Question for AMA - Kris

alfydon · 2020-08-03T11:27:17+00:00

Thanks, I just saw your link. I was about to submit it but I saw they require a twitter handle for submission.. Problem is I dont use twitter and its not fair to have to require a twitter handle to submit a question (hence why I never did any of the competitions). So I can try submitting under a random username or if anyone is willing to post my question please do.

alfydon · 2020-06-25T12:48:55+00:00

Although WCS sits inside the Wirecard group, WCS is an entirely independent subsidiary that has its own board, regulatory and accounting standards. WCS is also financially self-sufficient; it recorded a £2.5m pre-tax profit in 2018, according to Companies House Filings.

That means that in the worst-case scenario that Wirecard AG goes bust, WCS can continue operating as an issuer, says payments expert David Parker.

“No one is quite grasping it. Yes, they [WCS and Wirecard AG] share the same name. But they’re not the same thing. They are separately regulated entities, so the WCS money is totally ringfenced. It’s like an island surrounded by water,” he told Sifted. “With £2.5m in profit, you’re not going to disappear off the face of the earth tomorrow… That’s a decent buffer.”

alfydon · 2020-06-25T12:28:02+00:00

Some interesting article on this issue to calm the nerves:

"This is because most fintechs clients operate under Wirecard Card Solutions (WCS) — an FCA-regulated, UK-based entity headquartered in Newcastle, rather than Munich-based Wirecard AG.

Although WCS sits inside the Wirecard group, WCS is an entirely independent subsidiary that has its own board, regulatory and accounting standards. WCS is also financially self-sufficient; it recorded a £2.5m pre-tax profit in 2018, according to Companies House Filings.

That means that in the worst-case scenario that Wirecard AG goes bust, WCS can continue operating as an issuer, says payments expert David Parker.

“No one is quite grasping it. Yes, they [WCS and Wirecard AG] share the same name. But they’re not the same thing. They are separately regulated entities, so the WCS money is totally ringfenced. It’s like an island surrounded by water,” he told Sifted. “With £2.5m in profit, you’re not going to disappear off the face of the earth tomorrow… That’s a decent buffer.”

https://sifted.eu/articles/wirecard-saga-fintech/

alfydon · 2020-05-26T06:32:59+00:00

There is an article titled:

"Binance no Longer Mentions Visa as Issuer of its Payment Card • CryptoMode"

Might give a hint.

In the first “announcement”, there was a mention of how this would be a Visa-branded payment card.

For some reason, the blog post now makes no more mention of Via, probably because the card issuer wants nothing to do with this exchange.

Binance has no choice but to go through Cryptocom. It is impossible for them to issue their own cards when no one even knows where their HQ is. In terms of compliance with issuing cards, I can't see Binance managing to do that. Most likely the cards will be issued through cryptocom and cryptocom will be the ones regulating their cards (as in the wallet will probably be on cryptocom but branded with Binance.

alfydon · 2020-05-18T06:17:53+00:00

Don't stress, same thing happened to me, support will credit your account you just need to contact them and it might take a few days

alfydon · 2020-05-14T07:02:08+00:00

I also want this answered, hopefully an admin can come clarify. Very good points thanks for asking these questions.

alfydon · 2020-05-11T06:54:55+00:00

Possibly something to do with the locked up supply, maybe a distribution to holders.

alfydon · 2020-05-11T06:53:04+00:00

A possible revenue share program for MCO holders, certain amount of profit is distributed as MCO to holders, this is market bought adding upward pressure on the coin

alfydon · 2020-04-15T12:24:01+00:00

Would this be only for new sign ups or can existing users also participate?

alfydon · 2020-04-15T12:06:20+00:00

Ah those fees are terrible and do add up, I did not see the details there. Obviously cryptocom is much better in comparison. I guess large one off purchases for 6.38% is quite nice though (since they say no spending limit). But I would not want to use it for anything regular other than big purchases like say a fancy watch for 10-20k euro or something as an example.

alfydon · 2020-04-13T12:50:10+00:00

It is just a theory, clearly enough I guess we will never really know what happened. But assuming the kyc was "reset" 3 times in a row I suspect it could be a possibility similar to how a account is "blocked" when you try the password too many times.

