BLUEPAPER

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION
a. Past and Future Financial Landscape
b. Shared Marketplaces as Economic Drivers
c. Decentralization and Governance

2. MARKET OPPORTUNITY

3. PURPPLE PROJECT
a. The Problem
b. The Solution

4. PLATFORM DESCRIPTION
a. Marketplace
b. Communication Platform - Messenger
c. Financial Platform - Omni Wallet

5. BUSINESS MODEL

6. MARKETING & STRATEGY

7. COMPETITION

8. DECENTRALIZATION & GOVERNANCE

9. TECHNICAL DETAILS

10. ICO – INITIAL COMMUNITY OFFERING

a. Pre-Ico
b. ICO
c. Budget Allocation and Distribution
d. Repurchasing Program
e. Vesting

11. ROAD MAP

 1. INTRODUCTION

Past and Future Financial Landscape

We’ve been reading everywhere about the disruption of the financial markets throughout Bitcoin, crypto
currencies, DLT’s, consensus algorithms and the like, they are been introduced in the future vision of all these
projects as the central machine that coordinates, distributes and secures this decentralized crypto currencies and
their platforms. This people’s feeling comes as the result of many decades of manipulation of power and money
by the wealthy and powerful that is now part of how the capitalism system works and it seems for the majority
of us that we have accepted to live by those rules.

You and I like most people on earth will never probably have the opportunity to be part of that elite 1% that
owns most of the world wealth and represents the super-rich and powerful, and that is not something that most
of us is ambitioning to be, cause at the end money doesn’t make you happy, people makes people happy, what
most of us really want is a decent place to live and a decent income that allow us to enjoy a comfortable life to
share with your friends and family without the stressful that carries the multiple circumstances that happens in
our lives in our way to get to that dream may appear sometimes discouraging.

It is said that every life has its roses and thorns; there seemed, however, to have been a misadventure or
mistake in Stephen’s case, whereby somebody else had become possessed of his roses, and he had become
possessed of somebody else’s thorns in addition to his own.”(Charles Dickens, Hard Times) Stephen’s case
resonates with millions across the globe who struggle with poverty, sordid working conditions and
unemployment while the more ‘privileged’ sections of society enjoy the luxuries and higher living standards
endowed by technological progress and long-run economic growth. 1

Proponents of the “thorns” argument suggest that economic growth and technological progress have been
accompanied by a widening gap between the rich and the poor – with the rich becoming richer by leveraging on
their greater access to technology and the increased productivity it entails and the poor becoming increasingly
unemployable and replaceable by machines thus, sinking deeper into poverty. In other words, while the rich
enjoy all the “roses”, the poor suffer the “thorns” of industrial advancement.

While technology’s contribution to economic growth is undisputed, its impact on working class welfare is a
subject of great debate. While aggregate economic estimators dating back to the first industrial revolution show
increases in real wages, employment and living standards (higher literacy and decreased mortality rates), these
measures paint an optimistic picture that fails to reflect the situation of those that face the unintended costs of
progress. According to Erik Brynjolfsson, author of The Second Machine Age, “technology is the main driver of
recent increases in inequality.” If this is indeed the case, then the perpetuation of technology dichotomously
facilitates the macroeconomic goal of economic growth while hindering that of equitable income distribution.

If one regards equity in income distribution and job displacement as being indicative of social welfare, then in
today’s technology driven economy there exists an opportunity cost between growth and welfare. With Artificial
Intelligence transitioning from fiction to reality this argument against technology is rapidly gaining ground. It is
however, a simplistic argument that fails to take into account the historical trends in industrial and technological
development.

History is testimony that every technological breakthrough has rewarded some and punished some. Right from
the printing press to assembly lines, technology has consistently made it possible for capital to replace labor.
While this has increased productivity it has also left masses unemployed and depressed. Even so, comparisons
across periods show that the average man is better off today than he was in the past. Thus, the gloom that
settled on the masses owing to technological substitution seems simply to be the “pain” associated with any
major transitory or transformative growth period. Why this pain is experienced less by the rich than the poor
might just be a matter of access. Those with greater access to resources and information are more easily able to
make the transition to the obligatory increase in skill level. Holding other factors such as wealth inheritance
constant, the difference between the rich and poor then simply translates to the difference between the skilled
and the unskilled in the modern economy.

1 Source from: Lubna Akhtar - Meghnad Desai Academy of Economics

Over time, as average skill level increases, the overall welfare also increases. It would then seem likely, that
efficiency and equity are not trade-offs but economic consequences of growth that manifest over different
lengths of time. Why some individuals take longer to catch up to the increased level of efficiency than others
may be a matter of their social context or the Darwinian ‘survival of the fittest.’ The increases in inequality are
therefore more rightly attributable to discrepancies in worker skill-sets than to technological progress. In the
modern era, with technology growing at an unprecedented rate, the time-constraint on skill upgradation is
significantly tighter.

As a result, bridging the income gap is becoming increasingly difficult. For those on the bottom-most rung of the
social ladder, average skill and efficiency requirements of the market are increasing at a much faster rate than
they are capable of catching up with. Owing to the autonomy of human ingenuity, technological progress cannot
be reined in or slowed down. A plausible alternative is therefore, to increase the pace of skill upgradation
through easy access to education and training without discrimination. While perfectly equitable income
distribution is a theoretical ideal, a real world equivalent would entail policy decisions aimed at minimizing the
“thorns” and consequently the “pain” that is an inevitable corollary of transformative economic growth

The world’s technology is evolving so fast in many fields in the last decades and that is excellent news for the
good of mankind, because will allow us tackle major problems that affect our societies, but, in the other end any
other person, community, city or country that is not up to speed with the technology trends will be relegated as
Second or Third Tier class, which in turn will increase the breach and access to basic infrastructure and wealth
re-distribution, and the same problems in an even bigger proportion such us immigration exodus, terrorism,
hunger, health’s pandemic, wars, etc. Putting all in long term perspective all these current facts are not going to
disappear overnight any time soon, in part because human greed and ego is part of what we are and is a
constant unconscious fight we all have to deal with.

So long have the central banks across the globe held a massive monopoly over the most important resource,
money. They have built their rules and shaped their fortunes, but now, there is an upstart digital currency
challenging all this, and no one is really sure of how to handle it. The emergence of Bitcoin as a real player, a
real threat, has caused many to take sides. From the Wall Street Banks who are either in Jamie Dimon’s corner
or the other more accepting side, Bitcoin divides thoughts. Central banks are big players when it comes to
shaping the global economy, and they have had to make their own minds up when it comes to Bitcoin. But it is
not only Bitcoin that they are considering, there is also talk of “Why not us?” as many of them look to create
their own version of Bitcoin. 2

US: ͞But how will we monitor you? The over-eyeing US has a problem when it comes to Bitcoin because the
digital currency offers up much more anonymity when it comes to transactions. The central banks are thus a
little concerned with the privacy issues these digital currencies bring. Overall, the US central bank has not been
overly enthused about the whole thing as they have already had problems with tax avoidance. Jerome Powell, a
board member for the Federal Reserve said: “There are meaningful challenges to a central bank cryptocurrency,
but it is the privacy issues that would be the problem, perhaps private-sector alternatives are the answer.

