Thursday, 15 November 2018

Initiative Q – Nonsense spreading like a virus



Lately there has been a lot of buzz about Initiative Q in social media. Even people who usually aren't gullible to promote these kind of chain-letter type of schemes have been sharing invite links luring more and more people to do the same.

So what is this initiative of spam all about then?

According to the webpage of Initiative Q the aim of the company/people behind the scheme is to create "the payment system of the future". 


Joining Initiative Q requires an invitation to sign up. You only have to give your name and email address, no payment is required – yet.

People signing up and sharing invite links are rewarded with the future currency. Like the webpage says: "To get millions to join, we are giving away our future currency". As I'm writing this the webpage claims that the estimated future value of next spot would be about 19.000 dollars. And get this: that fat stack of dollars will be yours free of charge! Don't mind that it's just an empty nonsensical promise based on nothing.






Is it worth signing up?


Although there's no money asked (for now), and you'll probably only get your email address contaminated, should you trust the sincerity of this initiative? – I know I wouldn't.

I did not sign up but read through texts and information available on the webpage of Initiative Q. I also made searches online to check whether the company and the people behind the program were real.


Initiative Q is marketed as an attempt by ex-PayPal guys to create a new payment system instead of credit cards. Surprisingly that seems to be somewhat accurate marketing pitch. However, only one man is named on the website, an Israelian Saar Wilf, who in fact has a history with PayPal. According to Saar's LinkedIn profile he was a director at PayPal between 2008 and April 2010. He has also publicly presented himself as the man behind the concept of Initiative Q.

Wilf Saar on the left. Besides being an "ex-PayPal guy" he is also a poker player.


The registrant of the website of Initiative Q is an Israelian company SW Ventures LTD owned by Saar Wilf. There isn't much to be found about the company online. The only thing I managed to find was a patent application dated July 2018 for "system and method for locating and eliminating insects". – I guess it's the future of killing insects as well.





A lot of hype



The webpage is pretty much full of hype about this payment system of the future, boosted with some claims that are in fact ridiculous. There really isn't any explanation how this Q currency would actually work. – Well, at least nothing that would make sense or be reasonable.

Like scams usually do also Initiative Q makes predictions based on nothing and threaten that you would miss a chance of your lifetime by choosing not to sign up.



"It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. Don't miss your chance!" 
– Yeah, that's a direct quote from the site.

The following chapter from the FAQ tries to explain what is the value of Q based on by explaining that there really isn't any base for the value. There's a certain resemblance to OneCoin ponzi scam.
"What is your estimate of the Q value based on?

The reasoning behind the estimated future value of the Q payment network can be summarized as follows: 
    1. The payment world is stuck with decades old technologies, since it is very difficult to get buyers to adopt a new technology that sellers don’t yet support and vice versa.
    2. Initiative Q solves this problem by compensating early adopters with future currency.
    3. This enables the building of a payment network that is far superior to current ones.
    4. A payment network that is both superior technologically, and widely adopted, would be preferred by both buyers and sellers.
    5. It is realistic to expect that such a network would eventually overtake credit cards, which account for $20 trillion in annual transactions.
    6. The total amount of money in the world is roughly half the world’s annual economic activity. The value of all Q currency could thus reach half of Q’s annual volume (i.e. $10 trillion).
    7. An alternative data point is the value of cryptocurrencies which peaked at nearly $1 trillion, despite hardly being used for real payments (nearly all activity is speculation).
    8. Therefore, the total future value of Qs could reach a few trillion dollars. Since there are currently 2 trillion Qs, the goal of one US dollar per Q is achievable."


As already said, Initiative Q asks no money for signing up. However, the future plans of the company seem to require astonishing piles of cash for the sheer existence of the payment system. 

An independent monetary committee will be chosen via voting by all members and stakeholders in the Q payment network (don't ask me how). The committee has a huge responsibility and also an option to issue new coins for the purpose of maintaining stability, and increasing adoption.

But why would anyone trust that Qs have any value? Well, the answer is to have "large reserves of USD" managed by the monetary committee. According to Initiative Q that huge reserve of dollars will be financed through selling Qs for USD and selling future grants of Q. 

