AirSave Travel Project: Clarifications
Hi, recently I noticed some posts questioning the legitimacy of the Airsave Travel IEO (https://www.airsavetravel.com/). Owing to the fact that I am one of the people closely associated with the Airsave Travel ICO/IEO project from Sept 2018, I took the onus to clarify some points that occurred. This is my LI profile — https://www.linkedin.com/in/krishnendu-chatterjee-ph-d-9841ba101/ and I am a real person.
So before I start let’s get on with the vision first.
Vision — This is neither a marketing coin nor a pyramid scheme as some has been suggested. It’s a simple policy of customer acquisitions through referral. People refer their friends and loved ones and get paid for it upon successful conversions. Airsave Travel already has a partnership with Smart Trip Platform and users can redeem tokens partially to avail bookings from Smart Trip after implementation of the token in App. Other partnerships in the Crypto sphere are under negotiations! Stay tuned for more.
Now on with some of the allegations —
1. “Often in such cases, we are facing with the fact that crowdsalers are so lazy or poor that they don’t have even MVP.” An iOS App is present for Airsave travel which is not yet based on blockchain. This qualifies for an MVP for normal people I guess, not sure what qualifies as an MVP in the eyes of this critic.
2. “Cooperation between Airsave Travel and STA Travel is mentioned only in press releases of the Blockchain company.” This was terminated sometime in October so the previous ICO token sale was stopped as without a travel partner it affected the business model. Our current travel partner is Smart Trip Platform!
3. “Why do guys need sale in the first place? They have a mobile app for a long time now and the “cooperation with a top company”, right? In a whitepaper, this kind of important question is explained with the only one chart. A-grade expertise.” Airsave Travel needs to raise close to 600K (Phase I) in the first round for DApp development on Android & iOS, marketing, personnel cost, other miscellaneous costs.
4. “And they want to transfer them to Fiat ( but why?).” Our KYC+AML Partner is Civic Platform. If it were a fake ICO sale we would not get a KYC+AML partner, a legal third-party custodian for OTC and an Exchange for conducting IEO. We need an OTC partner either third-party or via Exchange because most people prefer to be paid in Cash due to crypto volatility and in some places like India where we have some people working on the project remotely, crypto is grey zone and so they prefer to be paid in fiat.
5. “Poor Stefan even has a fake Facebook page where he is mentioned as “she”.” Thanks for pointing this out but he isn’t associated with the project anymore.
6.“Last fall, the Founder boasted that their Telegram channel reached 15,000 followers rate. Now there are far fewer people in the community” Yes most people or bots left during crypto winter and the present group also has a lot of bots or fake bounty hunters. As the ICO craze died down so the people started quitting or vanishing. So, in this respect you are correct.
7. “And 90% of the posts are written by Sarah herself.” That’s also something I can agree with since mostly it’s her investment so she calls the shots. Having 90% post by someone knowledgeable about the project is still better than some fake PRs I believe. Also, since its a startup it’s always safe to post from the project owner’s account as the team dynamics can change quickly owing to downsizing, new recruitments, and change of project directions.
8. “They want to collect $ 9,600,000” The collection is done in phase wise manner. Phase I — 600K US$ & Phase II — 2 million US$ and so on for growth. Hard Cap is mentioned, that’s the maximum the project can raise, but that’s the best case scenario.
9. “The core team of 8 persons is fair but not exceptional for a project of this scope. Only half of the core team mentions the Airsave project in their LinkedIn profiles. This could mean they are not fully committed. None of the Advisors mention the project in their profiles.” The core-team has 8 persons who are okay to put their faces on the project since some other members wish to be anonymous until they join full time or have other bindings. As an advisor, I have mentioned all the contractual (ICO/IEO/STO) projects under my Accomplishments > Organizations.
10. “It appears that an ICO for the same project has already been conducted Q2 2018, which raises a red flag.” As explained earlier the ICO was stopped as soon as the partnership with STA was void. So, no public investment was collected and the private investment was not based on tokens if any to raise any concerns. Till date, the majority of the investments has been from Sarah’s own funds to the best of my knowledge.
Hopefully, I have answered them (to the best of my knowledge) successfully to defend that the project is a legitimate project and not a scam, that’s the main objective I had in coming out with this clarifications. A project can have a failed ICO/IEO but it doesn’t amount to being a failed project. But in case, someone isn’t convinced, he/she is free to connect on LI for clarifications. Thanks for your comments, it shows we still have some bridges to cross to make people aware of our project, which by the way is 100% legit.
