Havven

The WP looks like 20 pages with theoretical and technical description of the product itself, but practically nothing about marketing and competitive analyses, financials and business planning. So it does not look like real whitepaper, most likely it looks like some part of somebody’s scientific theses... the site also looks raw. The team looks great for sure, but advisors should be added. Guys, here in the ICO world we are already used to some minimal “standards” of “packing” the projects, why you almost totally do not comply? What about MVP? It not enough to draw some scientific pictures to claim 30 mln hardcap.

whitepaper far too technical for average investor. NO KYC as of yet. can change if kyc passes.

Good team. Unique project!

NEEDED!!!

What is missing here is a clear execution strategy. The whitepaper seems like only a theoretical explanation of their product but neglects the business side of the project. Something which each project without a doubt should have.

No doubt the project has been able to generate steam through their strong social presence but the product and vision seems to be just another project in the crowded space. The key differentiator in such projects remains the clear execution strategy for mass adoption, which is missing and has to be worked upon.

This project came when we desperately needed stable cryptocurrencies. Everyone already knows that Tether is risky. And Maker was not liquid as well. It has been good to have another solid stablecoin.

T:4
V:5
P:4

Seems to be a less-than-original concept.