Basic Rating

2.9
  • Zipper

  • Zipper brings the decentralized world to our smartphones in one seamless and user-controlled experience, starting from easy and secure use of one’s cryptographic identity and private keys.
  • 2.9

Rating Insights

Zipper is going to create an entire infrastructural solution for blockchain on mobile devices (android), which will provide digital identity for new users and then this identity will be used within blockchain world (to provide credit scoring to cryptobanks, secure KYC AML and so on). Project has been created by old team with very interesting background in mobile applications development. Same team is behind of project Jolla which created their own OS – Sailfish alongside with development of Nokia’s MeeGo OS, so experience of the team looks promising. For now, Zipper has working prototype for Sony Xperia platform allowing to make transactions and send value through blockchain for Xperia’s owners.


“The Zipper mobile platform makes blockchain-based services easy to use for anyone. In Phase 1, Zipper will be a simple crypto wallet allowing everyday smartphone users to safely and easily manage their cryptocurrencies, private keys and digital identity. In Phase 2, Zipper will enable access to core blockchain-based services such as peer-to-peer financial services, storage, and messaging in an easy and intuitive way – just like Apple’s services on iOS today. However, with Zipper the user retains full control of their identity, transactions and data.”

Category Rating

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

Product

They've got some sort of prototype working only on Sony Xperia's devices. Later on, according to roadmap, product will be adapted to any type of the platforms through using SDK of Zipper.

Readiness

Is the product ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

3.0
N/A
3 - Prototype / MVP / alpha.
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?

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?

1.0
N/A
1 - Many / much better competitors.
Innovation

How innovative or inventive is the product, either conceptually or technologically?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some, but nothing outstanding.
2.2
Use of Blockchain

Use of Blockchain

Blockchain in Zipper is a product itself. Because of its infrastructural nature it will be basis for other crypto related projects and also will be an additional source of information about users of Zipper. Later on, user base of Zipper would be used for marketing proposals and stuff like that. Somehow they're going to create blockchain 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?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or indeterminate.
Need for 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)

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?

1.0
N/A
1 - None really, or unknown.
3.2
Whitepaper

Whitepaper

Whitepaper of the project consists of 34 pages with a lot of text and clarify most of the important issues. They've covered blockchain usage, current state of the product and core functionality. Main problem of their whitepaper is that they didn't mention anything of their advantages to understand why should investors buy their tokens instead of investing into existing and stable projects. Business model described less than technological part of the project.

Comprehensiveness

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Covers most key issues; a few holes.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Missing critical information.
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.
2.8
Roadmap

Roadmap

RoadMap of the project has three important milestones: (1) Q1 2018 Zipper platform for Xperia community (2) Q3 2018 Implementation of 7 different functions like (KYC and API releases) (3) Q4 2018 Availability for various Android devices. Looks promising but a little bit ambitious. Only one year to create such complex solution? Maybe because they've got prototype now, they are so optimistic.

Concreteness

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

3.0
N/A
3 - An overall plan, major milestones stated.
Feasiblity

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?

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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Available and trusted.
Current Position

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Getting there.
3.2
Compliance

Compliance

ZIP token is entirely utility token. Whitepaper has a formula to calculate value of their tokens using parameters as demand, supply and re-spend. Will be used for reward system, additionally lending will be performed only with ZIP tokens and another basic function is to be an incentive for developers, getting rewards in ZIP token after implementing their solution in any new field. ""ZIP is the utility token which powers the Zipper platform. Users earn ZIP tokens as a reward for actively using apps and dapps. Users can then spend ZIP tokens in a variety of ways, for example ZIP can be used for in-app purchases, peer-to-peer lending or selling them for other cryptocurrencies. Users can also stake ZIP tokens in the Zipper app store to curate content and make the best apps stand out."

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?

5.0
N/A
5 - Only through utility value, or airtight compliance.
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?

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?

1.0
N/A
1 - None available.
3.6
Company and Team

Company and Team

Team is very great, according to their website but it's not looking big enough to cover all aspects of their declared model in such short period of time. Maybe they've got other employees behind the scene, but no info provided. All mentioned members has strong background in app development and management. LinkedIn profiles are valid and provided for each of the team members.

Company Stage and Foundation

Is the company already established? Has it raised funds before? Is it mature?

