Basic Rating

2.9
  • Sapien

  • Sapien is a highly customizable, democratized social news platform capable of rewarding millions of content creators and curators without any centralized intermediaries.
  • 2.9

Rating Insights

Social network based on the blockchain. Currently has a live beta version, so potential users are able to test it and decide what to use. It’s great for them because actually, it will be difficult to compete with such companies like Steem or Social. One is already well established, another successfully passed an ICO and reached hard cap. The main idea is to provide users with rewards for content’s curation and creation at the same time, other declared features are similar to any social network (e.g. subscriptions, friends and so on).

Category Rating

Click any score to view its breakdown and category insights
2.8
Product

Product

The current state of the product is live beta version. Users are able to test platform and use it on daily basis. Sapien.network is a web-address where people can test their product.

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

Does this solution have a distinct edge?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
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?

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

Is there (patentable) innovation and intellectual property?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or indeterminate.
2.8
Use of Blockchain

Use of Blockchain

Blockchain in the project is implemented in the traditional way for social networks. It will provide trusted and verified data (it can be content or number of upvotes/downvotes) and will be used as a basis of the reward system. In white paper, they've got other types. They've got a lot of information about usage of blockchain in their whitepaper, but mostly it's about rewards and valid data.

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

Is it safeguarded against misuse and corruption?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some, but not much.
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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Issuing a custom token is justifiable.
System Decentralization (besides token)

Does the token provide holders with value other than as an investment?

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

Does the solution contribute to the evolution of blockchain infrastructure and economy?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
3.8
Whitepaper

Whitepaper

Whitepaper looks like a lot of time has been spent on its preparation. It consists of 52 pages and covers everything connected with development and deployment of the blockchain based social network. Looks justified, because in the market we already have well-established solutions and no visible demand for new social network.

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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Readable, takes some time.
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?

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

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Clear, well thought out, realistic.
3.0
Roadmap

Roadmap

The project has been launched in alpha mode in 2016 and currently is open beta version. RoadMap itself looks concrete and stages are described clearly enough. Final milestone is 10 million people by 2020. By the end of 2018, they're planning to acquire 10k users per month. Looks realistic if they'll do a good marketing campaign.

Concreteness

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Down to earth.
Feasibility

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Optimistic.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

2.0
N/A
2 - Riding the current wave.
Dependencies (other services or capabilities required)

Does it seem as though a lot of know-how and experience went into the development plan?

3.0
N/A
3 - Imperfect but available, or using substitutes.
Current Position

Is the project currently sufficiently far along in its development plan (relative to its vision and plans)?

3.0
N/A
3 - Getting there.
3.4
Compliance

Compliance

According to Howey test, SPN tokens are classified as "Unlikely a security". The whitepaper has use cases written and most of them are rewards for content creators and those who are curating someone's content. Company based in California and going to operate under US laws, so compliance issues are important to them and they developed own strategy how to be compliant with US laws.

Token Utility (intrinsic 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 financial instrument)

Is the business model realistic? Is it based on reasonable goals and timelines?

5.0
N/A
5 - Only through utility value, or airtight compliance.
Token / Smart-Contract Infrastructure Readiness

Are the solution's revenue streams, profit mechanisms, key KPIs, etc. clear and easy enough to understand?

4.0
N/A
4 - Beta or initial rollout.
Attention to Compliance Issues

Is the project raising an amount of money that makes sense given what it needs to reach profitability?

4.0
N/A
4 - Specific, detailed.
Legal Review or Agreement

Is it safe from legal, moral or investor abuse?

1.0
N/A
1 - None available.
2.2
Company and Team

Company and Team

Team section looks poor. Only 6 team members mentioned on the website, in white paper 2 more members are shown. Still, 8 people are not enough to maintain the social network with 10k new users per month.

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?

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

What is the level of presence, added value, and commitment of the advisory board?

2.0
N/A
2 - Lacking or inconsistent.
Team Skill Set Balance (biz / tech / blockchain)

Are there enough sufficiently experienced blockchain architects and developers on the team?