I still don't understand why anyone in their right mind would exchange their dollars to those worthless Qs. There simply is no base for the value before there's a base for the value. Nevertheless, I have a pretty good guess who would be asked to contribute for the greater good to get that reserve of dollars piling up. – Wink, wink, give me your name and email address and I'll tell you.

Signing up is free and you'll be gifted with Qs, but the lunch doesn't seem to be free:

"As an additional means of instilling trust in the long-term purchasing power of Q, the monetary committee will continuously offer to buy Qs in exchange for USD (and other currencies) at the target rate of 1 Q per 1 USD. This will assure sellers they can confidently accept Q as a payment method.

This requires the monetary committee to hold large reserves of USD. The reserve balance will be publically available, assuring members that they can convert to USD at any time, thus supporting Q stability. As Q becomes a global standard, and trust in its long-term value increases, the reserve ratio can decrease.
 

These reserves are financed through two sources: 
    1. Selling Q for USD — Buyers looking to benefit from the advantages of the Q payment network need to add Qs in their account, which is done by buying them from the monetary committee.
    2. Selling future grants of Q — This option is available to accredited investors who believe in the long-term success of Initiative Q. They can purchase (at a significant discount) the right to receive Qs in the future, that will be released according to the network growth — similar to the new members rewards."


Furthermore, it seems evident that Q requires a worldwide heavy organisation to run its business. 


A chapter titled "Reversibility and dispute arbitration" describes how disputes need to be resolved by "trained representatives":

"The Q payment network can also include an automated dispute resolution process, with an easy to use interface that allows users to submit claims and upload evidence to support those claims.

Disputes that cannot be resolved automatically can be assigned to a trained representative, who investigates the claims to determine whether there has been a violation of the Q payment network regulations. If the agent finds that the seller was at fault, then the transaction can be reversed, while in cases where both sides acted appropriately (e.g. an unauthorized charge) the buyer can be reimbursed by Initiative Q. Such reimbursement can be paid from a global insurance pool financed from transaction fees."


Now, wait a minute, doesn't this all resemblance a lot how a credit card company or a bank would work. The only difference is that banks and credit card companies handle valuable assets whereas Initiative Q has nothing but worthless Qs to offer. All I see is future risks and lots of expenses to be covered and a massive capital to be raised.


Conclusion


As long as no money is required there's little to no harm done to the people signing up. However, I guess those email addresses could be stored for a later use to market other shady schemes. A database of email addresses belonging to gullible people could be a valuable asset to any scam. 

Despite being seemingly harmless Initiative Q has many red flags waving already. Although no money is asked for now, I see likely that if the company were to proceed with the concept, it would start asking for money from the participants. 

Personally I wouldn't sign up to this and neither would I recommend Initiative Q to anyone. In poker terms: Initiative Q has dealt the worst hand ever and I would definitely fold it.

Friday, 26 October 2018

OneCoin – the D-day, 8th October 2018

Monday 8th October was the most highly anticipated day for onecoiners around the world. After years of waiting patiently, disappointment after disappointment, the coin was supposed to finally go public. Alleged 3.5 million members and billions of coins that they had not been hodling but instead forced to hold for years.

Well, of course nothing happened. The coin didn't go public and there still is no exchange to sell onecoins. Not that it really even matters because the coins are absolutely worthless and there's no point organizing an exchange for a certain failure. But there are still a lot of members who simply don't believe there's a smell until shit hits the fan.

In fact, the going-public date was already postponed a couple months back. As a custom of the company nothing was officially informed to the members and they were just left baffled without any information about the future of their possessed coins. For now there isn't any information available when the coin is going to go public. Of course dates don't even matter, because OneCoin can always continue postponing things.

On Monday there was also supposed to be the beginning of OneCoin's ICO – or "CO" to be exact. In an OneCoin event there was people celebrating and filming while a counter on the ICO webpage was closing zero. Little did they know that the ridiculous counter was ticking according to the time zone they were in, and most of the world was still hours away from the big moment. Well, the counter did go to zero accompanied by music, Europe's The Final Countdown, but nothing happened.



