The exchange isn't a problem as is. The problem lies in the fact that they are moving away further and further from the original plan. The plan was to make a crypto bank! BANKERA not EXCHANGERA If you have read everything correctly i have asked multiple times if and when they applied for a banking license.
The answer to that was:
that it would be a waiste of time and resrouces to go and get a banking license because Pervesk already has one.
Next to that we always have been told that pervesk was part of the whole "eco-system", but yesterday they told us there will be no wr from Pervesk.
So to keep it simpel. The revenue which should make our wr is now done by a sister company which they can let charge every price as they are the owners and whatver goos into Pervesk they don't have to share with you and me.
And for Bankera there will be no banking license what was the idea what attracted me to the project.
From the whitepaper:
To achieve this, Bankera will not only become a regulated European bank, but
also will seek to become authorised issuer and acquirer of payment cards and obtain
banking licenses in key jurisdictions to avoid dependency on the correspondent bank
services, which are extremely fragile nowadays as identified by the World Bank when
they concluded that correspondent banking relationships (CBRs) are declining due to
several factors including AML risk or reduction of risk.
Are you saying they have gone on record completely changing their tune about not wanting to rely on correspondent banks (like Pervesk) and abandoned the goal to become a fully licenced bank? I'm not saying anything. This is what i'm trying to find out, if you read the last few pages this is the conclusion one might draw. But you tell me what you make out of it? Unless you can produce concrete evidence Bankera has gone 180 on their promise to become a fully licenced bank, you're just contributing to the FUD. Running around like chicken little yelling "Is the sky falling?!?!?! Is it?!?!?!?" is not helping anybody. well unlike you running around with fairytales and fairydust spreading fomo all day. I thought i invested in a BANK. Not some crowdfunding project who wishes to send some home meals or something. So unless they have a good explanation how things are managed and organised i wish you keep your FUD campain to yourself. Because at the moment we are a year in and the only answer i'm getting is that getting a bank license will be a waist of money. If that for you sounds like the next new crypto bank fine by me! but i rather get some reansurance ok harry potter? |
|
|
|
The exchange isn't a problem as is. The problem lies in the fact that they are moving away further and further from the original plan. The plan was to make a crypto bank! BANKERA not EXCHANGERA If you have read everything correctly i have asked multiple times if and when they applied for a banking license.
The answer to that was:
that it would be a waiste of time and resrouces to go and get a banking license because Pervesk already has one.
Next to that we always have been told that pervesk was part of the whole "eco-system", but yesterday they told us there will be no wr from Pervesk.
So to keep it simpel. The revenue which should make our wr is now done by a sister company which they can let charge every price as they are the owners and whatver goos into Pervesk they don't have to share with you and me.
And for Bankera there will be no banking license what was the idea what attracted me to the project.
From the whitepaper:
To achieve this, Bankera will not only become a regulated European bank, but
also will seek to become authorised issuer and acquirer of payment cards and obtain
banking licenses in key jurisdictions to avoid dependency on the correspondent bank
services, which are extremely fragile nowadays as identified by the World Bank when
they concluded that correspondent banking relationships (CBRs) are declining due to
several factors including AML risk or reduction of risk.
Are you saying they have gone on record completely changing their tune about not wanting to rely on correspondent banks (like Pervesk) and abandoned the goal to become a fully licenced bank? I'm not saying anything. This is what i'm trying to find out, if you read the last few pages this is the conclusion one might draw. But you tell me what you make out of it? |
|
|
|
Ansault thanks for that. I suppose it depends on the interpretation of currency exchange. My interpretation was an extension of SC functionality as a brokerage exchange converting fiat between fiat/ fiat to the big crypto's, crypto back fiat. A trading platform/exchange for just crypto is a different beast all together IMHO.
