Another nice try, @Nice_Try ;-)

But let's try it with logic: Assumed your theories about me would be true and I would believe to have so much influence that I could write the price down (I'm not that arrogant!), using sock-puppet-accounts etc., having the intention to buy cheap: What would be the most effective way to address that since you wouldn't ever be able to prove my intention or that I use other accounts (which one would you consider as that?)?

What I try to say is simple: Whatever my intentions might be, no matter if shady or if I just express my opinion honestly, the most effective way to address that would be to rebut on topic in any case. You just try to compromise what I say with the attempt to make readers believe that I would want to buy cheap. And I don't believe that you believe that. Out of your perspective it may make some sense, because you try to place a message like "tempus actually believes that this project has such a great quality that he puts some effort into getting it cheap" , or even better: "tempus was sent by a competitor! How great Savedroid must be that others are so scared that they go on attack".

But: Isn't that much more manipulative than what I do? Let me explain why the answer is "yes": Because you try just that and nothing else. You don't show up with arguments in favor of the project. You just focus on the market situation because that is what scares you when you have to read critique like mine. You don't try to rebut what critiques say and you don't say why this would be worth an Investment or just to stick to it. I'm not even sure that you really get what I try to explain here. But it's you who tries manipulative games. I don't blame you. Actually I challenge you to do a better job (while your question should be why that should be your job - shouldn't they have communicators in place to have this and other platforms at least under some control?)

Another important point, which I've already explained: If I would want to buy into this cheap, I wouldn't write in favor of a refund. Again: A refund would be positive for all Investors, those who chose to get their money back and those who still believe in this project. It would reduce supply (only if burned of course), it would reduce the risk of dumping on exchanges. I can not say that and be against anyone who is invested in this. And the team should be able to start with $20 mln as well, or do you believe that's not enough?

Binance:

"Binance.com launched on July 14th, 11 days after its ICO which raised $15m, (...)"
https://www.reddit.com/r/binance/comments/6zukht/binancecom_stats_and_bnb_valuation/

Not because it wasn't wanted but because they didn't hype it up like mad. Same with NEO (formerly Antshares). Their crowdfunding was in summer 2016. They've also raised about $15 mln (at that time it was the most expensive ICO I ever bought into - and just btw, it even fell below ICO-price first and for about 6 months). Factom in 2015: Only about $1 mln. Or Icon last summer: about $30 mln. I consider all of these as legit projects with professional teams who didn't hype the shit out of it. But this one needs about $50 mln just to make it's first steps? And they claim that it would have been easy to steal that money and even let ppl think they would have done that, but when Investors ask for refund: "no... we have to stick on the rules. that would only have been possible until 14 days after ICO!"

But yeah, I'm the shady one here. Dream on, honey!  


Btw, I have some good news for you: This topic and my posts are unlikely to have much impact. Reason is this: "Read 15476 times" since it was created in December. The activity was probably on it's high during the ICO and now it's about less than 100 clicks per day and not even 50% by different people. No need to be scared. But yeah, I don't like the usecase, I don't like how they treat their own supporters/Investors, I don't like how they've hyped it and how greedy they prove to be, I don't like how they communicate (if they do that at all) etc.  And not a single satoshi of mine will ever be on the buyside if this hits the exchanges.

The only thing I agree on is education. But my approach is totally different of course. I prefer a much softer approach of respectfully communicating arguments instead of pushing others into desperation first to keep holding them in a stockholm-syndrome-situation afterwards. And while Savedroid asked for payment in advance to deliver their educational torture, my posts are for free!  


Herr, die Not ist groß!
Die ich rief, die Geister,
Werd ich nun nicht los.

That is the most concerning about this project in my opinion, if true -  even without PR-Stunt. And it very well could be true, because if you think about the App and what it actually does: It's purpose is to help ppl to put money aside by simple rules. Let's say you connect your bank-account to the Savedroid-Account and you activate that a tiny amount is transacted from your bank-account to the savedroid-account whenever Trump makes a tweet or whenever you walk 1000 m or whenever you go to your Fitness-Club: It doesn't make much sense at all. In my opinion that are just annoying and useless gimmicks. Some might find it funny for 2 weeks but it's hard to believe that it attracts anybody over a long time. And, most important: It doesn't generate any money, just unnecessary transactions. What it generates though: User-data. Dependent on the rules a user choses, they will know a lot. Put that in context with the financial side and users become perfect targets for all kinds of shady stuff.


