bitJob Team Responds to “Hacked.com” ICO Analysis
You can read the source here: https://hacked.com/ico-analysis-bitjob/
Last week, bitJob was featured on Hacked.com in an ICO analysis of our ongoing STU Token contribution period. Although we are honored to be discussed by notable figures in the blockchain community, we felt that the review itself was full of misconceptions, inconsistencies, and in some cases, incorrect information.
To maintain clarity as the sale is ongoing, we’ve taken the time to write out detailed responses to aspects of the review that may misinform readers.
Hacked wrote:
Freelance marketplaces are a thing that are ripe for disruption. Fiverr.com, for instance, takes 20% of the revenues that workers earn. Blockchain technologies can drastically reduce costs, and decentralized services can make them more viable. As such, anything which presents itself as a crypto version of Fiverr or Freelancer.com or Upwork or any of them is bound to pique the author’s interest.
In bitJob, the technology’s disposition appears important to the designers. They intend for clients — as in, the people who would be hiring people — to use a centralized server run by them. On the other end, they want a decentralized to be available for everyone using the platform. They believe that maintaining a more standardized, centralized infrastructure at the outset will improve adoption, and on this point they may be right. It’s no secret that many people like to use web wallets despite the risks. The same will be true of decentralized applications — people will prefer the easiest route forward, even if it means using something centralized to eventually transition to something not.
bitJob’s response:
First and foremost, thanks for the lovely introduction! It seems that, at least on the (very) big picture scale, this reviewer understands what bitJob is all about.
Hacked wrote:
As a reminder, it’s very simple: bitJob is a place where students looking to provide services online can join the online marketplace, choose from a list of professionals jobs for relevant work, provides quality delivery, and receive immediate payment in their choice of cryptocurrency or fiat money.
bitJob addresses a criticism which says that there are no obvious benefits to them using a blockchain, pointing out that the lower cost of moving money on a decentralized ledger is far lower, among other things, like the fact that building a decentralized, blockchain-integrated platform early is better than playing catch-up when it becomes the norm. This is all sensible, but in general, we get the feeling that we’re being distracted from the fundamentals. How exactly do you intend to make money?
bitJob’s response:
bitJob being built on the blockchain only brings positives to the project, sets the marketplace up for successful development in the future, and will give students all around the world an opportunity to get paid instantly by cryptocurrency, educating the next generation to use blockchain technology. The issue of reducing costs is only one of many reasons listed in the whitepaper.
In regards to the delicately stated question of “But how will bitJob make money?!” — Here is the vision of the bitJob revenue model:
· Commissions between transactions.
· Exchanges fees from between crypto currency & fiat money.
· Advertisements and Banners.
· P2P Loans, Insurances, Scholarships, Internships.
· Premium Dynamic Resume Version.
· Yield assets — Reputations and STU Tokens.
Hacked wrote:
We’ve built a fantastic affiliate program that will strengthen the relationship between bitJob and students. Individual student unions will receive a commission from each transaction in which their students engage. We have launched pilot agreements with leading student associations in Israel, in addition to a number of employers who were more than happy to participate. We are also negotiating with several leading job search engines to ensure a continuous flow of quality jobs.
We see. Layers of intermediation. One problem from the top is that these affiliate fees are compensated somehow, we will have a look at the confusing chart in a moment, and some students may be wise enough to view this as an unnecessary expense.
bitJob’s response:
The Affiliate plan will significantly reduce marketing expenses. It will allow unions and academic institutes from all around the world to participate in the pilot, bringing students into the marketplace using their own distribution channels, and create Affiliate fees which will be paid in STU.
This is a win-win situation that will not only increase the global expansion of the marketplace, but will also strengthen the STU token and it’s usage worldwide. Mentioning that the rewards/fees will be drawn from the students’ pocket is misleading. We are giving away cryptocurrency as a reward in order to attract users, and inside the marketplace, students will NEVER pay transactions fees themselves (The fee will only be withdrawn from transactions of professional employers). This will make bitJob totally free-to-use for the student employee.