Given the crypto/blockchain background of this project, I don't think it's a stretch to take it to mean crypto-centric exchange. Spectrocoin's platform was already operational during the ICO and so was the (trading) exchange demo, which any ICO participant could test drive. I don't see any kind of misleading or obfuscation there. Why is the exchange suddenly a problem anyway? It's a revenue generating mechanism that benefits all token holders. The exchange isn't a problem as is. The problem lies in the fact that they are moving away further and further from the original plan. The plan was to make a crypto bank! BANKERA not EXCHANGERA If you have read everything correctly i have asked multiple times if and when they applied for a banking license. The answer to that was: that it would be a waiste of time and resrouces to go and get a banking license because Pervesk already has one. Next to that we always have been told that pervesk was part of the whole "eco-system", but yesterday they told us there will be no wr from Pervesk. So to keep it simpel. The revenue which should make our wr is now done by a sister company which they can let charge every price as they are the owners and whatver goos into Pervesk they don't have to share with you and me. And for Bankera there will be no banking license what was the idea what attracted me to the project. |
|
|
|
Well this always works best with an example.
So let's say we wan't to do an SEPA transaction. 80% of the fee is for pervesk as the EMI provider. then we would receive wr over the 20% which Bankera makes. Are you telling us now that we would also make WR on the fee which Pervesk is charging, so wr over the 80% in this example?
BNK holders receive 20% of the net transactional revenue share. To calculate the weekly net transactional share, we take the difference between our weekly revenue from transactions and the costs that we incur, and then we get the weekly net transactional revenue. Therefore, costs (ours and/or 3rd parties) are not part of the weekly commission. See it took us a while, but we are getting there. So now we all understand why we want BNK to have their own license instead of a sister company running away with the promises made in the whitepaper, maybe you can answer the question we had earlier. Has BNK already aplied for his own license? It was stated from the beginning that Bankera as a product will either be delivered through its own license or through partnerships. Obtaining a separate license for servics for which we already have a license in our ecosystem would be a waste of our time and resources - which can be better employed to develop our other services (such as the Exchange Platform). Well it was stated from the beginning that you wanted to be a bank. Like we said earlier you never told us you were going to build an exchange. So I would call that a waste of time and money. We never invested in the exchange idea! We invested because we wanted you to achieve into building a blockchain bank. Not to make your own ecosystem from which we are receiving no revenue at all and in the meanwhile use the resource we gave you to build something what would improve the revenue for that but not for us. So you can tell me what you want with your it was clear from the beginning. No it was not clear from the beginning! And becomes clearer by the day that you don’t have the investors (sorry contributors in your words) at heart. The Exchange is a part of blockchain bank. We will have liquidity. "exchange" as a service was always in the white paper. We just later expanded this into the roadmap o was it now? Or are you very hard hoping for support from some users. But since you wanna go that way. Let us get the record straight on some things while we are ad it. Tell me who is or was lying. Your CEO or you? i qoute Vytautus: and Bankera is an ICO, an ecosystem which involves a number of different entities etc, to build a compliant crypto banking provider is not an easy task, otherwise there would be many of them, but I believe we are the ones who are have done most by know (we have cards live, we have required licenses, team, IT side is in development), so you will be able to see fruits soon guys, rome was not built in a day. Yes, we had initial plans even to do pre-ICO in late June-July 2017 and yes ICO was delayed. However, we are here building a bank, not organizing a pump and dump scheme, so strategy and decisions are a bit different from other ICOs. We had always been clear that Bankera is about product, not bullshit and promises. The Bankera exchange was even not in the original plan, but then situation changed as it became much more rational go and build our own exchange than paying 1m+ USD fees for getting listed on other exchanges. Also we have achieved core milestones such as EMI license and working hard to launch our products. Bankera's ecosystem is like a puzzle and at the end you will see how it all add ups. Bankera now has two offices in Lithuania with 70+ people being involved in the project. And Banker token has a usage as it will be used for banking services at Bankera's products such as utility token for zero-cost exchange as well as to pay for robo-advisory and other services as it was said in the whitepaper and elsewhere. |
|
|
|
Well this always works best with an example.
So let's say we wan't to do an SEPA transaction. 80% of the fee is for pervesk as the EMI provider. then we would receive wr over the 20% which Bankera makes. Are you telling us now that we would also make WR on the fee which Pervesk is charging, so wr over the 80% in this example?