Now translate that into Crypto: It's not possible to connect a normal and external address in a way to the Savedroid account like it's possible with an external bank-account. The Crypto-assets need to be stored inside Savedroid and they'll have the private keys. A fully developed Savedroid would have total control and the user would be transparent like glass. And for what? I have no idea what the real value for the user would be. I mean, he would even have to pay for that... with the token, which is just a made-up-purpose, because (considered this would make any sense): Normal fees would be much more efficient. But they needed something to sell in an ICO, so they've created a token and tried best to promote it as purposeful and even valuable. They've even used a price-prediction-chart on their website.

If sane ppl with a bit experience in and knowledge about Crypto think about that:

- who wants to have his savings in an online environment he has no control about (experienced guys put everything on cold storage)?
- who wants Savedroid to have control over private keys, especially when it's about money somebody wants to put aside for later?
- who needs all the unnecessary transactions, let's say whenever he goes from home to the fitness-club?
- who wants the App to know the own location and other stuff
- is there anything to find here that is in favor of the user?

Really... the PR-Stunt is probably not even the worst about this project and in my opinion, it has no chance in Crypto, because it is a total contradiction of what Crypto is about in so many ways.

Now add the PR-Stunt on top of that: They let their Investors and Users believe that they ran with the money... what a great joke for guys who raised $50 mln with a promoted business-model of managing other ppl's money.

I really believed I would have seen everything in Crypto, but this is....... so damn..... new! #insanity ;-)

M.A.n. sollte viel mehr Druck gemacht werden, dass jene die raus wollen ihr Geld zurückbekommen.

Der Grund ist simpel: Es wäre im Interesse aller. Jene die raus wollen könnten raus ohne das (m.A.n. hohe) Risiko finanziellen Schaden zu erleiden. Jene, die nach wie vor in Savedroid und das Team dahinter vertrauen, hätten eine bessere Marktsituation in Aussicht weil weniger abverkauft würde.

Möglicherweise wäre es sogar für das Team und Projekt am besten. Denn mal ernsthaft: Die brauchen doch nicht 40 Millionen... NEO hat in 2016 nicht mal 20 Millionen bekommen. Factom hat in 2015 sogar nur etwa 1 Million bekommen (Dollar). Dragonchain vor etwa einem halben Jahr hat nen Deckel drauf gemacht wenn ich mich richtig erinnere, Coinlion ebenfalls.

Savedroid wäre auch mit 20 Millionen überfinanziert. Außerdem würden sie nen positives Zeichen setzen, es müsste nur klug kommuniziert werden.

Aber: Mein Eindruck ist, dass diese Typen es tatsächlich v.a. auf die ICO-Kohle abgesehen haben und ansonsten wenig echte Prioritäten haben. Wenn man sich anschaut wie sie das ICO durchgeführt haben, wie sie es gehyped haben, inklusive jeder Menge Strategien die man ansonsten tatsächlich eher in Scam-Projekten sieht (Preis-Vorhersage-Chart, Buzzwords wo man hinschaut etc.), dann kann man schon den Eindruck bekommen, dass die einfach v.a. gierig sind, aber gar keinen echten Plan für die Zeit danach haben. Bisher haben sie es ja nicht mal hinbekommen dass jeder seine Token hat. Gleichzeitig hatten sie genug Zeit diese total kranke PR-Aktion zu planen und durchzuführen, inklusive Making-Of... Sie wissen es vielleicht selbst nicht, aber m.A.n. haben die ein "Scammer-Mindset".

Still all exchanges on board that agreed to list you? If you think through this out of their perspective and after your PR-Stunt: It wouldn't be that surprising if they are unsure if they want to be associated with such a move.

