Miner One

Crowdfunded Crypto Mining Operation

About Miner One

Miner One is a crowd-funded cryptocurrency bitcoin mining operation. Funds from the MIO token sale will be used to buy mining hardware and token holders will receive a portion of the profits. The mining farm will be constructed in Lule, Sweden, where Miner One claims there is a competitive advantage due to low electricity costs and a colder climate.

Token Sale Use of Blockchain

Product

1.6
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
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?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or indeterminate.

Product

There are currently many crypto mining operations that would be competing with Miner One. There are no notable aspects of the project that suggest that it is in any way revolutionary. Although, Miner One indicates that the climate of the suggested location of the mining farm (Sweden) gives it a slight competitive advantage due to reduced cooling costs. It is also stated that electricity costs will be competitively low (EUR 0.065 / kWh).

Product Whitepaper

Use of Blockchain

1.2
Use of 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 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?

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.)?

1.0
N/A
1 - Essentially centralized.
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

MIO is an ERC20 compliant token used as an investment vehicle for the Miner One project. Hence, the need for a custom token is not due to technological capabilities or constraints. The use of blockchain technology is unimpressive, as the project is simply using blockchain technology as a means to easily receive funding.

Use of Blockchain Roadmap

Whitepaper

3.6
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?

5.0
N/A
5 - Crystal clear. Enjoyable.
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 fairly long at 45 pages. The technology plan is nearly nonexistent, as the ICO for this project is primarily a means of funding in order to purchase and operate hardware. The business plan is presented in relatively high detail and includes several fiscal aspects of the proposed mining operation, including the estimated return at different BTC price points, a comparison to cloud and pool mining, and a comparison of different mining equipment. However, the most critical aspect of the project is whether Miner One will be able to successfully obtain the required hardware, regardless of the success of the ICO. ASIC miners are in significantly high demand, especially in Asia, and there is no mention of whether Miner One has a confirmed supplier that will be able to provide them with a specified number of units. Overall the whitepaper is well organized, discusses the business plan in fair detail, and is visually appealing.

Whitepaper Compliance

Roadmap

2.0
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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Realistic.
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?

1.0
N/A
1 - Not-yet-available or questionable.
Current Position

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

1.0
N/A
1 - Nowhere yet.

Roadmap

The roadmap presented in the whitepaper spans from February 2018 to September 2018 does not contain significantly high levels of detail. Milestones are presented without descriptions of what each entails. Milestones reached thus far are not included in the development roadmap presented in the whitepaper. The first equipment order is planned to take place in April 2018 and the first payout is expected in August 2018.

Roadmap Company and Team

Compliance

1.8
Compliance
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?

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?

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?

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

Compliance

The whitepaper contains a disclaimer section. It is explicitly stated in the legal disclaimer section that MIO tokens are not “an offer to buy any securities in any jurisdiction”. However, this is outright false, since the entire premise of the project is to sell MIO tokens enabling the buyer to receive future returns based on the performance of the organization. Additionally, this contradicts another statement in another section of the document, which states that: “the MIO Token can be categorized as a security as it entitles token holders to receive the profits from mining operations”. KYC/AML procedures will be utilized for the token sale. Miner One goes beyond what most ICOs include in the whitepaper by describing their proposed KYC process as well the privacy and security concerns associated with it. US residents are not able to participate in the public token sale.

Compliance Token Sale

Company and Team

3.0
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?

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.

Company and Team

The team of 15 individuals is listed on the website, along with short descriptions of their professional experience and skill set, profile pictures, and links to LinkedIn profiles (for most of the team members). The team’s skill set is heavily geared towards technology as opposed to business. Investigating the LinkedIn profiles of the team members shows that, overall, the team is quite capable and possesses a significant amount of combined experience working in the technology industry. However, a team of this size and skill set is questionable for this kind of project.

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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Justifiable.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

3.0
N/A
3 - Rough estimates, but sensible.
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 MIO tokens is 350 million (82% is for sale, 6% is for research and development, 2% is for the bounty program, and 10% are for the founders). The allocation of funds is described in moderately low detail. The soft cap is $3MM USD and the hard cap is $200MM USD, where 1 MIO = 0.001 ETH. The token sale takes place on February 15, 2018.

