Why is Taiwan’s Fintech such a Laggard? What Does Its Future Hold?

Jun Wakabayashi, Analyst (若林純 / 分析師)

Jun is an Analyst covering both AppWorks Accelerator and Greater Southeast Asia. Born and bred in America, Jun brings a wealth of international experience to AppWorks. He spent the last several years before joining AppWorks working for Focus Reports, where he conducted sector-based market research and interviewed high-level government leaders and industry executives across the globe. He’s now lived in 7 countries outside US and Taiwan, while traveling to upwards of 50 for leisure, collectively highlighting his unique propensity for cross-cultural immersion and international business. Jun received his Bachelors in Finance from New York University’s Stern School of Business.

Taiwan is often not top of mind when it comes to fintech in this part of the world. For one reason or another, first impressions generally evoke a sense of conservatism or stringency, with little room for fintech innovation, at least when compared to some of its peers in the region like Singapore or Hong Kong. Certainly, when I dug into our own ecosystem, out of the 395 active startups that have passed through AppWorks Accelerator, only 15 or 4% were found to be working on fintech, with only 8 of them headquartered in Taiwan. 

It’s rather a curious phenomenon. I’ve always heard about Taiwan’s lacking fintech capabilities, but at the same time, I also recognize that the country features many characteristics conducive to innovation around financial services, including a strong talent pool, high rates of internet/mobile penetration, widespread access to credit cards and bank accounts, and a generally higher willingness to pay and save compared to other, more emerging countries in the region. 

Yet, activity in this space feels paltry at best. There are currently less than 60 fintech players operating in Taiwan, in contrast to around 350 in South Korea, 600 in Hong Kong, and 1,200 in Singapore. Regulations are often cited as a primary deterrent. Regulations, however, are the bedrock of any financial system to prevent it from breaking. So, what is it specifically about Taiwan’s regulatory regime that seems to turn founders away? And what opportunities, if any, have yet to be uncovered for prospective fintech players looking to enter Taiwan?

Money in the bank

Taiwan displays a very robust financial services sector, and is considered “overbanked” by most standard measures. There are 36 domestic commercial banks and 5,055 branch offices catering to a population of 24 million people according to Taiwan’s Central Bank. That’s equivalent to 210 branches per million population; by contrast, Hong Kong counted 165 and Korea 133 in 2017. Consequently, roughly 94% of all Taiwanese adults now have bank accounts, visibly surpassing the global average of 69%. The high concentration of financial services in Taiwanese cities has led to high levels of convenience, demonstrated by the ratios of 141 ATMs per 100,000 people (compared to the global average of 53), roughly 2 credit cards and 3 NFC payment cards (i.e. Easycard, iPass, iCard) per person, and the highest insurance coverage in the world.

Despite the well established banking system, penchant for digitalization among financial institutions is still sparse. Speaking to my own experiences as a consumer, I find myself commonly faced with clunky mobile banking apps or often displacing my physical passbooks which are still widely used by banks. Strict KYC/AML/anti-fraud procedures and largely paper-based processes can sometimes turn simple banking requests into half-day, in-person affairs. And of course, limited English speaking staff, user interfaces, and forms pose a distinct set of challenges for foreign entrepreneurs.

From a startup’s perspective, establishing partnerships with banks and more specifically winning their trust is an uphill battle to say the least. One lending startup that I spoke to spent more than a year meeting with multiple rungs of internal team members within a bank from product to sales to credit risk to compliance, all in an effort to convey their value proposition and get buy-in across the hierarchy for a potential collaboration. By contrast, it only took them 3 months to establish the same type of commercial partnership in a neighboring country.

The tides, however, seem to be gradually changing. In 2016, the Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC) which oversees all finance sectors unveiled a strategy to revolutionize fintech development in Taiwan. It details a handful of priorities including doubling e-payment penetration, promoting blockchain adoption, creating a fintech incubation hub, while issuing an industry-wide mandate for banks to collaborate more with startups and digitalize some of their existing service offerings. All these initiatives aim to ensure that financial institutions adequately meet consumers’ evolving needs and play an active role in facilitating Taiwan’s digital economy, instead of falling by the wayside. 

In 2018, for example, the country’s largest P2P lender LnB successfully established a customer data-sharing agreement with Standard Chartered Bank Taiwan, which leverages the online platform to reach a younger, more digitally savvy segment of the market. Meanwhile, Fubon Financial, towards the end of last year announced its partnership with local blockchain developer AMIS to launch a blockchain-based money transfer service. 

Do a quick Google search and you’ll find many other recent press releases from banking institutions similarly touting their embrace of startups and digital technology, distinctly contrasting the general tone several years ago. It’s a good start, but more work needs to be done in moving beyond PR rhetoric and reforming the overall mentality towards innovation among decision makers in both financial institutions and regulatory agencies. 

Better safe than sorry

The basis of Taiwan’s regulatory and broader legal system finds its roots in Germanic civil law, which is widely adopted across continental Europe, Latin America, and many parts of Asia including Japan and South Korea. It’s a rule-based system that basically says “you’re only allowed to do what I say is allowed” as opposed to the more principle-based common law found in the US or UK where it’s more of a “if I don’t prohibit it, then you can do it” attitude, according to Shan Luo, managing director of FinTechSpace, a government-supported incubator for local and international fintech startups. 

Consequently, many regulations in Taiwan follow a positive-listed approach, restricting the scope of possibilities to a very narrow band that may not adequately capture the evolution of technology. For example, a typical KYC process for opening an online brokerage account might stipulate a national ID card as a requirement under Taiwanese laws, whereas a negative-listed approach might just require anything that proves your ID. The latter is a broad stroke up for interpretation, whereas the former is a granular instruction that specifically dictates what is allowed, with anything outside those bounds requiring a codified change in the law, which can take upwards of 2 years.

The rigid legalese not only stems from the fact the regulators can be held personally liable for any fraud, misconduct, or oversight that resulted from their decrees, but also Taiwan’s largely export-driven economy. As a global manufacturer of electronic goods, Taiwan derives roughly 55% of its GDP from exports, and is thus very cautious in preventing money laundering or any financial crime that might undermine its status as a reliable trading partner.

It comes as no surprise then that most finance-related activities require a license, which normally comes attached with steep capital requirements and strict AML procedures that fall beyond the means of a typical early stage startup.

Finatext, for example, is Japanese startup that offers zero-commission online stock trading, very much in a similar fashion as Robinhood in the US. In order to set up shop in Taiwan, they would need at least NT$200 million (US$6.7 million) of paid-in capital to secure a brokerage license, a steep hurdle from what they’ve experienced in their home country. “Japan has long recognized that there’s no one-size-fits-all approach when it comes to startups. Their brokerage license actually comes in 4 types, ranging from light to heavy, depending on the nature of your business. For us, we’re doing a purely online business and thus qualified for the light version which requires minimal capital requirements,” says David Tsai, managing director of Finatext Taiwan. 

Zero-commission trading is actually not even allowed due to protections by not only the FSC, but also the brokerage unions who fear that the business model may threaten the job security of thousands of brokers. Nevertheless, Taiwan has long recognized the value of fintech and begun to make small but resolute steps forward. In 2018, FSC launched a regulatory sandbox for startups to trial their business without the associated regulatory risks. EMQ (AppWorks is an investor) was the first startup to enter the sandbox, where they’ve been able to successfully roll out their cross-border remittance service to the hundreds of thousands of migrant workers in Taiwan. 