Btw, there is the theory out there that it wasn't just a "Prank-Exit-Scam" but that you guys tried to execute it and backed off because you got scared and that the explanation and "making-of" a day later was just a cover up. I know that's not true, because you were not even able to move money. But your problem now is that none of the results are in your favor:

- some still believe it was an exit-scam (realized), because the first message (and it's gone, over and out) was more powerful than everything what came after
- some are informed and consider it as stupid and irresponsible
- some believe it was a failed scam, like said above
- near to zero positive feedback.


Another btw: What I thought about is how you guys pulled that off, how it was discussed and planned in your team before. I can't know it, but I think it's unlikely that everybody agreed and believed that to be a smart move. Assumed I'm right, there is something I additionally find irresponsible: Those who didn't agree and expressed their concerns were pushed in an impossible situation without any good option. Actually they only had the options to participate or to quit. Theoretically everybody could have stopped it by saying "If you really want to pull that off, I'll make it public before" (whistleblowing). And the paradox here is: In that case it wouldn't have happened and that would have been better for Savedroid. They would have rescued it. But: Because it wouldn't have happened they wouldn't have any proof to be right. Those who believed the "Hoax-strategy" would be a smart move could have seen that as betrayal, blaming the person who avoided the disaster.

If you think about that... creating such a situation of pressure and without any good option for those who actually disagreed is already irresponsible against the own people.

Of course there is also the scenario that everybody on your team believed it to be a great idea right away. But actually that would be the worst scenario.

Will be interesting to watch. Some quotes that show the status quo:


we don't need answers, we just need refund

i did think i lost my money after your antics...😧 worried feeling all day, this is my last ico i will invest in.

Savedroid has destroyed its own reputation whether or not its an exit scam. I believe the majority of us would like a refund and it is crazy for them to lock tokens for 180 days but only give us a short period of 14 days to refund. Very unfair terms and I will be taking action under the Consumer Protection Act 2015. I have already asked my bank for a refund as Savedroid have acted both unprofessionally and in an incompetetive manner. I am still completely unsure if this was a failed exit scam or if they are buying time to take our money.
I spoke to Tobias (co founder) and he is extremely rude and unprofessional and he said he would send me a bill if I refunded (I mean seriously, what will you do with a bill from Germany??).

__________________________________________

I don't have a FB-Account and since I'm not invested I wouldn't ask questions anyway. But otherwise I would ask this:

• You said that you wanted to prove how easy it is to execute an exit scam and to steal all ICO-funds, your bank and lawyer were forced into statements that everything is safe and your CTO confirmed on the german section of Bitcointalk that it would not have been possible to steal the funds. What did you prove then?
• Whenever asked for refund, Savedroid-Admins on Telegram reply that a refund only would have been possible 14 days after ICO. Your (debunked) argument was that regulations are so lax that it would have been easy to get away with theft, but when it’s about giving money back to Investors the rules are so strong?
  
• In an interview with Gruenderszene you’ve claimed that the PR-stunt would not have negative impact on the future price of the token, otherwise the team wouldn’t have done it. How could you ever know that?
• When you planned that PR-stunt…
  …didn’t you think about a potential scenario that an overwhelmed and shocked Investor could have done harm to himself out of desperation?
  …didn’t you think about the scenario that your bank, lawyer, german fintechs, german blockchain association, advisors etc of you would be forced into distancing themselves from Savedroid?
  …didn’t you think about the potential scenario that the connection of words Savedroid and Scam would not be the best brand to move on?
  …didn’t you think about the scenario that you’ll not be able to control the communication and establish your narrative afterwards?
• The PR-Stunt has caused damage to the reputation of your project, what will you do to repair that?
  
• Have you lost any partnerships and/or advisors?
  
• You've used and deceived your Investors to promote Savedroid as ICO-advisory-service while that hasn’t anything to do with what you’ve promised to deliver and the sold tokens during the ICO. Don't you think that would be a reason to refund those who want out?
• Is it possible that there will be legal consequences?
  
• Is it possible that exchanges will reject to list SVD now?
  
• Do you believe that attention is equal to trust?
  
