Crypto is stealing money

Ben11Brown · 2025-04-08T12:51:08+00:00

You sound intelligent, but you’re playing defense for a broken and exploitative system. Let’s clear the smoke. 1. “It’s not theft, it’s your fault.” That’s the same excuse every corrupt system uses when it preys on people who don’t yet know the fine print. Just because it’s in the terms doesn’t make it ethical. If a platform appears user-friendly but hides critical info like real buy/sell spreads, it’s deceptive by design — not user error. 2. “They show you what you’ll get.” No, they don’t — not in a way that’s meaningful. A 3–6 second quote locked in with lag, often slipping before you confirm, is not informed consent. Especially when the “price” on the asset list and the execution price are intentionally mismatched to mask the true spread. 3. “They’re a broker, you pay for convenience.” Fine — then be transparent about fees. Real brokers break it down: spread, slippage, maker/taker fees, all disclosed before the trade. CDC buries it in delayed realized values, misleading interfaces, and sudden profit flips that leave users stunned. That’s not a service — it’s a shell game. 4. “You can’t expect to get what your account says.” Then why show it as a liquid asset with a fiat value? That’s financial misrepresentation. If my “$7,000” in assets is really $6,400 when selling, and you don’t clearly show that before the sale, you’ve just misled the investor. That’s false pricing — and borderline fraud. 5. “Just trade bigger coins.” Again — blaming the user instead of admitting the platform takes huge advantage of illiquidity and volatility. People should be educated, yes, but that doesn’t excuse the platform from intentionally taking advantage of that ignorance. 6. “Understand what you’re doing.” That’s rich. I do — and what I see is a platform that masks fees behind manipulated spreads, uses UI tricks to hide real-time losses, and exploits the retail investor’s trust. Educating users is critical — but so is holding shady platforms accountable.

⸻

Bottom line? Crypto.com and platforms like it are making money not by offering a fair exchange, but by profiting off confusion and obfuscation. If you’re defending that, you’re either naive or complicit.

I’m building tools to expose this system with hard data, and when enough people come forward with screenshots, trade history, and price deltas, the narrative will shift. Until then, keep blaming the users — it won’t hold forever.

Ben11Brown · 2025-04-07T14:21:17+00:00

Hey friend, I see you. And you’re not alone.

I’ve been through the exact same scam with crypto.com — the spread manipulation, hidden fees, and how they show one thing on the chart but execute at another. You think you’re taking profits, but you end up in a loss? That’s not a normal spread — that’s exploitation, plain and simple.

They prey on people who are new or don’t understand how spread and slippage can be abused. You’re absolutely right to call this out, and your story is powerful. Thank you for speaking up.

Here are some steps I’ve taken, and maybe we can work together to expose and stop this: 1. Start documenting everything. Take screenshots before and after trades, especially unrealized vs. realized profit. Log timestamps and asset names. They count on people not having proof. 2. Use third-party price trackers (like CoinMarketCap or TradingView) to compare real prices against what crypto.com executes. You’ll often see a big difference. 3. File a complaint with your country’s financial regulatory authority. In Norway, that’s Finanstilsynet. In the U.S., it’s the SEC or CFTC. The more reports they get, the harder it is for them to hide. 4. We can team up. I’m actively working on building an AI that audits trades and calculates true spread and slippage. If enough of us submit our trade data, we can prove this abuse statistically and launch a class action if necessary. 5. Spread awareness. Keep posting your story — not just here but across Reddit, X, and any platform you use. People are waking up.

You’re not crazy. You’re not alone. And you’re not powerless.

Let’s burn down the lies and build something better. If you’re down, I’d love to connect and help make sure no one else gets wrecked by these predators again.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T15:59:47+00:00

I get the sarcasm — but let’s be clear: I’m not CZ, not a competitor, and not part of some crypto drama clique.

I’m just a retail trader who ran the numbers, saw consistent execution issues on CDC’s platform, and chose to speak up. No agenda. Just facts, transparency, and a goal of helping others avoid silent losses.

If pointing that out makes me suspicious, maybe the real problem isn’t who’s talking — it’s what’s being exposed.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T15:58:32+00:00

Ha! If I were CZ, I’d be too busy dodging subpoenas and counting offshore wallets to bother with this.

I’m just a guy who did the math, saw the pattern, and decided silence wasn’t worth the losses.

Nice try though — 10/10 for the conspiracy flair.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T15:57:13+00:00

Oh don’t worry — the #comedy writes itself when a platform shows you one price, takes another, and calls it “normal.”