More recently, the FSC announced its plan to roll out Open API across its entire banking sector, which essentially allows third-party service providers including startups to more seamlessly integrate with banks and leverage their data. Ultimately, this would allow customers to enjoy a more diverse and convenient array of financial services through technology, bringing Taiwan closer in line with global standards.

Complement, don’t disrupt

While Taiwan’s financial system may not have as many glaring pain points as those markets in Southeast Asia where up to 70% of the people are either unbanked or underbanked, the country still has its fair share of gaps and inefficiencies in the market. But the more successful models have skewed more towards those that complement existing infrastructure, not disrupt it. 

Moneybook, for example, is riding on the fact that most adults are simply inundated with financial products and need a better way to organize their personal finances. “Consumers on average have 2 to 3 bank accounts, with a new one opened whenever they switch jobs, and 2 to 5 credit cards, each with a different purpose. Our online platform helps consolidate all of that and provides users with a holistic view of their spending and overall financial health,” details Isaac Chiang, co-founder of Moneybook. 

While consumers have no trouble quickly gaining access to cheap financial products like low-interest loans, SMEs often have challenges obtaining a debt facility. “Companies that have annual sales turnover over NT$100 million (US$3.5 million) shouldn’t have a lot of problems when applying for bank financing. But smaller companies, with turnover below NT$100 million (US$3.5 million) it’s still not easy, due to a lack of collateral or financial history. But if they are eligible for a loan, the terms are usually not very favorable, and the 3 months of KYC and overall onboarding process also presents its own set of pain points,” depicts Anson Suen, founder of FundPark (AW#14). 

Clearly, there are still many parts of the economy where traditional banking institutions cannot necessarily reach. This is why the FSC recently granted online banking licenses for three digital banks Next Bank, Line Bank, and Rakuten International Commercial Bank, who can theoretically offer more low-cost services and access a subset of the population due to the absence of physical branches.

E-payments is another area that the government has been promoting heavily, setting an ambitious goal of 90% penetration by 2025. Heavy tax incentives for mobile payment adoption has led transactions to reach NT$120.9 billion (US$4.15 billion) in the first seven months of this year, growing 127% from the year prior, with the lion’s share dominated by JKOPay, LINE Pay, and Apple Pay. 

Beyond the pastures

In the realm of venture capital, we often try to visit things from first principles; that is, holding our unconscious biases and knee-jerk assumptions up to a microscope and see if they still hold true, usually after several rounds of asking “why.” 

Any impressions of stringency surrounding Taiwan’s fintech landscape are generally true. Taiwan is a developed market with an extensive and in many cases restrictive regulatory regime; however, that doesn’t mean there aren’t any problems to solve. The country’s fundamentals are comparatively solid, in terms of internet/mobile penetration and availability of financial services, which collectively lead to a whole new set of opportunities. This is clearly evident in the growing success of mobile payments and potential promise of digital-only banks.

Of course, a conversation around fintech wouldn’t be complete without mentioning blockchain. 2020 has been the year of decentralized finance (DeFi), now with over US$14B of total value locked-in, with many Taiwanese companies riding the wave such as Steaker (AW#20), Fuly.ai (AW#20), and Pelith (AW#21). Certainly, the very concept of decentralization is rather provocative, as it negates the need for any centralized authority like the FSC in the first place. But it’s still early days DeFi, and whether or not it can fulfill the everyday financial needs of consumers while adequately protecting their interests has yet to be fully proven. As we’ve seen with the eras of ICOs/STOs/IEOs, regulatory frameworks are likely imminent as DeFi grows in adoption, but hopefully not to the point where it throttles innovation. 

Nevertheless, with recent initiatives like the regulatory sandbox and open banking, Taiwan has been making a steadfast push in not only catching up with other fintech hubs around the region but effectively putting itself ahead of the curve.

【If you are a founder working on a startup in SEA, or working with AI / IoT, Blockchain / DeFi, apply to AppWorks Accelerator to join the largest founder community in Greater Southeast Asia.】

Photo by TheDigitalWay on Pixabay

Blockchain 新創如何在財報上認列持有的加密貨幣?

Norman Chi, Analyst (紀泳瑜 / 分析師)

負責投資與基金管理。在加入 AppWorks 之前,曾於勤業眾信審計部門服務近兩年,參與過的財務報表查核案件橫跨多個產業。畢業於台大會計系,學生時期曾擔任台大學生會活動部部長與會計系系學會公關長。喜愛品嚐美食、棒球與推理懸疑類影集。期許自己成為理性,但不失熱血與溫度的創投分析師。

在 2018 年底,AppWorks 合夥人 Andy 蔡欣翰,曾撰寫專文「當 ICO 遇上 Accounting,Blockchain 新創必須知道的會計觀念」,分析在當時蔚為盛行的 ICO (Initial Coin Offering) 籌資狂潮下,透過發行加密貨幣 (Cryptocurrencies) 籌資的 Blockchain 新創,該如何認列以符合會計規則。

兩年過去了,雖然 ICO 已不再是新鮮事,但加密貨幣交易市場仍持續蓬勃發展 。根據 Coinmarketcap 的數據,全球目前共可追蹤統計的現時加密貨幣市場約有近 4,000 種加密貨幣 (Cryptocurrencies),相較於 2017 年初的 617 種成長了六倍,全球加密貨幣市場市值在近期則一度突破 5,700 億美元。今年 10 月,線上支付平台龍頭 PayPal,就宣佈在美國推出以數位支付的形式購買、出售或持有加密貨幣的服務;12 月,信用卡機構 Visa 也宣佈將與 Circle 合作,在全球的支付網路中,增添 USDC 作為結算選項,未來金流不再需要透過支票或匯款方式,將大幅撼動目前國際金融生態。可見 Blockchain 發展至今所累積的能量,對人類世界在商業、科技、社會的影響,已不容小覷。AppWorks Accelerator 自 2018 年下半年開始,開始限定招募 AI / IoT 與 Blockchain / DeFi 兩個領域的新創進駐後,至今也累積了超過 30 支、來自大東南亞 (東協 + 台灣) 的優秀 Blockchain 新創。

2020 年全球整體的投資市場,在大印鈔時代的政策催化下,更是反映投資人在標的的選擇上,似乎正逃離易受通貨膨脹影響的法定貨幣,轉向投資更能保值的資產。例如貴金屬 (黃金、白銀),以及近年來在避險資產市場曝光量大增的比特幣及其他加密貨幣。在 2020 年,隨著 DeFi (Decentralized Finance) 在 Uniswap 等創新協議問世帶來新契機下,各家治理 Token 的發行,及大眾對流動性挖礦的狂熱,更是推升加密貨幣市場的交易量。

對持有加密貨幣,或是經營加密貨幣相關服務的新創來說,如何在會計與財務實務上認列與表達,是 Blockchain 創業者需要重視的課題。

今年以來,購買、投資加密貨幣的交易熱潮持續升溫,以及 Blockchain 新創推出的加密貨幣應用功能日趨多元,例如,從基本的支付到借貸、賦予投票權甚至是股權表彰象徵等。但在過去幾年,被超過 160 個國家採用的國際財務報導準則 (IFRSs) 中,卻沒有針對加密貨幣如何在財報上認列進行修訂,依然停留在舊時代的規則,造成了新創、企業與創投,對加密貨幣在財務報表上的認列與表達,產生不小的困擾。因此,我希望透過這篇文章,對於現行國際財務報導準則的見解輔以其他實務,對加密貨幣的持有者提供一些會計認列方向的探討與分析。為求簡單明暸,除另有特別說明,本篇文章提及的加密貨幣均包含 Coin (錢幣) 與 Token (代幣),企業則涵蓋新創。