Europe: ͞The land of Tulips In general, Europe, having lived through Tulip Mania in the Netherlands, are of the
opinion that the Bitcoin Craze is just one big Tulip-shaped bubble, issuing a warning to that effect. Vice-
President, Vitor Constancio, of the European Central Bank has said: “Bitcoin is a sort of tulip,” Constancio said at
an ECB conference. “It’s an instrument of speculation ... but certainly not a currency and we don’t see it as a
threat to central bank policy. “As such, the European Central Bank approach is that Bitcoin is no threat to their
monopoly with the Euro - quite a one-eyed view to have.

China: ͞China is one of the few major nations to take a hard stance - either way - when it comes to digital
currencies. They have not been that keen on the big one, Bitcoin, and have rather decided to try and get that
out of their system. Rather, China’s central bank is building a situation where they can try and launch their own
digital currency to try and keep money within their boundaries. “The development of digital economy needs
central bank-issued electronic currency more than ever,” Yao Qian, who leads the research at the People’s Bank
of China (PBOC). Japan: ͞Japan has never been hostile to Bitcoin at all, but there has never really welcomed it
with open arms. They have been in waiting for some time now, letting the ecosystem grow and develop into
2 Source from: CoinTelegraph, Darryn Pollock. Bitcoin Revolution and The Great Central Bank Divide.
something that they can actually monitor. Now that Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are getting legs, and
there is deeper understanding.

Japan has even gone as far as to suggest some big changes, but they have not dived in yet - such as the J-coin.

"This will be pegged with Japanese Yen, and hopefully used to make payments and transfers through a mobile
phone app," a spokesperson from Mizuho Financial Group, one of the institutions spearheading the move, said.

India: ͞No thanks. India’s biggest fear is that digital currencies are full of potential for money laundering and
terrorist funding, this has caused the central banking authority in India to retract away from any dealings with
Bitcoin, or in fact, even thinking about creating their own. However, when it comes to the utilizing the coins, the
country is not adverse to its citizens using it. According to the Central Bank’s Executive Director Sudarshan Sen:
"As regards non-fiat cryptocurrencies, I think we are not comfortable. Bitcoins for example. That's a private
cryptocurrency. Right now, they have a group of people who are looking at fiat cryptocurrencies. Something that
is an alternative to the Indian rupee, so to speak, they are looking at that closely´.

United Kingdom: While the UK has never really written the headlines for cryptocurrencies, it has a very positive
approach to the digital side of things. The central bank in the UK has cited digital currencies as a financial
revolution. Bank of England Governor Mark Carney has cited cryptocurrencies as part of a potential “revolution”
in finance.

SHARED MARKETPLACES AS ECONOMIC DRIVERS

The multi-billion dollar Uber and Airbnb entities are running the always-in-the-headlines, oh-so-sexy shared
economy we’re seeing today, and they have tapped into a secret, scrumptious sauce that has consumers renting
out their living rooms and sharing rides around town, producing revenues worthy of the Three Comma Club. But
that secret sauce isn’t so secret anymore, and the on-demand tendencies of society today have bled into
virtually every major consumer-focused industry and new players

Think Amazon. Now think about Amazon’s competition. This booming industry, incumbents and newbies alike,
has big plans for a major retail refresh in the way shoppers are able to browse and buy products when tapping
into online commerce. Amazon alone sells more two billion items on its online platform per year, with 40% of
those sold through their marketplace, according to the ecommerce giant.

By 2018, more than 50% of ecommerce growth will be supported by marketplaces.

How can retailers bring the industry’s version of the shared, on-demand economy into their operations, and do
so profitably? There are some massive impacts that the online marketplace is bringing to a retail industry in
desperate need of restructuring, if they are ever to survive the escalating demands and change of behavior of
shoppers.

With all the chatter on soaring company valuations and “unicorn” startups, it may seem easy to pass Jet off as
one-hit wonder, but industry influencers say the rising online marketplace industry is here to stay. By providing
broader assortments with lucrative margins, these emerging players are even less onerous to deploy than those
in the past, and major U.S. retailers are beginning to see the light. The fact is that as marketplace sales grow,
overall sales grow as well, and retailers hosting their own online marketplace eventually outperform those that
don’t.

Just as Uber helped solve burdensome traffic and transportation issues with a mobile network of thousands of
self-employed personal drivers, emerging online marketplaces that compete with the big guns are helping
retailers take back control of their inventory and solve their biggest supply chain challenges. Uber owns zero
cars, Airbnb owns zero real estate, and Amazon sellers sold hundreds of millions of items and did not own or
even warehouse them.

The costs associated with finding and purchasing merchandise, receiving and handling warehouse inventory,
managing fulfillment logistics for that inventory, and then tracking liability for shipments on a case-by-case basis
can be astronomically high, and online marketplaces remove those costs completely.
When utilizing an online marketplace, a retailer is in the driver’s seat, if you will. Instead of competing with the
likes of Amazon and Alibaba, retailers can actually seek out the brands and products they’d like to sell on their
site, and anyone that jumps onboard benefits from increased revenues and greater visibility and promotions.
According to Amazon, a great percentage of his revenues came from the third-party sellers using their
Marketplace platform, so as surprising as it may seem with a commission-based business model, there is no
cannibalization for retailers when utilizing online marketplaces. The Ubers of society have set out to make vast
changes to flawed systems, and emerging marketplace solutions have a vision of transformation and modernity
for the future of online retail. So, you could say the success of online marketplaces is in the hands of the global
retail community, but in all honesty, omnichannel and inventory management success now depends on their
decisions to tackle the Goliaths head on, or let the monopolies continue to degrade their revenues.

There are corporations that provide great value to their Marketplaces and its users. You are right on this one,
but as we all know that real wealth and value goes to the founders and investors of such Marketplaces and there
is nothing wrong with seen people been successful with their projects and god knows what risks and suffering
they’ve taken to be where they are now, but at the end of day its capitalism at its maximum expression because
most of these enterprises are funded by the same big corps over and over, don’t get me wrong because these
investments creates lots of jobs and drives the economy cycles of those countries where they are located. This
tech driven capitalism investment cycle allows each year for the despair of basically a more in depth division of
social classes and nurturing distrust and discord in our politicians and leaders. 3