Hacked wrote:
Students are free to use the existing centralized marketplaces, after all. The real challenge for any platform which wants to enable freelancers to find clients is that it have enough of said clients. Despite the fact that Fiverr takes 20% of people’s earnings, it’s still likely the best option for many providers, by virtue of the fact that their odds of getting paying customers is much higher. The same is true of Freelancer, and Upwork. A great way to thwart all this is to, as much as possible, be friendly to the idea that clients should be able to use whichever platform has what they need. This is to say that probably the real masterful technology in this space will be one that enables both providers and clients to freely navigate between the various middlemen, and then the thing that would obsolete that would be something which allowed the two parties to directly communicate without any intermediation at all. (Something like OpenBazaar, perhaps?)
bitJob’s response:
What the author seems to be misunderstanding here is that, here in 2017, we’re looking to deploy bitJob in the now, not in some Utopian future. That’s why we’ve undertaken steps to establish a network effect early and strong, with incentives from all sides for inclusion. bitJob is not a middleman, and doesn’t act as an HR service. Nor are we “just” a Job board. It’s a complete Eco-system for students to engage with employers with no intervention, using the platform communication tools.
BUT — no marketplace these days can handle itself without customer support right? And what about Technical errors and development? bitJob is building a sophisticated mechanism to sort out disputes using Academic figures and elected “Judges”. bitJob is also building a fully decentralized ranking system for reputation.
The author suggestion of a complete “stand-alone” system like Open Bazaar is, quite frankly, absurd. When dealing with sensitive issues like payments and employment, there is no magic solution available, you need people supporting people, you need a strong dev’ team to build a safe and secure environment, Those things cost money, and like any business, the revenue model is meant to cover them.
Hacked wrote:
bitJob also points out that lower transaction costs mean that people in depressed regions of the world will be able to participate, as both providers and clients. While individually their revenues may be small, collectively the size of that market is functionally unknown until someone like bitJob actually does reach it in an all-encompassing way.
bitJob’s response:
We’re enthused that the author understood the positives of the bitJob roadmap in this instance. We are seeking to expand globally, even if that means the fees from those areas will be smaller. The globalization of bitjob’s academic network is our biggest strength.
Hacked wrote:
There is no need for bitJob to spend money on hardware, infrastructure, or tech staff. Platforms like Ethereum offer such infrastructure, which has minimal cost only when used. Any new technological advances within the Ethereum community will be available to the platform as soon as they are created. It would be impossible for a business that facilitates freelance jobs to simultaneously invent systems that can be competitive in the global market. Due to the competitive nature of technology in global markets, it is very likely that a new platform similar to Ethereum will someday appear — offering new abilities, gaining market share, and offering competitive pricing — thus creating an environment conducive to experimentation and to inexpensive operation.
This part seems a bit ridiculous. No tech staff? What if something goes wrong in the client system? Who fixes it when it breaks? And therefore, what is the money for? Just build it once and run it forever? We reject this notion off-hand. In terms of our points, this disposition against actually building a product is expensive for bitJob.
bitJob’s response:
In this instance, we acknowledge that what is in our WP has been developed upon and our original intent for an entirely decentralized network was then modified to an Hybrid vision which will combine both decentralized features and centralized servers, by doing so, we do need a full dev’ team to support the platform.
The section referenced is regarding the features that are developed on the blockchain: like the reputation model, and registration., verification of students ID’s, and, obviously, transactions of STU’s which will be listed on the blockchain. All of the above will reduce the need of any databases or centralized servers maintenance.
This doesn’t mean we are not going to have a Tech team, because all other aspects of the system will be developed by our developers: The platform itself, the UI, the fiat money payments, the rest of the centralized features.
The early, original vision was of a 100%, uncompromising decentralized vision. As we grew the project, we realized that some aspects of centrality are not just necessary, but beneficial, particularly in the short term. That’s why bitJob is launching with a hybrid model that enjoys the best of both philosophies. The long-term roadmap accommodates a shift towards total decentralization.
Hacked wrote:
bitJob describes its acceptance of a variety of currencies as a good thing, but for the token holder, it makes the proposition sort of a non-starter. Their justification for the creation of the token is rather weak, perhaps the only valid or acceptable argument in that section of their whitepaper is that branding their own token gives people some incentive to be in some sort of exclusive network, and that it gives them help in approaching student unions and other affiliates. As we said before, we’re most interested in platforms which have foreseen the future disruptions they may themselves face, and we’re not noticing an awareness of that here at all.
bitJob’s response:
By giving away crypto currency as affiliate fee you are basically reducing all need of fiat conversion and handling banks between countries, Avoiding financial bureaucracy, and all other painful spots for the “Unbanked” as we call them. Or the weakest populations worldwide that can actually earn a living instantly. Using our own token will inspire confidence in our users and Affiliates, giving them the chance to be a part of our Eco-system.
Another important things is the ability to create Incentives for new users to log-in. Even giants like PayPal used the same strategy at it’s early days, giving away “PayPal credits”, rather then USD. With our business Model backed up by market studies, we expect massive demand by the student community and need to reserve our compensation options for well designed global expansion.