BNK holders receive 20% of the net transactional revenue share. To calculate the weekly net transactional share, we take the difference between our weekly revenue from transactions and the costs that we incur, and then we get the weekly net transactional revenue. Therefore, costs (ours and/or 3rd parties) are not part of the weekly commission. See it took us a while, but we are getting there. So now we all understand why we want BNK to have their own license instead of a sister company running away with the promises made in the whitepaper, maybe you can answer the question we had earlier. Has BNK already aplied for his own license? It was stated from the beginning that Bankera as a product will either be delivered through its own license or through partnerships. Obtaining a separate license for servics for which we already have a license in our ecosystem would be a waste of our time and resources - which can be better employed to develop our other services (such as the Exchange Platform). Well it was stated from the beginning that you wanted to be a bank. Like we said earlier you never told us you were going to build an exchange. So I would call that a waste of time and money. We never invested in the exchange idea! We invested because we wanted you to achieve into building a blockchain bank. Not to make your own ecosystem from which we are receiving no revenue at all and in the meanwhile use the resource we gave you to build something what would improve the revenue for that but not for us. So you can tell me what you want with your it was clear from the beginning. No it was not clear from the beginning! And becomes clearer by the day that you don’t have the investors (sorry contributors in your words) at heart. |
|
|
|
Well this always works best with an example.
So let's say we wan't to do an SEPA transaction. 80% of the fee is for pervesk as the EMI provider. then we would receive wr over the 20% which Bankera makes. Are you telling us now that we would also make WR on the fee which Pervesk is charging, so wr over the 80% in this example?
BNK holders receive 20% of the net transactional revenue share. To calculate the weekly net transactional share, we take the difference between our weekly revenue from transactions and the costs that we incur, and then we get the weekly net transactional revenue. Therefore, costs (ours and/or 3rd parties) are not part of the weekly commission. See it took us a while, but we are getting there. So now we all understand why we want BNK to have their own license instead of a sister company running away with the promises made in the whitepaper, maybe you can answer the question we had earlier. Has BNK already aplied for his own license? |
|
|
|
"The WR is paid from Bankera products, not by the companies who help providing these products." This means that products which are offered for Bankera's clients through partners are part of the WR. Products that those partners offer and are not related to Bankera nor Bankera's clients, are not part of the WR.Well this always works best with an example. So let's say we wan't to do an SEPA transaction. 80% of the fee is for pervesk as the EMI provider. then we would receive wr over the 20% which Bankera makes. Are you telling us now that we would also make WR on the fee which Pervesk is charging, so wr over the 80% in this example? |
|
|
|
Hi all!
veteran in bnk chat, newbie overhere.
Can i ask why everything what is posted here, what is the truth, is getting al kind of weird troll and fud answers?
is there a way for a normal discussion overhere? or is moris1987 not the only nutcase. Because the way is see it those other people are exactly the same only their subject is different?
And more so, moris attacks the project and no one personal.
Hi there and welcome. Moris attacks people calling Bankera investors idiots, calling Bankera's team scammers, typing death threats to the team and so on, he's the only one here that is that much into trolling and insulting people. The lack of work regarding the admins here is quite impressive, and unfortunately Bankera's team presence here is not what it used to. Other than that if you read the numerous pages of the thread, you will see that most of us are just being patient waiting for the project to evolve. Hi and thank you for your welcome! The rest is waiting for the project to evolve. That's is something i was waiting on also and i was a big supporter. But as it turns apart from the exchange which they are supposedly building there is nothing really done for the bankera project. The exchange was never in the original whitepaper and all the things they did promise in the whitepaper are done by companies which aren't bankera. They promise those companies will al be part of the "eco-system" but after a year we don't receive any wr from any of those. In the meanwhile the cards are out, the IBAN isn't working anymore, CMC situation isn't resolved, the new website has many shortcommings and they are receiving fines by the authorities. And if one asks hard questions about in on their chat or reddit. the posts get deleted or the people get banned or muted. So yes I can understand that people are getting worried. i'm getting