This response is a thread on Reddit. It may or may not be deleted in the future, in any case here is the link.

I decided to write a well thought out response here, to attract a larger audience. Their response was pitifully weak:

“Dear Crypto Panda, this is a response to your erroneous and misleading post about Lympo. There are major factual errors in your Medium article. First of all, we did not collect $17 million in our ICO, instead a total sum of $14 million was raised. You shouldn’t trust the first source found on Google. Secondly, regarding the ad with Caroline Wozniacki. We understand that you might have misheard Caroline saying “I use Lympo” instead of “I would use Lympo,” but it’s a shame that you didn’t double check it. You can hear it clearly here: https://youtu.be/zLCivsUTH58?t=44 There are plenty of articles on Caroline’s engagement with Lympo saying that the app will be released later this year. It is also clearly indicated on Lympo.io, Lympo.com and in all of our communications, we are completely transparent about it. Thinking that a world-class star would risk her reputation saying something as false as this is rather incredible. These kinds of deals are discussed with multiple people representing the athlete, including written communication on every single word that Caroline would say. We are disappointed with this demonstration of complete ignorance about Lympo and bold accusations regarding our ambassador. To continue, yes, you are right — there will always be cheaters, be it fitness, taxes, gaming or any other area. Despite this, technology is constantly evolving due to innovative solutions and every day it is getting harder to cheat on all kinds of systems and platforms. With the right measures taken it inevitably comes to a point when cheating simply becomes too much of a hassle. We are already actively discussing with gear engineers about preventing all kinds of cheating. There are many measures and standards for that and for now we will be able to reduce it with programmed calculations, taking into account various factors which will serve to evaluate the validity of submitted data. In the future, we will certainly implement an AI-based data analyzer which will be able to evaluate data to an even greater degree of accuracy. Large amounts of raw data with multiple parameters will help to continuously train the AI and ensure the ever increasing accuracy of analysis results. Furthermore, token rewards will be small enough not to create an incentive to put actual effort into gaming the system — it just won’t be worth it, and so cheaters will not compromise our ecosystem. In fact, the challenges too will be designed to minimize this risk: 1. Challenges posted by a users’ personal trainer after they paid in LYM tokens will work as a cash back option. One may cheat on those, sure, but generally, this group of people is interested in getting fit rather than struggling to find a way to cheat an app. 2. Challenges by sports events where you have to provide, for example, your marathon ticket number. This group of users is genuinely interested in running. They will pay a participation fee in advance and later use Lympo as a cash back system. We believe that this too will help minimize cheating, together with other measures. Going further, we agree that there was a miscommunication regarding purchases of LYM directly with USD. There are no direct pairings like LYM/USD, LYM/EUR or LYM for any fiat. You are right; this was a communication error from our side. We would also like to add that we are, in fact, currently working with several exchanges to launch LYM/Fiat pairs. Although we appreciate your efforts to write a comprehensive critique, in this case your position on Lympo is simply mistaken, and your tone is unconstructive and accusatory. In the future, we will only engage in constructive discussions since it takes too much of our time to respond to every single baseless accusation. Lympo team”

ICO Info:

The information on the ICO was not listed on the Lympo site. I went with the closest estimate which was $17 million as listed on ICO drops. ICO bench lists Lympo as raising $8.36m, Track ICO says $11.5m. Considering this, I think I got pretty close. This is hardly a point of contention but I’m glad it was pointed out.

Caroline

Caroline was unintelligible in some parts of the interview, but is clearly heard saying “With using Lympo I think its just that extra motivation”. This is a present tense statement, clearly expressing that she uses the platform. Again, commenting on how motivating something is when it does not yet exist is an extremely bold claim to make, or just a terribly scripted statement.

Repeated claim that software will fix cheating:

Preventing cheating using software is impossible. I spoke with Apple engineers on the ways an Apple Watch and other fitness devices can be cheated. I also know this from my years working as a personal trainer, using and recommending dozens of types of fitness tech. It all comes down to hardware being vulnerable to cheating, and no amount of software upgrades will change that. The Lympo team repeatedly claims software can fix this problem, it is a complete lie.

Reward payout:

This is actually hilarious, as its an admission their platform cannot work:

“Furthermore, token rewards will be small enough not to create an incentive to put actual effort into gaming the system”

If a fitness rewards platform can’t payout rewards, what exactly is it? Yes, I understand Lympo is more than a rewards payout system, but the cornerstone of how the ecosystem works is rewards given to its users.

Reward payout example:

Challenges posted by a users’ personal trainer after they paid in LYM tokens will work as a cash back option. One may cheat on those, sure, but generally, this group of people is interested in getting fit rather than struggling to find a way to cheat an app.”

I am not sure what this means, but “cash back” is deceitful, LYM are tokens and not cash. There is no fiat gateway, and despite answers given to me suggesting otherwise, LYM cannot be exchanged to fiat.

Regarding the second point, I think any business that posts a statement based on assumptions rather than research is a business you should stay away from. Again, cheating these devices is not a struggle, its extremely easy.

Reward payout example 2:

“Challenges by sports events where you have to provide, for example, your marathon ticket number.”

The average cost of a marathon in the U.S is $60-$100. I would love to understand how the Lympo team thinks. Uploading a picture of a $60 bib to get a minuscule reward is a joke. At this point I think Lympo is flying by the seat of their pants trying to answer hard hitting questions.

Closing:

“Although we appreciate your efforts to write a comprehensive critique, in this case your position on Lympo is simply mistaken, and your tone is unconstructive and accusatory. In the future, we will only engage in constructive discussions since it takes too much of our time to respond to every single baseless accusation.”

Rewards are small enough to not incentivize cheating. Essentially rewards are very, very small. For a rewards based platform, this is a pretty destructive statement.

Lympo thinks their software engineers are more experienced, talented, and understand more about tech than Apple engineers.

Lympo is upset I pointed out the horrible script Caroline read for the promotional video.

Lympo assumes users won’t cheat, because “…this group of people is interested in getting fit rather than struggling to find a way to cheat an app.” Last time I checked, successful businesses were not based off of assumptions.

The Lympo team has never run a marathon, or doesn’t understand how the health and fitness industry works in the United States.

In their closing statement the Lympo team essentially said they were done talking to me on this topic. I think anyone reading this article should decide for themselves if these claims of mine are baseless. I’m sorry if my tone seems harsh, its not personal its businesses.

If you don’t want your feelings hurt don’t make a shitty product and deceive your investors by leaving out key information in the whitepaper.