Basic Rating

2.7
  • FluzFluz

  • Fluz Fluz is a mobile-first marketplace where members can purchase gift cards and earn cash back rewards.
  • 2.7

Rating Insights

Fluz Fluz is a mobile-first marketplace where members can purchase and instantly download gift cards while earning cash back rewards for their purchases and their friends’ purchases. Members can earn a passive income each month from their purchases at major retailers across their extended network while keeping their usual shopping habits.

Category Rating

Click any score to view its breakdown and category insights
3.6
Product

Product

The FluzFluz network is a mobile-first marketplace that is already running in Colombia to moderate success. The team is now planning to launch FluzFluz in the US. As it targets consumers in general, the network's appeal and target user base is immense. There is some normal competition to date, nothing exactly like FluzFluz.

Readiness

Is the product ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

3.0
N/A
3 - Prototype / MVP / alpha.
Appeal

How appealing is the product? How good or necessary is it? Does it have a distinct edge?

4.0
N/A
4 - Captivating.
Target User Base

Is it mass market or niche?

5.0
N/A
5 - General audience / mass market.
Competition

Are there many other similar solutions or is this one of just a few, or even one of a kind?

3.0
N/A
3 - Some normal competition.
Innovation

How innovative or inventive is the product, either conceptually or technologically?

3.0
N/A
3 - Partial, a novel approach or aspect.
1.4
Use of Blockchain

Use of Blockchain

The FluzFluz network has worked in Colombia without a blockchain solution. Moreover, the company admits the FluzFluz token will not be exchanged as a security until regulatory issues are settled. The system, even on-chain, does not seem to be decentralized and no relevant documentation has been published in this regard. Could be done without a blockchain.

Blockchain Development

Is blockchain technology essential? Does it make the solution significantly different and better?

1.0
N/A
1 - None; simple Ethereum based coin.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

How disruptive is the introduction of blockchain technology into the product's market space?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or indeterminate.
Need for Custom Token (vs. BTC or ETH)

Is the token essential or could it be done just as well or better with fiat or Bitcoin?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some, mainly network effect.
System Decentralization (besides token)

How decentralized is the system architecture other than the token (e.g., data collection, storage, access, and use, or decision making processes, etc.)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Centralized with some plans to decentralize.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

How compelling is the solution's contribution to the evolution of blockchain infrastructure and economy?

1.0
N/A
1 - None really, or unknown.
3.0
Whitepaper

Whitepaper

85 pages long, its length is misleading. The whitepaper is surprisingly easy to read, yet not quickly, and presents a business plan presentation and the inner workings of the FluzFluz system. The technological aspect of it is not as thorough as the other aspects (Market data, competitors data, system architecture and more)

Comprehensiveness

Is there a concrete and practical development plan (vs. just a conceptual vision)?

4.0
N/A
4 - Satisfactory coverage, well written.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

3.0
N/A
3 - Readable, takes some time.
Transparency

Does it candidly describe and disclose where the project now stands, how much exists and how much still needs to be done, etc.?

3.0
N/A
3 - Basic honesty with some hype.
Business Plan Presentation

Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?

3.0
N/A
3 - More information required.
Technology Presentation

Does it present a well thought out technological architecture? Does it address implementational challenges?

2.0
N/A
2 - Missing critical information.
2.8
Roadmap

Roadmap

The way the FluzFluz system is designed - with premium seats up top in two different teams - resembles a pyramid scheme. You earn more 'passive income' money the more friends you have in your network, and you have to pay to stay active in your network. Those at the top, with an enormous network of friends, earn more money than those on the bottom. In the FluzFluz whitepaper they even have several illustrations of the system - all of them are literally pyramid like. The team presents a coherent long-term vision, and there is some feasibility and concreteness to their plan, but a lot of legal reviewing is required.

Concreteness

Is there a concrete and practical development plan (vs. just a conceptual vision)?

3.0
N/A
3 - An overall plan, major milestones stated.
Feasiblity

Is the development plan realistic? Is it based on reasonable goals and timelines?

3.0
N/A
3 - Optimistic.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

4.0
N/A
4 - Long term.
Dependencies (services or capabilities)

How available, operational, or trusted are the other systems or capabilities on which the project relies?

2.0
N/A
2 - Not fully available or trustworthy.
Current Position

Where is the project now, relative to its vision and plans?

2.0
N/A
2 - Critical obstacles ahead.
1.8
Compliance

Compliance

In FluzFluz's whitepaper the last segment is reserved for legal reviews and things of that nature. The FluzFluz token is solely to be used within the FluzFluz network, at first. Tokenholders will not be able to exchange their tokens in any exchange until FluzFluz meets the regulatory requirements for such an event. Until then it can not be regarded as a security. Moreover, according to their own documentation, there isn't any significant smart-contract infrestructure in place.

Token Utility (value through usage)

How much use is there for the token itself (regardless of its value as an investment vehicle)?

1.0
N/A
1 - None in the near (or any) future.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

How valuable is the token as an investment vehicle or financial instrument?

