Omitude

Utilising Omnitude as an integration layer between existing systems enables rapid deployment of blockchain technology without the need to replace current systems.

About Omitude

Omnitude is a project striving to revolutionize eCommerce by using a blockchain-based technology and ecosystem to address challenges around fraud, identity theft, and supply chain transparency/accountability, and to integrate enterprise systems and eCommerce platforms.

Token Sale Use of Blockchain

Product

2.6
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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Interesting.
Target User Base

Is it mass market or niche?

4.0
N/A
4 - Large audience / wide 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?

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

Product

Notably there is NO PoC, NO demo, and NO partnerships listed to date.Product features include identity confirmation via Proof of Interaction (POI), the Omnitude Wallet (OW), the Omnitude Supply Chain Blockchain, and the Omnitude Ecosystem.
There is a lack of information concerning the actual product / service (how existing enterprise platforms are to be integrated, flowcharts or trade paths etc.).

Product Whitepaper

Use of Blockchain

4.0
Use of Blockchain
Blockchain Development

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Innovative use of blockchain technology.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

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

5.0
N/A
5 - Fundamentally 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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Token is essential to platform.
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

Omnitude is an ERC-20 Token based on the Ethereum blockchain. Omnitude’s Proof-of-Interaction will provide the means to establish that a reviewer has a verifiable history of interaction with the merchant they are reviewing. Each time a customer with an Omnitude ID (‘OID’) transacts with a merchant with an OID, a record will be encrypted and written to the Omnitude blockchain by the merchant, thus reducing affiliate fraud. Other uses of the token include Supply Chain solutions and the Omitude Tracker App. Again however, there is no POC, no demo, and no partnerships listed.

Use of Blockchain Roadmap

Whitepaper

2.6
Whitepaper
Comprehensiveness

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Insufficient coverage.
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.?

4.0
N/A
4 - Informative disclosure.
Business Plan Presentation

Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?

2.0
N/A
2 - Missing critical information.
Technology Presentation

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

1.0
N/A
1 - Severely lacking.

Whitepaper

There are two whitepapers provided, a business whitepaper and a technical whitepaper.
The whitepapers are not fully comprehensive and provide little insight into the project’s business plan and technical implementation. While very readable, the large text coupled with twitter length snippets is insufficient to fully describe the product and token offering.
In addition, the documentation is not very transparent; the nature of the “ecosystem” is loosely defined with little or no explanation of how developers will contribute or who will be the participating partners.

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.
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?

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?

5.0
N/A
5 - Available, trustworthy, recognized.
Current Position

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

1.0
N/A
1 - Nowhere yet.

Roadmap

A basic roadmap is given on a quarterly basis. Critical obstacles lie ahead, with actual beta testing for the platform set to begin after the ICO. The roadmap is vague and brief descriptions are provided for the intermediate steps required to complete each milestone. Notably there is NO POC, NO Demo, and NO Partnerships listed to date. The only objective completed are the launch of the website and whitepaper.
Q3 2017 – Concept Creation & Team Formation
Q4 2017 – Whitepaper & Website Designed
Q1 2018 – Whitepaper & Website Released / Release code on Github / Token Sale / KYC
Q2 2018 – ECOM Live on Exchanges / Partnership development / Join Hypledger Foundation
Q3 2018 – TBD / testing phase I
Q4 2018 – TBD / testing phase II
Q1 2019 – TBD / Launch phase II

Roadmap Company and Team

Compliance

2.4
Compliance
Token Utility (value through usage)

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Limited or uncertain use cases.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Partly; compliance not fully assured.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Insufficient or unprofessional.

Compliance

The ECOM token will serve as:
* A native method of payment – merchants will make payments in ECOM for use of services (Supply Chain Provenance, Delivery Cycle Transparency Data, Single ID, Single Reputation and Proof-of-Interaction), while customers will make payments to merchants using ECOM, crypto currencies and fiat.
* Incentivization for platform operators – “In return for enforcing Omnitude’s Delegated Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance (DPBFT) consensus algorithm, validating nodes will share in ECOM block rewards.”
* “A means to raise funds for long-term development of Omnitude a. Through the crowdfunding, the Omnitude Foundation is raising funds for the initial issuance of ECOM, and for the development and launch of the Omnitude ecosystem. b. The ECOM coins issued during the crowdfunding will be the initial float to bootstrap the ecosystem.”