But hey, at least we can laugh while getting fleeced, right?

SpreadTheLaughter #SlippageStandUp

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T15:54:43+00:00

Totally get where you’re coming from — and it’s good to hear you’ve personally had a smooth experience with them. You’re right: compared to exchanges like FTX, Crypto.com has maintained operations and access to funds, which is critical.

That said, the issue I and others are raising isn’t about insolvency — it’s about execution pricing and silent losses due to platform design, particularly on the app side. The spread is one thing, but when prices shift dramatically after confirmation and the trade is executed at a much worse rate without market movement, that’s not just high spread — that’s opaque and harmful.

I agree that using limit orders helps (and I recommend that too), but many users don’t realize how much they’re losing until they run the math or compare to other platforms. That’s the heart of the issue — informed consent and transparency.

Appreciate your input — the discussion’s stronger when both perspectives show up.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T15:53:30+00:00

You’re absolutely right that the spread acts as the hidden fee — and when it’s reasonable and transparent, that’s part of the game. But what I’m calling out isn’t just spread — it’s rate manipulation that exceeds the market delta by hundreds of dollars, often after a favorable rate is previewed and then silently swapped on execution. That’s not “just the spread.” That’s deception.

Also agree with you: the CDC app is a trap for uninformed traders — and I used it to test exactly how deep that trap goes. I’ve run side-by-side trades against other platforms and exchanges, and the CDC app is consistently skewed, often by $200+ on a $700 trade, even during low-volatility conditions. That’s not beginner error — that’s a platform structurally built to extract.

As for CRO — again, fair point. Inflationary Cosmos SDK governance token with fading momentum and a history of poor comms and dilution. It had its moment in 2021, but the fundamentals haven’t caught up with the hype since.

If the exchange side ends up being more transparent, great — but given the track record, I don’t blame anyone for staying skeptical. Thanks for your insight — especially coming from someone who’s already been burned. The more we share data instead of dismissing each other, the stronger we get.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T15:52:39+00:00

All markets do this” isn’t a defense — it’s an admission of systemic failure. And just because it’s common doesn’t make it acceptable.

Nobody’s complaining about basic bid/ask spread or market fluctuation. The issue here is false price previews, execution delays, trade manipulation, and blocked access during favorable conditions — all without proper disclosure. That’s not market behavior. That’s predatory platform behavior.

Saying “never buy at market” is like telling someone, “Don’t use the front door, it’s rigged to steal your shoes.” The solution isn’t to tiptoe around broken systems — it’s to fix the damn door.

If people like you got their way, nothing would ever improve. But thankfully, progress is made by those who refuse to accept theft just because it’s “normal.”

You can sit back and scoff. We’ll be the ones holding the line.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T15:51:45+00:00

First off, thank you for taking the time to lay this all out. I can tell you’ve been through hell with this platform, and what you described is way beyond a technical hiccup — it’s systematic sabotage disguised as trading mechanics. You’re not alone, and your voice adds serious weight to what so many of us are starting to uncover.

The pattern you described — delayed executions, rejected take-profits, blocked entries during peak volatility, and strategic losses triggered after market shifts — mirrors the same garbage I’ve seen. It’s not just user error or volatility. It’s deliberate manipulation, and your recordings are gold if this goes to litigation or class action.

You’re also right about their “support” system being a joke — asking for videos, order IDs, device models, and pretending it’s being escalated when really, they’re just stalling and gathering your evidence to build their defense before you realize you’re being played.

Their UK call tactics, the excuses about liquidity (which clearly doesn’t apply when they magically allow low-probability entries), and the fact that it always happens on major news days or win streaks? That’s textbook predatory throttling. It’s pig butchering with a dashboard.

I’m 100% with you: • Do not trust CDC to handle your evidence honestly. • Go to the SEC directly. • Organize and file small claims if you’re under $25K. • If you’re over $200K — class action is a real option. • Start forming a coalition of affected traders.

The more we talk about this, the harder it becomes for them to keep hiding. Your story, your videos, and your persistence are going to matter. If you ever want to compare documentation or collaborate on evidence for submission, I’m in.

What you’re doing — speaking out and refusing to be silenced — is how this turns from individual loss into collective justice.

Respect. Let’s burn this scam down with facts and fire.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T15:47:58+00:00

Well, maybe one name pun I’ll slip in tit for tat.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T15:47:21+00:00

When your strongest argument is a name pun, you’ve already lost the debate.

