grain.io

Grain processes work agreements on the blockchain and has an instant payment mechanism. It helps companies save billions of euros/dollars annually in middleman services and payment processing costs.

About grain.io

GRAIN is a platform that allows labor contracts to be processed via smart contracts on the Ethereum blockchain. It is stated that this will reduce costs while increasing flexibility among workers as well as employers.

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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Proof of concept or test platform.
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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Few competitors / a leading solution.
Innovation

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

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

Product

GRAIN aims to create a platform that transforms labor contracts by implementing them as smart contracts. Once contract termination consensus is reached, GRAIN tokens are awarded to recipients as specified by the contract, and can then be exchanged for fiat currency. The potential target user base is vast, and the level of competition for blockchain-related projects dedicated specifically to this purpose is relatively low.

Product Whitepaper

Use of Blockchain

3.0
Use of Blockchain
Blockchain Development

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Automation; making something easier to do.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Generally disruptive.
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?

1.0
N/A
1 - None really, just fundraising.
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.)?

4.0
N/A
4 - Mostly decentralized.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Interesting.

Use of Blockchain

GRAIN is an ERC20 compliant token used as fuel for transactions that take place in the GRAIN ecosystem. The section in the whitepaper dedicated to discussing the GRAIN token consists primarily of a reiteration of general features of blockchain technology and smart contracts – features which are not unique to GRAIN. As such, the need for GRAIN to create a custom token is questionable and seems to be primarily a means for funding the platform.

Use of Blockchain Roadmap

Whitepaper

3.4
Whitepaper
Comprehensiveness

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

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?

3.0
N/A
3 - More information required.

Whitepaper

The whitepaper is quite concise at 25 pages with large margins and many figures. Business related details are discussed in satisfactory detail, with token and funding allocation properly addressed, as well as a page of discussion regarding the business case of the platform and other details such as transaction fees. The document is lacking, however, in technological details of how the platform will operate. Overall the whitepaper is concise, well organized, and visually pleasing.

Whitepaper Compliance

Roadmap

2.6
Roadmap
Concreteness

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Vague, noncommittal.
Feasiblity

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Realistic.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

3.0
N/A
3 - A trend with potential.
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.

Roadmap

The roadmap presented in the whitepaper spans from Q2 2016 to Q1 2019 and contains low levels of detail with regard to the business-focused milestones. Milestones reached thus far have been mainly about raising capital and establishing the organization. The first public beta test of GRAIN is planned to occur during Q2 of 2018.

Roadmap Company and Team

Compliance

2.2
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?

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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal, superficial or hackneyed.
Legal Review/Risk Assessment

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Semi-professional (e.g. Howey Test)

Compliance

There is a section in the GRAIN whitepaper that discusses governance and compliance. The language does not seem professional and the level of detail is low. The entirety of this section is approximately four sentences and a few bullet points. In the abstract of the paper it is stated that “GRAIN will be flexible enough to comply with any regulations related to labor”. These particular labor regulations or how GRAIN plans to address them are not discussed in significant detail in the whitepaper.

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?

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?

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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Fully 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

The team of 9 individuals is listed in the whitepaper, where profile pictures, job titles, and short descriptions are provided. LinkedIn profiles are given on the GRAIN website, as well as video interviews with the founders. The CEO was the former senior director for Microsoft. The team’s skill set and professional experience is geared mainly towards technology as opposed to business. Many of the developers on the team have previous experience developing smart contracts.

Company and Team Product

Token Sale

3.2
Token Sale
Raise Amount Max

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Justifiable.
Raise Amount Min

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Reasonable, sensible.
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?

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

Token Sale

The total number of GRAIN tokens is 3.6 billion (30% is for sale, 24% is for the foundation, 25% for the escrow fund, 15% for advisors and partnerships, 5% for the founding team, and 1% for the bounty program). The allocation of funds is described in sufficient detail. The soft cap is 4000 ETH and the hard cap is 40000 ETH, where 1 GRAIN = 0.000037 ETH. The public token sale takes place on March 1, 2018.