企業持有的加密貨幣,應歸屬何種會計科目?仍是沒有規則的「規則」

儘管國際財務報導準則解釋委員會,在 2018、2019 年,皆開過會討論加密貨幣認列的相關議題,但目前仍舊決議不會對任何虛擬資產或是加密貨幣,提出新的公報或新增科目,而是以現行的會計準則或公報適用於加密貨幣認列。那麼,在現行的規則下,加密貨幣可以被認列在財報的哪個項目?依照委員會決議,加密貨幣應適用於兩種資產類別:存貨、無形資產。

存貨:若一間企業持有加密貨幣的主要目的為出售,且交易加密貨幣為日常營業活動 (持有供正常營業過程出售),依據國際會計準則第 2 號 (IAS 2) 規定,企業於財報上表達加密貨幣為存貨應屬適當。

什麼是日常營業活動?講白了,就是企業的本業或是企業如何創造主要營業收入,而產生的經濟活動。例如全國電子是透過出售各類電子產品,作為營業收入的主要來源,這時他們所擁有的各式電子產品即被視為存貨,而不會是固定資產或是其他類別的資產。同樣的道理,如果一間企業持有各式加密貨幣,就是要再出售賺得價差,且賺取出售加密貨幣賺得的收入,是這間企業的主要收益來源,這時企業即可將持有的加密貨幣認列為存貨。例如專門投資加密貨幣的基金或投資公司,或許他們持有的加密貨幣就符合存貨的定義。

若持有的加密貨幣歸類在存貨項目下,加密貨幣價值該如何決定?一般來說,存貨的價值採成本與淨變現價值孰高法,即成本和存貨估計售價扣除處分成本,如銷售費用、交易稅費等後取數字低的認列。但有一個例外,如果企業持有加密貨幣是預計在短期內出售,並預計從劇烈的價格波動中賺取利潤,則不適用上述評價方法,而需適用 IAS 2 第 5 段大宗商品之經紀 – 交易商之例外規定,將存貨價值的波動認列於損益。依目前加密貨幣市場價格波動的程度與交易情況來說,有不小的機率,會被主管機關認定適用這個例外的評價方法,這意味著,持有者財報損益將大幅隨加密貨幣市價波動。

但如果企業持有加密貨幣的目的,是長期投資期望增值;或是持有的加密貨幣,是用來獲取對方未來服務的憑證;抑或企業的主要營業活動,與交易加密貨幣根本無關,只是購入加密貨幣進行短線進出的投資行為,那就不符合現行規範下存貨的認列定義。

無形資產:若企業持有加密貨幣,不適用存貨認列規定,那只能依照國際會計準則第 38 號 (IAS 38) 規定,將加密貨幣表達為無形資產。例如在美國納斯達克上市、經營加密貨幣挖礦業務與加密貨幣交易所的 RIOT BLOCKCHAIN 財報中,就將持有的加密貨幣認列於無形資產。

若加密貨幣被歸類於無形資產,評價方式有兩種:成本或重估價模式。若企業選擇價值評估採用成本法,因預期加密貨幣並沒有一個確定的耐用年限,故在成本法下,加密貨幣的衡量即以企業購入成本扣除累計減損列報,無需扣除攤銷成本;另一種則是採用重估價模式衡量。在重估價模式中,加密貨幣將公允價值 (簡單來說就是市場價格) 扣除累計減損列報,當公允價值高於成本時,利益將認列於其他綜合損益,並不會直接反應於損益中;反之則將在損益中認列減損損失。值得注意的是,台灣金管會於證券發行人財務報告編製準則 (採國際財務報導準則版本) 中並未開放無形資產採用重估價模式衡量,這也是當初台灣接軌 IFRS 時並未與國際接軌的地方之一,故台灣公開發行公司 (或是其子公司) 若取得加密貨幣並表達為無形資產,企業僅能採用成本法。

仍有不少未解之題待解決

不少創業者一定會有疑惑,僅靠存貨與無形資產兩個會計科目,真的能反映加密貨幣的經濟實質?依據我的理解,上述兩種會計科目,主要依據加密貨幣持有者的意圖,與企業主要營業活動是否與買賣加密貨幣高度相關來進行分類,但加密貨幣功能的多樣性,會讓會計判斷與處理變得更複雜,也需要更多的研究與討論,來決定會計處理方式。因此在國際財務報導準則解釋委員會發布對加密貨幣認列的會計處理決議後,國際財務報導準則解釋委員會收集到了 23 封來自世界各地的意見函,其中即有包括韓國在內的部分國家,反對將加密貨幣會計處理定案。

除國際財務報導準則解釋委員會並未對加密貨幣進行嚴格定義外,Token 的多樣性,也是讓這個議題在短期內無法有拍板答案的原因:像是加密貨幣的部分經濟實質,實與貨幣類似,只要交易雙方同意,即可透過加密貨幣交換商品或是服務;或是使用者持有 Utility Token (如 Turnkey Jet 發行的 Token) 時,經濟實質比較像是預付款項或是部分適用於貨幣;甚至治理 Token  (如 Uni, COMP 等),也賦予持有者類似投票權或是治理權的功能,故單單僅靠持有者的意圖,在財報上進行簡單的二分法,似乎草率了些。因此,在目前的 IFRS 架構下,很難有一套完美的論述,套用於認列加密貨幣。

對於這樣的情況,一個有趣的例子是日本的做法。因為日本並沒強制要求公開發行公司採用 IFRS,日本會計準則理事會 (ASBJ) 其實針對加密貨幣,訂定了一套會計處理標準與財報審計準則,且把加密貨幣視為一種全新的資產,而非屬於存貨、金融資產、無形資產等任何科目。台灣的會計研究發展基金會,亦向國際財務報導準則解釋委員會建言,希望日後能對加密貨幣會計處理發佈新公報,或是對既有的會計規則進行修訂,以更符合加密貨幣的經濟實質。

結論

在可見的未來,Blockchain 技術將持續加速發展,加密貨幣的交易量及重要性也將與日俱增,加上加密貨幣功能的發展持續推陳出新,甚至有機會顛覆既有金融和投資市場。對新創與企業而言,究竟該如何對加密貨幣進行會計處理,是國際財務報導準則解釋委員會,與各國主管機關刻不容緩需面對的問題。依據目前的各國實務作法,主要還是依賴現有的會計準則框架,去尋找合適的計量和確認方法,並進行主觀解釋,但加密貨幣的功能多樣性,在既有會計框架下仍有許多表達不清之處,進而影響財報的呈現和訊息傳遞。

可惜的是, 2020 年國際財務報導準則解釋委員會已召開的會議中,並沒有將加密貨幣會計處理相關議題列入議程內。在 IFRS 沒有發佈進一步具體的指引或修改前,各國主管機關究竟如何在現有的會計規則下認列加密貨幣,或是以全新分類與規則表達此種資產,仍隨著時間過去才會更加明朗。

在那之前,如果 Blockchain 創業者對加密貨幣會計處理議題有任何疑問,也歡迎來找我們討論。

【歡迎所有 AI / IoT、Blockchain / DeFi、面向東南亞市場的創業者,加入專為你們服務的 AppWorks Accelerator

Photo by Eftakher Alam on Unsplash

創業者最該專注的事情:用戶!用戶!用戶!