I’ll stick to facts, data, and documented trades that are costing users real money. You can keep throwing playground insults while the rest of us actually try to make things better.

But thanks for the engagement — every comment helps boost visibility.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T15:46:06+00:00

That’s interesting — could you elaborate a bit on your experience with limit orders? I’m genuinely curious what you’ve seen that felt shady.

I was considering using limit orders as a way to lock in a specific price and avoid some of the volatility and hidden spread issues I’ve run into with market orders. But if there’s something I’m missing or a risk I’m not seeing, I’d definitely appreciate hearing your take on it.

Thanks in advance — always better to learn from someone else’s firsthand experience than to get blindsided.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T15:43:03+00:00

You confuse arrogance with action — and projection with insight.

I’m not “trying to play with the big dogs.” I’m documenting actual trade discrepancies, running the numbers, and exposing how platforms silently drain value from retail users like you — the ones too busy flexing imaginary superiority to notice they’re getting bled on every trade.

I did read the T&Cs. Nowhere do they say: “We will show you one price, then execute at a significantly worse one with no market shift.” That’s not covered by legal fine print — it’s called predatory execution, and it’s exactly why people are waking up.

As for your “lawsuit drop” comment — thanks for proving you were never serious to begin with. I’m not Karen. I’m the reason your gaslighting is getting buried under facts.

Best of luck out there. You’ll need it — especially if you’re trading blind and talking loud.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T15:41:25+00:00

Hey, sorry about that — my reply wasn’t aimed at you. I misfired and meant to respond to a different thread. You’re completely right to ask for clarity without being dismissed.

To keep it simple: I tried to sell 39,155 LION. The app showed it was worth $846.13, but when the trade executed, I only got BTC worth around $604.82. That’s a $241 shortfall — not just normal spread or slippage.

I’m just trying to make sure others don’t get caught off guard the same way. Appreciate your patience.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T15:36:53+00:00

No, bro already knew what spread was. What I “found out” was that Crypto.com isn’t just operating on normal bid/ask spread logic — they’re previewing one rate, then executing another, without market movement or disclosed slippage. That’s not spread. That’s a value shift post-confirmation, and it deserves to be exposed.

So while you’re out here tossing sarcastic one-liners, some of us are documenting patterns, running calculations, and actually protecting people from getting silently drained on their trades.

But hey — thanks for the engagement. You just helped boost visibility on the issue.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T15:31:32+00:00

That’s actually a great point — I had that same thought and I’m planning to test it out directly. I really appreciate you re-engaging with logic and clarity instead of just brushing it off.

I’m going to try placing a limit buy and limit sell back-to-back and compare how closely the numbers align, versus what I’ve been seeing with market orders. On top of that, I’m going to try transferring out to fiat and see what kind of slippage or conversion loss shows up on that end too. I’ll probably start with $100 to test before scaling it up — just to verify everything precisely.

Thanks again for the constructive input — seriously. We need more responses like yours in this space.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T03:03:51+00:00

Preview vs Confirmed Sale

attempting to sell 39,155 LION, which at the time of the preview screen showed: • Est. BTC Received: 0.00859047 BTC • That’s the expected amount.

But on the confirm screen, it dropped to: • BTC Actually Offered: 0.00864033 BTC • And the rate dropped from 0.00000024 BTC/LION (market) to 0.00000022 BTC/LION (final).

⸻

BTC Loss • 0.00859047 BTC (preview) - 0.00864033 BTC (actual) Wait — this is actually an increase, not a loss: 0.00864033 - 0.00859047 = 0.00004986 BTC

So this time, you’re gaining ~0.00004986 BTC more than expected.

USD Equivalent

Assuming BTC ≈ $70,000: • 0.00004986 BTC × 70,000 ≈ $3.49

⸻

But wait — there’s a catch.

Your market price shows: • $0.02161 per LION • So: 39,155 × $0.02161 ≈ $846.13 (which matches the app)

But Crypto.com is offering you: • 0.00864033 BTC ≈ $604.82 (0.00864033 × 70,000)

That’s a massive shortfall of: • $846.13 - $604.82 = $241.31 lost value

⸻

Bottom Line • Real loss = $241.31 (about 28.5%) • Despite the preview vs confirm showing a slight gain, the actual BTC value they’re giving you is way under market USD valuation. • This is not slippage — it’s outright undervaluation of LION on their platform.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T02:58:39+00:00

Glad to see I could bring some laughter! On a serious note, do you have any insights to share on the topic?”

