• WaBi

    3.09
  • Wabi is a digital token backed by safe products.

About WaBi

WaBi is a blockchain based loyalty token issued by Walimai, a company that provides a products traceability mechanism to consumers. Walimai started back in 2014 but only started commercializing its functioning application by 2016 in China.

Walimai’s solution consists of an RFID (Radio-frequency identification) label that sticks to the product and can be scanned by consumers with a phone app to check a product’s authenticity.  The label contains information on the whole life cycle of the product such as authenticity, background, storage location and more. The labels used by Walimai (1) have a unique code for every single product (2) contain dynamic data frequently changed and synced with Walimai’s servers to avoid cloning (3) are made of very fragile antennas to make moving the same label between several products impossible.  

The purpose of Walimai’s ICO and conversion to blockchain in general is unclear as there is no proven technical need to involve blockchain technology. The team claims adopting blockchain and a token based system to par a meta-fragility problem, referring to users losing trust in Walimai’s process of securing all interactions an RFID can have along its supply chain.

The WaBi token’s purpose is to incentivize consumers to scan products. A dynamic that the Walimai team claims is crucial to its counterfeit detection system, even though there are several issues arising from this subject, one being what Walimai refers to as the ‘voting paradox’. The ‘voting paradox’ claims that with a sufficient level of trust in the Walimai brand, consumers might not feel the need to scan the product at all, thus not updating the system. Thus, Walimai has to incentivize users to scan and authenticate their products which creates a very delicate balance.  The tokens can be used by the users to get discounts on products tagged with Walimai’s RFID or to buy Walimai protected products.

To kickstart the system, buyers of products protected by Walimai technology will receive some initial tokens when they start buying.The tokens can be used by the consumers to buy more Walimai protected products or to claim discounts and bonuses. Throughout the whitepaper and the company’s documents, there is a slight forced use of blockchain related keywords without necessarily matching their context, such as “proof of purchase” in which they simply refer to a customer that bought a product and “mining” by which they mean the action of scanning a product. It might be a way to attract  potential investors that might not have an extensive understanding of the proper terminology.  The necessity to shift their technology to Blockchain and run an ICO with such a big raise amount is not built on any solid argument. The White Paper hints from time to time to some blockchain technology advantages but doesn’t connect them with  actual consumers need. Another thing is Walimai’s explanation of how certain goods are identified as ‘fake goods’ is sub par, at best.

By August 2017, the Walimai team closed its presale cycle in which it hit the max Walimai requested and raised 300.000 USD. The team is using said amount to power up the ICO. The tokens sold in the presale are still undergoing a lock period, which should last roughly 3 to 6 months. One might be concerned, however, about the lack of a soft cap. In general, not determining a small cap either points towards greed or the company didn’t feel the need to specify a minimum amount for the project to kick off.  Another point regarding the token sale is that the hard cap, currently set at $11.5M, seems to be way too high and no where do Walimai explain the reasoning for requesting such a hefty amount in regards to their plans.

Overall, Walimai are a peculiar breed. They have a proper product that’s useful and is already applied on the market.  They claim to have signed contracts with 3 physical baby stores to set up a dedicated ‘Walimai shelf’ at their locations. Their team is composed out of competent figures, it seems, and their PreICO reached its raise amount defined meaning there is some support towards their goals. However, it is very unclear as to why they need a blockchain or a token to keep doing what they do. Sure, a blockchain provides many advantages, but in light of dozens of ICOs raising immense amounts of money for no apparent reason these past few months, one might question Walimai’s real motives.

 

 

Team

The information below each team member is taken from the company's website.
Alexander Busarov
Cofounder & CEO

Former McKinsey & Co. consultant, Sales Director at a leading infant formula producer. Guided project development for Russia and China-based companies as an independent advisor. Graduate of the London School of Economics. Conversational in Mandarin Chinese.

LinkedIn

Yaroslav Belinskiy
Cofounder

Former consultant with Bain & Co., Business Development Manager at LP Amina. Extensive experience in consumer goods. Graduate of Oxford University and the London School of Economics. Fluent in Mandarin Chinese.

LinkedIn

Kitty Xu
Marketing Director

Marketed semiconductor technologies for NXP, ARM and RS Components in Asia-Pacific and global, Business Consultant for Johnson & Johnson. Graduate of the Manchester Business School (MBA).

LinkedIn

Duomo Pan
Project Manager

Food Engineer. Former Sales Representative at TransGO, corporal in the Coast Guard and Google Local Guide. Graduate of the National Taiwan Ocean University and TAITRA.

LinkedIn

Arthur Pinchuk
IT Lead

IT solution architect with over 15 years of IT expertise. Blockchain and crypto economics specialist. Former founder and CTO at Mind Development.
Graduate of the Belarus State University.

