I don't who know did the analysis here but it differs slightly with ICO bench a week ago. One of the experts listed these points:
- Does not clearly define the problem they're solving. Is it that people don't have time? Is it online 3D retail made available? What's the point of having 3D residence and converse with people there if I can use SKYPE?
- Explanatory video hardly explains anything.
- 3D retail not gonna work for all industries. Especially upper class clothing and luxury brands: people have an experience shopping, try things out before buying, sometimes it is a status thing. 3VR at current stage of development and accesibility is not going to change that yet.
- Team has no advisors.
- Team member links to FB pages and/or wikipedia for the ICE hockey guy. Should it be an inspiration of confidence? How does ICE hockey skills relate to VR and this project?
My question is, has any of this changed for MarkSpace to score a 4.1 now? I am not trying to be the bogeyman but since we are all invested in this exciting project, we ought to know.
I think the comparison with SKYPE is quite weak ... beside the fact that SKYPE is not 3D/VR you could have argued in the same way that who would have needed SKYPE at skypes beginning. Especially as there were not even so many fast internet connections.
I think there will always be people who would prefere a new technology especially if it brings a different view to the things, in this case a VR view.
About the advisors: I am sometimes be happy if a project don't have 12-100 advisors. Beside of the fact that these guys get a good share of the money (project tokens/coins) a lot of them have different views and then the fun beginns and you see postponed ICOs, changing rules and project focusses every 2 weeks etc. pp.
How is it called: Too many cooks spoil the broth.
- 
