Trevor Hill
The company says their electronic ledger will be used as a new way to store both original and authoritative business information. By applying a “hybrid blockchain” to monitor new information and note changes in company information (e.g. company filings, changes in directors, etc.), they hope to provide more accurate records about these companies.

The company’s blockchain also would serve as one-stop shop to retrieve any kind of information or official documentation on any business or their executives. The intention is to create a source on the vitals of each business that is completely auditable, and in real-time reflects the best available information as it becomes known.

Instead of having divided databases providing different information, all the information that can be provided will be available in one transparent blockchain. Furthermore, it enables a search for companies based on all current and future identifiers (e.g. commercial register number, LEI, EUID, REID, DUNS®, Bloomberg Global ID/FIGI, Thomson Reuters PermID, EIN, VAT numbers), theoretically streamlining the infrastructure of global business information.

Kompany.com’s announcement adds to the growing trend of firms experimenting with the technology. The blockchain has become an intriguing prospect for many businesses and organizations, with many big-name companies taking an interest in it.

Some have introduced “Blockchain as a Service” platforms, such as Microsoft Azure‘s Ethereum-integrated development platform and IBM’s Bluemix. These are very real examples of tech giants providing use value through the blockchain in a very specific way through specific product lines. The significance of this trend is to give credibility to the potential of the blockchain as a disruptive force in the tech arena. If hugely successful fortune 500 companies are risking their own capital to implement blockchain services, it signals that they are convinced of its ability to eventually provide value to their customers.

Private chains have been criticized in the past for being allegedly pointless because the advantages of blockchains are their trustless nature — which comes from public distribution. If a chain is private and relies on centralized, institutional servers, then do they really provide us with any differentiating qualities?