2.0
N/A
2 - Somewhat skewed.
2.6
Token Sale

Token Sale

Price per token will be announced right before an ICO. Hard Cap: 30 000 000 USD Soft Cap: No Pre-Sale dates 31st Jan -15th Feb (Pre-Sale) Main Crowdsale: 3rd March - 3rd April

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 reasonably enough to carry out the majority of 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?

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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Solid exposure and interest, good impression.

Product

The current state of the product is live beta version. Users are able to test platform and use it on daily basis. Sapien.network is a web-address where people can test their product.

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

Does this solution have a distinct edge?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
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?

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

Is there (patentable) innovation and intellectual property?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or indeterminate.

Use of Blockchain

Blockchain in the project is implemented in the traditional way for social networks. It will provide trusted and verified data (it can be content or number of upvotes/downvotes) and will be used as a basis of the reward system. In white paper, they've got other types. They've got a lot of information about usage of blockchain in their whitepaper, but mostly it's about rewards and valid data.

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

Is it safeguarded against misuse and corruption?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some, but not much.
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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Issuing a custom token is justifiable.
System Decentralization (besides token)

Does the token provide holders with value other than as an investment?

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

Does the solution contribute to the evolution of blockchain infrastructure and economy?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.

Whitepaper

Whitepaper looks like a lot of time has been spent on its preparation. It consists of 52 pages and covers everything connected with development and deployment of the blockchain based social network. Looks justified, because in the market we already have well-established solutions and no visible demand for new social network.

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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Readable, takes some time.
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?

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

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

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

Roadmap

The project has been launched in alpha mode in 2016 and currently is open beta version. RoadMap itself looks concrete and stages are described clearly enough. Final milestone is 10 million people by 2020. By the end of 2018, they're planning to acquire 10k users per month. Looks realistic if they'll do a good marketing campaign.

Concreteness

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Down to earth.
Feasibility

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Optimistic.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

2.0
N/A
2 - Riding the current wave.
Dependencies (other services or capabilities required)

Does it seem as though a lot of know-how and experience went into the development plan?

3.0
N/A
3 - Imperfect but available, or using substitutes.
Current Position

Is the project currently sufficiently far along in its development plan (relative to its vision and plans)?

3.0
N/A
3 - Getting there.

Compliance

According to Howey test, SPN tokens are classified as "Unlikely a security". The whitepaper has use cases written and most of them are rewards for content creators and those who are curating someone's content. Company based in California and going to operate under US laws, so compliance issues are important to them and they developed own strategy how to be compliant with US laws.

Token Utility (intrinsic 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 financial instrument)

Is the business model realistic? Is it based on reasonable goals and timelines?

5.0
N/A
5 - Only through utility value, or airtight compliance.
Token / Smart-Contract Infrastructure Readiness

Are the solution's revenue streams, profit mechanisms, key KPIs, etc. clear and easy enough to understand?

4.0
N/A
4 - Beta or initial rollout.
Attention to Compliance Issues

Is the project raising an amount of money that makes sense given what it needs to reach profitability?

4.0
N/A
4 - Specific, detailed.
Legal Review or Agreement

Is it safe from legal, moral or investor abuse?

1.0
N/A
1 - None available.

Company and Team

Team section looks poor. Only 6 team members mentioned on the website, in white paper 2 more members are shown. Still, 8 people are not enough to maintain the social network with 10k new users per month.

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?

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

What is the level of presence, added value, and commitment of the advisory board?

2.0
N/A
2 - Lacking or inconsistent.
Team Skill Set Balance (biz / tech / blockchain)

Are there enough sufficiently experienced blockchain architects and developers on the team?

2.0
N/A
2 - Somewhat skewed.

Token Sale

Price per token will be announced right before an ICO. Hard Cap: 30 000 000 USD Soft Cap: No Pre-Sale dates 31st Jan -15th Feb (Pre-Sale) Main Crowdsale: 3rd March - 3rd April

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 reasonably enough to carry out the majority of 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?

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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Solid exposure and interest, good impression.

Most Read Reviews