1.0
N/A
1 - Solely; a passive investment vehicle.
Token/Smart-Contract Readiness

Is the blockchain infrastructure of the project ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

2.0
N/A
2 - Proof of concept or test platform.
Attention to Compliance Issues

How much attention is given to compliance (via token and ecosystem design, token sale participation, etc.)? Is this issue addressed directly and coherently?

3.0
N/A
3 - Limited to blanket standard.
Legal Review/Risk Assessment

What kind of legal documentation (reviews or agreements) and risk assessment are provided?

2.0
N/A
2 - Insufficient or unprofessional.
3.0
Company and Team

Company and Team

All the information about the team behind FluzFluz is on the main page of their website. They seem to be more widely known in LATAM, which makes sense seeing how FluzFluz is already running in Colombia. FluzFluz presents a nice balance between relevant roles and skillsets. All team members presented on their site have a LinkedIn page.

Company Stage and Foundation

Is the company already established? Has it raised funds before? Is it mature?

3.0
N/A
3 - Company structure in place.
Background of Lead Team Members

Do we know who they are? Do they have LinkedIn profiles? Do they have solid, relevant backgrounds?

3.0
N/A
3 - Minimally sufficient.
Team Assembly and Commitment

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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Mostly assembled and committed.
Team Skill Set Relevance

Does the amount of talent and skill in each area seem to fit the project requirements?

3.0
N/A
3 - Correlated to project requirements.
Team Skill Set Balance

Is the team well-rounded (biz/tech/blockchain)? Is there sufficient talent and skill in all areas of required development?

3.0
N/A
3 - Somewhat uncertain, probably okay.
3.4
Token Sale

Token Sale

The FluzFluz team are planning to sell 204,780,000 tokens for $0.1 USD each. There is no minimum amount to be raised, and every token not sold will be burned. The fund allocation is specified in the whitepaper: 23% into Gift Code Inventory, 6% into Legal & Financial OH, 10% into IT infrastructure, 41% into branding campaign and 20% into personnel OH. There is a decent media presence and following around FluzFluz.

Raise Amount Max

Is there a clear cap? Is the maximum raise amount modestly sufficient (as opposed to either greedy or insufficient)?

4.0
N/A
4 - Well suited to needs and plans.
Raise Amount Min

Is the minimum raise reasonable considering the development plan? Are there raise-amount dependent milestones?

2.0
N/A
2 - Only loosely related to plans.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

4.0
N/A
4 - Well defined and reasonable.
Token Allocation

Is the ratio of tokens sold to those kept reasonable? Does it prevent the company from having too much control?

3.0
N/A
3 - Sufficient company/community interest balance.
Media Presence and Following

Is the sale being talked about in Reddit, Bitcointalk, Social Media, Medium, etc.? Is information available and accessible? Is there interest?

4.0
N/A
4 - Solid exposure and interest, good impression.

Product

The FluzFluz network is a mobile-first marketplace that is already running in Colombia to moderate success. The team is now planning to launch FluzFluz in the US. As it targets consumers in general, the network's appeal and target user base is immense. There is some normal competition to date, nothing exactly like FluzFluz.

Readiness

Is the product ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

3.0
N/A
3 - Prototype / MVP / alpha.
Appeal

How appealing is the product? How good or necessary is it? Does it have a distinct edge?

4.0
N/A
4 - Captivating.
Target User Base

Is it mass market or niche?

5.0
N/A
5 - General audience / mass market.
Competition

Are there many other similar solutions or is this one of just a few, or even one of a kind?

3.0
N/A
3 - Some normal competition.
Innovation

How innovative or inventive is the product, either conceptually or technologically?

3.0
N/A
3 - Partial, a novel approach or aspect.

Use of Blockchain

The FluzFluz network has worked in Colombia without a blockchain solution. Moreover, the company admits the FluzFluz token will not be exchanged as a security until regulatory issues are settled. The system, even on-chain, does not seem to be decentralized and no relevant documentation has been published in this regard. Could be done without a blockchain.

Blockchain Development

Is blockchain technology essential? Does it make the solution significantly different and better?

1.0
N/A
1 - None; simple Ethereum based coin.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

How disruptive is the introduction of blockchain technology into the product's market space?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or indeterminate.
Need for Custom Token (vs. BTC or ETH)

Is the token essential or could it be done just as well or better with fiat or Bitcoin?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some, mainly network effect.
System Decentralization (besides token)

How decentralized is the system architecture other than the token (e.g., data collection, storage, access, and use, or decision making processes, etc.)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Centralized with some plans to decentralize.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

How compelling is the solution's contribution to the evolution of blockchain infrastructure and economy?

1.0
N/A
1 - None really, or unknown.

Whitepaper

85 pages long, its length is misleading. The whitepaper is surprisingly easy to read, yet not quickly, and presents a business plan presentation and the inner workings of the FluzFluz system. The technological aspect of it is not as thorough as the other aspects (Market data, competitors data, system architecture and more)

Comprehensiveness

Is there a concrete and practical development plan (vs. just a conceptual vision)?