Ching Tseng, Associate (曾意晴 / 投資經理)

負責區塊鏈投資,尤其專注東南亞市場。學生時期曾於 AppWorks 實習一年半,2015 年政大企管系畢業後正式加入擔任分析師,主要參與投資案相關業務,最得意的案例是協助 CHOCO TV 從 A 輪一路到被 LINE 併入。是我們的年輕人趨勢專家,2019 正式升任經理。平常熱愛嚐鮮、美食以及旅遊。

不少人創業的起點,來自自己就是預設的第一批用戶。因為不滿意現有的產品與服務,或是發現市場中浮現未被滿足的需求,所以決定自己下海創業,花時間、花力氣,建立團隊企圖打造最適合的解決方案。

AppWorks Accelerator 共 395 支校友新創團隊中,很多擁有技術專長的創業者,最初創業的起心動念,便是想要打造符合自己所需的產品和服務。他們會從用戶的角度,爬梳對用戶來說的各種不便、痛點,或是未被滿足的需求,並以此來開發產品與服務、打造商業模式,尋求建立更大的用戶規模,進而找到 Product Market Fit 。然而,在我過去 5 年輔導 AppWorks 新創的經驗,卻發現,不少創業者在一段時間後,卻忘記了「關注用戶」這個初衷。這個狀況,尤其容易發生在找到 Product Market Fit 後,從 Startup 轉入 Scale up 這個階段時。

忘記將專注放在用戶上,對創業者來說,是一件致命的事情。當產品到了一定規模、競爭者開始出現,創業者每天的心思,時常會被競爭者的一舉一動、廣告成效及數據表現佔據,又或者是被員工及投資人的建議所影響。常常在不知不覺中,便忘記關注用戶的真正需求,甚至不再依據用戶回饋,持續優化產品或使用者體驗,導致產品與服務的疊代方向,反而離用戶需求越來越遠。

常見因為忘了用戶而導致的現象,就是創業者喜歡分析未來趨勢、比較競爭對手優劣勢,不斷和別人切磋商業模式。思考市場上的競爭態勢本身沒有錯,畢竟知道全盤的狀況,才知道如何挑選適合自己的戰場,也才知道如何才能贏。但與競爭者的角力,要能回饋到真正營收以及用戶成長上,都建立在一個先決條件之下:你有多了解用戶?滿足了他們哪些需求?以下我從廣告、數據、競爭對手等三個面向,分享創業者因過度關注而造成忽略用戶的迷思:

1. 廣告是工具,目標還是用戶

在網路廣告還相對便宜的時期,透過廣告讓新創獲取第一批用戶、營收,進而取得初期成績,難度比現在低許多。也因此,在前幾年,可能會讓有些新創在真正清楚理解用戶的行為前,就誤打誤撞開啟了第一波成長。

曾經有個經營垂直電商的新創,因為經營社群以及投放廣告得早,跨過初期門檻後,持續透過投放廣告取得新用戶、新流量來消費,或是藉此吸引舊用戶回購,廣告幫助他們成長了好幾年,團隊也擴張到數十人。

但隨著越來越多企業,開始在 Facebook 上投放廣告,廣告的單價也隨之攀高。同時,原本只在線下經營的競品,也陸續投入電商經營,市場與競爭瞬間豬羊變色,一夕之間,廣告的成本,已經不是原本的商業模式與營收結構可以負擔,團隊才開始思考如何提升用戶留存率、檢視產品該如何調整,並努力尋找其他接觸潛在用戶的管道,無奈對用戶了解不深的他們,在找到其他有效的推廣管道時,就已經不堪負擔虧損,決定終止營運。

2. 數據是用戶的表現,重點還是用戶

在商業模式邁向規模化的過程中,新創都會為營運訂定關鍵追蹤的數字指標。例如,對於娛樂型 App 來說,可能是 MAU (每月活躍用戶);對電商來說,可能是 AOV (平均客單價)。

創業者或同業間交流,也經常會得到許多調整這些關鍵數字指標的方法。多數的時候,創業者根據數據表現,去調整產品或者是測試產品,都會有不錯的成效。

但對創業者來說,這不該只是盲目追求數字提升的過程。更重要的事情,是每一個數字後面代表用戶真正的行為是什麼?例如,對於 MAU 的定義很多,可以是打開 App 就算、也可以是實際使用超過幾分鐘才算,但這些定義,真的符合產品或服務的使用情境,或者貼近用戶實際使用狀況嗎?創業者除了關注數據,需要更質化地研究自己的 TA,究竟他們是誰、使用習慣與其他喜好為何?簡而言之,就是更理解用戶輪廓,而不是沈迷於數據帶來的虛假繁榮。

3. 跟著競爭者的腳步,不如耕耘用戶

初入市場時,創業者很自然地,會追隨著某個業內領先者的腳步學習;又或者隨著產品熱門度上升時,創業者會覺得市場中,浮現各種競爭者。由於創業者對各種變化十分敏感,一旦旗鼓相當的競爭者出現,創業者關注的焦點,很容易被吸引到競爭者身上。這時,競爭者的一舉一動,很容易牽動創業者所有的思緒,包括從每個 App 的推播內容、發布新聞稿的一字一句、任何廣告的操作方式,或是競爭者提到任何數字,都可能成為創業者所關注的焦點,只要發現自己有所落後,都會想要立刻追上。

在檢視自己是否需要跟著競爭者的腳步,有所動作或者修改產品服務內容時,回頭檢視用戶真正的需求與習慣,才能確保自己不至於迷失方向、劃錯重點。有時候,對手對於 TA 的理解,不見得更深厚,也可能會做錯決定或下錯棋,甚至新聞稿的部分內容,也只是放煙幕彈的誤導策略。深刻的瞭解並且耕耘用戶、滿足需求,才是長期維護用戶成長以及使用率的最佳良方。

結論

AppWorks Accelerator #6 的校友 Justfont,從 2010 年創業至今,一直專注在經營字體相關的服務。在前期,除了上架專屬於 Web 使用的字體外,團隊同時也深耕字型社群,長期與潛在用戶交流,這也為他們在發表自創字體「金萱體」時,打下了穩固的根基,吸引超過 9,000 位設計師支持,透過金萱體,在使用者社群成功取得聲量與口碑後,團隊也不忘本的時時透過社群,與用戶交流使用情境以及需求,後續推出其他字體如金萱那提也獲得十分好的回響,尤其是凝書體,獲得了超過 6,000 位用戶實際掏腰包贊助支持。

專注在用戶身上,這幾個字說來簡單、做法也不複雜,但要能貫徹始終實在不容易。創業的路上,有太多容易讓創業者分心的雜訊,最好的練習方法,無非就是在想任何事情,小至 Facebook 貼文裡的每句話,大至公司新產品的規劃,都回歸到用戶身上,檢查是否符合用戶所需,久而久之,制訂的策略、採取的行動,也就能持續接近能滿足用戶真正的需求。

