Yesterday the Synereo Team held another public meeting in an attempt to break the empasse on how best to spend funds raised in their second ICO.

As stated in a previous blog post, CEO Dor Knoforty and CTO Greg Meredith are at loggerheads about how best to proceed. Their relationship has deteriorated into personal animosity and this tension was on display in today's public meeting. It is also safe to say that there are two distinct camps in Synereo, Team Dor and Team Greg.

Picking the bones

There were two bones of contention in yesterday’s meeting as Greg attempted to find out whether his proposal to spend 70% of Synereo’s funds on RChain was acceptable.

Technical due diligence

A lot of the meeting was taken up with discussing whether the VM Greg was proposing to use for RChain was fit for purpose. The debate was around the amount of effort it would take to make the VM (used for RChain) in a state where it (i) compiles on Linux at the very least (it currently only compiles on OSX) and (ii) is compatible with 64 bit machines (it currently only works on 32 bit). It appears that many of the issues with Special-K arose out of trying to get existing older software to work with current technologies. Team Dor was relunctant to go down this path again.

Business due diligence

The second issue was Greg assertion that the $2m requested from Synereo was a fraction of what was needed to deliver RChain. Greg estimated that $10m would be needed. Team Dor made the point that I made in my previous post. Namely what happens if RChains could not secure the additional funding? Greg attempted to clarify his position. He stated that $10m is what was needed to make Synereo “Production Ready”.

What constitutes "Production Ready"?

Rabbit hole

The meeting then went down a rabbit hole of what was meant by "Production Ready." Greg talked about it taking 10 year (as well as $10m) before Synereo was "Production Ready." He compared it to Java software and how long it took to be Production Ready. In Greg’s view no cryptocurrency (including Bitcoin) are Production Ready. They would all take a substantial period of time and investment before they reached that stage.

Red herring

In my view all the talk of a “Production Ready” RChain, whilst interesting was a red herring. The key point is how long and how much will it cost to release a working MVP or beta prototype of Synereo that can be released in the wild for users to road test. Whether it’s the finished product (or close to a finished product) is neither here nor there. People (users and investors) need to see a product, a move away from Proof of concept on paper, to Proof of working in reality.

You're reading the working alternative

Unfortunately for Synereo, Steem/ Steemit is already out there. It has delivered a working prototype. It is processing more transactions that other public blockchain offerings. It is working on scalability will enable it to grow to the size of a Reddit or even Facebook.

Whilst no-one knows how much VC seed funding enabled Steem to get off the ground. It is clear that with the right technology and know-how it is possible to deliver a decentralised blockchain based social media site in a matter if months, not years. With no need for one, let alone two ICOs.

Synereo could do worse than look at the Steemit approach to how to get a product out, onboard a community of users and developers and expand/ tweak the proposition in ways that the community find valuable. This approach is in line with most successful social media platform (e.g. see Facebook's recent integration of Periscope type streaming capabilities).

Steemit threatens to have a monster social media ecosystem (see the Busy.org and SteemSports propositions) with a vibrant engaged, diverse community before Synereo deliver anything approaching a working product.

Worse still other blockchain social media platforms could emerge in 2017, relegating Synereo to a distant memory.

Any progress in this meeting then?

After a 2 hour meeting there was no real concrete progress however there were some commitments made that may help to bring this saga to a conclusion, namely

• Greg indicated he may be willing to re-budget to 50% of Synereo’s funds from his current position of 70% ($2.1m)

• Greg indicated that he could get a letter of intent from an investor, to invest $8m into RChain if Synereo put in $2.1m.

• If such a commitment is forthcoming, Anderson Mccutcheon one of the largest Amp holders outside of the founders, has promised to do all in his power to ensure that RChain get the $2.1m they need.

This is fine in principle. However there was no outline on what the terms of the LOI will be. Mentioning an $8m Letter Of Intention is meaningless with no details of what the agreement is.

View from the galleries

Nigerian Prince

When anyone asks for money ($2m) with a promise or more money being given ($8m) it conjures images of Nigerian Princes and 419 scams. I'm not insinuating that either RChain or Synereo are scams however the view from many investors on the call is is that they were duped when they invested.

Refund?

As I was listening to the call I was keeping one eye on the conversation in the message box. There were a number of investors on the call. At one stage there was a stream of messages. Just one word.

Refund.
Refund.
Refund.
Refund.

Petty

The meeting ended with a bizarre conversation about where the next online meeting should be held. Greg wanted it on “neutral” territory. The conversation went on for about ten minutes before someone pointed out the obvious. It was petty. The next meeting is due to be held today. It will need to be a lot more constructive before the cries for a refund (to second ICO investors) deafen any back-and-forth from the founders.

Watch this space...