• In a german article is said that the Savedroid team was thrown out of an office in it’s early days because of „dubios and irresponsible behaviour“ and that you’ve tried to sell user-data. Is that true?
  https://kryptoszene.de/savedroid-status-update-alles-nur-ein-pr-stunt/

Edit: One guy just posted this article:

Savedroid CEO to be Grilled at Frankfurt BBQ
https://bitsonline.com/savedroid-ceo-grilled-frankfurt-bbq/

LMAO:

"As for Hankir’s promised appearance at the community BBQ, only time will tell whether that will be fulfilled. If not, it would appear the hoax was a hoax and he is possibly on that beach in Egypt. If he does make an appearance, he looks set for a roasting the likes of which he has probably never been subjected to. And deservedly so."
 

They've put themselves into a situation they are unable to control/handle. Until now they've achieved exactly one thing: To raise a shitload of money in this space. The whole company is probably not even worth $5 mln but the marketcap of a token with the purpose to fuel a gimmick-usecase without any sense should be worth about $50 mln? Who the hell would ever pay for giving away his private keys to watch the system making unnecessary transactions whenever Trump makes a tweet or the favorite team wins a match?

A majority of those who invested into this must be new and unexperienced like these Fintech-Clowns who managed to sell a useless App. On top of that they promote their ICO-advisory using deception and lies, pushing own Investors into desperation, divide their Community into those who are mad as hell and want their money back, and those who still want to believe in them.

And now about the obvious fact here: While some of those who still believe in them try to calm down critiques, those who caused this mess and should be on top of the communication on all fronts, went silent - on all fronts.

Why? Because it's impossible to defend their stupid deception any further using already debunked lies. They don't know anything about this space. Nothing about useful and innovative usecases, nothing about what Crypto really is about and what could be accomplished by using Blockchain-Technology, nothing about the vital and controversial communication on platforms like this one or Reddit etc. They are just skilled in using bolt buzzwords and silly price-prediction-charts and their Fintech-Background to blind unexperienced Guys and lure them into giving them money. And instead of going heads down into Development or just to mange the distribution of their tokens after getting $50 mln, they write down things like:

- Website down
- Savedroid is gone
- get users angry
- motivate users to visit our office

Source: Behind the scenes
https://youtu.be/CyAllUhDxXk?t=41s


...what a genius and thought out strategy and how subtle that is, right? Like everything they do... That's the red line.

Just found this article on Twitter, very well written by a professional. Especially the Savedroid-team should read it:

https://medium.com/@erhankorhaliller/after-this-pr-stunt-even-a-superhuman-robot-would-struggle-to-explain-what-the-savedroid-team-were-f32ae3c92f31

Nice try Nice_Try! ;-)


But let me explain. I have nothing to hide:

1) Yes, I'm not invested. I didn't even know this project until I saw the desperation on twitter after the Savedroid-CEO had pushed out his "over and out - tweet".

2) I recognized they are germans. I'm also a german and probably that was the first trigger to pay attention

3) After reading a bit and thinking about that move, nothing made any sense to me. Especially that got me really interested, simply the question what this is about. My first conclusion was: Whatever it is or will turn out to be, in any case it's stupid and insane.

4) The next day their explanation-video... I just thought "what a stupid idiot, what an insane combination of pure arrogance and naivety." that has lead into such stupidity and ruthlessness, pretending an educational purpose while clearly they are the ones who should go back to school.  

5) It was a safe prediction that it would backfire hard and to see that was kind of entertaining but also embarrassing. Actually I was happy to see the hard media-echo in Germany. I talked with some of the german Investors on the german thread and got more information, figured that not even their story was true (would have been so easy to exit scam with all of the funds).

7) Even after the first hard feedback they didn't learn. They kept on with their arrogance (most of it on german threads), still pretending they could have executed a scam, pretending that they wanted to educate people about that, and even about the greed in the market. And yes, all of that made me really angry, even if not invested myself. They hyped their ICO to $50 mln, then put anybody else at risk including their own partners, while risking nothing of their own money that they only got because people trusted them. And they even want to educate others and even point on greed? Damn, that's bolt!

8 ) They pretend the intention to educate all others, but in fact they have acted deceptive. And while they also pretend they would have solved the situation with their explanation, they've just built another lie on the first deception. Whenever I see something like that I consider a high probability that the claimed intention is also not true or at least not the whole truth. Since they've even started a new website, saying "ICO Advisory coming soon - made in Germany" I believe their main-intention was promoting that.  

