Topic: WEIRD! Second company with the name Kepler Technologies is raising $250M in ICO. (Read 179 times)

Well it is very possible that it is just a coincidence, but one thing e should know in this space is that a lot of people are very observant and will do anything possible to bring the project down just because it bears the name of another project, bearing the name will even cause a competition with the existing platform because they will do anything within their power to make sure they platform is being brought down to the last so that they won't be overthrown by them, this is why they just have to change the name as soon as possible.

 I read just now that KeplerTek is a scam ( the one based in GA). I joined the bounty a year ago and I wish I read your post during that time maybe I did not join this project at all. I felt bad that I became a part of it.

i dont agree ... why you feels so that it have so many red flags? just because name are smame, their concept,vision and project presentation all are different.
Kepler is supported by the CEP of the original token. KEP will be reinforced by the value of the company assets, including labor, knowledge and experience, equipment and infrastructure.

We already have an established cryptocurrency portfolio management and analytics platform company, named Kepler Technologies LLC and it is based in Zug, Switzerland. It is associated with TaaS (the company).

I noticed that a new company named Kepler Technologies has announced an ICO with astonishing goal of $250M. This one is building a mega factory for AI & Robotics. This one is based in Georgia and the team is mainly from that country. They have no connection at all with the Swiss based company.
Website is keplertek dot org.

I got very interested in the project, because they have one of the best websites I have seen and the whole complex they are trying to build seems outstanding.

However, I quickly changed my mind about this ICO. A few questions, that should be addressed:

1. Having the same name as another company already operating in the blockchain sector is a complete marketing disaster. I would re-brand on the second with the first name that comes to my mind. I don't see any other logical reason why you would choose a name that is already taken, unless you want to create some confusion and benefit out of it.

2. They openly admit that their token is representing shares in the company. This is a direct invitation to all the regulators to come and shut them down.

3. I don't see any usability of the token, except for fundraising. So, it will have no value.

One more time, fantastic website, ideas and goals, but I will be very very careful with this one. Too many red flags for me.

Usually I don't write about lame ICOs, just because there are too many of them. I gave a word about this one, because it is absolutely remarkable on the surface and people can be easily blazed by the glamour.