Service and Use cases

Case 1. Shiseido Company, Limited

What was your impression of our company in the early stages of the project?

In the process of communicating with the company to determine the feasibility of the project, I felt that the company had not only blockchain technology, but also a high level of “service quality and proposal capability,” “sense of speed,” and “reasonable price. For example, in the early stages of the PJT, I was strongly impressed by the fact that the company made proposals that included the use of RFID from a brand perspective, not just from the perspective of a system development company.

Why did you finally choose our company?

There were three reasons why we chose your company as our system development company.

First, they had an extremely high level of expertise in the use of blockchain in a marketing context. Instead of blockchain being used for virtual currency, he was able to propose blockchain from a more long-term and holistic perspective with a marketing leaning.

Secondly, they had the ability to make solid proposals that considered the entire PJT, including proposals for themes around blockchain, such as the use of RFID. Perhaps it was the fact that Mr. Fujita had a lot of experience in marketing support and Mr. Nakamura had experience in application development and hardware work, but I felt that they would be able to work together with a sense of ownership and wisdom to promote the PJT.

Thirdly, by placing an order directly with a system development company, the investment in blockchain development is reduced to a certain extent, and the answers to our questions are quicker.
The approval or rejection of an internal proposal is based on two factors: the amount of money the proposal will cost, and the return on investment. If the proposal cost is too high, especially for a new PJT proposal, the proposal is often rejected at the time of the proposal cost.
Not only in our PJTs, but also in PJTs where the primary contractor intervenes to have the subcontracted development company make proposals and confirm them, it is often the case that questions cannot be answered immediately and there is a gap in the understanding of the development content. In this case, however, we were able to communicate directly with the system development company, so we were able to proceed with the PJT without intermediate communication with the primary vendor or intermediate costs.

What is your impression of our company?

As a PMO, Mr. Fujita’s knowledge and connections in the legal field helped us to sort out the legal issues and gave us advice from a third party’s point of view. As the PMO, Mr. Fujita’s legal knowledge and connections helped us to sort out the legal issues and gave us advice from a third party’s point of view, which was very helpful. In the PMO of system development, Mr. Fujita and Mr. Nakamura were very helpful in coordinating with other vendors so that we could proceed with the PJT more smoothly. In the development of the system, we were able to greatly reduce the man-hours by using TradeLog’s blockchain API, YUBIKIRI, which accelerated the development speed and reduced the cost.

This PJT is gradually gaining recognition within the company, and people say to me, “How did you coordinate so well? I believe that this is due to the comprehensive support of Trade Log, who also provided support as PMO. In the next phase of the project, I hope that you will continue to support us in our efforts to spread and establish the system among our customers.

Case 2. Bridgestone Software Co., Ltd.