Friendz

Friendz connects companies to people willing to provide support in the creation of advertising contents directly posted on their social media profiles.

About Friendz

Friendz Coins are to be a currency used by brands to connect with their audience on social media. The Friendz platform aims to allow companies to directly interact with a community of users that create content and perform other marketing actions on demand. Friendz aims to offer a variety of digital advertising services, including brand awareness and product placement campaigns, sharing content activities, and market research. Friendz community members can take part in activities on the platform, supporting brands in the process of content creation and validation, and be compensated with Friendz Coins that can be spent on the Friendz network of ecommerce platforms and physical shops.
Competitors: Flatlay, Steemit, Nexus, Social X, Sphere.
Uniqueness/Advantages to competition: Friendz incorporates ‘Contents approvers’ who are considered to be highly skilled users that satisfy certain criteria with regard to quality and experience using the platform. Their task is to check every content uploaded, making sure that it complies with Friendz and brand policies. Content approvers are rewarded in Friendz Coins at the end of the validation activity.

Token Sale Use of Blockchain

Product

3.4
Product
Readiness

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Beta or initial rollout.
Appeal

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Interesting.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some, but nothing outstanding.

Product

Andriod and IOS apps are available and functional. There is a claim that there are currently over 40,000 active users on the platform. The Friendz platform is scheduled to be further developed and launched in various parts of the world in the coming years (see Roadmap).
There is appeal to the Friendz product, given the tremendous number of social media and marketplace users throughout the world and the desire to receive crypto-rewards for participation. The potential/target user-base is very large, as about 1/3 of the global population uses social media in some form. The competition over time will greatly stiffen as blockchain technology adoption continues, given the size of the target audience.
Competitors: Steemit, Nexus, Social X, Sphere, Flatlay.

Product Whitepaper

Use of Blockchain

2.4
Use of Blockchain
Blockchain Development

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Some smart contract functionality.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Potentially disruptive.
Need for a 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.)?

3.0
N/A
3 - Hybrid; decentralized as far as circumstances allow.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.

Use of Blockchain

The project offers some contribution to blockchain development as it has developed its own social media app and intends to develop its own digital marketplace/exchange and rating system for brand and marketing content creators. There is a disruptive advantage as, in theory, it would enable further decentralization of centralized applications such as FB, and would allow companies to directly interact with a community of users that create content and perform other marketing actions on demand. There is need for a custom token as the platform is an independent dapp, however in theory ETH alone could accomplish this as well. Potentially disruptive since FB and other social media applications are completely centralized.

Use of Blockchain Roadmap

Whitepaper

3.2
Whitepaper
Comprehensiveness

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Covers most key issues; a few holes.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

4.0
N/A
4 - Easy to read and understand.
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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Clear, well thought out, realistic.
Technology Presentation

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Missing critical information.

Whitepaper

The whitepaper is very well put together, professional and aesthetic, and provides a good mixture of media and textual explanation. The document seems very long, at 71-pages, but can be read through very quickly since a lot of it is graphics, pictures, and presentation. The whitepaper contains: an introduction to the project, overview of the digital marketing sector, how Friendz works, the business model, Friendz coins and value creation strategy, the long term plan, the token sale, ICO Partners, roadmap, team intro, legal considerations, governance and compliance, and an important disclaimer. The business plan is well explained, but very little explanation for the technology behind the platform is provided.

Whitepaper Compliance

Roadmap

2.4
Roadmap
Concreteness

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Vague, noncommittal.
Feasibility

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Very ambitious.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

2.0
N/A
2 - Riding the current wave.
Dependencies (services or capabilities)

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Available and trusted.
Current Position

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Critical obstacles ahead.

Roadmap

A very basic, quarter-to-quarter roadmap is given, starting with being ‘listed on exchange’. Critical obstacles lie ahead, with an internal user wallet for the platform not to be provided until Q3 2019. The roadmap is very vague and nothing is provided regarding the intermediary steps required to completely each milestone.
Milestones:
Q1 2018 – Listed on Exchange
Q2 2018 – Central Europe
Q3 2018 – Introduction of creativity approvers
Q4 2018 – Expansion of Friendz services to B2B clients
Q1 2019 – Nordics
Q2 2019 – Widget payment system for commercial partners
Q3 2019 – Users internal wallet
Q4 2019 – Eastern Europe
Q1 2020 – North America
Q2 2020 – South America
Q3 2020 – Asia and Australia

Roadmap Company and Team

Compliance

3.0
Compliance
Token Utility (value through usage)

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal or contrived.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Primarily, with few additional rights.
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?

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Specific, detailed.
Legal Review/Risk Assessment

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Professional.