... Nope, it wasn't launched.

New DealShaker (aka DealShitter) platform was supposed to be launched during September. That didn't happen either. The latest information implies that the site would be launched at the end of October. But this is OneCoin we're talking about – the future of delays – so anything might not ever happen.



OneCoin ICO II


After never getting its first ICO started it was time for another effort. All began with an informational period, which I think was supposed to attract people outside the scheme to invest in OneCoin without participating the pyramid scam part of it.


OneCoin ICO – Informational Period
"Informational period (September 8– October 7, 2018)

Conducting an information campaign aimed at fully informing the participants about the project."


The awkward Informational Period ended on October 7. However, it was far from being informational, if anything it was just confusing and disinformational. – Not that we were expecting much else.

During this "information campaign" there has been some strange modifications to the ICO site. Suddenly almost all logos related to OneCoin were removed, probably just to make any visual connection to the mother scam barely visible. Strangely there still is a "project video" that includes OneCoin logo. The logo also appears as a favicon of the browser tab, and the website still has a link to OneCoin's YouTube channel. Throughout the website word "OneCoin" has been replaced with "ONE Coin".

Some information related to OFC token was removed. The Smart Contract of the ICO was deleted at the very beginning of this campaign. I guess it was a bit too embarrassing to reveal that 120 billion Ethereum based tokens were to be created for this coin offering – exactly the amount that is supposed to be the finite number of OneCoins issued.


On Friday 14 September the T&C and FAQ sections of the website were finally published.

According to the terms and conditions the company responsible of the ICO is an offshore company from Panama. To be exact:
AHS Latam S. A., reg. number 155655623-2-2017, with registered office address: 69 Street, P. H. Alfa Real Building, Suite 2, San Francisco, Panama City, Republic of Panama.


The resident agent behind the company is a panamanian law firm Robles and Robles. The directors of the company haven't had any known connections to OneCoin – up until now. 

The following names can be found connected to AHS Latam SA: Jorge Luis Herrera, Brendy Escalona, Irina Pilava, Christina Antonis Solomou and Andri Andreou.

Jorge Luis Herrera and Brendy Escalona are lawyers of Robles and Robles law firm.

Irina Pilava doesn't seem to have any public connections to OneCoin that could be found online. A person with an identical name appears in Offshore Leaks Database, but that only figures because OneCoin has a track record of using offshore companies.

Christina Antonis Solomou has no public connections to OneCoin either, but a connection to Irina Pilava can be found. Apparently they have a connection related to a business in Panama.

Andri Andreou has no public relations to OneCoin. He is also one of the directors of AHS AMERICAS S.A., a company which has all the persons above aboard including the law firm Robles and Robles.

Robles and Robles (Robles y Robles) has operated as an agent for thousands of offshore companies so its involvement in OneCoin related company isn't anything peculiar per se. However, I found that Robles and Robles is also the agent behind a Panamian company named Servicios De Educacion Online, S.A. One of the directors of that company is Alexandro Marco Vinicio Ortega Mejia who happens to be also the director of One Life Servicios República Dominicana, Network One Servicos Eireli (Brazil) and One Network Servicos Brazil LTDA. At first those companies didn't seem to be important because there are maybe hundreds of OneCoin related shell companies all over the world. However, making some searches with the names of those companies led me to find out OneCoin's Brazilian bank accounts – which I then added to my list of OneCoin's bank accounts in Latin America.


The terms and conditions of the ICO state for example the following clauses:


