Basic Rating

  • Refereum

  • Watch, play & share games to earn points and tokens.
  • 2.7

Rating Insights

Refereum aims to give gamers the ability to earn RFR tokens while game developers reduce marketing costs. As the name implies, the Refereum platform operates based on a referral-based marketing strategy in order to promote products within the gaming industry. Refereum suggests that by reaching out to influencers in the gaming community, referral-based marketing campaigns will allow for advertisements to be easily targeted to a selected demographic and have an inherent sense of trust compared to other marketing techniques that require extensive research, time, and cost to implement. Gamers will be able to earn tokens by writing reviews, watching videos, and even by playing games. RFR tokens will be used to purchase games and game related content on the Refereum platform.

Category Rating

Click any score to view its breakdown and category insights
2.6
Product

Product

The Refereum service launched in July 2017 has a completed roadmap. It is currently operational and as the platform matures, more developers will implement their games onto the platform. Currently, users are able the purchase four games with RFR tokens. Earning RFR tokens can be accomplished though watching or hosting designated streams and by connecting Refereum to other services such as Twitch, Discord, and Telegram. Also RFR tokens can also be obtained by, of course, sharing a referral link through any of the platforms mentioned above.

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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
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?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or indeterminate.
1.4
Use of Blockchain

Use of Blockchain

The gaming market is a rapidly growing sector with opportunities to have many innovative technologies developed for the space. However, when comparing Refereum with other ICOs that set out to disrupt entire industries, Refereum falls short in this regard. The platform itself is highly focused on referral-based marketing and Blockchain technology is simply a means to an end without a significant purpose that would justify its own token, other than as an investment vehicle for the Refereum platform.

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?

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.
2.2
Whitepaper

Whitepaper

The whitepaper lacks technological detail. Approximately a page and a half is dedicated to discussing the technological foundation of the platform, most of which is a general layman explanation of the benefits of Blockchain technology and details regarding ERC20 tokens, which are not unique to RFR. The focus is towards the benefits of the Refereum of the platform with respect to gamers, influencers, and developers.

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.?

2.0
N/A
2 - Ambiguous non-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.
2.4
Roadmap

Roadmap

Major milestones that Refereum have set out have been completed. It is now simply a matter of developing the Refereum brand so that more users and creators use the platform. Since the platform is not significantly technologically ground-breaking, Refereum has been able to produce a working product and are at the stage of development where the focus is adoption of the platform. Only time will tell if users will respond well to referral-based marketing campaigns, especially considering that many ICOs are implementing this growth strategy and the large influx of referral links that users will see may cause a sense of annoyance and possibly distrust.

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?

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.
3.8
Compliance

Compliance

The RFR token is primarily an investment vehicle and utility device for the Refereum platform. There is not a significant purpose for creating a unique token for its use case. The value of the token is highly leveraged with the Refereum marketplace, thus the project does not aim for decentralization.

Token Utility (value through usage)

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Distinctive use cases.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Not as such, or compliance is 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?

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.
3.6
Company and Team

Company and Team

Company size: 5-15 employees. The whitepaper lists the founder and employees of various sectors of the project including communications, front-end and back-end developers, growth, software engineering, and operations. As this project is not demanding from a technological development sense, the small team is justified for Refereum. Advisers are also included and have affiliations with major companies such as Google, and Facebook. Updated LinkedIn profiles are not available through the whitepaper but can be found by manual search (from a small sampling) and backgrounds of individuals are outlined and relevant to the project. Backgrounds of lead team members are closely aligned with the project.

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?

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.
3.2
Token Sale

Token Sale

Total RFR token supply is 5 million (pre-mined). 50% of the total supply will be available during the token sale and the other 50% will be allocated to platform development (25%), game developer incentives (10%), the team (10%), and influencer incentives (5%). The hard cap is $25MM USD (~$0.01 USD per token). The token sale will take place February 8th 2018.

Raise Amount Max

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Well suited to needs and 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?

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

Product

The Refereum service launched in July 2017 has a completed roadmap. It is currently operational and as the platform matures, more developers will implement their games onto the platform. Currently, users are able the purchase four games with RFR tokens. Earning RFR tokens can be accomplished though watching or hosting designated streams and by connecting Refereum to other services such as Twitch, Discord, and Telegram. Also RFR tokens can also be obtained by, of course, sharing a referral link through any of the platforms mentioned above.

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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
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?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or indeterminate.

Use of Blockchain

The gaming market is a rapidly growing sector with opportunities to have many innovative technologies developed for the space. However, when comparing Refereum with other ICOs that set out to disrupt entire industries, Refereum falls short in this regard. The platform itself is highly focused on referral-based marketing and Blockchain technology is simply a means to an end without a significant purpose that would justify its own token, other than as an investment vehicle for the Refereum platform.

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?

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.

Whitepaper

The whitepaper lacks technological detail. Approximately a page and a half is dedicated to discussing the technological foundation of the platform, most of which is a general layman explanation of the benefits of Blockchain technology and details regarding ERC20 tokens, which are not unique to RFR. The focus is towards the benefits of the Refereum of the platform with respect to gamers, influencers, and developers.

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.?

2.0
N/A
2 - Ambiguous non-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.

Roadmap

Major milestones that Refereum have set out have been completed. It is now simply a matter of developing the Refereum brand so that more users and creators use the platform. Since the platform is not significantly technologically ground-breaking, Refereum has been able to produce a working product and are at the stage of development where the focus is adoption of the platform. Only time will tell if users will respond well to referral-based marketing campaigns, especially considering that many ICOs are implementing this growth strategy and the large influx of referral links that users will see may cause a sense of annoyance and possibly distrust.

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?

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.

Compliance

The RFR token is primarily an investment vehicle and utility device for the Refereum platform. There is not a significant purpose for creating a unique token for its use case. The value of the token is highly leveraged with the Refereum marketplace, thus the project does not aim for decentralization.

Token Utility (value through usage)

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Distinctive use cases.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Not as such, or compliance is 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?

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.

Company and Team

Company size: 5-15 employees. The whitepaper lists the founder and employees of various sectors of the project including communications, front-end and back-end developers, growth, software engineering, and operations. As this project is not demanding from a technological development sense, the small team is justified for Refereum. Advisers are also included and have affiliations with major companies such as Google, and Facebook. Updated LinkedIn profiles are not available through the whitepaper but can be found by manual search (from a small sampling) and backgrounds of individuals are outlined and relevant to the project. Backgrounds of lead team members are closely aligned with the project.

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?

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.

Token Sale

Total RFR token supply is 5 million (pre-mined). 50% of the total supply will be available during the token sale and the other 50% will be allocated to platform development (25%), game developer incentives (10%), the team (10%), and influencer incentives (5%). The hard cap is $25MM USD (~$0.01 USD per token). The token sale will take place February 8th 2018.

Raise Amount Max

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Well suited to needs and 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?

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

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Most Read Reviews