Rated on Jul 4, 2019
I was able to talk with the team months ago. They explained me the project and I have to say that I like it.
Any product helping to improve energy efficiency has a huge future market and will be positive on long term.
They have the patents for a working product and are ready to sell it worldwide.
I think they have a lack of blockchain experience and maybe they don't need blockchain for this, but I love the real projects and real products.
Good luck Saiterm, I'll follow this ICO very close.
Rated on Mar 29, 2019
Modified on Mar 29, 2019
The team is ok in terms of productions, although I don't see a lot of blockchain experience there. I also don't really see too much of a use for blockchain here
Rated on Mar 5, 2019
Reducing energy efficiency and emissions is a global challenge. The team has a proven track record in heating equipments, and seems to understand the issues well.
But why is it a block chain?
I read the page, What puprusion does the blockchain have in your project? But I have not solved the fundamental question. I think they can lead the world better without using block chains. For projects with high expectations like this, I would like you to spend the necessary costs on the necessary points.
Rated on Mar 13, 2019
→ Blockchain Advantage - ⛔️
→ White Paper - ✅
→ Team Composition - ✅
→ Token Economics - ✅
→ Business Model - ⛔️
→ Social Media Presence - ✅
→ Collaborations & partnerships - ✅
→ Fund Allocation - ✅
→ Legal Loopholes - ⛔️
→ MVP/ DApp/ Working Product - ⛔️
Advantage - They have a great team in product side who can develop the required products. The products can be bought with the ICO tokens.
Disadvantage - The use of blockchain is unnecessary. The business model for doing an ICO is unclear and shouldn’t be the way ahead for fundraising. They have no working product as of yet.
You can find my ratings methodology here- https://medium.com/@krishnenduchatterjee/ico-evaluation-investing-a-vc-perspective-for-investment-over-greedy-short-term-returns-433f6f9e13d8
Rated on Feb 27, 2019
I think that they are not as bad as a team, but I think they are lacking in persuasion to make an ICO successful.
Also with respect to token balance they lack convincing power.
I think that they should enrich WP and MVP more.
Rated on Feb 1, 2019
The vision and the "bio" intentions of the team can produce a good result to be launched on the market. On the other hand, however, it is still not very clear why you want to use the Blockchain for this project. It is a very ambitious project but it can also become very very expensive.
The team is neither too short nor very large, but unfortunately at the moment, there is no Blockchain figure inside, while the background of some members is very discreet. Also the advisors or any mentor Blockchain are missing.
The tokenomics is unclear and the distribution is not the best, 24% for team & experts is excessive, while 10% of "reserve fund" tends to be very little. There is also an inexplicable chasm between the softcap and the hardcap (1M VS 50M), while the ICO price is excessive given the current market conditions.
Website and Whitepaper are well kept, while the social and communication channels lack community and vast activities. On github, apart from a few files, there is no other movement. The MVP turns out to be a simple demonstration video which shows the heat that one of the panels issues.
The Roadmap is very poor and there are no well-established targets, only two sections, "until today" and "from now on".
I hope to be able to re-evaluate this project in the future, but at the moment I consider that the Blockchain is not the solution for it and that they are not in line with the minimum parameters of perspective. Unfortunately in 2019 a dream, a good website and a whitepaper are no longer enough to get success with an ICO.
Rated on May 13, 2019
Modified on Dec 27, 2019
Team: Aside from advisors, team has no great potential in my view... KYC passed.
Vision: MVP link is a youtube video of curious content.
Product: Absolutely no dire need for blockchain from my subjective view.
Rated on Mar 21, 2019
The team obviously has a lot of experience in fields that could be related to this project but unfortunately it lack blockchain expertise which is essential.
I am not sure why blockchain is really necessary in this case and it seems to me that it's only about raising money. It is acceptable I suppose to use it for fundraising but it could also be a red flag.
Rated on May 24, 2019
Great team and vision. The initiative to reduce energy consumption and save the environment is commendable. Interesting to see how this project will develop in the future.
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.