DECENTRALIZATION AND GOVERNANCE

Before we can really tackle building next generation governance, we may have to shake up some of the
assumptions holding us back. After all, we can’t build something on disproven ideals and expect it to work, no
matter how comfortable they are to cling to. If your primary experience with governance is the morass of
gridlock and corruption that passes for politics today, you’d be justified in being dismissive of ungrounded
theories. However, you might discover that it’s our CURRENT models and practices of governance that fail to be
grounded in reality.
We have experienced a wide gamut of approaches and settings for governance ranging from do-acracy,
adhocracy, sociocracy, corporate hierarchies of some of the largest companies, bureaucracies of the educational
system, egomaniacal tyrants, churches and religious societies, agile start-ups, anarchy, Quaker communities,
hippy Eco-villages, political organizing and activism, occupy Wall Street assemblies, beneficent dictators, online
communities, and schools run by kids. It doesn’t matter what brilliant ancient or modern political philosopher set
forth the ideals we’ve followed, if we build next-gen solutions on broken assumptions, we’ll stay stuck in
patterns of dysfunction. So, let’s shake up some of our assumptions about governance we mostly take for
granted.
People Make Rational Decisions.
Sorry, but we don’t. Neurologically speaking, the ability to decide is an emotional capacity. The rational weighing
of pros and cons continues ad infinitum without the emotional will to bring it to closure and act. But that’s just
the tip of the iceberg of this problem. We have to oversimplify issues for people to understand them. Our
reasoning is impaired by hundreds of cognitive biases. We say and do things to be accepted by our peers and
groups, and let our need for acceptance or preoccupation with immediate desires overshadow our ability to
perceive things rationally. We’ve been perfecting the manipulation of people using human irrationality for many
decades. Advertising firms use it to make you buy junk. Political campaigns use it to alienate you from
opponents, or mobilize people with angering ballot initiatives. Many political campaigns leverages your social
media activity and uses it for fine-tuned, individualized manipulation.
Governance which relies on the notion that people are inclined to make rational decisions falls victim to our own
frailties. However, since we know about our limitations, we can start to incorporate them into good designs.
People Follow Procedures.
Interestingly, it’s possible to create social processes which help keep our irrationality in check. For example,
models like Holacracy, have you speak from a role or responsibility that you have, rather than from your
personal beliefs or preferences. Good social processes are compelling and following them can become deeply
embedded into the culture of a group. However, humans aren’t robots, and the more contrived, structured, and
rational you make a process, the less people tend to enjoy or adhere to it. If the conversation is limited only to
3 Source from: Adrien Nussenbaum, US CEO and Co-Founder of Mirakl
rational discourse, people don’t end up feeling, heard, seen, or acknowledged. Even the most rational among us
need not only to speak, but to feel heard.
Even when people mostly follow a procedure, they won’t follow it consistently. We all agree driving on the
correct side of the road is important, yet we bend that rule when we think circumstances warrant it. When
people know he system is preventing them from doing what they feel is right, they find ways to get around the
system, even when they agree with most of its workings.
Won’t Smart Contracts solve this? Not really. The art of next-gen governance design isn’t to automate away all
choices, but provide support (via technical process, social process, or physical structures) for parts where we
tend to be most irrational. Yet include ways that people can exercise choice (opt-in, opt-out, or work-around) in
places where human judgment tends to be as good as or better than prefab designs. Humans won’t just follow
software anyway; we demand an emotional experience of choice.

Governance Should Treat Everyone Equally

We are not equal. We have differences—different interests, attention spans, beliefs, expectations, strengths,
weaknesses, skills, habits, languages, etc. The real goal is to be treated equitably and fairly, not as identical
interchangeable units. In an era of massive customization—of media, products, art, and experiences—why
should we be stuck with one-size-fits-all governance?
What if the goal wasn’t just “one person, one vote” which is about equalizing the power of your vote or your
voice, but was instead about finding the highest wisdom or best path? To achieve that, we might have to
recognize different people bring different skills, knowledge, competencies, and figure out how to optimize
everyone’s unique contribution. Your “governance feed” becomes tailored to your interests, attention span, ways
you like to contribute or participate. Some modern tools make good steps in this direction.
Direct democracy, enables people to participate directly in discussion and voting on individual issues rather than
isolating everyone from direct participation through representatives. Liquid democracy enables people to
delegate their votes to people based on specific topics or domains. I know this is touchy subject likely to trigger
people’s fears of elitism or abuse of power, but I am convinced that it is possible to responsibly wield tools like
the extreme targeting used in Trump’s campaign not to manipulate people, but to optimize participation. Your
“governance feed” becomes tailored to your interests, attention span, ways you like to contribute or participate.
You could also be directly tagged by a friend or colleague to bring something to your attention that might not fit
your typical interests. We might be able to keep governance fun and call out the best in people—but not if we
can’t include difference and must pretend equality.

Voting Works

Actually, voting mostly sucks. It reduces rich, nuanced discourse to one dimensional sums of numbers. Even if
you use more advanced runoff techniques or pairwise comparison algorithms, you basically reduce issues to a
popularity contest. Don’t get me wrong, we sometimes use voting, but it is important to know that popularity is
not wisdom. Just because something is currently popular doesn’t make it good or wise. Knowing how popular
something is can be extremely useful, especially for understanding paths to adoption, but aren’t their better
ways of making good decisions? “But you can’t have democracy without voting!”—Not true.
Speaking from experience, every setting where voting was used to decide things was less satisfying (in terms of
quality of decisions, experience of participation, and belief you could affect needed changes) than groups where
the process for discourse went deep enough that alignment was clear without a need for counting votes. That is
still “rule by the people” (democracy).

We Can Have More Parties / Elect Better Representatives.