Compliance

The FDZ-token has intrinsic value through its planned usage on the Friendz platform, allowing companies to directly interact with a community of users that create content and perform other marketing actions on demand, for a variety of digital advertising services including: brand awareness and product placement campaigns, sharing content activities, and market research. The token’s main utility is as a tradable financial instrument, as it is used specifically for payments and markeplace settlements but also allows for platform participation rewards.
The token smart-contract infrastructure is completed, however further development of the infrastructure is planned.
Compliance is addressed with direct statements of AML & KYC Due Diligence and enforced with a registration whitelisting process and manual screening of all platform registrants.
The legal review and terms and conditions of the sale are detailed, professional, and thorough, aiming to absolve the company of any liability regarding the ICO and any problems that may occur, and providing a general statment that the tokens are not to be deemed a security.

Compliance Token Sale

Company and Team

3.8
Company and Team
Company Stage and Foundation

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Established with some fundraising history.
Background of Lead Team Members

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Verifiable relevant experience.
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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Well suited 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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Good, sufficient for each aspect.

Company and Team

Friendz has an established team with 32 employees and 3 advisors.
The core team has experience in business, finance, and tech, including sales, digital marketing, PR, community development, UI/UX design, programming, and blockchain development/architecture.
The advisors have backgrounds in software engineering, tech development, investing, cryptocurrency and blockchain projects.
All team members have verifiable work experience credentials via LinkedIn profiles, however some profiles are strictly in Spanish. Some members of the team are fully dedicated to the project, while others are also dedicated to multiple projects outside of Friendz platform. Where verifiable work credentials are lacking, it is difficult to determine if website bios provide an accurate description of experience and dedication to the project. A couple of core team members and a few advisors have previous experience with blockchain, cryptocurrency, or smart-contract projects and ICO consultation.
Positives: The core team is very well rounded, with several committed members who have previous blockchain, cryptocurrency, or smart contract experience, and three dedicated blockchain developers.
Negatives: Not all members are fully dedicated to the project, and not all have verifiable work experience.

Company and Team Product

Token Sale

2.0
Token Sale
Raise Amount Max

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Somewhat greedy or unrelated to 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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Use of funds only loosely defined.
Token Allocation

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Unclear or suspicious.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minor exposure and interest, or ambivalent reception.

Token Sale

Friendz Coin (FDZ)
Total Supply: 1.5 billion (no new tokens will ever be created)
Hard Cap / Min Goal: 750M FDZ / 50M FDZ
1 FDZ = 0.067 USD
Bonus 1st Hour: +40%Bonus (Locked)
BONUS DAY 1: +20%
BONUS WEEK1: +10%
BONUS WEEK2-3: +0%

Token Distribution:
ICO – 50%
Reserve Fund – 20%
Partners – 11%
Advisors – 7%
Liquidy Fund – 5%
Team – 5%
Bounty Program – 2%

Use of Proceeds:
Business Development and Marketing – 50%
Personnel and professionals – 20%
Development – 15%
G&A – 10%
Other – 5%

Social Media Presence & Following:
There is very little community engagment and reception.

Product

Andriod and IOS apps are available and functional. There is a claim that there are currently over 40,000 active users on the platform. The Friendz platform is scheduled to be further developed and launched in various parts of the world in the coming years (see Roadmap).
There is appeal to the Friendz product, given the tremendous number of social media and marketplace users throughout the world and the desire to receive crypto-rewards for participation. The potential/target user-base is very large, as about 1/3 of the global population uses social media in some form. The competition over time will greatly stiffen as blockchain technology adoption continues, given the size of the target audience.
Competitors: Steemit, Nexus, Social X, Sphere, Flatlay.

Category Breakdown
Readiness

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Beta or initial rollout.
Appeal

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Interesting.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some, but nothing outstanding.
Product Score:
3.4

Use of Blockchain

The project offers some contribution to blockchain development as it has developed its own social media app and intends to develop its own digital marketplace/exchange and rating system for brand and marketing content creators. There is a disruptive advantage as, in theory, it would enable further decentralization of centralized applications such as FB, and would allow companies to directly interact with a community of users that create content and perform other marketing actions on demand. There is need for a custom token as the platform is an independent dapp, however in theory ETH alone could accomplish this as well. Potentially disruptive since FB and other social media applications are completely centralized.

Category Breakdown
Blockchain Development

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Some smart contract functionality.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Potentially disruptive.
Need for a 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.)?

3.0
N/A
3 - Hybrid; decentralized as far as circumstances allow.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
Use of Blockchain Score:
2.4

Whitepaper

The whitepaper is very well put together, professional and aesthetic, and provides a good mixture of media and textual explanation. The document seems very long, at 71-pages, but can be read through very quickly since a lot of it is graphics, pictures, and presentation. The whitepaper contains: an introduction to the project, overview of the digital marketing sector, how Friendz works, the business model, Friendz coins and value creation strategy, the long term plan, the token sale, ICO Partners, roadmap, team intro, legal considerations, governance and compliance, and an important disclaimer. The business plan is well explained, but very little explanation for the technology behind the platform is provided.