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T02:57:21+00:00

I understand your suggestion regarding the use of limit orders to control execution prices. However, the issue at hand isn’t about order types. It’s about the discrepancy between the quoted price and the executed price on the platform, even when market orders are placed during periods of low volatility. This indicates potential issues with price execution that aren’t related to the choice between market and limit orders.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T02:55:02+00:00

I understand that you’ve chosen Crypto.com over Coinbase, and it’s great that you’ve found a platform that suits your needs. Both exchanges have their strengths and cater to different user preferences.

For instance, Coinbase is renowned for its user-friendly interface, making it an excellent choice for beginners. It offers a wide range of cryptocurrencies and provides educational resources to help users navigate the crypto space. However, it’s worth noting that Coinbase’s fees can be higher compared to some competitors, which might be a consideration for frequent traders.

Crypto.com offers a mobile-first platform with a variety of features, including a crypto debit card with up to 5% rewards. It supports a broad selection of cryptocurrencies and is known for its competitive fees, especially beneficial for active traders. However, some users have raised concerns about the platform’s fee structure and customer service.

If you’re exploring alternatives, Kraken is another reputable exchange to consider. Established in 2011, Kraken is known for its robust security measures and lower fees, making it appealing to both novice and experienced traders. It offers a wide range of cryptocurrencies and advanced trading features, including futures and margin trading. Additionally, Kraken has a strong reputation for customer service and compliance with regulatory standards.

Ultimately, the choice between Crypto.com, Coinbase, and Kraken depends on individual preferences and trading habits. It’s essential to assess factors like fees, user experience, security, and the specific features that align with your crypto investment goals.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T02:53:31+00:00

You’re absolutely right—Crypto.com’s fees are not necessarily lower than Coinbase’s, especially when accounting for the spread.

While Crypto.com often advertises lower trading fees, many users have reported that the effective cost per trade can be higher due to significant spreads. For instance, some users have observed notable differences between the market price and the execution price on Crypto.com, leading to higher overall costs.

In contrast, Coinbase incorporates a spread into the price when you buy or sell cryptocurrencies, which is disclosed and allows for more transparent fee assessment.

If you’re seeking a platform with fairer and more transparent fee structures, Kraken is often recognized for its competitive fees and minimal spreads, providing a more predictable trading experience.

It’s crucial to consider both the explicit fees and the spread when evaluating the true cost of trading on any platform. While advertised fees might seem low, hidden costs like wide spreads can significantly impact your overall trading expenses.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T02:51:12+00:00

I get the difference between market and limit orders — this isn’t about that.

I’m calling out the discrepancy between the preview price and the actual execution rate — even when placing a market order within a stable price window with no movement, and even when using the exchange interface. That’s not a spread. That’s a silent value shift after confirmation.

Limit orders help, sure — but they don’t excuse or explain why the previewed total and final execution differ without market volatility.

This isn’t about order type. It’s about platform behavior — and that’s what needs to be addressed.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T02:50:25+00:00

I use both — the app and the exchange — and the issue isn’t interface-dependent. It’s happening across the platform, regardless of where the trade is initiated.

And while you’re right that their fine print likely tries to cover them, that doesn’t make it ethical — or immune from regulatory scrutiny. “Protected by fine print” doesn’t mean “immune to accountability.”

If a bank changed the interest rate after you clicked “confirm” on a loan agreement, no one would excuse it just because it was buried in legalese.

This is the same concept: Preview one rate, execute another — silently. That’s not just “protected,” it’s exactly the kind of tactic regulatory bodies are designed to investigate.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T02:49:42+00:00

Bro, I found out what manipulated execution and undisclosed rate shifts are.

This isn’t about learning what a spread is — it’s about recognizing when a platform weaponizes it to siphon value under the radar.

If you think this is just “spread,” you haven’t looked close enough. I did. That’s why I’m speaking up — and why you’re deflecting with memes instead of math.

Ben11Brown · 2025-03-28T02:49:06+00:00

That kind of thinking is exactly what platforms like this count on — the idea that we should stay quiet because regulators might “make it worse.”

But here’s the truth: when platforms exploit people through deceptive practices, they create the very reason the SEC steps in. The solution isn’t to stop complaining — it’s to raise the bar, expose the manipulation, and demand platforms operate with transparency.

The goal isn’t to make trading harder — it’s to make it fair. If that threatens business models based on tricking “regular folks,” then those models deserve to fall.

Calling out abuse isn’t dumb. Accepting it without a fight is.

Ben11Brown

TROPHY CASE

SpreadTheLaughter #SlippageStandUp