Putting aside the fact that concentrating power into the hands of a small number of representatives makes it
easy for the wealthy to target their influence and manipulate those “representatives.
”Representatives can’t represent us. At least not in the general sense, that across all issues someone who
doesn’t even know me could be said to represent my perspective or interest in: net neutrality, military spending,
drug enforcement, funding for arts, immigration policy, etc. On a specific issue, I certainly might say: “Hey, the
things that person is saying really represent what I think about that”. So that kind of delegation of narrow
representation may be feasible, like in liquid democracy. But what about this concentrating of power effect?
Doesn’t it still warp outcomes? Yes it does. Realistically, the more power becomes aggregated or concentrated, a
system ends up with poorer discourse and is easier to manipulate.
We Know What Decisions to make.
It might have been much easier to address sustainable energy use or C02 emissions if we designed all our
technology with that in mind from the beginning. But we didn’t yet know it mattered. And now that we’re
addicted to convenience and certain lifestyles, it’s much harder to change course. The deeper problem is that
decisions are discrete, but the world is wholly interconnected. When we make a decision, we cut off a scope of
reality that we’re considering, and what we think could make it work better (who to date, a better job, a CO2
policy, use of resources on state lands, etc.).
When we cut out that little segment of reality, we did so using a bunch of assumptions about how things work,
and beliefs about how they are separate or independent of each other. Unfortunately, this is already a faulty
model. Everything is connected, but our decision making processes can’t deal with the complexity of
“everything.” So we chop the world into arbitrary parts and convince ourselves our cutting, and our
understanding of that segment is good enough to make useful decisions about it. Chances are good, that we’re
fooling ourselves.
Laws Should Be Carefully Deliberated and Made to Last.
So we’ve taken some piece of the world that we’re going to make a decision about (funding for head start
programs, health care insurance, a military action overseas), and now we’re going to be darn well sure to make
a good decision about it, right?. Let´s admit, some decisions are certainly better than others, and many of the
things so far are about ways to maximize the chances of better decisions rather than worse ones. Yet, we
significantly overestimate our ability to predict the outcomes of our decisions, while underestimating our
cognitive biases and corruption by self-serving influence of special interests feeding those biases. Many of you
may be familiar with the field of genetic algorithms (GA)—basically computer programs that randomly evolve
offspring which compete for better fitness for a solution to a problem. In many contexts, GA’s outperform
human programmers. When we use agile/adaptive governance approaches outperform structures which focus
heavily on the decision-making process. When we minimize the cost of trying something, learning from it, and
changing it if we didn’t get it right, then we’re leveraging human intelligence in the learning, rather than in
predicting an unknown future. Those organizations also tend to have more fun, and much shorter meetings.
Transparency (Blockchain Will Save Us)
We favor transparency, and see a commitment to it as admirable. Yet transparency often doesn’t accomplish
what we hope. In some cases, people feel vulnerable to attacks or persecution from disagreeing parties.
In other cases, it creates uncomfortable tension between personal inclinations and social pressures. But the
sticky point for me is that data taken out of context is not information, it is misinformation (alternative facts?)
When you have attained the level of expertise to be involved with making decisions about a complex issue, then
you are using specialized language in your discourse which is inherently opaque to people outside.
People outside of your context and domain of specialization can hear/see the same words, but they don’t have
the same meaning. This inaccessible jargon is an unavoidable part of “compressing” the massive complexity of a
problem into sentences we can actually speak. You could listen to podcast recordings on topics of our
cryptocurrency design conversations, but almost nobody would know what we’re saying.
They might think they do, because we’re using familiar words, but we’ve refined their use in our context to have
meanings others don’t share. So, as far as decision making goes, transparency doesn’t make that accessible in
the ways we’d hope, and in fact can fuel massive misunderstanding or misinformation campaigns by taking
things said out of context. But what about transparent record keeping on something like a Blockchain? First, as
far as governance goes, Blockchain doesn’t have any.
They skipped the step of building social processes for decision-making for changes to the underlying technology,
so even the Blockchain is vulnerable to all the challenges of human irrationality as it evolves. However, it is
certainly a step in the right direction to establish open record-keeping with data integrity assured by
cryptographic hashes, and data provenance verified by cryptographic signatures.
So, Is There No Hope?
If bankrupt assumptions are built into today’s governments and even most leading-edge digital governance
tools, aren’t we screwed? No. We’re in pretty good shape. The hidden benefit of the current crises happening in
numerous governments is that people are loosening their irrational faith in the system, and opening to new
possibilities they couldn’t have considered even just a year ago.
We have created a possible path for how we can get to governance for a world that works. So, although this
could all seem like discouraging news, to me it is heartening, because it means that gnawing desire we’ve had in
our guts for something better, is justified. There are approaches to governance which are actually fun, easy,
agile, and deeply satisfying, but we do have to confront the challenges of taking them to large scales. 4

2. MARKET OPPORTUNITY

For years, business headlines have screamed about the demise of brick-and-mortar retail stores at the hands of
e-commerce. The accepted storyline seems to be that the steep drop in business at physical stores is a result of
growing online sales. If you dig deeper into the market of consumer data, you'll find the truth is much less black
and white. According to TABS analytics it’s found that share gains from online are modest, at best. In some
cases, such as baby products, e-commerce increased share but still experienced a sales decline because of
weakness in the overall sector. For others, like vitamins and cosmetics, both online and brick-and-mortar sales
experienced gains. In no instance did e-commerce share grow enough to materially affect brick-and-mortar
sales.

The annual Food and Beverage Report revealed that online grocery share is anemic, struggling to reach the 2%
share mark. Less than 5% of adults make at least six online purchases per year. By contrast, 78% of adults
purchase regularly at traditional grocery stores, and 56% shop at Walmart. The survey also showed online
shopping grew by 14% compared to only 2% growth for physical stores. Brick-and-mortar is dying! Let’s take a
deep breath and run through the numbers, something most industry analysts seem loath to do. Analyzing data
from the Food and Beverage Report, we find that online grocery's share gain from 1.4 to 1.6 equates to $1.6
billion in extra sales. The 2% growth by physical stores is 10 times that number, $16 billion. Even if we shift all
of the online growth to physical stores, the growth rate would only move to 2.2%, still historically low levels for
the CPG industry. The non-effect of online sales also were evident in our study of beauty products. Walmart was
the clear leader in beauty with an estimated 17 share of transactions, and it also posted the highest share gains,
along with specialty beauty retailers Ulta and Sephora. Amazon and other e-tailers also grew share, but not as
much as the leading brick-and-mortar outlets. In fact, only 10-15% of U.S. adults make online purchases at least
once a week, according to the Pew Research Center. This statistic calls into question any industry estimates that
put online market share above that level. It’s certainly possible, and we see sectors, such as baby, to be more
like a 20% share. But the burden is on the analysts to support their estimates when we know so few Americans
are heavy online shoppers. One report by Fung Global Retail & Technology pins Amazon’s share of the U.S.
apparel market, including third-party sales, at a modest 3.7% for 2016. In the same study, it's revealed through
consumer survey data that no e-commerce site made the top 10 of preferred outlets. So if weakness in brick-
and-mortar retailers is not the primary cause behind a shift to online shopping, what gives? Our research
suggests there are two macroeconomic factors at play. First, there’s an income effect resulting from uneven
growth rates in purchasing power by income bracket. And secondly, there is a structural shift in consumer
preference. People are moving away from consumer staples and apparel toward electronics and durables. Only
the top 20% of income earners have seen their income grow, according to U.S. Census Bureau. At the same
time, the income of the remaining 80% has either lagged or just kept pace with inflation. This hurts the CPG
industry because the marginal spending on CPG is lower among those in the high-income bracket than other
consumers. For illustration: For every extra dollar of income for a household making $55,000 per year (the
national median), roughly eight cents will go toward CPG products. That number drops to only five cents (a 38%
decline) for a household making $180,000 per year. Based on our analysis of Nielsen data over the past five
years, CPG sales have grown less than 2% annually in the mass market, while overall consumption of all goods
has grown closer to 4% annually, corroborating the income disparity thesis. The growth in consumption appears
in other sectors. For example, consumer tech and cars are two sectors seeing significant gains and eating up
share of wallet. So the "lost" brick-and-mortar sales that some feel are shifting to online sales are actually going
away or shifting to other sectors.5 We look at flat income growth from most Americans (shifting consumption
4 Source from: Arthur Brock in ´Challenging Assumptions of Governance´.
5 Source from: Kurt Jetta, Ph.D. CEO and founder of TABS Analytics.
preferences) and low acceptance of online shopping overall. This adds up to a growing e-commerce channel, but
it's still not large enough in most sectors to have a material impact. In the meantime, all retailers have plenty of
time to study consumers and understand why more of them are not doing their shopping online and see what
offers they could offer to change consumers’ minds.