Product

GRAIN aims to create a platform that transforms labor contracts by implementing them as smart contracts. Once contract termination consensus is reached, GRAIN tokens are awarded to recipients as specified by the contract, and can then be exchanged for fiat currency. The potential target user base is vast, and the level of competition for blockchain-related projects dedicated specifically to this purpose is relatively low.

Category Breakdown
Readiness

Is the product 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.
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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Few competitors / a leading solution.
Innovation

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Partial, a novel approach or aspect.
Product Score:
3.4

Use of Blockchain

GRAIN is an ERC20 compliant token used as fuel for transactions that take place in the GRAIN ecosystem. The section in the whitepaper dedicated to discussing the GRAIN token consists primarily of a reiteration of general features of blockchain technology and smart contracts – features which are not unique to GRAIN. As such, the need for GRAIN to create a custom token is questionable and seems to be primarily a means for funding the platform.

Category Breakdown
Blockchain Development

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Automation; making something easier to do.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Generally disruptive.
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?

1.0
N/A
1 - None really, just fundraising.
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.)?

4.0
N/A
4 - Mostly decentralized.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Interesting.
Use of Blockchain Score:
3.0

Whitepaper

The whitepaper is quite concise at 25 pages with large margins and many figures. Business related details are discussed in satisfactory detail, with token and funding allocation properly addressed, as well as a page of discussion regarding the business case of the platform and other details such as transaction fees. The document is lacking, however, in technological details of how the platform will operate. Overall the whitepaper is concise, well organized, and visually pleasing.

Category Breakdown
Comprehensiveness

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

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?

3.0
N/A
3 - More information required.
Whitepaper Score:
3.4

Roadmap

The roadmap presented in the whitepaper spans from Q2 2016 to Q1 2019 and contains low levels of detail with regard to the business-focused milestones. Milestones reached thus far have been mainly about raising capital and establishing the organization. The first public beta test of GRAIN is planned to occur during Q2 of 2018.

Category Breakdown
Concreteness

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Vague, noncommittal.
Feasiblity

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Realistic.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

3.0
N/A
3 - A trend with potential.
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.
Roadmap Score:
2.6

Compliance

There is a section in the GRAIN whitepaper that discusses governance and compliance. The language does not seem professional and the level of detail is low. The entirety of this section is approximately four sentences and a few bullet points. In the abstract of the paper it is stated that “GRAIN will be flexible enough to comply with any regulations related to labor”. These particular labor regulations or how GRAIN plans to address them are not discussed in significant detail in the whitepaper.

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?

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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal, superficial or hackneyed.
Legal Review/Risk Assessment

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Semi-professional (e.g. Howey Test)
Compliance Score:
2.2

Company and Team

The team of 9 individuals is listed in the whitepaper, where profile pictures, job titles, and short descriptions are provided. LinkedIn profiles are given on the GRAIN website, as well as video interviews with the founders. The CEO was the former senior director for Microsoft. The team’s skill set and professional experience is geared mainly towards technology as opposed to business. Many of the developers on the team have previous experience developing smart contracts.

Category Breakdown
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?

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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Fully 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

The total number of GRAIN tokens is 3.6 billion (30% is for sale, 24% is for the foundation, 25% for the escrow fund, 15% for advisors and partnerships, 5% for the founding team, and 1% for the bounty program). The allocation of funds is described in sufficient detail. The soft cap is 4000 ETH and the hard cap is 40000 ETH, where 1 GRAIN = 0.000037 ETH. The public token sale takes place on March 1, 2018.

Category Breakdown
Raise Amount Max

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Justifiable.
Raise Amount Min

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Reasonable, sensible.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minor exposure and interest, or ambivalent reception.
Token Sale Score:
3.2

Use this code to share the ratings on your website