9) They are the ones who have turned what was meant to be business into a social experiment with educational purpose. They, and those who still believe in them, shouldn't have a problem if others do exactly that. And my credibility is not at stake here. Everybody is free to come to own conclusions. To believe my posts would be manipulative because I'm not invested doesn't make much sense. It's the opposite: I simply point out my honest thoughts because I have no horse in this race.

10) No, I have zero intention to write the price down and I won't buy into it in any scenario, no matter of price. I'm one of those who don't believe in the use-case and I don't believe in the team. I don't believe in their abilities to lead a project to success and even without this silly PR-Stunt I would see this project and their ICO as an overvalued hype, which only worked out so well because it was "pre hyped" in the fintech-space. And what a majority doesn't seems to care much about, but it really is a major aspect in my opinion: I consider the introduction of their new idea to become Ico-advisors as a bad sign because 1) it is not thought out as well, 2) it has nothing to do with what they've sold in their ICO, and most important: 3) it shows a lack of commitment regarding their core-project.

A committed team would never decide to make things more complicated. There would also be no reason to hype a project even more after a successful ICO with any kind of PR before real delivery. They got about $50 mln and shouldn't have any time to think about ICO-advisory, about torturing their own Investors, making silly videos including a "making of". #smokeandmirrors

I wouldn't ever buy into a project that shows such a lack of having priorities.

_____________

Some words to those who believe posts like this to be strategic- or maybe even paid FUD: It's natural that you want to see it that way because you recognize critique as risk of your Investment. That's understandable. But again: Those who push for a refund are right and giving that choice would be best for everybody. If I would want to see Investors suffer, maybe even buy cheap later, I would not write in favor of a refund but the opposite. Again, the reason is simple: The probability of a crashing price increases the more supply will hit the exchanges and the other way around.

At least they should give choice. If they would offer a refund to everybody who would like to have his/her money back, it may change the whole situation to the better. A potential scenario:

Let's say 50% would want to get their money back and those tokens would be burned, it would have several positive results:

1) It would be fair, because the current situation is clearly not.

2) It would help the future price, because those who want out wouldn't have to dump on exchanges later. Total supply and marketcap would be reduced and the market-situation would be relaxed and have more potential.

3) It would have psychological effect, send a different and better message and probably/hopefully help to restore trust in a) the team & project and b) the market-situation



There may also be a negative: It would be the admission that they have done a terrible mistake and it's not possible to predict the media echo on such an admission. But.. at least it would be fair. If they refuse to do that they will have to face the accusation that they have trashed their reputation by taking own Investors into hostage and to promote their new business-idea, while they themselves risked nothing when it's about the financial side. Theoretically this whole thing could fail completely and they would still be able to leave as multi-millionaires. The raised $50 mln are safe.

Several of their Investors asked for getting refunded on Telegram and it's always the same. Last conversation about it went this way:

Q: When refund?
A: Refund is allowed 14days after you registered.
Q: Why not 14days after marketing fail?
A: I'm sorry but that's one of policy.


In my opinion they've really crossed a line to fraud, because:

1. Their pretended message is based on a lie. They could not have stolen the funds, while Yassin even said in his infamous video that it would have been easy to exit scam with all of the funds. A german journalist of gruenderszene said on youtube that Yassin didn't want to give an answer on the question how much of the money they really could have taken. Surprise... because the answer is: near to nothing or even nothing, especially no Crypto.

2. Besides the fact that their pretended message about regulations is totally trivial, it's actually even worthless in that context. There is no regulation against insanity. Since they didn't think through it and acted deceptive, I highly doubt that the message really was their true intention. If it was, it just proves their superficiality and inability of thinking through stuff.

3. Their real intention behind this PR-Stunt probably was to promote their new business-idea of ICO-advisory, which has nothing to do with the use case they've sold during the ICO. To invent a new business that has nothing to do with the usecase that was promoted to sell out the ICO would be a no-go anyway, even without the self-destructive PR-stunt.