The ECOM-token has intrinsic value through its planned usage on the Omnitude platform, allowing users to connect with merchants directly. The token’s main utility is as a tradable financial instrument, as it is used specifically for streamlining and alleviating problems with regard to payment settlement and transparency in Customer Identification and Supply Chain optimization.
The token smart-contract infrastructure will be fully completed after the ICO.
The legal review, securities law review, and terms and conditions of the sale are insufficient and unprofessional. There is only one short statement, aiming to absolve the company of any liability regarding the ICO and any problems that may occur, and providing a general statement that the tokens are not to be deemed a security.

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?

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?

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

The Omnitude team is comprised of 8 core team members and 6 advisors.
The team members’ experience appears to be relevant and additive in the eCommerce sector. However, only one member of the team, Benjamin Van Every, seems to possess any relevant blockchain experience (being listed as their Blockchain Architect, however no solidity coding experience or any past blockchain projects are listed in his profile). The team does not have a GitHub repository live but members are visible and active on LinkedIn.
Most members appear to be fully committed to project.

Company and Team Product

Token Sale

2.4
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?

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?

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.

Token Sale

Token supply: 100,000,000 ECOM
Token Distribution: 5% – presale, 50% – token sale, 12% – team and advisors (vested with 20% released each year for 5 years), 33% – Omnitude Foundation

Private pre-sale cost: $0.40 USD/ECOM
Pre-sale cap: 10 million ECOM (4 million USD)
Public token sale cost: $0.46 USD/ECOM
Hard cap: 45 million ECOM (20.7 million USD)
Soft Cap: none
Unsold tokens: In the event that the Token Sale funding cap is not reached, all remaining tokens will be burned.

Fund Allocation: 5% – Research and Development, 60% – Omnitude Platform, 10% – Business Development, 20% – Marketing, 5% – Legal (“Most of the funding will be used for developer salaries and bounties for open-source to Omnitude”)

Product

Notably there is NO PoC, NO demo, and NO partnerships listed to date.Product features include identity confirmation via Proof of Interaction (POI), the Omnitude Wallet (OW), the Omnitude Supply Chain Blockchain, and the Omnitude Ecosystem.
There is a lack of information concerning the actual product / service (how existing enterprise platforms are to be integrated, flowcharts or trade paths etc.).

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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Large audience / wide 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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Partial, a novel approach or aspect.
Product Score:
2.6

Use of Blockchain

Omnitude is an ERC-20 Token based on the Ethereum blockchain. Omnitude’s Proof-of-Interaction will provide the means to establish that a reviewer has a verifiable history of interaction with the merchant they are reviewing. Each time a customer with an Omnitude ID (‘OID’) transacts with a merchant with an OID, a record will be encrypted and written to the Omnitude blockchain by the merchant, thus reducing affiliate fraud. Other uses of the token include Supply Chain solutions and the Omitude Tracker App. Again however, there is no POC, no demo, and no partnerships listed.

Category Breakdown
Blockchain Development

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Innovative use of blockchain technology.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

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

5.0
N/A
5 - Fundamentally 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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Token is essential to platform.
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:
4.0

Whitepaper

There are two whitepapers provided, a business whitepaper and a technical whitepaper.
The whitepapers are not fully comprehensive and provide little insight into the project’s business plan and technical implementation. While very readable, the large text coupled with twitter length snippets is insufficient to fully describe the product and token offering.
In addition, the documentation is not very transparent; the nature of the “ecosystem” is loosely defined with little or no explanation of how developers will contribute or who will be the participating partners.

Category Breakdown
Comprehensiveness

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Insufficient coverage.
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.?

4.0
N/A
4 - Informative disclosure.
Business Plan Presentation

Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?