LinkedIn

Roman Tronenko
Mobile Lead / Blockchain Architect

Polyglot programmer, developed solutions for Alibaba, chinesepod.comitalki.com, and openlanguage.com. Blockchain pioneer, founder of open source blockchain-powered project gogo.tattoo connecting the tattoo community. Holds Masters in Computer Science from Harbin Engineering University and Saint Petersburg State Marine Technical University. Fluent in Chinese and Esperanto

LinkedIn

Walt de Hoogd
Community Manager/Copywriter

Former Head of Content Marketing for technology startup the Squirrelz. Experienced in SEO copywriting and social media management. Founder of a vinyl record label and e-commerce shop.

LinkedIn

Danjie Hu
Project Manager

Chemical engineer. Former Marketing Executive at two technology startups, Portus and Aerifai. Completed an overseas program in Entrepreneurial Innovation at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore. Graduate of China University of Geosciences

LinkedIn

Dmitry Korzhik
Blockchain Lead

Smart contract architect, blockchain evangelist. 6 years in IT industry.

Co-founder Outstaffing-me
Chief business development Mind-dev
Holds Masters degree in Computer science from Belarus State University

LinkedIn

Crowdsale Details

Token Sale Dates

Start Date: November 28th, 2017

End Date: December 28th, 2017

Min/Max Cap

Soft cap: Undisclosed.

Hard cap: $11,500,000

Total Supply

100,000,000 WaBi:

  • 10.000.000 tokens will be sold at the preICO.
  • 8.000.000 will distributed among the founders, team members and bounties.
  • 1.000.000 will be distributed through the bounty program.
  • 46.000.000 will be distributed during the ICO
  • 35.000.000 will be delivered to consumers through the mining process.
Pricing Structure

1 WaBi = 0.25 USD

Citizens of the People’s republic of China are not permitted to participate in the ICO as the regulation doesn’t allow it. concerning US citizens, only accredited investors will be allowed to participate in the crowd sale.

Project Highlights

Technical White Paper

The white paper covers details about the platform and its mechanics but lacks a highlight on the relevance of blockchain in the Whole ecosystem. The tokenization of the ecosystem can be done without involving any blockchain technology.

 

Location

Singapore.

Ratings

Product

View Breakdown
Readiness

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

4
N/A
4 - Beta or initial rollout.
Appeal

Does this solution have a distinct edge?

3
N/A
3 - Interesting.
Target User Base

Is it mass market or niche?

4
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?

4
N/A
4 - Few competitors / a leading solution.
Innovation and IP

Is there (patentable) innovation and intellectual property?

4
N/A
4 - Original, specialized.
Use of Blockchain

View Breakdown
Blockchain Development

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

2
N/A
2 - Some smart contract functionality.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

Is it safeguarded against misuse and corruption?

3
N/A
3 - Potentially disruptive.
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?

2
N/A
2 - Some, mainly network effect.
System Decentralization (besides token)

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

3
N/A
3 - Hybrid; decentralized as far as circumstances allow.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

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

3
N/A
3 - Interesting.
Whitepaper

View Breakdown
Comprehensiveness

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

1
N/A
1 - It's a brochure.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

2
N/A
2 - Difficult, tech / marketing babble.
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
N/A
2 - Ambiguous non-disclosure.
Business Plan Presentation

Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?

3
N/A
3 - More information required.
Technology Presentation

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

3
N/A
3 - More information required.
Roadmap

View Breakdown
Concreteness

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

4
N/A
4 - Down to earth.
Feasiblity

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

3
N/A
3 - Optimistic.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

4
N/A
4 - Long term.
Dependencies (other services or capabilities required)

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

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

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

4
N/A
4 - Past a few hurdles.
Compliance

View Breakdown
Token Utility (intrinsic value through usage)

Is there a concrete business plan (vs. market descriptions, general sentiments, and fluff)?

3
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?

4
N/A
4 - Not as such, or compliance is assured.
Token / Smart-Contract Infrastructure Readiness

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

2
N/A
2 - Proof of concept or test platform.
Attention to Compliance Issues

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

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

Is it safe from legal, moral or investor abuse?

3
N/A
3 - Semi-professional (e.g. Howey Test)
Company and Team

View Breakdown
Company Stage and Foundation

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

5
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
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?

4
N/A
4 - Fully assembled and committed.
Team Skill Set Relevance

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

3
N/A
3 - Correlated to project requirements.
Team Skill Set Balance (biz / tech / blockchain)

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

3
N/A
3 - Somewhat uncertain, probably okay.
Token Sale

View Breakdown
Raise Amount Max

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

2
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
N/A
1 - None or nonsensical.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

1
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
N/A
4 - Most tokens sold, vesting periods on kept tokens.
Media Presence and Following

Is the ICO well planned in terms of time, phases and scenarios?

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

Most Read Reviews