【歡迎所有 AI / IoT、Blockchain / DeFi、面向東南亞市場的創業者,加入專為你們服務的 AppWorks Accelerator

Photo by mcmurryjulie on Pixabay

幣圈華爾街的下一步, DeFi 催生「監管 2.0」

Liying Wang, Legal Master (王琍瑩 / 法務輔導長、台北律師公會創新科技委員會主任委員 & 明日科技法律事務所主持律師)

帶領內建法務團隊,提供企業經營、合約協商、紛爭處理等各方面法律諮詢,輔導建立營運管理機制,必要時也協助團隊尋求「突破框架」的解方。曾任 HTC 全球營運資深法務經理、萬國法律事務所科技法律部律師,也曾服務於士林地方法院、台北高等行政法院。美國西北大學法學碩士、政大法學士、政大 EMBA,具備美國紐約州與台灣律師執照。

美國名作家馬克・吐溫 (Mark Twain) 有句名言:「歷史不會重演,但卻會相似性地重複發生。」(History doesn’t repeat itself, but it does rhyme.)

對照區塊鏈與加密貨幣 (Cryptocurrency) 之於金融世界的發展與影響,正是如此,只是歷史演化的速度更快。兩年前,我寫了一篇文章討論 STO (Security Token Offering) 的興起,儼然是華爾街「證券交易市場」的故事翻版。一年前,我的另一篇文章討論 Facebook 成為「全球超級央行」的渴望,與 Libra 以穩定幣 (Stablecoin) 之姿挑戰主權貨幣的野心。

而今年,一如歷史的必然,加密貨幣領域最熱門的關鍵字 DeFi (Decentralized Finance;去中心化金融) 正式切入銀行、證券、期貨等全方位金融業務,鎖倉金額 (Total Value Locked;TVL) 一度衝破 140 億美元,使得「人間華爾街」的傳統金融業者開始警覺,或許不久的將來,「幣圈華爾街」也將成為麻瓜生活的日常。

DeFi 現在走到了哪裡?

讓我們試著用麻瓜的語言,來認識 DeFi 究竟是什麼?首先,我們知道,當 Internet 進行「資料傳遞」,並不是真的傳遞,而是將資料加以複製;相對於此,區塊鏈最大的貢獻,在於採取「分散式帳本技術」(Distributed Ledger Technology;DLT),能夠做到當你那邊「+1」、我這邊就「-1」的「價值傳遞」。因此,區塊鏈號稱是「價值的網路」(The Internet of Value),並且在發展初期,以加密貨幣作為最直覺、最有感的應用,也就不難理解。

然而,加密貨幣這四個字,每個人說出來可能代表著完全不同的定義,原因在於加密貨幣的本質是一種基於密碼學的加密協定。例如,在 DeFi 世界被廣泛運用的以太坊 (Ethereum) ERC-20 協定,允許開發者在相同的基礎上,依照個案的使用需求,發展出商品 (Commodity)、證券 (Security)、數位現金 (Digital Cash) 等不同屬性的應用。因此,在「人間華爾街」看似無關的應用場景,在「幣圈華爾街」則基於「幣幣交易」的共同特徵,能夠藉由「單一」的標準協定,進行「多元」的設計開發。也因此,我們可以觀察到全球 DeFi 服務百花齊放,儼然已經形成一個相當完整的生態系。

以 DeFi 生態系的核心角色 DEX (Decentralized Exchange;去中心化交易所) 為例,如果用來交換的幣,是具備數位現金功能的穩定幣 (例如:用 DAI 來購入 USDC),那麼交易行為就類似於麻瓜世界的「Currency Exchange」(匯兌);而當用來交換的幣,具備證券型代幣的屬性 (例如:假設稍後說明的 COMP 被認定為證券,而使用者用 ETH 來購入 COMP),那麼交易的外觀就會像是「Stock Exchange」(證券交易)。

DEX 揚棄以美元或歐元等主流法幣作為交易媒介,而採用「幣幣交易」的「交易對」(Pair),無論「幣的屬性」在法律上如何認定,DEX 最為關注的還是「幣的流動性」(Liquidity)。DEX 市佔率最大的 Uniswap 目前已有超過三千項 ERC-20 幣種上架 (其中經 Uniswap 認證表列的將近有 200 項),TVL 一度超過 30 億美元。它的高流動性,歸功於以智能合約 (Smart Contract) 設計出「自動造市商」(Automated Market Maker) 的數學模型,取得交易數量與價格的即時動態平衡,打破傳統下單搓合 (Matchmaking) 的交易機制,人人都可以成為流動性提供者 (Liquidity Provider),賺取手續費。換句話說,Uniswap 的成功方程式,來自「多元特色的加密貨幣」加上「自動執行的智能合約」,使得人人都能當莊家。

此外,近期也相當活躍的 Compound 借貸服務,外觀則像是做「銀行」的生意,貸方 (Lender) 把幣「存入」,借方 (Borrower) 把幣「借出」。但實際上,Compound 透過「流動性資金池」(Liquidity Pool) 的運作模式,恰恰是要略過「銀行」這個中間人提供服務並分潤的角色,同時打破時間與地域的限制,讓價格 (利率) 直接取決於市場實時運作。當供過於求,利率便低,反之,利率便高。而這一切,都是由智能合約自動執行完成。

DeFi 下一步將往哪裡去?

世界上第一間現代化銀行的誕生,距今已經兩個世紀,至於「錢莊」或「當鋪」的歷史,肯定更是淵遠流長。直到 DeFi 的出現,結合「多元特色的加密貨幣」與「自動執行的智能合約」兩大優勢帶來完美的應用場景,似乎所有「人間華爾街」可以做的事情,「幣圈華爾街」都可以做,甚至做得更好。也因此,我們很容易聯想到,這些類似於傳統金融業務的 DeFi 服務,會不會涉及銀行、證券、期貨等相關法令規範?

如果我們以傳統「監管 1.0」的角度來觀察,當專案代幣無法通過美國法上「Howey Test」的測試 (我國金管會 2019 年核定令也採取類似認定標準),當然可能落入「投資契約」(Investment Contract) 的定義,被認定為違法發行或交易「有價證券」。尤其 DEX 並沒有繁瑣的上架審核程序,任何人都可能將任何加密貨幣上架到次級市場,進行炒作,使得「功能型代幣」與「證券型代幣」的分野更加難以掌握。至於 DeFi 世界的匯兌與借貸,通常不涉及出入金 (On / Off Ramps) 的法幣與穩定幣交換 (這也是防洗錢與反資恐最重要的合規關卡),用戶使用非全球性的穩定幣進行匯兌或借貸,目前仍傾向認定僅屬「商品」的交易。然而,隨著穩定幣日趨全球化,以及央行幣 (Central Bank Digital Currency;CBDC) 參與競爭,監管機構的見解,勢必將依循政策目的重新梳理調整,而有認定為實施「地下匯兌」或「違法吸金」的可能。