"The present terms and conditions are not in any way a solicitation for investment and does not in any way pertain to an offering of securities and/or any other type of investment instruments in any jurisdiction."
– Well, yeah, OneCoin was never an investment but a scam.
"Do not participate if you are not an expert in dealings with cryptographic tokens and blockchain based systems."
– So common knowledge isn't enough? You have to be an "expert"?
"The CO performed will not include or in any other way involve issuance of any currency, securities (whether equity securities or otherwise) or other kind of investment certificates and/or instruments. The tokens to be sold during the CO are merely cryptographic tokens existent, that enables usage of and interactions with services enabled, if successfully completed and deployed."  
– So this "Coin Offering" isn't about a coin then, because I'm sure coins are considered as currency. Anyway, I'm glad you are admitting that OneCoin isn't a currency.
"Such tokens are not redeemable, associated with financial return or backed by any underlying asset or repurchase commitment and do not necessarily have market price. Furthermore, the OFC do not stand for any sort of investment contract for all intents and purposes. Individuals shall not participate in the CO with a view to investment or speculation or in pursuit of any profit." 
– Well, currently the ICO web page informs that "300 OFCS = 1 ONE". So in other words, the above statements consider OneCoins as well. Ergo OneCoin is not a currency and you should not expect any financial return in exchange, let alone profit. 

All in all OneCoin's ICO scam is an embarrassment even by ICO scam standards. The website is still missing information that would be presented on a website of any other ICO (scam) that was taking itself seriously. 

This Coin Offering doesn't even follow its roadmap. The first round of the CO was already going on for weeks but there was no way to participate. Currently the website is linked to another one that makes it possible to sign up for the CO.

Participation to the CO requires participants to go through KYC procedure. However, KYC doesn't seem to be required for making deposits. Only proceeding further requires the participants to be KYC compliant. This procedure isn't constructed to prevent terrorists and criminals from laundering money through OneCoin. A more accurate term for this procedure would be KYV (Know Your Victims), a procedure that many modern scams use. KYV isn't required for deposits but for withdrawals, and some times also to delay stuff that is supposed to happen after a deposit has been done. It's a useful tool for keeping scams running longer.

Of course, in reality OneCoin doesn't actually need KYC procedure at all, because the most effective money laundering repellant OneCoin has is the coin itself. The worthless coin that has no exchanges surely doesn't attract anyone in their right mind.



GLG and Inner Circle


The company being unable to provide answers to the members desperately asking questions, OneCoin scammers decided during the early summer of 2018 to set up exclusive GLG (Global Leaders Group) and Inner Circle groups to spread misinformation among the members and strengthen their belief to the ponzi.




However, there's a contradiction in the sheer existence of GLG and Inner Circle. The company has specifically warned not to trust any information released by any other sources than the company itself. OneLife newsletter August 13 gives an important reminder to the members: "Only trust information that you receive from the official corporate emails or the one that you find published via the official corporate channels." – A rhetoric question: What is the purpose of GLG and Inner Circle then?

I guess the sources not to be trusted should include the head of the GLG and Inner Circle groups, Konstantin Ignatov, because he has been caught lying in public twice already. 

During an event in July in Argentina Ignatov announced that according to report by investigators the company was clean from any allegations about violating laws. 
Konstantin Ignatov: "The investigators didn't even find one thing to support their allegations." ... "In those 3000 pages (referring to the alleged report) they didn't even find one law that was violated."
– In fact, on the contrary to Ignatov's claims the investigation by Europol and German police is still ongoing. The focus of the investigation is in organised commercial fraud, money laundering, pyramid sales providing financial services without authorization and providing payment services without permission. The investigation is being conducted against eight suspects, mainly employees of one of the companies of the OneCoin group registered in Germany. Ruja Ignatova is among the persons suspected. Source: Bulgarian Capital 25 October.

Another one of Konstantin Ignatov's lies is a petty one in comparison, but it certainly doesn't lack in magnitude. On his Facebook post 30 August, Konstantin was boasting: "Being featured in one of the biggest magazines, with 10 million readers." 


That was of course a lie. Numbers magazine has only 3.000 copies printed. In addition OneCoin had most likely paid for the article to be published. The company happened to be sponsoring the magazine at that time.



The questions left unanswered


The company doesn't seem to be interested to answer even to the most important questions the members have:

– There's still no information when OneCoin is supposed to go public.

– Several members have lost their coins that were deposited into so called CoinSafe. The idea was to deposit OneCoins in CoinSafe for a period of 1 or 2 years after which an interest was supposed to be paid according to the deposited sum. There are members who lost their coins about half year ago and still haven't received them.

– Members who bought OFC (OneCoin Future Certificates) during OneCoin's failed IPO process in 2017 still don't know what happens to their Future Certificates.