5.0
N/A
5 - Well established, has raised significant funds.
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?

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.
2.6
Token Sale

Token Sale

ICO details will be announced later, for now they've got only Pre-ICO results and details. (1) HardCap: 3 000 000 USD (reached) (2) SoftCap: 500 000 USD (3) Price: 33.33 ZIP for 1 USD (4) Started: 30th November; Ended: 3rd January (2018) (5) All sold tokens locked up to the official launch for Xperia Platform (March 18).

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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Only loosely related to plans.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

1.0
N/A
1 - Not clear how funds will be used.
Token Allocation

Is the ratio of tokens sold to those kept reasonable? Does it prevent the company from having too much control?

4.0
N/A
4 - Most tokens sold, vesting periods on kept tokens.
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.

Product

They've got some sort of prototype working only on Sony Xperia's devices. Later on, according to roadmap, product will be adapted to any type of the platforms through using SDK of Zipper.

Readiness

Is the product ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

3.0
N/A
3 - Prototype / MVP / alpha.
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?

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?

1.0
N/A
1 - Many / much better competitors.
Innovation

How innovative or inventive is the product, either conceptually or technologically?

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

Use of Blockchain

Blockchain in Zipper is a product itself. Because of its infrastructural nature it will be basis for other crypto related projects and also will be an additional source of information about users of Zipper. Later on, user base of Zipper would be used for marketing proposals and stuff like that. Somehow they're going to create blockchain 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?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or indeterminate.
Need for 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)

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?

1.0
N/A
1 - None really, or unknown.

Whitepaper

Whitepaper of the project consists of 34 pages with a lot of text and clarify most of the important issues. They've covered blockchain usage, current state of the product and core functionality. Main problem of their whitepaper is that they didn't mention anything of their advantages to understand why should investors buy their tokens instead of investing into existing and stable projects. Business model described less than technological part of the project.

Comprehensiveness

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Covers most key issues; a few holes.
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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Missing critical information.
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.

Roadmap

RoadMap of the project has three important milestones: (1) Q1 2018 Zipper platform for Xperia community (2) Q3 2018 Implementation of 7 different functions like (KYC and API releases) (3) Q4 2018 Availability for various Android devices. Looks promising but a little bit ambitious. Only one year to create such complex solution? Maybe because they've got prototype now, they are so optimistic.

Concreteness

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

3.0
N/A
3 - An overall plan, major milestones stated.
Feasiblity

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?

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?

4.0
N/A
4 - Available and trusted.
Current Position

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

3.0
N/A
3 - Getting there.

Compliance

ZIP token is entirely utility token. Whitepaper has a formula to calculate value of their tokens using parameters as demand, supply and re-spend. Will be used for reward system, additionally lending will be performed only with ZIP tokens and another basic function is to be an incentive for developers, getting rewards in ZIP token after implementing their solution in any new field. ""ZIP is the utility token which powers the Zipper platform. Users earn ZIP tokens as a reward for actively using apps and dapps. Users can then spend ZIP tokens in a variety of ways, for example ZIP can be used for in-app purchases, peer-to-peer lending or selling them for other cryptocurrencies. Users can also stake ZIP tokens in the Zipper app store to curate content and make the best apps stand out."

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?

5.0
N/A
5 - Only through utility value, or airtight compliance.
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?

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?

1.0
N/A
1 - None available.

Company and Team

Team is very great, according to their website but it's not looking big enough to cover all aspects of their declared model in such short period of time. Maybe they've got other employees behind the scene, but no info provided. All mentioned members has strong background in app development and management. LinkedIn profiles are valid and provided for each of the team members.

Company Stage and Foundation

Is the company already established? Has it raised funds before? Is it mature?

5.0
N/A
5 - Well established, has raised significant funds.
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?

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.

Token Sale

ICO details will be announced later, for now they've got only Pre-ICO results and details. (1) HardCap: 3 000 000 USD (reached) (2) SoftCap: 500 000 USD (3) Price: 33.33 ZIP for 1 USD (4) Started: 30th November; Ended: 3rd January (2018) (5) All sold tokens locked up to the official launch for Xperia Platform (March 18).

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?

2.0
N/A
2 - Only loosely related to plans.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

1.0
N/A
1 - Not clear how funds will be used.
Token Allocation

Is the ratio of tokens sold to those kept reasonable? Does it prevent the company from having too much control?

4.0
N/A
4 - Most tokens sold, vesting periods on kept tokens.
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.

Most Read Reviews