4. Yassin said in a german interview that they don't think their PR-stunt will have bad impact on the future price of their token, otherwise they wouldn't have done it. The latter implies and underlines the pretense of being totally sure about that. That must be another lie, because nobody with an IQ above a cake could believe to be able to make such a prediction. Truth must be that they didn't care about Investors or again: are not able to think through stuff.

5. Investors beg for actions to repair the caused damage, but how should they manage that? It's not possible to get on top of the communication if confronted with several of their own lies and the inconsistency of their pretended message. Anybody seen any public communication of the leadership lately?

Quote: "Yassin has currently not answered our request to interview him and post the results publicly. We will update the situation in case anything changes."
https://medium.com/@BestofICOs/savedroid-the-damage-caused-4de56625aa26

6. They reject all requests of Investors who wish a refund. Of course they don't want to give the money back. It's about $50 mln in Fiat, Bitcoin and other Cryptocurrencies. And while prices of BTC and alts are rising, Investors of their token are in hostage and can't do anything but wait. #stockholmsyndrome


______________


If they would have been fair they would not only agree to refund those who would like to get their money back but even would've planned a refund into the "PR-Stunt-Strategy". Afterwards they would've refunded everybody and then announced a new ICO - also as kind of a poll/voting about their PR-strategy.
That would still have turned out to be a stupid move, it still would have been irresponsible. But at least it would have been a little bit better and also give them a better situation to react on accusations.

But they know they've fucked up, so they prefer the corner they've put themselves into while keeping the money, because they know they wouldn't ever get $50 mln again...

The interesting part about this situation really is to subdivide it all into the topics Inconsistency vs. Consistency, what they really care about and show real committance and what they don't care about. What they really cared about and where they have done a great job actually: To market their ICO and get a lot of money.

Everything else shows poor strategy, incompetence, selfish and ruthless action, inconsistency and even deception.

 

See, there are two kinds of FUD:

1) Negative rumors or even lies
2) true but negative informations

1 is always bad and shouldn't be spread. In this case it was the team itself that started exactly that. Now they have to face the fact that the feedback is about 2. And of course, that concerns many of their Investors, but why? Because informations about what Savedroid has really done might increases the risk that it will not be so easy to offload own bags on others.

And I see it this way: They pretended to educate all others about risks in this markt with a PR-Stunt in which they first have spread a lie about themselves and afterwards told a lie about that, because all of that was done under false premise and to promote their new business idea that has nothing to with what they've sold in their ICO.

In my opinion there would only be one legit move: If they would refund everybody who wants out. But, a guy on the german thread just posted a quote out of telegram:

Serg Antourag, [20.04.18 13:38]
hey, is it possible to get a refund?

xxx | savedroid, [20.04.18 13:40] [Admin]
[Antwort auf Serg Antourag]
We cannot process refund anymore since it is more 14days from ico


Very paradox situation. They pretended to be scammers, than told the world that they just wanted to educate, but fact is that they have the real money while putting everybody else at risk, especially own Investors. And I believe it needs education about that. I really feel bad for their Investors but I also think that everybody who thinks about buying this later on an exchange should have the chance to figure out what they do here. And since Savedroid is all about educating others and now even about professional advisory that is fully in line with their own ideals. Or they are just dishonest...
 

Sie haben ihren super-klugen PR-Stunt also aus Versehen zu spät für ihre Investoren gemacht...

Ehrlich, je mehr ich über diese Clowns nachdenke desto mehr komme ich zur Schlussfolgerung, dass die durchaus Scammer sind. Sie checken es nur selbst nicht. Es gibt einfach einen Fakt: Sie haben viele Millionen in anderen Währungen eingesammelt während sie mit ihren offensiv gepushten Lügen alle anderen riskieren. 

Yes, agreed. I'm not so sure that they really will have to face legal actions because of their ICO-Investors. But, german law says that faking a crime is a crime. And their amateurish-educational PR-Stunt has implications beyond Crypto.