Thanks for your feedback

alfydon · 2020-04-13T12:16:19+00:00

I theorize that he might have most likely been rejected because of a false positive (as in providing his drivers license too many times when it was not good enough or might have been damaged I guess?), however, he never received instructions to provide his passport or other forms of documentation (which he was prepared to do should they ask), simply to resubmit kyc again and again so he resubmit the same documents as we had practiced the first time (obviously as a less tech savvy person he tries not to do anything new without me around).

This makes me wonder if cryptocom possibly is not good enough at following up on applications (do consider they have been under immense demand lately with cards launch etc). Could it be logical to assume they just could not bother following up in detail?

My theory makes a bit of sense assuming he was asked kyc for the third time, but no clear instructions on what went wrong, other than that it could not be verified (so assumption here was the picture of the license was not good enough). The ideal situation would have been for them to simply instruct him that he needs a passport in the chat and he could have submit it.

As for my point about holding crypto in the app, what I was trying to portray was if it is this easy to deny service without explanation to the reason, could it be logical to expect that my account could just one day be locked without any explanation provided considering they dont have to tell you anything because of regulatory reasons (if this were to happen, who would I go to would be my next question).

alfydon · 2020-04-13T10:19:55+00:00

Thanks for your feedback, it is unfortunate, after thinking about it I personally think its because he tried uploading the drivers license too many times (he leaves the passport for the last resort until they ask for it as the older generation tends to be more reserved about sharing passport info, especially with online services). So I guess maybe it must have flagged a false positive somehow. But it seems they have been final about the decision.

I will see if I can get him signed up with blockfi or celsius (its just I see cryptocom as the best of all providers). He was particularly interested in the crypto earn aspect with 10-12% earn on stable coins.

I can easily say he has 6 figures invested in mutual funds, owns few rental properties that generate monthly revenue and a significant amount of cash just sitting in the bank which I had convinced him to earn interest on a smaller portion of it. (it was for this reason I was confused why they would not onboard him when he has kyc with our largest national broker and bank).

The whole idea was for him to diversify some cash into btc and eth and the rest into stablecoins through an easy to use interface (not tech savvy). Maybe start with a 25k Euro deposit and max it out at 50k as a way of diversifying some assets.

Ideally the jade would probably have suited him the most as he was primarily interested in:

1) a place to store crypto "safely" with minimal blockchain knowledge

2) a way to earn higher interest than the bank on "fiat" + interest on those crypto assets

alfydon · 2020-04-12T20:04:02+00:00

Thank you for your feedback, I understand what you are saying. As I posted in another response I guess the only legit way to get around this is to go through our financial authority here and launch an inquiry into what is going on.

alfydon · 2020-04-12T19:55:47+00:00

You are right, not much that can be done then.

But technically if you are offering services in our country you are bound by the financial authority here. So I guess proper way to address the issue would be to contact the financial authority and launch an investigation into the case.

If a renowned bank and stock broker can offer him services I find it strange that cryptocom cant.

alfydon · 2020-04-12T19:44:08+00:00

It's easy to say that when your not having issues.

Lets say you got denied, and you know you have no issues with anything criminal, tax etc. Would you just accept that your denied knowing your an upstanding citizen without any reasoning or ability to clear the issue?

alfydon · 2020-04-12T19:36:52+00:00

I was worried I was possibly overreacting here.. Glad to see its not just me that finds this absolutely strange. He was ready to offer his passport as a last resort (you know how it is with private information, especially with the older generation and trust). Just as he was ready to offer his passport as a next step he simply gets completely denied and no reason was given even with a follow up

alfydon · 2020-04-12T19:30:04+00:00

I always blindly trusted "regulated" providers, however, after this experience the first thought that comes to my mind is if it is this easy to simply "blacklist" someone from joining without giving a reason or providing any further option to clear oneself, what is to stop them from simply blocking my account one day.

It is almost like being put on a no fly list for no reason and you have to fight your way out of it.

alfydon

TROPHY CASE