Kepler Technologies

Kepler Technology is developing a fair, simple, and reliable social network universe that will help transform ideas into reality by bringing people around the world to work together.

About Kepler Technologies

Keplertek Universe Platform aims to be an innovative ecosystem that will commission scientific initiatives for developing breakthroughs through global team efforts. Keplertek aims to provide talented and gifted minds with opportunities to participate in the development of technological solutions or link up with the right resources and personnel to bring their ideas to life. The platform will act as a direct gateway for unintermediated connections, and provide investors with unique investment opportunities. Keplertek platform users are registered under specific groups based on purpose, goals and backgrounds. Some users may choose to be idea generators due to their ability to visualize solutions, while others may choose to be assistants based on their ability to ground these ideas. Some will be investors who provide financial resources for development, while others could provide the technical capabilities or experience required to successfully bring all these forth.
Competitors: Numerai, DBrain, DeepBrainChain, Synapse AI
Uniqueness/Advantages to competition: Aims to create a brick & mortor environment for real world collaboration, investment and advancement on AI technologies.

Token Sale Use of Blockchain

Product

2.0
Product
Readiness

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

1.0
N/A
1 - Nothing yet, just an idea.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Small audience / niche market.
Competition

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Quite a few / somewhat better competitors.
Innovation

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

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

Product

Alpha development and blockchain testing for the platform are planned to occur well after the ICO, as well as the campus/complex construction (see Roadmap).
There is appeal to the Keplertek product, given the increasing demand for AI, robotics and undeveloped technologies. The potential / target user-base is large, as much of the investment in research and development demands transition to these technologies. There is large legacy competition in terms of investments and communities centered around technology development, and competition over time will greatly stiffen as blockchain technology adoption continues, given the size of the target audience.
Competitors: Numerai, DBrain, DeepBrainChain, Synapse AI

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 aims to create an innovative ecosystem that will commission scientific initiatives for developing breakthroughs through global teamwork. There is a disruptive advantage as, in theory, it would enable further decentralization of investments in AI/robotics/technological R&D. There is need for a custom token as the platform is an independent community, however in theory ETH alone could accomplish this as well.

Use of Blockchain Roadmap

Whitepaper

3.8
Whitepaper
Comprehensiveness

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

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

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

Whitepaper

The whitepaper is well put together and professional, and provides a mixture of media and textual explanation. The document is 32-pages long, but can be read quickly given the large font and that most pages are not completely filled with text. The whitepaper sections include: Introduction, General description, Project Development, Project Kepler Implementation Phases, Kepler Universe Platform, Value of the Project, Kepler Token, Kepler Tech, Prospects, Kepler Technology JS, Investment Council, Distribution and Value of Tokens (KEP), Token sale structure, Roadmap, and Crowdfund Breakdown. The business plan and technology behind Keplertek are concisely explained.

Whitepaper Compliance

Roadmap

1.6
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?

1.0
N/A
1 - A pipe dream.
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?

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

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

1.0
N/A
1 - Nowhere yet.

Roadmap

A very basic roadmap is given on a monthly basis, starting with ‘Starting Kepler Labs’. Many critical obstacles lie ahead with alpha development and blockchain testing planned for well after the ICO, as well as the campus/complex construction. The roadmap is vague and no descriptions are provided of the intermediate steps required to complete each milestone.
Important Milestones:
April 2018 – ICO
September 2018 – Alpha Release
Q1 2018 – Begin Construction of Campus/Complex
Q2 2019 – Fully Functional Laboratory
Q1 2020 – Megafactory Opening for Robotics

Roadmap Company and Team

Compliance

2.6
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?

1.0
N/A
1 - Nothing yet, just an idea.
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 KEP-token has intrinsic value through its planned usage on the Keplertek platform, allowing users to participate in an independent marketplace to create and invest in innovative technologies. The token’s main utility is as a tradable financial instrument, as it is used specifically for payments, investments, and marketplace settlements, but it also allows for platform interaction.
The token smart-contract infrastructure will be completed after the ICO, as well as the campus/complex construction.
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 and are not intended to be sold in places it is prohibited.