Product

There are currently many crypto mining operations that would be competing with Miner One. There are no notable aspects of the project that suggest that it is in any way revolutionary. Although, Miner One indicates that the climate of the suggested location of the mining farm (Sweden) gives it a slight competitive advantage due to reduced cooling costs. It is also stated that electricity costs will be competitively low (EUR 0.065 / kWh).

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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
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?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or indeterminate.
Product Score:
1.6

Use of Blockchain

MIO is an ERC20 compliant token used as an investment vehicle for the Miner One project. Hence, the need for a custom token is not due to technological capabilities or constraints. The use of blockchain technology is unimpressive, as the project is simply using blockchain technology as a means to easily receive funding.

Category Breakdown
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 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?

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.)?

1.0
N/A
1 - Essentially centralized.
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:
1.2

Whitepaper

The whitepaper is fairly long at 45 pages. The technology plan is nearly nonexistent, as the ICO for this project is primarily a means of funding in order to purchase and operate hardware. The business plan is presented in relatively high detail and includes several fiscal aspects of the proposed mining operation, including the estimated return at different BTC price points, a comparison to cloud and pool mining, and a comparison of different mining equipment. However, the most critical aspect of the project is whether Miner One will be able to successfully obtain the required hardware, regardless of the success of the ICO. ASIC miners are in significantly high demand, especially in Asia, and there is no mention of whether Miner One has a confirmed supplier that will be able to provide them with a specified number of units. Overall the whitepaper is well organized, discusses the business plan in fair detail, and is visually appealing.

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?

5.0
N/A
5 - Crystal clear. Enjoyable.
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:
3.6

Roadmap

The roadmap presented in the whitepaper spans from February 2018 to September 2018 does not contain significantly high levels of detail. Milestones are presented without descriptions of what each entails. Milestones reached thus far are not included in the development roadmap presented in the whitepaper. The first equipment order is planned to take place in April 2018 and the first payout is expected in August 2018.

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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Realistic.
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?

1.0
N/A
1 - Not-yet-available or questionable.
Current Position

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

1.0
N/A
1 - Nowhere yet.
Roadmap Score:
2.0

Compliance

The whitepaper contains a disclaimer section. It is explicitly stated in the legal disclaimer section that MIO tokens are not “an offer to buy any securities in any jurisdiction”. However, this is outright false, since the entire premise of the project is to sell MIO tokens enabling the buyer to receive future returns based on the performance of the organization. Additionally, this contradicts another statement in another section of the document, which states that: “the MIO Token can be categorized as a security as it entitles token holders to receive the profits from mining operations”. KYC/AML procedures will be utilized for the token sale. Miner One goes beyond what most ICOs include in the whitepaper by describing their proposed KYC process as well the privacy and security concerns associated with it. US residents are not able to participate in the public token sale.

Category Breakdown
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?

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?

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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Semi-professional (e.g. Howey Test)
Compliance Score:
1.8

Company and Team

The team of 15 individuals is listed on the website, along with short descriptions of their professional experience and skill set, profile pictures, and links to LinkedIn profiles (for most of the team members). The team’s skill set is heavily geared towards technology as opposed to business. Investigating the LinkedIn profiles of the team members shows that, overall, the team is quite capable and possesses a significant amount of combined experience working in the technology industry. However, a team of this size and skill set is questionable for this kind of project.

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?

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.
Company and Team Score:
3.0

Token Sale

The total number of MIO tokens is 350 million (82% is for sale, 6% is for research and development, 2% is for the bounty program, and 10% are for the founders). The allocation of funds is described in moderately low detail. The soft cap is $3MM USD and the hard cap is $200MM USD, where 1 MIO = 0.001 ETH. The token sale takes place on February 15, 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)?

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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Justifiable.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

3.0
N/A
3 - Rough estimates, but sensible.
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:
2.6

Use this code to share the ratings on your website