4.0
N/A
4 - Satisfactory coverage, well written.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

3.0
N/A
3 - Readable, takes some time.
Transparency

Does it candidly describe and disclose where the project now stands, how much exists and how much still needs to be done, etc.?

3.0
N/A
3 - Basic honesty with some hype.
Business Plan Presentation

Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?

3.0
N/A
3 - More information required.
Technology Presentation

Does it present a well thought out technological architecture? Does it address implementational challenges?

2.0
N/A
2 - Missing critical information.

Roadmap

The way the FluzFluz system is designed - with premium seats up top in two different teams - resembles a pyramid scheme. You earn more 'passive income' money the more friends you have in your network, and you have to pay to stay active in your network. Those at the top, with an enormous network of friends, earn more money than those on the bottom. In the FluzFluz whitepaper they even have several illustrations of the system - all of them are literally pyramid like. The team presents a coherent long-term vision, and there is some feasibility and concreteness to their plan, but a lot of legal reviewing is required.

Concreteness

Is there a concrete and practical development plan (vs. just a conceptual vision)?

3.0
N/A
3 - An overall plan, major milestones stated.
Feasiblity

Is the development plan realistic? Is it based on reasonable goals and timelines?

3.0
N/A
3 - Optimistic.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

4.0
N/A
4 - Long term.
Dependencies (services or capabilities)

How available, operational, or trusted are the other systems or capabilities on which the project relies?

2.0
N/A
2 - Not fully available or trustworthy.
Current Position

Where is the project now, relative to its vision and plans?

2.0
N/A
2 - Critical obstacles ahead.

Compliance

In FluzFluz's whitepaper the last segment is reserved for legal reviews and things of that nature. The FluzFluz token is solely to be used within the FluzFluz network, at first. Tokenholders will not be able to exchange their tokens in any exchange until FluzFluz meets the regulatory requirements for such an event. Until then it can not be regarded as a security. Moreover, according to their own documentation, there isn't any significant smart-contract infrestructure in place.

Token Utility (value through usage)

How much use is there for the token itself (regardless of its value as an investment vehicle)?

1.0
N/A
1 - None in the near (or any) future.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

How valuable is the token as an investment vehicle or financial instrument?

1.0
N/A
1 - Solely; a passive investment vehicle.
Token/Smart-Contract Readiness

Is the blockchain infrastructure of the project ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

2.0
N/A
2 - Proof of concept or test platform.
Attention to Compliance Issues

How much attention is given to compliance (via token and ecosystem design, token sale participation, etc.)? Is this issue addressed directly and coherently?

3.0
N/A
3 - Limited to blanket standard.
Legal Review/Risk Assessment

What kind of legal documentation (reviews or agreements) and risk assessment are provided?

2.0
N/A
2 - Insufficient or unprofessional.

Company and Team

All the information about the team behind FluzFluz is on the main page of their website. They seem to be more widely known in LATAM, which makes sense seeing how FluzFluz is already running in Colombia. FluzFluz presents a nice balance between relevant roles and skillsets. All team members presented on their site have a LinkedIn page.

Company Stage and Foundation

Is the company already established? Has it raised funds before? Is it mature?

3.0
N/A
3 - Company structure in place.
Background of Lead Team Members

Do we know who they are? Do they have LinkedIn profiles? Do they have solid, relevant backgrounds?

3.0
N/A
3 - Minimally sufficient.
Team Assembly and Commitment

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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Mostly assembled and committed.
Team Skill Set Relevance

Does the amount of talent and skill in each area seem to fit the project requirements?

3.0
N/A
3 - Correlated to project requirements.
Team Skill Set Balance

Is the team well-rounded (biz/tech/blockchain)? Is there sufficient talent and skill in all areas of required development?

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

Token Sale

The FluzFluz team are planning to sell 204,780,000 tokens for $0.1 USD each. There is no minimum amount to be raised, and every token not sold will be burned. The fund allocation is specified in the whitepaper: 23% into Gift Code Inventory, 6% into Legal & Financial OH, 10% into IT infrastructure, 41% into branding campaign and 20% into personnel OH. There is a decent media presence and following around FluzFluz.

Raise Amount Max

Is there a clear cap? Is the maximum raise amount modestly sufficient (as opposed to either greedy or insufficient)?

4.0
N/A
4 - Well suited to needs and plans.
Raise Amount Min

Is the minimum raise reasonable considering the development plan? Are there raise-amount dependent milestones?

2.0
N/A
2 - Only loosely related to plans.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

4.0
N/A
4 - Well defined and reasonable.
Token Allocation

Is the ratio of tokens sold to those kept reasonable? Does it prevent the company from having too much control?

3.0
N/A
3 - Sufficient company/community interest balance.
Media Presence and Following

Is the sale being talked about in Reddit, Bitcointalk, Social Media, Medium, etc.? Is information available and accessible? Is there interest?

4.0
N/A
4 - Solid exposure and interest, good impression.

Most Read Reviews