Compliance Token Sale

Company and Team

2.8
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Fragmented or inconclusive.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Lacking in key areas.
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.

Company and Team

Keplertek has an established team with 19 employees, 6 advisors, and 5 researchers and developers.
The core team has experience in data analytics, software and tech development, marketing, finance/accounting, graphics design, computer science, project development, front end design, and blockchain investments/developments.
The advisors have backgrounds in ICO advisement, marketing, sales, tech development, investing, cryptocurrency and blockchain projects.
Most team members have verifiable work experience credentials via LinkedIn profiles, however some profiles provide little information. Some members of the team are fully dedicated to the project, while others are also dedicated to multiple projects outside of Keplertek platform. A few core team members and the advisors have previous experience with blockchain, cryptocurrency, or smart-contract projects and ICO consultation.
Positives: The core team is well rounded and has committed advisors with previous blockchain, cryptocurrency, or smart-contract experience.
Negatives: Not all members are fully dedicated to the project and no team member in particular is identified as the blockchain developer.

Company and Team Product

Token Sale

2.6
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?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or nonsensical.
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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Some presence, lukewarm reception.

Token Sale

Kepler Token (KEP)
Total Supply: 257 Million KEP
Total token supply will be 250, 000, 000 KEP + 7 000 000 Bonuses.
1 USD will Generate 1 KEP which means that paying $1 investor will get 0.8 KEP in return.1 Token price = $1.25
Amount to be raised is $250,000,000

Token Distribution
80% ICO
5% KEPLER TEAM
3% TOP MANAGMENT
4% ICO MARKETING
4% PRODUCT MARKETING
4% RESERVE

ICO Fund Distribution
Facilities / Complex $50,000,000 will be allocated for the construction
Equipment
● Lab + the platform – $100,000,000 has been earmarked for the creation of our revolutionary laboratory
● Factory – $75,000,000 for a fully automated where most of the employees are robots.
● University – $5,00,000
● Campus – $3,000,000
● HQ offices – $5,000,000
● Other facilities – $5,000,000
● Kepler City Network – $17,000,000
Overhead and Logistics
● General infrastructure – $10,000,000
● Payroll for 2 years – $10,000,000
● High-tech manufacturing resources/Parts acquisition – $15,000,000
● Utility expenses and logistic – $5,000, 000

Social Media Presence & Following
There is decent community engagement and reception.

Product

Alpha development and blockchain testing for the platform are planned to occur well after the ICO, as well as the campus/complex construction (see Roadmap).
There is appeal to the Keplertek product, given the increasing demand for AI, robotics and undeveloped technologies. The potential / target user-base is large, as much of the investment in research and development demands transition to these technologies. There is large legacy competition in terms of investments and communities centered around technology development, and competition over time will greatly stiffen as blockchain technology adoption continues, given the size of the target audience.
Competitors: Numerai, DBrain, DeepBrainChain, Synapse AI

Category Breakdown
Readiness

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

1.0
N/A
1 - Nothing yet, just an idea.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Small audience / niche market.
Competition

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Quite a few / somewhat better competitors.
Innovation

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

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

Use of Blockchain

The project offers some contribution to blockchain development as it aims to create an innovative ecosystem that will commission scientific initiatives for developing breakthroughs through global teamwork. There is a disruptive advantage as, in theory, it would enable further decentralization of investments in AI/robotics/technological R&D. There is need for a custom token as the platform is an independent community, however in theory ETH alone could accomplish this as well.

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 well put together and professional, and provides a mixture of media and textual explanation. The document is 32-pages long, but can be read quickly given the large font and that most pages are not completely filled with text. The whitepaper sections include: Introduction, General description, Project Development, Project Kepler Implementation Phases, Kepler Universe Platform, Value of the Project, Kepler Token, Kepler Tech, Prospects, Kepler Technology JS, Investment Council, Distribution and Value of Tokens (KEP), Token sale structure, Roadmap, and Crowdfund Breakdown. The business plan and technology behind Keplertek are concisely explained.