2.0
N/A
2 - Missing critical information.
Technology Presentation

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

1.0
N/A
1 - Severely lacking.
Whitepaper Score:
2.6

Roadmap

A basic roadmap is given on a quarterly basis. Critical obstacles lie ahead, with actual beta testing for the platform set to begin after the ICO. The roadmap is vague and brief descriptions are provided for the intermediate steps required to complete each milestone. Notably there is NO POC, NO Demo, and NO Partnerships listed to date. The only objective completed are the launch of the website and whitepaper.
Q3 2017 – Concept Creation & Team Formation
Q4 2017 – Whitepaper & Website Designed
Q1 2018 – Whitepaper & Website Released / Release code on Github / Token Sale / KYC
Q2 2018 – ECOM Live on Exchanges / Partnership development / Join Hypledger Foundation
Q3 2018 – TBD / testing phase I
Q4 2018 – TBD / testing phase II
Q1 2019 – TBD / Launch phase II

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?

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?

5.0
N/A
5 - Available, trustworthy, recognized.
Current Position

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

1.0
N/A
1 - Nowhere yet.
Roadmap Score:
2.6

Compliance

The ECOM token will serve as:
* A native method of payment – merchants will make payments in ECOM for use of services (Supply Chain Provenance, Delivery Cycle Transparency Data, Single ID, Single Reputation and Proof-of-Interaction), while customers will make payments to merchants using ECOM, crypto currencies and fiat.
* Incentivization for platform operators – “In return for enforcing Omnitude’s Delegated Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance (DPBFT) consensus algorithm, validating nodes will share in ECOM block rewards.”
* “A means to raise funds for long-term development of Omnitude a. Through the crowdfunding, the Omnitude Foundation is raising funds for the initial issuance of ECOM, and for the development and launch of the Omnitude ecosystem. b. The ECOM coins issued during the crowdfunding will be the initial float to bootstrap the ecosystem.”

The ECOM-token has intrinsic value through its planned usage on the Omnitude platform, allowing users to connect with merchants directly. The token’s main utility is as a tradable financial instrument, as it is used specifically for streamlining and alleviating problems with regard to payment settlement and transparency in Customer Identification and Supply Chain optimization.
The token smart-contract infrastructure will be fully completed after the ICO.
The legal review, securities law review, and terms and conditions of the sale are insufficient and unprofessional. There is only one short statement, aiming to absolve the company of any liability regarding the ICO and any problems that may occur, and providing a general statement 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)?

3.0
N/A
3 - Limited or uncertain use cases.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Partly; compliance not fully assured.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Insufficient or unprofessional.
Compliance Score:
2.4

Company and Team

The Omnitude team is comprised of 8 core team members and 6 advisors.
The team members’ experience appears to be relevant and additive in the eCommerce sector. However, only one member of the team, Benjamin Van Every, seems to possess any relevant blockchain experience (being listed as their Blockchain Architect, however no solidity coding experience or any past blockchain projects are listed in his profile). The team does not have a GitHub repository live but members are visible and active on LinkedIn.
Most members appear to be fully committed to 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?

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?

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:
3.0

Token Sale

Token supply: 100,000,000 ECOM
Token Distribution: 5% – presale, 50% – token sale, 12% – team and advisors (vested with 20% released each year for 5 years), 33% – Omnitude Foundation

Private pre-sale cost: $0.40 USD/ECOM
Pre-sale cap: 10 million ECOM (4 million USD)
Public token sale cost: $0.46 USD/ECOM
Hard cap: 45 million ECOM (20.7 million USD)
Soft Cap: none
Unsold tokens: In the event that the Token Sale funding cap is not reached, all remaining tokens will be burned.

Fund Allocation: 5% – Research and Development, 60% – Omnitude Platform, 10% – Business Development, 20% – Marketing, 5% – Legal (“Most of the funding will be used for developer salaries and bounties for open-source to Omnitude”)

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?

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?

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.
Token Sale Score:
2.4

Use this code to share the ratings on your website