此外,「加密貨幣」與「智能合約」的先天優勢,鼓勵開發者把「樂高組合」的創意發揮到極致,也衍生出各式各樣「合成資產」(Synthetic Assets) 交易。而各國法規對於「期貨」(Futures) 的定義通常較廣,我國「期貨交易法」所規範的「期貨」,包括衍生自商品、貨幣、有價證券、利率、指數或其他利益的各種契約或契約的組合;而美國法上認定期貨交易的「商品」(Commodities) 更是包山包海,唯獨排除 (禁止)「洋蔥和電影票房收據」而已。因此,DeFi 服務如果涉及衍生性商品交易,都可能被傳統定義涵蓋,法遵風險相對更高。

儘管如此,「監管 1.0」面臨到一個最根本的困境,在於 DeFi 服務強調「去中心化的分權治理」,而傳統法規框架卻是鎖定「單一行為主體」,給予特許與集中監管,二者存在本質上的對立性 (Antithesis)。前面提到,傳統銀行交易是 Peer-to-Bank-to-Peer,而像 Compound 這樣的借貸機制,則是跳過銀行這個中間人,交易的啟動與完成,並不是麻瓜世界所理解的「銀貨兩訖」,而是各自與智能合約產生互動,雙方不需要互相認識,也沒有信不信任的問題,僅僅依賴自動執行的軟體程式。雖然沒有踐行實名認證與徵信等過程,透過超額抵押 (Over-Collateralization) 與提前清算等智能合約設計,也可以相當程度控制違約與壞帳風險。這正是區塊鏈「Trustless」(不需要信任基礎) 的特徵,在「幣圈華爾街」被賦予最重要的任務。

值得注意的是,Compound 並非試圖取代銀行,成為另一個中間人。依照白皮書的設計,這個開源 (Open Source) 專案,不只強調智能合約的公開透明,隨著系統發展,最終要達到退居幕後、回歸社群的目標。而推動這個「去中心化」過程的重要推手,就是名為 COMP 的治理幣 (Governance Token)。除了分配給創辦團隊與早期投資人之外,系統也會結合流動性挖礦 (Yield Farming) 或類似的獎勵機制,按照貢獻程度自動將相當比例的 COMP 回饋給積極參與的用戶。COMP 的持有者,在符合特定條件下,能夠透過提案與表決,來修正智能合約的遊戲規則。此外,在緩衝期間 (Timelock) 與提案附帶執行程式 (Executable Code) 等細部設計上,也保障成員無論是反對或贊成提案,都享有真正民主化的決策空間。

DeFi 透過分散治理幣與配套的分權機制,達到高度「去中心化」的結果,使得監理機關無從沿用傳統集中管理模式,對一個「不存在的主體」加以課責,而不得不重新檢視「有權始有責、無權即無責」的法律意涵。另一方面,智能合約本身的高度「自動化」與「透明化」,相當程度控制了傳統金融產業最棘手的代理人風險與資訊不對稱風險;以往金融消費者的弱勢地位,在未來健全的 DeFi 生態系中,也可望獲得提升。「人間華爾街」的監管措施既不合身、又事倍功半,究竟在「幣圈華爾街」的平行時空,我們該期待怎樣的「監管 2.0」呢?

「監管 2.0」國際趨勢

除了前面提到防洗錢、反資恐的任務之外,金融監管的重點還包括保護金融消費者與維持金融穩定性,無論在人間或幣圈,這些政策目標應該是一致的。只是,面對「幣圈華爾街」的創新,「監管 1.0」的執法只會發生兩種結果:一是流於形式、不痛不癢,二是全面扼殺、遁入黑市。無論何者,都落入「不接地氣」的監管盲點,更可能平白斷送科技創新的下一次典範轉移。相反的,監管機構如果能夠將「去中心化」視為區塊鏈技術發展的最大優勢,而不是阻礙監管與執法的眼中釘,願意與民間社群聯手打造「技術優先」、「自律優先」的「監管 2.0」方案,那麼此時此刻,便是天時、地利、人和的轉型契機:

一、技術優先:「幣圈華爾街」是「監管科技」最佳示範場域

各國多年來推動監管科技 (SupTech) 成效不彰,主要原因可能在於並未找到真正的「監管痛點」與「解決方案」。如今,DeFi 選擇區塊鏈領域最直覺、最有感的加密貨幣應用,面對監管強度最高的金融產業直球對決,一方面希望打破「人間華爾街」長久以來高成本、低效率的循環,同時運用智能合約優勢,可望形塑國際共識、防止監管套利 (Regulatory Arbitrage) 。基於「防弊」與「興利」的共同目標,「幣圈華爾街」有機會成為發展監管科技的最佳示範場域。

事實上,早在 2019 年 9 月,國際清算銀行 (Bank for International Settlements;BIS) 的貨幣經濟部門,便針對採用區塊鏈技術的金融業務,提出「內建式監管」(Embedded Supervision) 的政策建議,主張採用區塊鏈系統內建自動化交易監控模式,取代傳統集中式的資訊搜集、核實與交換,以「預防勝於治療」的角度,肯定智能合約自動執行監管任務的技術優勢,堪稱創新。只是,BIS 的政策建議,仍然以金融機構採用「許可制的去中心化帳本技術」(Permissioned DLT) 為前提,並未與「單一行為主體」的法規框架脫鉤,但或許可以作為一個思考與討論的起點。另一方面,國際機構金融穩定委員會 (Financial Stability Board;FSB) 在今 (2020) 年 10 月針對全球穩定幣 (Global Stablecoin) 提出的政策建議,雖然重申「相同業務、相同風險、相同規則」(Same business, same risks, same rules.) 的最高指導方針,並強調這個原則不會因為業者使用何種底層技術而改變,同時卻也承認「非許可制的去中心化帳本技術」(Permissionless DLT) 欠缺「可歸責的單一行為主體」的確是個難題。

科技對於人類行為的制約,並不亞於法律的力量。「幣圈華爾街」證明了法律作為外部規制的不足,同時也展現了智能合約承接「跨境立法」與「跨境執法」任務的潛力,因而造就「監管 2.0」發展的最佳場域。以治理幣的設計為例,在前述「Howey Test」的判斷基準下,固然有被認定為「證券型代幣」的可能。然而,「有價證券」的原始意涵,是將企業的信用、所有權或其他權利,藉由債券、股票或其他表彰權利的證書,予以碎片化、商品化,從而自由流通。相對於此,治理幣的主要機制,則在於管理智能合約,確保監督與制衡的架構完整,並且自動執行。治理幣雖然也可能具有次級市場流通性,但它真正的價值,卻是跳脫「表彰某種經濟權利 (Rights/Interests)」的思維,轉而強調「賦予治理權力 (Power)」的特徵,從科技創新的角度來看,彌足珍貴。透過治理幣的運作,提高「為善」的誘因、抑制「為惡」的動機,或許能夠促成「防弊」與「興利」兼顧的「監管 2.0」早日實現。

在 Internet 發展初期,我們也曾以為線上交易只是線下實體交易的數位化,既然本質相同,法律也應該一體適用;二十年來,我們卻目睹數位內容徹底翻轉影視音、新聞、出版產業,甚至改變了人類的閱聽行為。當年「著作權法」一度錯殺的「侵權行為」,反而加速商業模式的創新與疊代,而這只是科技帶動破壞式創新的其中一個例子。歷史經驗告訴我們,DeFi 的發展,不該是又一次「看不起、看不懂、學不會、追不上」的輪迴。在監管的手伸進「幣圈華爾街」之前,監管的腦必須先進行自我改造,真正理解「加密貨幣」與「智能合約」的優勢,讓法律在科技面前學會謙抑,才有機會思考如何藉助「技術優先」的力量,形成對使用者行為 (User Behavior) 的制約,進而發展出為「幣圈華爾街」量身定做的「監管 2.0」方案。這一段自我改造的過程,絕對有賴公部門與私部門相互協力以及國際合作,也因此,「監管 2.0」的發展必須以「避風港」配套措施為前提。

