
2.0
ELI is an ERC20 compliant token used as a means of exchange on the platform. It is stated that “Eligma will be sharing part of [its] revenue with the users”. Thus, as the platform grows the value of the tokens increases. As a result, the need to create a custom token is not necessarily due to the complexity of platform operation, but rather, it is a strategy for facilitating a loyalty program so as to incentivize growth. It is stated that the first phase of the online platform has already been developed and is currently in the testing phase. The platform currently allows users to purchase products offered by offline retailers. It is stated that the development of beta versions of the mobile wallet and the POS system have been completed.
Is blockchain technology essential? Does it make the solution significantly different and better?
2.0How disruptive is the introduction of blockchain technology into the product's market space?
3.0Is the token essential or could it be done just as well or better with fiat or Bitcoin?
1.0How decentralized is the system architecture other than the token (e.g., data collection, storage, access, and use, or decision making processes, etc.)?
4.0How compelling is the solution's contribution to the evolution of blockchain infrastructure and economy?
2.0
The whitepaper is quite lengthy at 74 pages. Much of the discussion regarding the technological aspects of the platform is presented in layman terms and lacking in detail for various aspects, such as the AI development strategy and consensus protocol. The business plan is quite thorough and discusses various aspects of the platform, including revenue streams, platform features, and scaling strategies. Overall the whitepaper is well organized and quite thorough with respect to Eligma’s business plan and token model, but lacking in technical details.
Does it cover the full scope of the problem and solution?
3.0Is it easy enough to understand?
4.0Does it candidly describe and disclose where the project now stands, how much exists and how much still needs to be done, etc.?
3.0Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?
4.0Does it present a well thought out technological architecture? Does it address implementational challenges?
2.0
The roadmap presented in the whitepaper spans from 2017 to 2022 and contains fairly high levels of detail. The first integrations for “real-life testing” in retail stores in the BTC City area will take place in March 2018, the beta version of the online platform is planned to launch in April 2018, and the public release of the platform, supported by a national marketing campaign, is planned to launch in September 2018.
Is there a concrete and practical development plan (vs. just a conceptual vision)?
4.0Is the development plan realistic? Is it based on reasonable goals and timelines?
3.0Is there a larger, long-term vision?
4.0How available, operational, or trusted are the other systems or capabilities on which the project relies?
2.0Where is the project now, relative to its vision and plans?
3.0
The whitepaper contains a disclaimer section that spans approximately two pages. It is explicitly stated that ELI tokens are not to be considered securities. It is stated that “no regulatory authority has examined or approved of any of the information set out in this whitepaper”. The token sale will use KYC and the token sale may be limited or restricted to the following jurisdictions: Canada, China, Singapore, South Korea, and the United States.
How much use is there for the token itself (regardless of its value as an investment vehicle)?
2.0How valuable is the token as an investment vehicle or financial instrument?
2.0Is the blockchain infrastructure of the project ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?
2.0How much attention is given to compliance (via token and ecosystem design, token sale participation, etc.)? Is this issue addressed directly and coherently?
3.0What kind of legal documentation (reviews or agreements) and risk assessment are provided?
3.0
The company was founded in December of 2017. The 27 team members are listed on the Eligma website, along with their profile pictures, short descriptions, and links to social media profiles. It is peculiar that Eligma chooses to present only 24 team members in the whitepaper yet state that the team has 8 additional senior developers and 3 data scientists (without mentioning any names) – it is unclear why these team members are omitted from the whitepaper and website. The skill set of the team is heavily focused on technology as opposed to business. There are team members who have experience working with blockchain-related projects and organizations such as ChainX and Viberate.
Is the company already established? Has it raised funds before? Is it mature?
4.0Do we know who they are? Do they have LinkedIn profiles? Do they have solid, relevant backgrounds?
4.0Is a solid, fully committed core team in place? Do they have online (e.g. LinkedIn) profiles showing sufficient relevant experience? Is their participation transparent?
3.0Does the amount of talent and skill in each area seem to fit the project requirements?
4.0Is the team well-rounded (biz/tech/blockchain)? Is there sufficient talent and skill in all areas of required development?
4.0
The total number of ELI tokens is 500 million (60% is for sale, 12% is for community and user growth, 4% is for future partners, 5% is for advisors, and 19% is for the Eligma team). Vesting periods for tokens allocated to the team, advisors, future partners, and the community are clearly outlined. The allocation of funds is described with a moderately high degree of detail. Fund allocations are segregated into thirds: development, scaling, and marketing. Each of these categories are further segregated into smaller components and contain descriptions of each allocation. The soft cap is $3MM USD and the hard cap is $24MM USD, where 1 ELI = $0.10 USD. The public token sale takes place on March 17, 2018.
Is there a clear cap? Is the maximum raise amount modestly sufficient (as opposed to either greedy or insufficient)?
2.0Is the minimum raise reasonable considering the development plan? Are there raise-amount dependent milestones?
4.0Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?
4.0Is the ratio of tokens sold to those kept reasonable? Does it prevent the company from having too much control?
4.0Is the sale being talked about in Reddit, Bitcointalk, Social Media, Medium, etc.? Is information available and accessible? Is there interest?
2.0