worried myself also now. futhermore i welcome Spi, Scrooge, jimmy, monty-moo, boschen, ikikyabut, bitpuppy, holdingbags, albrcool, ironrand, massimo72, brandonlang95, djinxi, bnkbuyer and many other which i forgot to join me here as this seems to be tha last place where we can have an honest discussion without being sensored by BNK. @bankera please answer the question. Did bankera apply for a banking license yes or no? Hello, We never said other companies would pay for the WR. The WR is paid from Bankera products, not by the companies who help providing these products. Bankera already has a narrow banking license (EMI license), which is sufficient to offer most banking services. Actually it is Pervesk that holds the EMI not Bankera, Pervesk is not apart of the WR. You may want to have a chat to your CEO who verified this yesterday on the official chat. Happy to proven wrong if you would like to provide the licence number and the authority who issued it. From my understanding Bankera products will be underwritten by Pervesk and its licences. o you beat me to it :-) i was searching for the prove! https://chat.bankera.com/channel/community?msg=3W9BKpsZkPSQg92iYso in short al the profits or products margings that are going to be made are going to a sister companie who doesn't pay wr but is part of the "eco-system" what the hell that may mean now... They have been telling us for month's that Pervesk and PPB will be part of the eco-system. Stupid us should have ask if it pays wr. because when huup asked we don't profit from all those companies you are building on the side. he received the answer: "not yet :-)" https://chat.bankera.com/channel/community?msg=fxrqLRBcBPuAsdjpb |
|
|
|
The exchange was never in the original whitepaper
That's not true, the exchange is first mentioned on page 4 in the whitepaper:
The aim of the ICO is not to test a speculative idea, but to provide the capital to enable Bankera as a
product to expand its existing services to compete with existing banks as an equal
across all areas of operation including payments, lending, currency exchange, and investments.
This is totally incorrect! This was confirmed and then reaffirmed by Bankera's own founders. The exchange was not in the original roadmap and subsequently added because they had a change of direction. When did you come to the party? I guess people just wanna believe something different... Next they are going to tell us that Lon Wong is still an advisor :-) |
|
|
|
Hi all!
veteran in bnk chat, newbie overhere.
Can i ask why everything what is posted here, what is the truth, is getting al kind of weird troll and fud answers?
is there a way for a normal discussion overhere? or is moris1987 not the only nutcase. Because the way is see it those other people are exactly the same only their subject is different?
And more so, moris attacks the project and no one personal.
Hi there and welcome. Moris attacks people calling Bankera investors idiots, calling Bankera's team scammers, typing death threats to the team and so on, he's the only one here that is that much into trolling and insulting people. The lack of work regarding the admins here is quite impressive, and unfortunately Bankera's team presence here is not what it used to. Other than that if you read the numerous pages of the thread, you will see that most of us are just being patient waiting for the project to evolve. Hi and thank you for your welcome! The rest is waiting for the project to evolve. That's is something i was waiting on also and i was a big supporter. But as it turns apart from the exchange which they are supposedly building there is nothing really done for the bankera project. The exchange was never in the original whitepaper and all the things they did promise in the whitepaper are done by companies which aren't bankera. They promise those companies will al be part of the "eco-system" but after a year we don't receive any wr from any of those. In the meanwhile the cards are out, the IBAN isn't working anymore, CMC situation isn't resolved, the new website has many shortcommings and they are receiving fines by the authorities. And if one asks hard questions about in on their chat or reddit. the posts get deleted or the people get banned or muted. So yes I can understand that people are getting worried. i'm getting worried myself also now. futhermore i welcome Spi, Scrooge, jimmy, monty-moo, boschen, ikikyabut, bitpuppy, holdingbags, albrcool, ironrand, massimo72, brandonlang95, djinxi, bnkbuyer and many other which i forgot to join me here as this seems to be tha last place where we can have an honest discussion without being sensored by BNK. @bankera please answer the question. Did bankera apply for a banking license yes or no? |
|
|
|
|
Hi all!
veteran in bnk chat, newbie overhere.
Can i ask why everything what is posted here, what is the truth, is getting al kind of weird troll and fud answers?
is there a way for a normal discussion overhere? or is moris1987 not the only nutcase. Because the way is see it those other people are exactly the same only their subject is different?
And more so, moris attacks the project and no one personal.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