Category Breakdown
Comprehensiveness

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Covers most key issues; a few holes.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

4.0
N/A
4 - Easy to read and understand.
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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Clear, well thought out, realistic.
Technology Presentation

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Missing critical information.
Whitepaper Score:
3.2

Roadmap

A very basic, quarter-to-quarter roadmap is given, starting with being ‘listed on exchange’. Critical obstacles lie ahead, with an internal user wallet for the platform not to be provided until Q3 2019. The roadmap is very vague and nothing is provided regarding the intermediary steps required to completely each milestone.
Milestones:
Q1 2018 – Listed on Exchange
Q2 2018 – Central Europe
Q3 2018 – Introduction of creativity approvers
Q4 2018 – Expansion of Friendz services to B2B clients
Q1 2019 – Nordics
Q2 2019 – Widget payment system for commercial partners
Q3 2019 – Users internal wallet
Q4 2019 – Eastern Europe
Q1 2020 – North America
Q2 2020 – South America
Q3 2020 – Asia and Australia

Category Breakdown
Concreteness

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Vague, noncommittal.
Feasibility

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Very ambitious.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

2.0
N/A
2 - Riding the current wave.
Dependencies (services or capabilities)

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Available and trusted.
Current Position

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Critical obstacles ahead.
Roadmap Score:
2.4

Compliance

The FDZ-token has intrinsic value through its planned usage on the Friendz platform, allowing companies to directly interact with a community of users that create content and perform other marketing actions on demand, for a variety of digital advertising services including: brand awareness and product placement campaigns, sharing content activities, and market research. The token’s main utility is as a tradable financial instrument, as it is used specifically for payments and markeplace settlements but also allows for platform participation rewards.
The token smart-contract infrastructure is completed, however further development of the infrastructure is planned.
Compliance is addressed with direct statements of AML & KYC Due Diligence and enforced with a registration whitelisting process and manual screening of all platform registrants.
The legal review and terms and conditions of the sale are detailed, professional, and thorough, aiming to absolve the company of any liability regarding the ICO and any problems that may occur, and providing a general statment that the tokens are not to be deemed a security.

Category Breakdown
Token Utility (value through usage)

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal or contrived.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Primarily, with few additional rights.
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?

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Specific, detailed.
Legal Review/Risk Assessment

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Professional.
Compliance Score:
3.0

Company and Team

Friendz has an established team with 32 employees and 3 advisors.
The core team has experience in business, finance, and tech, including sales, digital marketing, PR, community development, UI/UX design, programming, and blockchain development/architecture.
The advisors have backgrounds in software engineering, tech development, investing, cryptocurrency and blockchain projects.
All team members have verifiable work experience credentials via LinkedIn profiles, however some profiles are strictly in Spanish. Some members of the team are fully dedicated to the project, while others are also dedicated to multiple projects outside of Friendz platform. Where verifiable work credentials are lacking, it is difficult to determine if website bios provide an accurate description of experience and dedication to the project. A couple of core team members and a few advisors have previous experience with blockchain, cryptocurrency, or smart-contract projects and ICO consultation.
Positives: The core team is very well rounded, with several committed members who have previous blockchain, cryptocurrency, or smart contract experience, and three dedicated blockchain developers.
Negatives: Not all members are fully dedicated to the project, and not all have verifiable work experience.

Category Breakdown
Company Stage and Foundation

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Established with some fundraising history.
Background of Lead Team Members

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Verifiable relevant experience.
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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Well suited 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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Good, sufficient for each aspect.
Company and Team Score:
3.8

Token Sale

Friendz Coin (FDZ)
Total Supply: 1.5 billion (no new tokens will ever be created)
Hard Cap / Min Goal: 750M FDZ / 50M FDZ
1 FDZ = 0.067 USD
Bonus 1st Hour: +40%Bonus (Locked)
BONUS DAY 1: +20%
BONUS WEEK1: +10%
BONUS WEEK2-3: +0%

Token Distribution:
ICO – 50%
Reserve Fund – 20%
Partners – 11%
Advisors – 7%
Liquidy Fund – 5%
Team – 5%
Bounty Program – 2%

Use of Proceeds:
Business Development and Marketing – 50%
Personnel and professionals – 20%
Development – 15%
G&A – 10%
Other – 5%

Social Media Presence & Following:
There is very little community engagment and reception.

Category Breakdown
Raise Amount Max

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Somewhat greedy or unrelated to 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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Use of funds only loosely defined.
Token Allocation

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Unclear or suspicious.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minor exposure and interest, or ambivalent reception.
Token Sale Score:
2.0

Use this code to share the ratings on your website