Why we need Purpple Now:

§ Combined small businesses are the largest employers, job generators and max GDP contributors in the
world. According to ZMR MARKET DATA, global mobile wallet will reach $3142 billion with 32% annual
increase by 2022. In the first quarter of 2017 the market was valued at 596 billion.
§ Surprisingly 67% of merchant application users say the use the wallet almost always when shopping at
the merchant.
§ Approximately 94% of total retail sales are still generated at brick and mortar stores.
§ 72% of millennials research their options online before actually making to the store.
§ 30% of surveyed customers prefer shopping in store to be able to see or feel the item from different
angles and ask for instant advice.
§ 3 out of 4 customers who find online information useful are more likely to visit stores.
§ Digital interactions influence 36 cents of every dollar spend in the retail store.
§ 22% of customers spend more at the store if digital channels are involved in the process.
§ 84% of customers believe that retailers should be doing more to better integrate their online and offline
channels.
§ The marketplace industry is ripe for an accelerated growth. As one of the top VC firms, Andreessen
Horowitz, put it: “This is just the beginning.”

So in the end finding new ways to combine e commerce and retail by providing a quick, seamlessly,
convenient and personalized experience is the only way to stay on business.

Fig - 1. Merchant Wallet Penetration.6

6 Source from: Image Credit - First Annapolis

Fig - 2. The way we bank is changing.7

3. PURPPLE PROYECT

THE PROBLEM

On one side Small business in cities and towns across the globe have suffer, are suffering any will continue to
suffer a decay on their business due to basically not adapting quick enough to the proliferation of competition
that comes from the internet, especially from centralized profit driven Social Marketplaces that act as
gatekeepers of who gets to be on top of the local searches at the cost of service, attention, quickness, etc. This
trend will gradually increase in the next years unless we find a better way to counter this problem.
On the other side users and shoppers are lacking of the quick personal touch of dealing with a local provider for
their favorite products and services.
Pain points of Users:
- Users don’t count with a single omni-channel point of contact to shop for products and services.
- Users don’t want to pay for high banking transaction fees.
Pain points of Small Business:
- Marketing strategies to increase sales to Small Business are dominated and dictated by few social and search
marketplaces who impose high fees to access those advertising services, like PPC, PPA, Display Ads, etc.
- Platforms that help small business and users to connect each other online do not offer any real advantage and
appealing over the big Box retailers and dealers.

THE SOLUTION

We’re developing a value generating system for small business and users that will fuel the power to create a
DECENTRALIZED MARKETPLACE - that uses a new powerful cryptocurrency that is stable, supply dynamic,
supply sufficient, low volatile medium of exchange and store of value created to last overtime and whose main
objective is that by exchanging of value propel the re-distribution of wealth and power to fight with the constant
growth of inequality.

Our concept base on the idea that new trends in technology should be taken to the masses for benefit of all and
not concentrated in a few platforms that don’t have doubtful business practices, where all users have an
opportunity to be part as a user and benefactor of the system.

7 Source from: Annual retail banking conference.

Fig – 3. Purpple´s future ecosystem.

4. PLATFORM DESCRIPTION

To address these problems and bring back business to retail stores we´ve designing an innovative platform
where we all can participate and collaborate. The platform will be easy to sign-up and use, free for users and for
business, but as the marketplace grows will provide more services aligned to create value and financial
opportunities to uses, business and towards a decentralized leadership and development.

a. Marketplace

This main feature is where all the e-commerce (buy/sell/search, etc.) takes place and it was designed to
showcase fairly all stores near users searching for them. In simple terms what every users want is:

EASY TO FIND
EASY TO SHOP

EASY TO SELL

EASY TO MANAGE
b. Communication Platform – Messenger

Our integrated messenger module will allow to any user to interact with friends and stores, users don’t have to
change between many apps to shop, search or communicate with the world around.

EASY TO TALK
c. Financial Platform - Omni Wallet (Integrated bank)

Accepting payments, is the most vexing problem that merchants need to solve. As of Q4 2017, less than a
third of B2C SMBs and a mere 10 percent of B2B SMBs had the capability to accept payments online,
according to the PYMNTS SMB Technology Index.

From ordering groceries online to going to a retail store and comparing prices on a mobile app,
or even shopping with the help of virtual reality (VR) or augmented reality (AR) — omni-channel
interaction between consumers and merchants is now the new standard.

Fig – 4. How people is expected to pay by 2021.8

8 Source from: Worldpay global

“Payments is a huge friction point for SMBs that want to get up and running quickly, “When customer behavior
is analyzed, is found that a lot of merchants struggle to find success as they fail to overcome the hurdles of
setting up their payment options. It’s just too complicated. For SMBs, that simplification process isn’t always,
well, so simple. In today’s market, even for SMBs, expanding an online presence doesn’t stop at rolling out an e-
commerce platform. Modern consumers want and expect more from their relationship with merchants. And while
providing an omni-channel experience is easier for large retailers, it can be a gargantuan task for smaller
merchants, especially online startups.

SMBs don’t typically have the deep pockets of big-name retailers and are left struggling to keep up with rapidly
evolving technology and to offer a seamless payment and shopping experience. When launching an omni-
channel platform, SMBs want to be able to maximize their return on investment. “Small businesses don’t
typically have the resources as larger ones,” he said. “Especially if you are online or if you just started and you’re
growing your business, and you are a sole proprietor or have a very small employee base — you want to be able
to leverage all the existing investments you’ve made in your website, infrastructure and so on.

And making sure those investments in digital don’t go to waste often means partnering with the right providers
that can help maximize a retailer’s efforts. For SMBs, providing customers with an optimal omni-channel
experience is, in a way, piecing together a puzzle in which payments are positioned right in the center. However,
the payment platform landscape, as it stands, remains fragmented when it comes to small businesses. Online
merchants are often left with no choice but to rely on multiple solutions in order to accept payments in different
currencies (even harder with cryptocurrencies) from customers spread out around the world. Payments has
always been a key component of enabling commerce or e-Commerce for small businesses, and the need for
merchants to work with a one-stop shop solution that can make the experience seamless for their customers.
For our SMBs to extend an array of payment options to their customers, we will integrate our wallet with a
network that connects our smb¨s well over with 50 payment gateways and processors. To overcome one and for
all these inconvenience the following wallet is our proposition to a seamless omni-channel payments and
transfers experience from either your desktop, smartphone (in the near future also trough wearable’s, VR, AR).
So we have a new way to access your financial services from your wallet:

EASY TO PAY

EASY TO SAVE AND EARN

 5. BUSINESS MODEL

Due to the company future decentralized model and self-sustainable governance our business model is based in
the following streams of income distribution, knowing that the major purpose to build this platform is to create
infinite recurring value for its users:

I. Transactions fees from payments.

PURPPLE will charge in every business transaction a 3% fee, of which:

1% will go to keep the platform constantly innovating, the other 1% will go to future yearly social and
infrastructure projects in states these communities are and will vote for, the last 1% will be returned to the user
as a cashback bonus for each purchase on the platform to incentivize usage and commerce among business and
users. This cashback bonus is in addition to any other cashback program the business may have in place to its
customers.

II. Revenue from Advertising Platform.

All PURPPLE users will receive 50% revenue from its integrated Advertising Platform, the remaining 50% will be
used for advertising platform R&D, marketing, leadership and governance.

