VLB

VLB will bring safety and power back to the people in the most innovative global consumer-oriented industry.

About VLB

VLB (Vehicle Lifecycle Blockchain) aims to incorporate blockchain technology into the used vehicle industry. Holders of VLB tokens will be able to use them to access used vehicle information stored on the blockchain, as well as to pay for car services via the platform.

Token Sale Use of Blockchain

Product

2.2
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?

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?

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

Product

VLB’s target user base is quite vast, but the project faces a few competitors in the same space (for example, VinChain). The appeal of the platform is discussed in the whitepaper and it is stated that systems in place today “lead to overestimated prices for services and unnecessary costs, estimated at about $100 billion a year”. The GitHub page shows very low levels of activity and content.

Product Whitepaper

Use of Blockchain

2.8
Use of Blockchain
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

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Generally 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

VLB is an ERC20 compliant token which grants access to the data stored on the ledger and is used as a means of exchange. Transactions are recorded on the blockchain using VLB tokens, which can be used in exchange for car services such as repairs. However, VLB does not do a sufficiently good job at presenting why a custom token is required, as opposed to simply using ETH for the same purposes. As such, the need to create a custom token is uncertain.

Use of Blockchain Roadmap

Whitepaper

3.6
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?

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.?

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 38 pages long. The technology plan is presented in moderately high detail and contains specifics regarding how the platform is planned to interact with the blockchain in order to accomplish the project’s goals. The business plan is satisfactory, with discussions regarding current problems in the automotive industry and thorough market research. Overall, the whitepaper has a good balance between comprehensiveness and readibility.

Whitepaper Compliance

Roadmap

2.2
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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Optimistic.
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?

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

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Critical obstacles ahead.

Roadmap

The roadmap presented in the whitepaper spans from Q2 2018 to Q4 2019 and contains very low levels of detail. Milestones presented do not contain descriptions as to what each milestone entails. Milestones reached thus far are not included. VLB’s blockchain implementation is planned to be ready by Q4 of 2018. Overall, the development roadmap is quite vague and seemingly noncommittal.

Roadmap Company and Team

Compliance

2.2
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Proof of concept or test platform.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal, superficial or hackneyed.
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 that is one page in length. It is explicitly stated that VLB tokens should not be considered securities. The language of this section of the document is fairly professional and the level of detail is moderately high. US residents will only be able to purchase VLB tokens if they are accredited investors. Residents from China, Korea, Indonesia, and Singapore are not permitted to participate in the 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 9 team members are listed in the whitepaper, along with their profile pictures and short background descriptions. Social media profiles are not provided, but a manual search on LinkedIn (of a small sample size) shows that the team members’ stated proficiencies are verifiable and align with their professional work experience. The skill set of the team is fairly balanced between technology and business development, and the team also has members with professional experience in the automotive industry as well as blockchain development (director at IBM Blockchain Labs).

Company and Team Product

Token Sale

3.2
Token Sale
Raise Amount Max

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Justifiable.
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?

5.0
N/A
5 - Carefully planned and fully transparent.
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 VLB tokens is 175 million (66% is for the pre-sale, 17% is for the public sale, 11% is for the team and project development and 6% is for bounties and advisors). The allocation of funds is described in high detail. The soft cap is $4MM USD and the hard cap is $12MM USD, where 1 ETH = 650 VLB. The public token sale takes place on March 12, 2018.

Product

VLB’s target user base is quite vast, but the project faces a few competitors in the same space (for example, VinChain). The appeal of the platform is discussed in the whitepaper and it is stated that systems in place today “lead to overestimated prices for services and unnecessary costs, estimated at about $100 billion a year”. The GitHub page shows very low levels of activity and content.

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?

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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some, but nothing outstanding.
Product Score:
2.2

Use of Blockchain

VLB is an ERC20 compliant token which grants access to the data stored on the ledger and is used as a means of exchange. Transactions are recorded on the blockchain using VLB tokens, which can be used in exchange for car services such as repairs. However, VLB does not do a sufficiently good job at presenting why a custom token is required, as opposed to simply using ETH for the same purposes. As such, the need to create a custom token is uncertain.

Category Breakdown
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

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

4.0
N/A
4 - Generally 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:
2.8

Whitepaper

The whitepaper is 38 pages long. The technology plan is presented in moderately high detail and contains specifics regarding how the platform is planned to interact with the blockchain in order to accomplish the project’s goals. The business plan is satisfactory, with discussions regarding current problems in the automotive industry and thorough market research. Overall, the whitepaper has a good balance between comprehensiveness and readibility.

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?

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.?

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:
3.6

Roadmap

The roadmap presented in the whitepaper spans from Q2 2018 to Q4 2019 and contains very low levels of detail. Milestones presented do not contain descriptions as to what each milestone entails. Milestones reached thus far are not included. VLB’s blockchain implementation is planned to be ready by Q4 of 2018. Overall, the development roadmap is quite vague and seemingly noncommittal.

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?

3.0
N/A
3 - Optimistic.
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?

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

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

2.0
N/A
2 - Critical obstacles ahead.
Roadmap Score:
2.2

Compliance

The whitepaper contains a disclaimer section that is one page in length. It is explicitly stated that VLB tokens should not be considered securities. The language of this section of the document is fairly professional and the level of detail is moderately high. US residents will only be able to purchase VLB tokens if they are accredited investors. Residents from China, Korea, Indonesia, and Singapore are not permitted to participate in the 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)?

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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Proof of concept or test platform.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal, superficial or hackneyed.
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:
2.2

Company and Team

The 9 team members are listed in the whitepaper, along with their profile pictures and short background descriptions. Social media profiles are not provided, but a manual search on LinkedIn (of a small sample size) shows that the team members’ stated proficiencies are verifiable and align with their professional work experience. The skill set of the team is fairly balanced between technology and business development, and the team also has members with professional experience in the automotive industry as well as blockchain development (director at IBM Blockchain Labs).

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 VLB tokens is 175 million (66% is for the pre-sale, 17% is for the public sale, 11% is for the team and project development and 6% is for bounties and advisors). The allocation of funds is described in high detail. The soft cap is $4MM USD and the hard cap is $12MM USD, where 1 ETH = 650 VLB. The public token sale takes place on March 12, 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)?

3.0
N/A
3 - Justifiable.
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?

5.0
N/A
5 - Carefully planned and fully transparent.
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:
3.2

Use this code to share the ratings on your website