Rated on Jun 5, 2019
Modified on Aug 6, 2019
Dear ICOBench community,
Please note that before reviewing this project & ICO/IEO, I conducted my own DD : team background, competitors, project history, various analysis and KPIs, growth potential and a lot more factors.
Here are the results of this analysis :
- Team : Experienced and professional team and all linked to the project on social media. I wish all teams were like this one
This is definitely worth a 4/5 for the team.
- Vision : It is definitely a great vision. Art and blockchain are a perfect match and no project actually succeeded in linking them properly. Blockchain can and will revolutionize the art industry and I really believe Monart can be the gateway.
For these reasons, I give a 4/5 for the vision.
- Product : Clear papers and roadmap & a realistic softcap. The company is already established in several locations and the community is growing organically. I strongly believe that the platform will be a real breakthrough, let's wait and see.
Therefore, I give a 3/5 for the product.
I invite investors to conduct their own DD before investing time / money on any project.
Rated on Sep 13, 2019
Modified on Sep 13, 2019
Monart’s business model is to take-on the highly fractionalised global art market, which is stated as a $63B pa market.
The market is traditionally rather closed, and to an extent localised, so the vision of global, democratic, disruption is to be encouraged.
The business is well described in the lite-paper, especially the current problems versus Monart solutions page, as well as the competitor analysis.
The MVP is planned for Q2FY19, which is a negative, however the ecosystem as envisaged is a bold plan.
I couldn’t quite understand the hard cap figure as 66% of 1B tokens sold at €0.04 being a €26M hard cap, as opposed to the €20M stated.
The Monart ecosystem includes a proprietary process for identity tracking which is pretty crucial, although having a truly global network of qualified, trusted photographers to implement the process and to install the necessary tracking chips etc may be more difficult than it’s put in the paper.
In terms of token economics and token price appreciation, the model is two-fold. Firstly, 10% of gross transaction fee revenues are payable to token holders. Secondly, 100% of added value (profits) on an art portfolio purchased by Monart is payable to token holders. In other words, if the portfolio achieves strong gains and those gains can be realised, token holders will enjoy the return and probably a token price appreciation.
It is stated that the art portfolio will be purchased from 50% of the STO proceeds and the initial choices will be made by a committee. In time, this will be devolved to the Monart community. It is implied but not stated that the (50%) art-fund will be reinvested, with only the added-value profits being distributed to token holders. Whether this is a fund built to last in perpetuity should perhaps be more clearly stated.
So, the strength of the economic model is partially reliant on the performance of the art committee and on the governance structure being robust. Comparing this model to a hedge fund or equities manager, there are no historical performance data from art trades made by the committee, as would have normally been the case. Also continuing the same analogy, the governance side is also lacking – custody, escrow, audit etc.
The independence and ability and reputation of the art committee is therefore a key issue, and I would have expected to see some more talent here, notwithstanding the profile of the existing team members.
Artists are perhaps unfairly paid in many countries and with the issue of proving provenance, royalties over subsequent sales, and moving quickly from local to global promotion, the Monart ecosystem has a lot of opportunity and I wish the team all the best with the STO sale and the rollout of the MVP.
A tie-up with a local organisation https://bluethumb.com.au/ may be a win-win.
This is not financial advice, nor a recommendation to invest in this or any other ICO/STO/IEO. Investors must perform their own due diligence and not rely on external ratings to make their final investment decision. ICOs/STOs/IEOs are risky and 100% of loss of capital is possible.
Experts are independently and voluntarily contributing to the community. If no expert has rated the ICO, only ICO analyzer's results are used. Always research before investing as these ratings should not be taken as an investing guide of any kind.
Ratings and ICO analyzer results are being updated (re-calculated) every few hours.