In addition, Ventures need funding in order to get the chance to make an impact, maybe even to change the world. Using Ethereum Blockchain, and it’s unique crowd Funding abilities, opens up new opportunities for startups like bitJob to create exciting new revenue streams woven into the Hybrid Marketplace, for the benefit of students union and blockchain communities.
Hacked wrote:
The justification for the token goes like this: in the future, decentralized applications and blockchains are going to be commonplace, so we should be prepared for that. While this is true, it does mean that if you are not going to provide some forced inherent value for your token (such as a limited supply complimented with a specific purpose that no other token can perform, to put it in very few words), and therefore can’t float a good demand proposition for said token, it’s hard to see why investors should throw Ether at it.
bitJob’s response:
Firstly, we’d encourage potential bitJob Contributors to not “throw” their ETH at the project, but rather contribute through the appropriate channels. Throwing is wasteful. Contributing is a great idea!
As we’ve already stated the multifaceted use of the STU Token, let’s take a look at some of the other aspects of the bitJob roadmap that will ensure long-term success for the project: Partnerships with major employers, collaboration with the Dutch Government, experienced founders and a strong development team all help to provide potential contributors with the information they need to understand that bitJob is a well-structured, well-run, and well-executed enterprise with major implications for students all over the world.
Hacked wrote:
What they lack in experience, they make up for in numbers. bitJob has a fairly large team to compensate. We must stress that our problems with bitJob are not in the implementation of the business strategy itself, but in the way that the token is assigned insufficient importance to really drum up demand. This is to say, we’re going to give them the team points, at least. The four co-founders are Dror Medalion, Bogdan Fiedur, Aviad Gindi, and Elad Kofman. Two have experience in blockchain development, one has spent most of his career building affiliate systems (intermediaries between customer and producer), and one is a currently active mutual fund manager. Collectively, they appear to be in the right positions.
bitJob’s response:
Well, thanks! It’s nice to be appreciated, although it’s unfortunate that this review was riddled with so many mistakes that it barely retains relevance.
Hacked wrote:
As we noted earlier, the company has no intention of building a staff to maintain the software going forward.
bitJob’s response:
We state officially and absolutely that bitJob will have a fully working dev team to build and maintain the platform.
Hacked wrote:
Perhaps their intent is to hire out the work through the platform? There’s a thought, but we don’t get that impression in our overview.
bitJob’s response:
Unfortunately, again: No. We have hired professional developers to build this from scratch. It’s the only way to build a product. The reviewer is sadly misunderstood in this instance.
Hacked wrote:
Nevertheless, hype is a powerful force, and we note that with the current buzz around cryptocurrencies, it’s highly likely that student association and individual student interest will increase the talent pool sufficiently.
bitJob’s response:
This is correct, and it’s happening already!
Hacked wrote:
We think the only play is a short play with this token, because on the long-scale, unless they force the use of the token in the system and only focus on making it easy for the students to get to fiat cash, preference for the token will be hard to develop, and demand for it is what makes it actually valuable.
Students may find themselves getting paid an increasingly worthless token, and just choose the fiat option where available. Commitment to the system seems hard to develop when it’s as trivial to go elsewhere. All of this is bad news for anyone aiming to hold this token long-term.
bitJob’s response:
The STU Token is built into every facet of the marketplace: platform fees, rewards, payments, and a deep system of incentives for students to use cryptocurrency, the usage of STU will be expanded to local business around campus and online merchants. In fact, the student will be able to get paid MORE by choosing STU rather than just fiat. This kind of global usage will increase the STU liquidity and stabilize its price on the markets.
Hacked wrote:
We’re not overly excited about bitJob. We arrive at a 4.75, with the caveat that short traders who are flexible enough should be able to take a small profit, if they’re interested, but there’s a hazard of a total drop-off that would make this difficult. At a base token price of over .001 (no matter the bonus structure), we see a potential immediate depression with little hope of recovery. Fair warning is considered served.
bitJob’s response:
The bitJob project is built to change the lives of millions of students globally. To approach it solely from the perspective of short-term trading is not only wrong, it’s irresponsible. It’s not a question of token price, it’s a question of supporting a revolutionary project, a true social project, maybe the first of its kind in the blockchain space.
By supporting us and contributing to our tokens, our amazing team will be able to build this vision. And in the long term, a stable foundation with a real product will also cause the Token to be strong and stable. That’s the only way to “play” this game. Products with true value for real people. And that is what we intend to provide with bitJob.
__________________________________________________________________
We are working around the clock to support our global community!
bitJob Crowdsale Main Event is now Live!