The Global (Mis)Leaders Group and the Inner Circle provide only disinformation or occasionally admit that there isn't any information available.


400 million dollars of OneCoin related money laundered in the U.S.



Cape Cod Times reported 13 September that a man has been arrested and charged of conspiracy to commit money laundering involving 400 million dollars from OneCoin ponzi-pyramid scam. The news from the U.S. truly underline the fact that OneCoin is an international criminal organisation.

Cape Cod Times: 
"A federal grand jury indicted Mark S. Scott on Aug. 21 on a charge of conspiracy to commit money laundering after finding evidence that he and others knowingly conducted financial transactions involving about $400 million in proceeds from a pyramid scheme involving a purported cryptocurrency known as OneCoin, with the intention of concealing the source of the proceeds, according to federal court documents."

The news article mentions that the FBI, IRS and Barnstable police executed a federal search warrant at Scott's house on September 5th. The indictment refers to some unknown individuals so I suppose there might be some more arrests to come – unless already arrested.As far as I know Mark S. Scott had no public relations to OneCoin. Cape Cod Times tells us that he has a law degree, 22-year career in law and license to practice law in Florida.

"The Florida Bar directory lists Scott as member in good standing who is eligible to practice law in Florida. He earned his law degree from Boston University in 1995, has an address in Coral Gables and is the principal of Mark S. Scott, PL, according to the directory."

According to Bulgarian Capital OneCoin already denied having any connections to money laundering by Mark S. Scott. However, I don't think that the FBI and the law enforcement of the U.S. just fabricates claims of OneCoin's connection to the money laundering out of thin air. Such statement must be based on investigated facts.

Wednesday, 17 October 2018

OneCoin bank accounts in Latin America

(Updated 25 October 2018 – added Brazilian bank details.)

Below you can find bank accounts related to ponzi-pyramid scam OneCoin (aka OneLife) in Latin America. I have no information whether all these bank accounts are still active. Some of them might already be frozen – or about to be frozen.





Argentina

Bank: Banco Galicia
Bank account holder: One Network Servicios Argentina
Account number: 3648-3-306-7
CBU: 0070306020000003648377


Brazil


Bank: Banco Do Brasil
Bank account holder: Network One Servicos

CNPJ (company ID number): 24.064.905/0001-93
Ag: 1744-2 
CC: 23,548-2

Bank: Caixa Economica
Bank account holder: Network One Servicos
CNPJ (company ID number): 24.064.905/0001-93
Ag: 2995 

Op: 003 
CC: 00001361-8

Bank: ITAÚ Bank

Bank account holder: Network One Servicos

CNPJ (company ID number): 24.064.905/0001-93
Ag: 6328 
CC: 14440-4

Colombia

Bank: Bancolombia 
Type of account: Savings 
Bank account holder: PAYMENT EXPRESS SAS 
Account number: 237.659783-78 
NIT: 900.513.308 

Bank: Bancolombia 
Type of account: Savings 
Bank account holder: ESSENTIAL 7/24 
Account number: 237-656055-55 
NIT: 900.728.368-5

Bank: Bancolombia 
Type of account: Savings 
Bank account holder: ONE NETWORK SERVICES COLOMBIA SAS 
Account number: 237-661120-81 
NIT: 900.976.785


Costa Rica

Bank: Banco Promerica
Bank account holder: OLCR BIZITZABAT SA

Account number: 30000001858999 
Client: 11610300018589995 

Account number for dollars: 40000001859319 
Client: 11610400018593193


Dominican Republic

Bank: Banco Popular
Bank account holder: One Life Servicios
Account number for pesos: 799632518 
Account number for dollars: 799633334


Ecuador

Bank: Banco Pichincha
Bank account holder: One Network Servicios Ecuador S.A.
Account number: 2100134325


Mexico

Bank: Banco Inbursa
Bank account holder: Bramex Easy SA de CV
Account number: 50030515053
Clabe interbancaria: 036180500305150531
– This account is suspected to have been closed.