Category Breakdown
Comprehensiveness

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

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Clear, well thought out, realistic.
Whitepaper Score:
3.8

Roadmap

A very basic roadmap is given on a monthly basis, starting with ‘Starting Kepler Labs’. Many critical obstacles lie ahead with alpha development and blockchain testing planned for well after the ICO, as well as the campus/complex construction. The roadmap is vague and no descriptions are provided of the intermediate steps required to complete each milestone.
Important Milestones:
April 2018 – ICO
September 2018 – Alpha Release
Q1 2018 – Begin Construction of Campus/Complex
Q2 2019 – Fully Functional Laboratory
Q1 2020 – Megafactory Opening for Robotics

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?

1.0
N/A
1 - A pipe dream.
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?

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

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

1.0
N/A
1 - Nowhere yet.
Roadmap Score:
1.6

Compliance

The KEP-token has intrinsic value through its planned usage on the Keplertek platform, allowing users to participate in an independent marketplace to create and invest in innovative technologies. The token’s main utility is as a tradable financial instrument, as it is used specifically for payments, investments, and marketplace settlements, but it also allows for platform interaction.
The token smart-contract infrastructure will be completed after the ICO, as well as the campus/complex construction.
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 and are not intended to be sold in places it is prohibited.

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?

1.0
N/A
1 - Nothing yet, just an idea.
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:
2.6

Company and Team

Keplertek has an established team with 19 employees, 6 advisors, and 5 researchers and developers.
The core team has experience in data analytics, software and tech development, marketing, finance/accounting, graphics design, computer science, project development, front end design, and blockchain investments/developments.
The advisors have backgrounds in ICO advisement, marketing, sales, tech development, investing, cryptocurrency and blockchain projects.
Most team members have verifiable work experience credentials via LinkedIn profiles, however some profiles provide little information. Some members of the team are fully dedicated to the project, while others are also dedicated to multiple projects outside of Keplertek platform. A few core team members and the advisors have previous experience with blockchain, cryptocurrency, or smart-contract projects and ICO consultation.
Positives: The core team is well rounded and has committed advisors with previous blockchain, cryptocurrency, or smart-contract experience.
Negatives: Not all members are fully dedicated to the project and no team member in particular is identified as the blockchain developer.

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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Fragmented or inconclusive.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Lacking in key areas.
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.
Company and Team Score:
2.8

Token Sale

Kepler Token (KEP)
Total Supply: 257 Million KEP
Total token supply will be 250, 000, 000 KEP + 7 000 000 Bonuses.
1 USD will Generate 1 KEP which means that paying $1 investor will get 0.8 KEP in return.1 Token price = $1.25
Amount to be raised is $250,000,000

Token Distribution
80% ICO
5% KEPLER TEAM
3% TOP MANAGMENT
4% ICO MARKETING
4% PRODUCT MARKETING
4% RESERVE

ICO Fund Distribution
Facilities / Complex $50,000,000 will be allocated for the construction
Equipment
● Lab + the platform – $100,000,000 has been earmarked for the creation of our revolutionary laboratory
● Factory – $75,000,000 for a fully automated where most of the employees are robots.
● University – $5,00,000
● Campus – $3,000,000
● HQ offices – $5,000,000
● Other facilities – $5,000,000
● Kepler City Network – $17,000,000
Overhead and Logistics
● General infrastructure – $10,000,000
● Payroll for 2 years – $10,000,000
● High-tech manufacturing resources/Parts acquisition – $15,000,000
● Utility expenses and logistic – $5,000, 000

Social Media Presence & Following
There is decent community engagement 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?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or nonsensical.
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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Some presence, lukewarm reception.
Token Sale Score:
2.6

Use this code to share the ratings on your website