III. Hosting from users Smartphone`s and IOT devices.

Every time a user downloads the PURPPLE App it will have the option to opt in to generate an extra income by
allowing its device (s) to host space for transactions made on the platform, user`s will be rewarded with BITX
Tokens for those transactions.

IV. Revenues from Credit Cards, Debit Cards, financial Institutions and others.

The revenue generated from the transactions using anyone of the legacy payments from outside the platform
will be 50% for users and 50% will be used for advertising, platform R&D, Marketing, leadership and
governance.
Transfers of BITX Tokens among users is completely free, so no income will be generated from it.

Future additions to increase revenues will be the integration of micro/small personal/business loans and
insurance offerings within the personal and business wallets.

Payments for services and revenue distribution will be made with BITX Tokens within the system. Tokens will be
available on a variety of exchanges until that existence is repurchased.

Purpple will never sell platform`s data to third party companies or individuals, that data will be used to the
growth of the platform products and services. Users will own their personal data and will use it at its own
discretion.

6. MARKETING AND STRATEGY

Local evangelists, brand ambassadors, content marketing gurus, YouTubers, tech gurus (Geographically based)
will receive 1% of transactions they generate with the Ambassadors Affiliate Program they are involved with.

A substantial amount of budget will be allocated for public awareness, consumer marketing and B2C sales and
marketing. The local retail and consumer packaged goods industries (events, exhibitions) will be a particular
area of focus for these campaigns. We`ll are establishing ongoing cooperation with telecommunication,
manufacturers and firmware developers with the goal of getting our app to be integrated with new devices.

A bounty program will be established with funds for hosting coverage to leverage infrastructure. Different
geographical areas will have regional pricing suggested by the Hosting Service Industry, but each local provider
will be able to overwrite this price creating marketplace dynamics.

Hosting providers who choose PURPPLE will be provided with industry leading tools to generate metrics for the
user and business owner to retention, returning customers, statistics, abuse counter measurements (web, https,
and email), hosting limitation, etc.

Using PURPPLE decentralized social e-commerce network will allow businesses to target consumers directly, and
both sides stand to gain. On the consumers’ side, we`ll see an increase in privacy as their browsing habits are
no longer sold to the highest bidder. Small business benefit from knowing that their marketing campaigns reach
their desired audience more effectively, cutting down on unnecessary marketing costs.

Strategy will be directed to make this platform the core of the retail ecosystem by disrupting value creation and
value capture by:

a. Attracting new customers to an ecosystem of thrusted and verified stores.

b. Onboarding new users and stores through cutting edge marketing channels.
c. A reward system for users and stores to upload good pictures, posts and reviews.
d. Empathizing on the marketplace power to provide additional economic growth to users and businesses.
e. Promoting inclusion to the 2+ Billion unbanked, underserved and underpaid.

7. COMPETITION

All the following companies listed below exercise a different grade of competition to our core products on the
platform:

Square.
9
Square, Inc. is a financial services, merchant services aggregator and mobile payment company based in San
Francisco, California. The company markets several software and hardware payments products, including Square
Register and Square Reader, and has expanded into small business services such as Square Capital, a financing
program, Square Cash, a person-to-person payments service, and Square Payroll. The company was founded in
2009 by Jack Dorsey and Jim Mc Kelvey and launched its first app and service in 2010. Square Register allows
individuals and merchants in the United States, Canada, Japan, Australia, and the United Kingdom, to accept

9 Source from: Wikipedia

offline debit and credit cards on their iOS or Android smartphone or tablet computer. The application software
("app") supports manually entering the card details, swiping the card through the audio jack-connected Square
Reader, or inserting or tapping the card using the Bluetooth LE-connected Square Chip and Contactless Reader.

Yelp.
10
Yelp is an American multinational corporation headquartered in San Francisco, California. It develops, hosts
and markets Yelp.com and the Yelp mobile app, which publish crowd-sourced reviews about local businesses, as
well as the online reservation service Yelp Reservations. The company also trains small businesses in how to
respond to reviews, hosts social events for reviewers, and provides data about businesses, including health
inspection scores. Yelp was founded in 2004 by former PayPal employees Russel Simmons and Jeremy
Stoppelman. Yelp grew quickly and raised several rounds of funding. By 2010 it had $30 million in revenues and
the website had published more than 4.5 million crowd-sourced reviews. From 2009 to 2012, Yelp expanded
throughout Europe and Asia. In 2009 it entered several negotiations with Google for a potential acquisition. Yelp
became a public company in March 2012 and became profitable for the first time two years later. As of 2016,
Yelp.com has 135 million monthly visitors and 95 million reviews. The company's revenues come from
businesses advertising.

PayPal
11
PayPal Holdings, Inc. is an American company operating a worldwide online payments system that supports
online money transfers and serves as an electronic alternative to traditional paper methods like checks and
money orders. PayPal is one of the world's largest Internet payment companies. The company operates as a
payment processor for online vendors, auction sites and other commercial users, for which it charges a small fee
in exchange for benefits such as one-click transactions and password memory.
Established in 1998, PayPal had its initial public offering in 2002, and became a wholly owned subsidiary of eBay
later that year. In 2014, eBay announced plans to spin-off PayPal into an independent company by mid-2015
and this was completed on July 18, 2015.

WhatsApp.
12
WhatsApp Messenger is a freeware and cross-platform instant messaging and Voice over IP (VoIP) service. The
application allows the sending of text messages and voice calls, as well as video calls, images and other media,
documents, and user location. The application runs from a mobile device though it is also accessible from
desktop computers; the service uses standard cellular mobile numbers. Originally users could only communicate
with other users individually or in groups of individual users, but in September 2017 WhatsApp announced a
forthcoming business platform which will enable companies to provide customer service to users at scale. All
data is end-to-end encrypted. The client was created by WhatsApp Inc., based in Mountain View, California,
which was acquired by Facebook in February 2014 for approximately US$19.3 billion. By February 2016,
WhatsApp had a user base of over one billion, making it the most popular messaging application at the.

Instagram.
13
Instagram is a mobile, desktop, and Internet-based photo-sharing application and service that allows users to
share pictures and videos either publicly, or privately to pre-approved followers. It was created by Kevin Systrom
and Mike Krieger, and launched in October 2010 as a free mobile app exclusively for the iOS operating system.
It is owned by Facebook. Instagram lets registered users upload photos or videos to the service. Users can apply
various digital filters to their images, and add locations through geotags. They can add hashtags to their posts,
linking the photos up to other content on Instagram featuring the same subject or overall topic. Users can
connect their Instagram account to other social media profiles, enabling them to share photos to those profiles
as well. In August 2016, Instagram introduced a "Stories" feature, letting users add photos to a 24-hour
temporary story, with subsequent updates adding virtual stickers and augmented reality objects.

10 Source from: Wikipedia

11 Source from: Wikipedia
12 Source from: Wikipedia
13 Source from: Wikipedia
In addition to the above companies we will be in competition with Facebook Ads, Twitter Ads and Google
AdWords for in App local advertising revenue share.

