Project team
Reputation. We verify the reputation of all project team members and founders using various public
sources: social networks, forums, professional communities, as well as dedicated tools such as Spark, etc.
-> with this you will fish for former dollar billionaires, banksters and burocratic paper tigers
Grade 5 signifies that the team’s reputation is spotless, while a grade of 1 points to a large number of dummy companies or a history of legal action and justified complaints against the team.
Experience. We perform a detailed check of each team member’s experience, focusing on its relevance (that is, experience in the same area).
-> if you go for experience, why dont you go for the 120 old people sitting in the central banks? vitalik didnt had any experience before he developed ethereum he was 19 years, old your criteria is already up here useles garbage.
Grade 5 signifies that all team members have at least 3 years of experience in the target area. Grade 1 is assigned when a team is less than 6 months old and less than 20% of its members have relevant experience.
Process transparency. We analyze both external activities
(marketing & PR, interactions with partners and contractors, tech support
reaction speed, etc.) and internal processes (we access internal management
tools to monitor current activities).
well 3 years of experience in a "target area" look at elon musk, he works in new areas without any experience, like he recently started with tesla or space x, same with buterin
target areas are also horrible to define as they are shadowy and overlap each other.
Grade 5 is assigned when all processes are designed and controlled by a professional PM with at least 3 years of experience of running projects in a similar area of business. Grade 1 means that project management activities is either not
carried out at all or is only carried out manually based on day-to-day requirements without an overarching plan.
Openness. Accessibility of team members and founders in social networks, messengers, and professional communities.
-> well jes you get then projects like eos that dont create anything but mainly focus on social relationship, with mr. "blumer" again you are here promoting burocratic communism
Grade 5: each team member has up-to-date and active profiles in at least two social networks (with several posts a week). All profiles are public. Grade 1: zero activity in the social media; accounts are not updated; a reply to a message is not received within three days.
Product
-> bitcoin or ethereum team had neither, they were anyonymous. many people dont like being very public
Idea. A project idea must be relevant, easy to understand, and viable.
Grade 5: the idea is well worked out and can be explained in three sentences. Grade 1: the team has trouble conveying the value proposition and the idea’s relevance.
well jes if they make it easy to understand it might still be not enough.
Technology. Existence of a demand for the proposed technology, as well as use of third-party tech in the product and its level of dependence on this tech.
Grade 5: there is a confirmed demand for the technology; any third-party tech required by the product is easily accessible. Grade 1: the demand is very low, or the product is dependent on expensive and little-used technology.
-> this is one of the few critera of your proposal that makes sense and cant be easy criticised
Stage. Idea, mock-up, MVP, or a functioning prototype?
Grade 5: a functioning alpha/beta version. Grade 1: idea stage.
Github. The presence of a repository on Github and frequent updates constitute an important proof that a development team is really working on a project.
Grade 5: at least 2 commits a week in the preceding 6 months or at least 50 commits in total. Grade 1: Github repository is empty.
-> github fixation.
Business model. Presence of a business model created using one of the common templates, such as canvas.
Grade 5: a clear, easy to understand business model adhering to Osterwalder’s canvas principles. Grade 1: unclear or absent business model.
-> jes its good to have a clear and easy to understand busines model, here you also need to filter weather you will have people working in real world or just paper tigers, supplying the inverstors with information
Roadmap. Presence of a product development plan for at least one year ahead.
i wouldn't go for that, ethereum or bitcoin didnt had a very detailed development plan either, the developers just developed and hoped they will end up great.
Grade 5: a clear and coherent roadmap with three detailed scenarios (from positive to negative. Grade 1: no roadmap or a development plan containing critical errors.
White Paper. A project must have a detailed, well-structured White Paper containing all the necessary data.
i do a break here.
Grade 5: the White Paper is properly detailed and structured and doesn’t lead to further questions about the product, market, and team. Grade 1: the White Paper is badly structured, lacks detail, or uses standard templates.
Market
Market opportunity. Market size, structure, and features; growth/shrinking rates with statistical data for the preceding 10 years.
Grade 5: detailed market data is provided. Grade 1: no market data is provided.
Competition. Existing competitors, their size and market shares.
Grade 5: at least 5 competitors are described in detail, including their advantages and flaws. Grade 1: no competition analysis is provided.
Market need. Demand for the proposed product and alternative substitutes; target audience.
Grade 5: the demand for the product is analyzed in detail. Grade 1: no analysis of potential demand is provided.
Market share. Existing market share of the company and forecasted market share depending on the amount of investment raised.
Grade 5: the project has provided a detailed market share analysis and forecast. Grade 1: no forecast/analysis is provided.
-> paper tiger looking for market details that quickly vary, instead of focusing development of a useful product
Economics
Profitability. Internal financial data. Real/planned revenue and gross profit.
Grade %: all financial documents are in order; revenues are verifiable and confirmed. Grade 1: the company does not carry out financial accounting activities; revenue forecast is not justified; gross profit margin below 20%.
Startup cost. Startup costs include the company’s assets that constitute or will constitute its initial capital, salary expenditures, licenses, patents, and any other assets that can increase the project’s attractiveness.
Grade 5: the project has a large number of patents, licenses, and awards, as well as the equipment necessary to create the product and which can be included in the initial capital. Grade 1: the project lacks the above-mentioned assets.
Costs. Cost items and amounts.
Grade 5: the project’s revenues exceed its costs. Grade 1: the project is pre-revenue and only consumes resources.
Burn Rate. Company’s average monthly financial losses. By dividing the available sum of money by the burn rate one can obtain the number of months that the company will be able to operates unless its revenue/loss ratio changes.
Grade 5: the project can survive for over three years. Grade 1: the project has no money to carry out its operations.
Investments. Investment structure and size.
Grade 5: the project is self-funded and has no financial liabilities towards any third party. The available money is enough to keep the project afloat without additional investments for the next six months. Grade 1: the company has financial liabilities towards third parties and money for its operations for less than one month.
Addenda (secondary criteria)
Team appetites. The financial appetites of the team constitute an interesting (though not key) criterion of evaluation. If the required amount of funding greatly exceeds the costs of product development and marketing, the project’s rating is lowered.
Share allocation. The presence of founders who are not actively involved in the development of the project is considered a strongly negative signal.