Bank: Banco Banamex
Bank account holder: Bramex Easy SA de CV
Account number: 9289607888
Clabe interbancaria: 002180700245406247


Panama

Bank: St. Georges Bank
Bank account holder: ONE DREAM TEAM PANAMÁ, S.A.
Account number: 2503136

– There are some familiar names behind the company that holds that bank account:
Christian Steinkeller
Jose Antonio Gordo Valero (aka Jose Gordo)
Maria Eugenia Diaz Cordero


Source: https://opencorporates.com/companies/pa/155619499


Jose Gordo on the left, Christian Steinkeller on the right.

Friday, 5 October 2018

Money laundering



Yesterday an interesting article occurred on Helsingin Sanomat website referring to news related to suspected money laundering that happened in Danske Bank's Estonian branch during 2007–2015.

The case has probably absolutely nothing to do with the scams I have written about in my blog. Nevertheless, there was some information worth mentioning what comes to money laundering and banks in general.

Danske Bank is the largest bank in Denmark. It also operates in several countries in the northern European region.

The money laundering suspicion concerns a total amount of 200 billion euros transferred between 2007 and 2015 through Danske Bank's Estonian branch.

Now, what's interesting is that despite being an European bank, Danske Bank is facing criminal investigation by U.S. authorities. The bank is now cooperating with U.S. Department of Justice over Estonian branch. But why US authorities are investigating an European bank?

Another article by Helsingin Sanomat related to the money laundering case enlightens us about the matter.

The article tells us that American JP Morgan, one of the largest banks in the world, had been transferring US dollar payments of the Estonian Danske Bank. In July 2013 JP Morgan quitted operating payments and gave a serious warning to the Estonian Danske Bank after noticing suspicious backgrounds of its clients. 

According to anti-money laundering regulation banks must know the exact beneficials of the accounts of their clients. What comes to the Estonian money laundering case, the bank has been severely neglecting its duties. 

Apparently banks of the U.S. are very observant what comes to money laundering. For example last year Deutsche Bank was fined 630 million dollars for failures over Russian money laundering



Scams, fear the U.S!





Strict policies of U.S. regulation and nosy banks are also a fact acknowledged by scams throughout the world. Hence scams operating outside the U.S. usually try to exclude U.S. citizens from participating. – Well, it's not like they really make an effort to prevent dollars from coming in.

During these nearly three years that my blog has existed among many banks that have visited is also JP Morgan. Taking a closer look on the visitor statistics show 57 users from the bank between August 2016 to August 2018. Most of the visits go to OneCoin related posts. Well, I'm just guessing here, but maybe JP Morgan was interested in money transfers involving dollars.




There has also been some visits from the IRS, which is not surprising now that it is known that there has been a criminal investigation of money laundering considering 400 million dollars related to OneCoin. 

The risks involved in traditional money laundering has driven many scams to choose other payment methods instead of wire transfers between banks. Sadly also cryptocurrency is growing its popularity as a payment method for scams, and from what I have seen, there are plenty of gullible people holding cryptocurrencies.

Thursday, 30 August 2018

OneCoin follow-up

OneCoin 2015 – 2018.


Crumbling remains of the pyramid


A successful scam usually has cult like members who continue believing in the scam even at the point when the whole pyramid is collapsing around them. This is also where we are at with OneCoin.

There are still members who are clinging to the hope of OneCoin going public and thus the imaginary value of the coin would magically turn into reality. One fact that they comfortable seem to forget is that it isn't relevant whether there are hundreds of thousands or 3,5 million members believing in the lie. There isn't going to be masses of even more gullible people to bail them out from their misery.

The members of OneCoin are supposedly holding about 60 billion onecoins, most of them very eager to sell all of their possessions as soon as possible. According to the dictated value of the coin, which is a bit above 20 euros at the moment, that's about 1200 billion euros. You have to be absolutely delusional to imagine people outside the cult buying these coins. And you only have to know the basics of economics to understand what would happen if the coin ever was successfully launched to open market.

Furthermore the latest news about OneCoin once again delaying the big day of going public seem to have agitated also some of the hardest believers to ask questions and demand answers.