8. DECENTRALIZATION AND GOVERNANCE

Leadership Model and Future Decentralization and Governance

With the advent of DLT´s and DAG´s (Blockchain, Hashgraprh, Holochain, Tangle) give birth to other underlying
projects like Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, DAO´s (decentralized autonomous organizations), SAC´s (sovereign
accountable commons), IOT (internet of things), and many other projects currently developing especially in the
financial realm are specially dedicated towards decentralization of everything they can think of. We´ve seen that
even though there may have the best intentions to a better financial system or any other ecosystem to finally
have a better redistribution of power and resources, most projects are failing to compare this two most intricate
and if not most important facts in software and human life:

´Bits are governed by software´

´Humans are governed by emotional experiences of choice and the need/search to fulfill them, either conscious
or unconsciously´.

There is mot such thing as ´Collective Self-Regulation´, any collective that we know of and any social or
business structure has a Leadership model to take care of the critical day to day decisions that the collective
goes through, on this specific case what if the code has a critical bug, a critical power outage, who in the
collective is in charge of new product innovation, adaptation, upgrades, strategies. We already know what is to
have a decentralized cryptocurrency like Bitcoin with all the issues regarding instability, transaction fees,
scalability, forks, mining centralization, etc., etc.

We want to develop a platform to survive over times, for this reason the following structure of leadership had
been envisioned to manage all those new challenges decentralized entities will face in the near future.

AUTONOMUS DECENTRALIZED AI POWERED TOKENIZED ORGANIZATION (ADAPT)

The ADAPT organization is based on the following main basic principles:

1. We acknowledge that every person independently of race, color, religion, credo or sexual orientation has an
inherent right to seek happiness, liberty and prosperity within our society, respectfully of others and the
government mandation or imposition.
2. We/I/Do not accept the principle that other people not necessarily know, need, deserve better that I do as
to what is best for me and my family and the communities we leave in.
3. We/I/Do accept the principle that wherever a person believes about our creation and faith is his (her) own
business, and I can and will respect it even if I don’t agree with it, however, I will not accept any imposition
upon me of anybody else`s belief`s, live and let live respectfully and peacefully of each other.
4. Any social structure which we`re expected to accept must not be imposed upon us. We must accept it
readily
or be allowed to defer and to propone a better solution to be agreed upon through voting and implemented
accordingly.
5. That there be a reasonable expectation that in commerce in general people will procure honest and ethical
transactions, community based considerations and that unscrupulous businesses and bad actors will be
monitored and reported to corresponding authorities.
6. That any and all contracts (including unit of account) on this platform must be in without any political,
economic or social prejudice and will reflect the reasonable rights and expectations of all parties according
to fair and unbiased decisions.
We`re not trying to create, dissuade or embark you in any type of believe, religion or similar we`re just looking
to establish the best possible decentralized governance for this ADAPT organization.

The ADAPT organization has been designed to adapt scale and evolve and shall have for this purpose an
integrated governance.

INTEGRATED GOVERNANCE OF AN A.D.A.P.T ORGANIZATION

After we register the foundation in Singapore, we´ll appoint the initial core team and directory. Our plan is to
get this foundation totally integrated to a self-sustainable decentralized organization in an estimated timeframe
of about 5 to 7 years.

One of the main objective of the ADAPT Organization is to provide a liquid democracy that works by forming
advanced sound proposals for current and future decisions to keeping up with platform´s daily functioning and
its innovative evolution into the future.

This organization will have the following entities and sub-entities with different scopes, but with equal rights and
responsibilities:

- CLEARENCE 1: - Executive Management. {CEO, COO, CFO, CMO, CAIO, CTO, Board, etc.}
- LEVEL 1:A: Executive Advisors
- LEVEL 1:B: AI Advisors
- CLEARENCE 2: - Senior Management. {VICE-PRESIDENCY, SENIOR EXECUTIVES.}
- LEVEL 2:A: Executive Advisors
- LEVEL 2:B: AI Advisors
- CLEARENCE 3: - Department Managers. {Department Directors}
- LEVEL 3:A: Senior Advisors
- LEVEL 3:B: AI Advisors
- CLEARENCE 4: - Area Manager. {Supervisors}
- LEVEL 4:A: Senior Advisors
- LEVEL 4:B: AI Advisors
- CLEARENCE 5: - Team Leader. {Leaders}
- LEVEL 5:A: Senior Advisors
- LEVEL 5:B: AI Advisors
- CLEARENCE 6: - Team Member. {Associates}
- LEVEL 6:A: Senior Advisors
- LEVEL 6:B: AI Advisors

The main task on any of the 6 clearance levels is to present proposals and execute timely decisions (urgency)
based on research, experience, advisors, analytics, peer review, hypothesis, users, proof, concepts or ideas, so
any of this proposals or pending decisions will be immediately posted on user´s dashboard for virtual voting
(50%), to all registered professionals around the world with experience on the subject proposed (17%), to the
board (17%) and to the AI advisory team (16%). The professionals, the directory and the AI Advisors will vote
first, this way users will have an informed decision before voting.

This way broad decisions will be taken for all users, professionals, boards and AI advisors, minor internal
decisions will be taken by a random group of professionals and advisor´s, who are experts on the subject and
whom will vote for the best option or solution to be taken.

So neither the team department's, neither the leads nor the directory will take directly decisions, they will just
propone the solutions based on their area of expertise and a pool of designated experts will vote for the best
solutions, all this decisions will have to be taken according to a proposed timeframe, 1 year, 6mo, 3mo, 1mo, 1
week, 1 day, 1 hour, and immediately. All teams will last 2.5 years (option to renovate only once) and will be
chosen the same way decisions are made and voted for.

A completed and detailed explanation of the A.D.A.P.T Organization will be given in our technical whitepaper.
 9. TECHNICAL DETAILS
Will be using Holochain to fuel our platform ecosystem, here is how the system will work:

Fig – 5. Diagram describing Purpple decentralized ecosystem.

Infrastructure Provider.
Holochain Protocol and its distributed platform will be used as a base layer to power Purpple platform
infrastructure design.
Application Provider (Purple).
Purple will interact as one of the main application layers within the Holochain Ecosystem
Supporting Hosts.
The hosts are people or businesses that receive an income when provide hosting on their smartphones or
devices to complete transactions.
Application Users.
All the people that signs up as a user and all the people that signs up as business.
BITX Utility Token.
This Bitx utility token doesn’t represent a share, equity or any type of ownership of the company. The primary
function of our Bitx utility token is to serve as a medium of exchange in the Marketplace, this token will be
priced as the total result of the daily value of the 25 most used currencies in the world. As an example how will
price its daily toke value, is explained as the following, for an instance let`s say the total value of a Bitt token at
12:00 EST comes to USD 20, 00. We`ll use that value as the daily value for all trades and exchanges in the
platform and so on. We do it that way so our token is the most valued cryptocurrency in reference to any other
fiat currency, this way the token will never lost its top average value because is always the sum all the major fiat
currencies in existence. So if any major fiat currency changes its value up and down it will not cause a major
effect over the platform, we will also add quantum proof risk mitigation parameters in case of war, natural
disasters and others.
 10. ICO – INICIAL COMMUNITY OFFERING

The PURPPLE ICO crowdsale event and the corresponding token creation process will be organized around smart
contracts running on Ethereum Platform.