二、自律優先:發展「監管科技」必須以「避風港」保障為前提

有別於「人間華爾街」習於以 IPO (公開發行) 與 M&A (併購) 作為創辦團隊與投資人唯二的「出場」(Exit) 選項,在「幣圈華爾街」的日常營運中,似乎沒有董事會頻頻追問 Revenue、也沒有投資人要求 Liquidation Preference,所有的約定都刻在鏈上,透過治理幣的分配,使廣大社群能夠行使「權力」(而非「權利」),並負擔責任,最終藉由集體共識協議的智能合約,自動執行公平、公正、公開的論功行賞。

以 COMP 為例,儘管白皮書早已宣示走向「去中心化」的決心,但畢竟「有人的地方就有江湖」。治理幣的分配,包括對象、數量、時間、比例、方式,本身就是一場「人性的試煉」,需要經過相當的期間,進行滾動式的規劃、試錯與修正,才可能真正促成「分權」的實現。屆時,所有的遊戲規則都不是任何單一主體說了算,而必須仰賴社群集體智慧、共同決策的結果,創辦團隊與早期投資人都將跟你我一樣,成為廣大社群的一份子,不再具有對專案的實質控制權。也就是說,DeFi 專案的成長,勢必是一個從「中心化團隊」走向「去中心化社群」的路線。還權於社群,才是真正的「出場」。

既然任何「去中心化」的目標,必定始於「中心化」團隊的努力,也必定需要經歷相當的期間,監管機構如果只關注專案發展初期的「中心化」外觀,甚至害怕「去中心化」的成果,將阻礙監管與執法,而直接套用不合身的既有法規加以裁罰或禁止,可以想見,未來將不會有任何專案,滾動式進化到「去中心化」的成熟階段。有鑑於此,素有「Crypto Mom」美譽的美國 SEC 委員 Hester Peirce 便提出「代幣避風港提案」(Token Safe Harbor Proposal),建議給予這些創新科技與商業模式適當的緩衝期間 (例如三年),幫助創辦團隊在戴上任何法規緊箍咒之前,一步一腳印走過「中心化」邁向「去中心化」的成長之路。

「避風港」機制確保團隊持續創新,整體產業也能透過「自律優先」的原則,逐步形成獨樹一格的 Best Practice。除了前面提到的智能合約開源、治理幣分權機制之外,我們已經看到針對資安與軟體漏洞風險,有週邊業者提供智能合約完整性與安全性的審核 (Audit),例如 Quantstamp。而為了減低代理人風險與資訊不對稱風險,也有進行整體評鑑 (Rating) 的服務,例如 ConsenSys。甚至基於 DeFi 類似金融交易的特性,還有業者提供實時行為偵測與模擬分析 (Testing and Simulation),有助於預測黑天鵝事件,防範系統性風險,例如 Gauntlet。更重要的是,在這段緩衝期間內,監管機構能夠深入觀察業界發展,找出各自的技術優勢,而有機會協力形塑真正「接地氣」的「監管 2.0」方案。

結論

兩年前那一篇討論 STO 的文章,我在結尾處寫著:「Blockchain 的共識演算,本質上就是一種政治運作,並且是在『管理眾人之事』的各種方法中,選擇了較為困難、卻可能較為長遠的去中心化道路……。Crypto 的劃時代技術與應用,即將帶領我們建構『華爾街金融 2.0』,只是這條華爾街,不屬於哪一個國家、哪一個城市,而是虛擬地、平等地、去中心地存在於整個社群之中」。

與其說 DeFi 是一種創新科技或商業模式,不如說是一項社會運動實驗。DeFi 交易大抵是傳統金融業務的重現,然而重要的是,這個從「中心化」走向「去中心化」的過程,徹底顛覆了我們對既有世界的認知。「幣圈華爾街」為我們揭示了跨境、開源、社群、共識、永續的精神,可以透過區塊鏈技術落地實踐;讓我們親眼見證智能合約將內心的想法透過程式加以表達,並且自動執行,真正展現「Code is law.」的美妙與強大。

社群經過不斷的努力,終於走到了今天。我們心裡都明白,「幣圈華爾街」的信仰,並不是把自己變成「人間華爾街」,而是讓華爾街無所不在。這個下一步,能不能成功地跨出去,取決於監管機構能不能順利進行系統升級,勇敢突破數百年來金融特許產業運作的侷限,從「技術優先」、「自律優先」的觀點,來思考如何透過公私部門協力與國際合作,共同打擊犯罪、保護金融消費者並維持金融穩定性,同步走向令人期待的「監管 2.0」時代。

【歡迎所有 AI / IoT、Blockchain / DeFi、面向東南亞市場的創業者,加入專為你們服務的 AppWorks Accelerator

Photo Pete Linforth on Pixabay

AppWorks Accelerator’s first-ever online Startup Showcase unveils 20 rising startups across Greater Southeast Asia (TW+SEA)

From November 19th to December 1st 2020, AppWorks Accelerator launched its first ever online Startup Showcase, featuring 20 of the most promising early-stage startups across Greater Southeast Asia (TW-SEA). We specifically curated teams with traction and interest in Southeast Asia to showcase how they’re leveraging digital technologies to tackle deeply rooted pain points in key markets across the region including Indonesia, Vietnam, The Philippines, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Taiwan. 

A great founder can come from all walks of life, and that’s clearly reflected in the diversity of our showcase. There are over 10 nationalities represented among the 20 pitching teams, of which 30% have at least one female co-founder. More than half of the founders have started at least one venture before, with some having exited to companies like Yahoo and Societe Generale Group, while others boasting prior experiences in leading tech companies such as LinkedIn, Google, Microsoft, and Lazada.

List of showcasing teams

Moladin, founded by Jovin Hoon and Mario Tanamas, empowers automotive sales agents in Indonesia to sell better and faster through their mobile-first marketplace. In 2019, they sold over 4,300 vehicles and generated $7.3M in GMV, and are looking to hit $12M in annualized transactions by the end of this year. 

Active Markets: ID

AyoBlajar, founded by co-founders Fariz Isnaini and Audy Laksmana, is focused on solving the deeply rooted inefficiencies in Indonesia’s education system through an e-learning app. Since launching in September they already have over 17,000 downloads.

Active Markets: ID

Astra, based in TW and founded by Gary Kao, is tackling the challenge of workforce productivity in Indonesia by using facial recognition to help organizations seamlessly manage part-time and remote employees. Their solution has been rolled out at Pondok Indah Mall and Pondok Indah Golf Course, collectively managing 3,000 employees.

Active Markets: ID, TW, JP

Docosan, founded by two Harvard grads Beth Lopez and Natalia Hendrickson, allows patients in Vietnam to compare healthcare providers across a wide range of specialties, book appointments online 24/7, and manage their own health data. They now have over 100 active doctors on their platform and completed over 240 bookings since launching 7 months ago.