Google Trends


In September 2016 OneCoin's popularity on Google was peaking and the company proudly claimed to have reached 2.5 million members. Currently the counter of the website claims that OneCoin has almost 3.5 million members. However this increase of 1 million members doesn't reflect at all on Google Trends. Search term "onecoin" has the popularity of about 20 % compared to the highest mark in September 2016.


Between those red vertical lines there has been an increase of 1 million members. Yet OneCoin's popularity on Google has gone down remarkably from the peak in September 2016. 

Google Trends can be a great tool for comparing popularities of different search terms. For instance OneCoin has been marketed as the biggest cryptocurrency in the world, also as "the Bitcoin killer" in addition to other nonsensical claims. On Google Trends we see a totally different story. Compared to other known cryptocurrencies OneCoin seems to be practically unknown to the general public. Adding Bitcoin to the comparison shows OneCoin's popularity as a flat line.


Comparing search term "onecoin" to "bitcoin" on Google Trends.

The stats shown by Google Trend are no surprise to me. Usually when OneCoin comes up in a conversation I have to explain what it is. Recently I talked to a fried who lives in an area that is most likely the worst OneCoin infected area in Finland. He had never heard about OneCoin.



Alexa.com


OneCoin's DealShaker platform presents a counter that has had linear growth of merchants and logged-in-members throughout the existence of the site. Alexa.com shows a rather drastic decline in popularity of the site which indicates that the figures given by OneCoin aren't trustworthy.




Over 70.000 merchants but only about 15.000 shitty deals available. Total amount of users logged in is very far from the alleged 3.5 million members of OneCoin. Seems that vast majority of them aren't interested about DealShaker.



Alleged 3.5 million members but not much interest towards DealShitter.


The popularity of the site has been declining despite the continuously growing number of members.



The BMW auction


In June there was a big marketing event of DealShaker and the climax was an auction of a BMW car that was going to be hammered for 100 % onecoins.

A video clip of the auction shows GLG (Global Leader Group) members of OneCoin running the auction. GLG is supposed to be a group of OneCoin leaders that are the highest in the hierarchy what comes to the IMAs (Independent Marketing Associates) of OneCoin/OneLife. They are the ones that members can rely on as a source of real disinformation.





Immediately after the auction was over it was praised as a great success and as a proof that you can buy even a BMW sports car with onecoins. The auction starts with a modest bid of 1.000 onecoins, next bid was 2.000 onecoins and the third one 2.300 onecoins. According to the dictated value of onecoin the third bid was close to the actual retail price of the car, which is probably something between 40k-50k euros. However, the auction didn't stop there. The final bid for the car was staggering 3.6 million onecoins. According to the imaginary value of the coin that would be well above 70 million euros for a BMW worth about 40k euros. Or to be more precise the value of onecoin in this transaction would be about 0.011 euro.

It's funny how the GLG members got more and more excited as the imaginary value of the coin was bombarded down by every bid, starting from the very beginning of the auction.


GLG member Mihail Petrovic thinks that the auction was fantastic.

Of course the auction got ridiculed online because it truly showed that not even the top leaders of OneCoin valued the coin even close to the imaginary value of the coin. However, the company was swift to interfere and as a result the auction was voided. Apparently OneCoin's members can't even use their coins as they will. Everything is controlled by the scampany.






Top leaders  and management abandoned the ship


The whole leadership of the company is gone and the majority of the top earners of the scam have moved on, many of them to other scams. Many of the loudest supporters and believers of OneCoin have gone quiet. Konstantin Ignatov stepped in to replace his sister who fled from the EU region and was never to be heard again.


Sebastian Greenwood, Global Master Distributor




Sebastian Greenwood left OneCoin in December 2017 after being in OneCoin since the beginning. His name popped up in China in May 2018 after Chinese authorities investigating OneCoin scam had frozen a bank account of Greenwood's holding 7.1 million dollars.


Bangkok 2016, Sebastian Greenwood lying about the birthday cake of OneCoin:
"The biggest cake ever" ... "And this cake is two meters by two meters in diameter."


Frank Ricketts


Frank Ricketts, the captain of the shipwreck.