In Total 300 Million PURPPLE tokens (BITX) will be created. And they will be issued and distributed in two
PHASES

Phase I

200 Million Tokens will be issued for ICO crowdsale event

Phase II

100 Million Tokens issued after platform launch to rewards every user at sign up and for referral program.

Participants willing to support the development of the PURPPLE Project can do so by sending Ethereum to the
designated address, or by contributing through PURPPLE platform. By doing so, they are purchasing PURPPLE
Tokens (BITTX at the rate of 1000 BITX per 1 ETH which will be sent to their wallet.

During token sale several rounds (Tiers) will be organized with different Bonus, Discount rates and payment
methods.

a. PRE-ICO

During the Pre-ICO, participants will have an opportunity to get 3x token Bonus. Only 1, 5% of total tokens are
distributed in this way, representing an excellent opportunity for early participants. The Minimum investment is
0.5 ETH while the Maximum is 100 ETH per investment.

Pre-sale of funds will be utilized for:

• ICO Marketing • Product MVP • Legal and Consulting • Advisors • Infrastructure

b. ICO

Participants willing to support the development of PURPPLE Project can do so by sending Ethereum currency to
the designated address, or by contributing throw PURPPLE web channels with other types of payments. By doing
so, they are purchasing PURPPLE Tokens (BITX) at the rate of 1000 BITX per 1 ETH which will be sent to their
wallet.

During token sale several rounds (Tiers) will be organized with a different Discount rates, payment methods.
PURPPLE keeps the right to have special negotiated deals and discounts for large stake community investors.

DETAILS:

• The main currency during the token generation event is Ether (ETH).

• It can be proposed to participate in other forms of payments too.

• Token Creation will be capped (“Soft Cap”) for 17.5 million BITX sold. This amount is subject to change before
the Token Creation event.

· Token Creation has a Hard Cap: upon achieving this Cap, token creation will stop and no further contributions
will be accepted. The Hard Cap is equal to 140 Million BITX.

• The Token Creation period will last till August 15st of 2018 or till all created PURPPLE tokens for the initial
phase will be sold.

• If the Crowdsale campaign does not reach its minimal capital goal all funds will be returned automatically to
the BITX holders.
• Tokens that are not sold during the Crowdsale rounds will be automatically transferred to the further financing
rounds by the smart contract, and will be kept to for next phase.

TOTAL TOKENS ISSUED 1 Billion BITX

(200 M Crowdsale and 100M Bonus)
(700 M for Global expansion)

TOKENS FOR SALE5 70%, 140 Million BITX

TOKEN SYMBOL BITX

BITX TOKENS GENERATED PER ETH 1000 BITX

SOFT CAP 17.5 Million BITX

HARD CAP 140 Million BITX

PERCENTAGE OF TOKENS FOR PURPPLE FOUNDERS 5%, 10 M (vested up to 36 months)

PURPPLE OPERATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE FUND 12,5%, 25 M

(FOR INITIAL OPERATIONS)

PERCENTAGE OF TOKENS GENERATED TO BOUNTY 12.5%, 25 M

CAMPAIGN, ADVISORS,SUPPORTERS AND PARTNERS

DATE OF CROWDSALE START 25th Of June, 2018

DATE OF CROWDSALE END 15st of August, 2018

Fig – 6. ICO Details

ROUND DETAILS

PRE – ICO ICO - PRESALE ICO TIER - 1 ICO TIER - 2 ICO TIER - 3

Silent June-25 / July-02 July-03 / June-18 June-19 / June- June-27 / August-15

26

Up to 2,6 M BITX Up to 32 M Up to 56 M Up to 32 M Up to 5,4 M and Over

Start Bonus 50% Bonus 35% Bonus 15% Bonus 0%

Fig – 7. Pre-ICO and ICO round details.

• Shortly after the ICO, PURPPLE tokens will be available on major exchanges, please remember that the max
value that each BITX token reaches outside the PURPPLE Marketplace will be set from inside the PURPPLE
Marketplace daily exchange value.

• Usage of PURPPLE services increases BITX token network effect and furthermore increasing its power of
adoption and value.

• For example if Ethereum is worth 600 USD, BITX will be worth 0.60 USD/PURPPLE (rate with Ethereum fixed
at the 1000 BITX s per ETH)

• For example if Ethereum is worth 1000 USD, BITX will be worth 1.00 USD/PURPPLE (rate with Ethereum fixed
at the 1000 BITX per ETH).

C. BUDGET ALLOCATION

Exact budgets will be allocated after the funding round.

Fig – 8. Diagram showing budget distribution.

• TEAM - up to 10% Operations worldwide

• LEGAL - up to 10%

• ENGINEERING - 40% R&D

• MARKETING - 30% Product global awareness, B2B promotion

• MANAGEMENT and VARIOUS- 10%

D. BUYBACK PROGRAM

A BITX Token repurchasing program would be in place 3 month after ICO to reward our investors community
who supported this project, tokens will be repurchased at fair market value. But this program will not be used or
intended to alter the market price in any way, so tokens will be bought in a discretionary manner from all our
early supporters, bounties, hackathons, etc.

E. VESTING

Ensuring commitment. All tokens distributed to the team, bounty and advisors are subject to vesting. Vesting
model ensures more value and security for the token contributors. Vesting provides more loyalty from the initial
core team towards the project and ensures that BITX is not subject to market manipulation and provides stable
market development for the BITX token. Eventually vesting is a way for the PURPPLE team to show the
commitment and loyalty for the PURPPLE project.

PURPPLE introduces the following Vesting model:

BITX tokens for co-founders will be locked once Token Sale distribution will end.

1. 1/3 of BITX is locked for 6 months from Token Sale distribution

2. 1/3 of BITX is locked for 24 months from Token Sale distribution

3. 1/3 of BITX is locked for 36 months from Token Sale distribution

The vesting model is active for 36 months in total and shall be activated with a smart contract once the token
sale is complete.
11. ROAD MAP
Fig – 9. Roadmap diagram schedule.
NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER

This Whitepaper is important and should be read in its entirety. To the best knowledge of the authors, this
Whitepaper contains information that is provided only in compliance with the requirements of applicable laws,
rules and regulations. All product and company names are trademarks™ or registered® trademarks of their
respective holders. Use of them does not imply any affiliation with or endorsement by them. The content of this
document includes forward looking statements with respect to PURPPLE network financial and technical viability.
The effects of regulation by the governments of countries in which it may wish to operate. Expectations
regarding the operating environment and market conditions. Forward-looking statements are sometimes, but not
always, identified by their use of a date in the future. Forward looking statements are predictive and involve risk
and uncertainty. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and are based on
assumptions. BITX Tokens issued by PURPPLE do not have any rights, uses, purpose, attributes, functionalities
or features, expressed or implied. Although BITX Tokens may be tradable, they are not an investment, currency,
security, commodity, a swap on a currency, security, or commodity or any kind of financial instrument.

This whitepaper contains confidential information only available to first pre-ico investors.

Provided definitions apply throughout the document, unless indicated otherwise.