Thing is: It can't even be education because their premise is false. Their CEO states in his video that they wanted to show, quote:

"(...) how easy it could've been that even we, as a highly regulated german stock corporation, could have just run away, then exit scam with all the funds (...)" https://youtu.be/o5_bwFf_byo?t=1m20s


Fact is: That's a lie. There were escrows in place and also their CTO confirmed on the german thread on one of my questions that they could not have taken the money.


What have they proven? Even a big stock company, let's say Tesla, could do what they did. Imagine the Tesla Leadership leaves their offices, shuts down the site, Elon Musk makes a "funny" tweet like this Savedroid-clown, and of course: Their stock-price would crash. No regulation could ever prevent that insane and narcissistic amateurs play with the trust of their own Investors and partners. That is what happened here and nothing else.

Their useless and dishonest move involves a high risk to devaluate their own coin, but of course, that's not a problem for them. Their funds are in EURO and BTC and other Cryptocurrencies. With other words: Their stupid PR-stunt happened on the back of their Investors, their partners  (Frick-Bank for example which is in anger now & their lawyer), the whole german fintech space and so on. A guy of a bank wrote an open letter and explained how bad this move was for the whole space, several Fintech-ppl wrote an open letter in which they distance themselve from Savedroid, Paymentandbanking retracted their award, the german blockchain association issued a statement in which they write:

"The German Blockchain Association Bundesblock believes the claimed PR stunt lacks any professionalism and sense of responsibility. It sheds a negative light on the whole blockchain ecosystem. It created a sense of fear and anxiety among users and investors alike. Instead of leading by example, Hakir decided to risk the collective reputation of thousands of responsible and diligent entrepreneurs in Germany and Europe, for minutes of dubious fame and potential benefits for their own. We strongly reject Savedroid’s behavior.

The Savedroid team has operated a controversial marketing campaign throughout, which ended in a truly damaging event. Savedroid AG has never been a member of our Association.

(...)"

https://www.bundesblock.de/2018/04/20/savedroid-pr-stunt-public-statement-of-bundesblock/



And the "super-fun-fact": If they should get away with this it would only be because of what they pretend to criticize and give a lesson about to everybody else: no clear regulations. Maybe they would say "yeah, that's what we wanted to show", but again: What they show is how easy it is to make a trashy move on the back of everybody else while they have the $50 mln. Will be interesting to see their "strategy" to clean up this mess and repair their own reputation. "Savedroid is a scam" made international headlines, even in Asia. The next headlines are "dumbest PR-Stunt ever", the rest is confusion and Etherscan calls them "suspicous".


Another interesting question is: What did they really try to "promote" with their PR-stunt? Their new business idea "ICO-Advisory". But how many would have bought into their ICO if they would've known that the team wants to become ICO-Advisors? And just besides: Which serious team would ever ask these amateurs for advice?

tobson2 said on the german thread that the advisory-stuff will be a whole new company with new ppl and also new capital but that there are no plans... Everything shows that they have zero clue and didn't think through anything. But what they've accomplished is to get many millions from Investors who saw no signs that this could turn out to be a scam but these arrogant amateurs believed it would be necessary to trash their own credibility and their Investors by giving a dishonest lesson under false premise.

In my opinion this crosses a line and is near to a scam out of a simple reason: While they have the real money, they're putting all others at risk. And best is: They didn't only want to show how easy it would be to scam (and again, that is not even true). tobson2 says on another german forum (https://coinforum.de/topic/11429-savedroid-svd/?page=34&tab=comments#comment-290166) that they also wanted to show how greedy this market is. That is so hypocritical... who has the $50 mln and rejects all questions for refund? ;-)

I'm in Crypto since 2013 and there was so much craziness over the time. These clueless teachers, who are an embarrassment for germany, found a whole new level of being damaging and entertaining at the same time.

German Prosecutors Consider Legal Action Against Savedroid

Wirtschafts Woche, the same German source that announced a $50 million exit scam by ICO Savedroid, is reporting prosecutors in Frankfurt are examining the “extreme advertising campaign” of the startup. After an elaborate hoax was played on its investors and the public, the company has been doing heavy damage control. According to the online news group, prosecutors have begun a “preliminary investigation.”