Active Markets: VN

Chip Chip is a Vietnam-based startup founded by Dung Ho, who’s now using his years of experience as a software developer to help Vietnamese children learn english from qualified Filipino teachers. Since starting last year, they’ve conducted over 6,000 classes for 2,000 students.

Active Markets: VN

Glints is a leading full-stack talent platform based in SG for professionals to connect, upskill, and get matched with employers across GSEA. The company has raised over $12M and active in 6 markets across the region with 400 people on staff. Fred Ng, country manager of HK and SG, will be showcasing on behalf of the company.

Active Markets: SG, HK, ID, VN, TW

Polymerize, based in SG and founded by serial entrepreneur Kunal Sandeep and Dr. Abhijit Salvekar who holds a PhD in materials science, strives to accelerate the discovery, formulation, and commercialization of polymers through machine learning. They’ve managed to launch a prototype and secure $12,000 in paid pilots within 6 months of inception. 

Active Markets: SG, JP, IN

Accredify, founded by Zheng Wei Quah, is a digital health passport that stores, displays and authenticates medical records securely through the use of blockchain. They’ve already managed to secure a partnership with Singapore’s Ministry of Health and are looking to penetrate markets like Vietnam and Thailand.

Active Markets: SG

ZumVet, founded by Athena Lee and Dr. Su Xiaoting, has created a televet solution for pet owners, providing them with services such as video consults, drug delivery, and digital health records at the touch of a button.The company has amassed over 500 users and 400 consultations since launching a year ago.

Active Markets: SG

Freehunter, based in HK and founded by Harris Cheng and Jerome Tse, is an AI-powered social network for creative talents, helping them generate more leads, exposure, connections, and collaborative opportunities. In the past 6 months, they’ve signed up over 700 subscribes and facilitated 600 matches. 

Active Markets: HK, TW, SG

Cognicept, based in SG founded by Michael Sayre, uses telerobotic intervention technology allowing robotics manufacturers and end-users to seamlessly inject a “human-in-the-loop” to resolve any errors or unknown protocols encountered by a robot. Since launching 1.5 years ago, they’ve already signed on companies like Savioke, Rapyuta Robotics, and Infinium Robotics as customers.

Active Markets: SG, US, JP 

Mighty Jaxx is a startup based in SG founded by Jackson Aw in 2015, who’s built up one of the world’s largest platforms to buy toys and art collectibles. They partner with leading brands such as Warner Bros, Marvel, and Disney to design pop culture collectibles, now set to ship 3 million units to collectors in over 60 countries this year. 

Active Markets: Global

SoopahGenius is based in TW and founded by Mike Calcagno, a former Microsoft executive who led the research and development of cortana. He’s now funneling his years of experience with AI into creating a product to help live streamers significantly decrease the time and cost of producing content from their raw materials.

Active Markets: US, MY

Poseidon Network is based in TW and founded by Light Lin, a serial entrepreneur with two successful exits under his belt. He’s now looking to create the world’s largest decentralized infrastructure by applying the concept of sharing economy to the unused resources latent within all of our digital devices whether its storage, bandwidth, or computing power.

Active Markets: TW, CN, MY

Workbean, founded by Kass Monzon and Neil Rojas, is an online platform that helps employers more effectively convey their culture and branding to prospective hires, with the aim of reducing the mismatch between companies and job seekers. They currently have over 15 companies using their platform, with 13,000 MAU and over 3,000 job clicks. 

Active Markets: PH

GoBuddy, based in HK and founded by Hong Yee Kow, Roy Yu, and CY Kwong, is an all-in-one tool for online sellers, combining an e-commerce platform with booking and ticketing management. After several iterations over the last year, the team has now amassed over 700 subscribers, facilitating over $40K in transactions and 700 bookings.

Active Markets: HK, MY

Growthspot is based in HK and founded by Randal Hung, who has over 10 years of experience in digital market and is all too familiar with challenges of SME online sellers when it comes to optimizing ad spend from FB and Google. He’s created a digital platform catering specifically to those sellers with limited resources and knowhow, having now acquired over 700 users across Asia.

Active Markets: HK, MY, TH, TW

Pitchspot, based in SG and founded by Ryan Chong and See Ting Goh, is an integrated workflow management and strategy planning canvas to enable innovative teams to work smarter, and faster. In the last 6 months, they managed to acquire over 5,400 active users and 600 paid users. 

Active Markets: TW, ID, KR, HK

Minastir is based in TW and founded by Thomas Jacobson and Michael Poulsen, who are now taking their combined 15 years of experience in prop trading and building AI/ML investment models to create an AI-based asset management solution for fund managers. They’re currently working with a client in South Korea, but are looking to target hedge fund managers globally. 

Active Markets: TW, KR

Aiello is based in TW and founded by Vic Shen, who worked on the development of Google Home and led the expansion of Google Assistant in Asia. He’s now taking his deep expertise in voice technologies to digitalize the hospitality industry through their IoT management and analytics solution Aiello SPOT. Currently, they’re working with a 4-star hotel in Taiwan, with plans to expand into SEA.

Active Markets: TW, CN

Fatster is based in TH and co-founded by Fabien Keller & Emmanuel Fauvel. Fabien sold his last startup to a major French bank and is now tackling the global problem of obesity. He’s created a mobile app that connects overweight people with other weight-loss buddies, while providing access to nutritional products & experts. Since launching earlier this year, they’ve acquired 20k users and logged 75k hours of activity.

Active Markets: FR, TH

A year to remember

It’s been a hectic year full of chaos and uncertainty. Widespread lockdowns and social distancing measures sent us fleeting into the confines of our own rooms, restricting physical interactions and forcing upon us a new normal characterized by seemingly endless Zoom fatigue. Nevertheless, we’ve proven that community is a concept that transcends far beyond physical limitations. Despite current travel restrictions, we still managed to attract some of the region’s most ambitious and bold entrepreneurs this past year, equipping them with an environment to learn from like-minded peers and mentors, both in-person and virtually through our hybrid offline-online program.

The ability to unveil their product/services and vocalize their passion to potential investors and partners after months of hard work is also a unique experience that we wanted to preserve by putting on the GSEA Startup Showcase. We understand that nothing can truly replicate the excitement of an in-person experience, but now with an online element, we hope to reach an even wider audience of our friends and partners in the startup community that normally wouldn’t be able to join us physically in Taipei. 

“COVID-19 has not only accelerated the importance of digital transformation, but also transformed the way entrepreneurs engage with the market, investors, and strategic partners. With the GSEA Startup Showcase, we hope to provide an efficient gateway for quality founders to connect with and learn from peers, collaborators, and partners, regardless of location. As the region’s leading ecosystem builder, we will continue to invest resources in fostering the regional startup community and delivering value to our founders,” say Jessica Liu, AppWorks Partner.

With the addition of startups recruited this year, there are now a total of 395 active startups and 1,331 founders in the AppWorks Ecosystem. Collectively, all companies produce a turnover of US$ 8B, an annual increase of 162% compared to the same time last year, and foster 17,359 employees, 73% more than the year prior. Altogether, the Ecosystem raised a total of US$ 2.36B, an annual increase of 140%, with an aggregate valuation reaching US$ 11B, growing 160% YoY.

【If you are a founder working on a startup in SEA, or working with AI / IoT, Blockchain / DeFi, apply to AppWorks Accelerator to join the largest founder community in Greater Southeast Asia.】