Frank Ricketts was appointed as the "captain" of the ship(-wreck) as Greenwood was making his way to exit. Awkwardly this fresh captain left without telling about it to his drowning passengers. The company itself didn't inform about the departure of Ricketts. Instead the news were milked from a member of the Global Leaders Group (GLG).


Pablo Munoz, CEO of OneLife




We still don't know why Pablo Munoz disappeared from the position of OneLife CEO. The company was loud to introduce him but buried him very quietly. – Oh, they didn't bury him literally. As far as I know Munoz is still alive. I don't think he misses his short reign though.

The LinkedIn profile of Munoz doesn't mention a thing about his position in OneLife.


Pierre "Pitt" Arens, CEO of OneCoin


Pierre Arens was introduced as the new CEO of OneCoin in May 2017.

Pierre "Pitt" Arens quitted as the CEO of OneCoin holding the position only about 5 months. His LinkedIn profile still doesn't mention a thing about being the CEO of "the biggest cryptocurrency of the world". According to Arens the reason for his departure was: "a lack of leeway as a leader". – Oh, i guess it had nothing to do with the company being a scam then.


Ruja Ignatova, the visionary, the founder, the queen of the crypt




The beloved leader of the ponzi disappeared in October 2017 and was never heard again. When OneCoin's offices were raided in January 2018 it became obvious that she had fled the EU region.

After Ruja Ignatova left the scam her brother Konstantin Ignatov took over as the head of the ponzi. It remains to be seen how long that lasts.



Konstantin plays the role of the head of the company but behind the curtains the real manager of One Network Services is certain Christian Manolov. However Manolov is apparently just a puppet put in charge of a strange circle of companies owning each other. Read this article by Bulgarian Capital to know more about the companies behind OneCoin.


Edward Ludbrook

I think there's one man behind OneCoin who has not given the praise that he deserves. I mean, he is after all the man who by his own words was behind the idea of creating the new blockchain for OneCoin in October 2016.

Edward Ludbrook was once "The Chief Leadership Officer" and "the Asian Ambassador" of the scam. To bring credibility to OneCoin and to himself Ludbrook was also keen on boasting how he had advised the British government on the pyramid law legislation in the 90's. I don't know if that's true, but while he was a loyal lackey of OneCoin this expert of pyramid legislation was in fact urging people to disregard any warnings about OneCoin.

After leaving the company Lubrook has tried to distance himself from the scam. He has removed all posts from his Facebook page regarding OneCoin. The only one I managed to find was this:


– Well he obviously has also focused on deleting material that connects him to OneCoin/OneLife.

His LinkedIn profile page is nowadays missing the 11 months he spent consulting a ponzi-pyramid scam. Luckily someone took a screencap before the reference was removed. According to Ludbrook he was "misled by the CEO of OneLife" (Ruja Ignatova) and he also addresses "deep concerns over the company." – I guess those concerns were not deep enough to give a shit about the victims of the ponzi.


Ludbrook: "I was misled by the CEO and have deep concerns over the company."

Although he was not the Consultant of OneLife after September 2016 he did continue as Asian Ambassador of OneLife for an unknown period.


Ludbrook as "Asian Ambassador" of OneLife in October 2016.


After getting out of the relationship with OneCoin Ludbrook has written a piece on Medium platform titled "How to spot a crypto-scam?" He writes:
"90% of true scams are easy to spot. And frankly most people join these knowing that they look weak and they just hope they can make a quick profit.
Its the 10% that are hard to spot. I was recruited into a crypto-business that had everything right except…. So anyone can be caught. It happens to the best of us."

– It happens to the best of us? – No, it doesn't happen to the best of us. The true nature of OneCoin was easy to spot since the day one. That's why there were so many people warning about the scam from the early on. There has also been numerous warnings from banks, governments and police.

By the way, an earlier edition of the article by Ludbrook was a bit more revealing:


Now who might this "con-woman" be?



Ed Ludbrook: 
"I don't think stupid people should be allowed to be in OneCoin."




Here's Ed Ludbrook discouraging people from searching information about OneCoin and urging to disregard any warnings:



So Mr Ludbrook, you claim you were somehow misled by Ruja Ignatova. How many people did you mislead?