(...)
https://news.bitcoin.com/german-cops-look-hard-at-antics-of-ico-savedroid-after-ghost-prank/

Ihr hättet also nicht mit dem Geld verschwinden können, aber Eure Prämisse dass das möglich gewesen wäre ist gleichzeitig nicht falsch - sondern eine Frage des Timings. Erklär bitte mal präzise was Du mit "Frage des Timings meinst". Und dann erklär dazu noch welche regularischen Vorkehrungen das unmöglich machen würden.



Scams zeigen den Missstand ja durchaus auf. Bitconnect etwa oder einige andere. Und es gibt auch sehr viele andere Arten von Scams, darunter auch Maschen die man extrem lange gar nicht erkennen kann. Dazu kommt dann Marktmanipulation usw. Der Punkt dabei ist: Regulierungen sind bereits auf dem Weg. Gleichzeitig wäre Überregulierung wirklich nicht besonders hilfreich. Mein Eindruck ist, dass Ihr wirklich Newbies seid die glauben irgendwas verstanden zu haben während ihr Euch selbst v.a. überschätzt und andere und den gesamten Bereich unterschätzt. Vor allem Eure eigenen Investoren behandelt Ihr unglaublich herablassend und respektlos. Eure Partner, etwa diese Bank. Die User Eurer App... und das alles für nen PR-Gag der nur Verlierer hervorbringt. Denn ihr habt absolut nichts bewiesen und das Problem auf das Ihr Aufmerksamkeit machen wollt ist für jeden der sich auskennt offensichtlich.

Und nur nebenbei: Etwas das mir an Crypto sehr gefällt ist Eigenverantwortung. Es ist nämlich normalerweise durchaus möglich Anhaltspunkte für einen Scam zu erkennen und dann die Finger davon zu lassen. Ihr aber habt einerseits ein ICO durchgeführt das diese Anhaltspunkte nicht aufwies, da Euer Projekt ja auch kein Scam ist, dann aber eine echt kranke Aktion gebracht und Eure eigenen Investoren in Geiselhaft genommen. Denn bitte vergiss mal nicht: Ihr habt deren Geld, die haben noch nicht mal Ihre Token. Und ich bin sehr sicher, das sich fast alle wünschen sie könnten die Zeit zurückdrehen und die Finger von Eurem Projekt lassen.



Sei doch nicht immer so oberflächlich. Du antwortest beständig in Einzeilern. Erklär das was Du sagen willst doch mal präzise und etwas ausführlicher. Ihr habt bewiesen das Ihr die Dinge nicht zu Ende denkt und meine Vermutung ist: Du antwortest deshalb wie Du es tust weil Dir die eigenen Limitierungen genau dann bewusst werden wenn es mal etwas tiefer geht.


Aha.. also auch nichts zu Ende gedacht. Es geht sogar um ne neue Firma mit neuen Mitarbeitern, gleichzeitig gibts bisher keine Pläne. Aber Promotion dafür macht ihr schon.

Weißt Du was mein Eindruck von Euch ist: Ihr macht gar nichts richtig und überschätzt Euch vermutlich in jedem Bereich. Bin mal gespannt was man von Eurem eigentlichen Projekt auf fundamentaler Basis erwarten darf und wie dieses Projekt eine 50 Millionen Ökonomie rechtfertigen will. Ein bisschen verrückt ist in dem Zusammenhang übrigens auf die Gier in diesem Bereich zu verweisen. Denn während die ebenfalls offensichtlich ist, seid Ihr selbst doch krasse Beispiele dafür!

Obwohl Ihr keinen Exit-Scam abgezogen habt, das m.A.n. auch nicht gekonnt hättet, würde es mich nicht überraschen wenn dieses Projekt dennoch als Betrug in die Crypto-Geschichte eingehen wird.

Und wie hättet Ihr also mit dem Geld verschwinden können? Ist Eure gesamte Prämisse von "Wir hätten so leicht..." nicht grundfalsch?

Abgesehen davon: Ist Dir klar, dass diese technischen Kontrollmechanismen absolut nicht neu sind? Schon 2015 und früher haben seriöse Projekte ICO's auf sehr seriöse Art gemacht. Factom z.B. ist sogar noch weiter gegangen. Nur wenn sie klar definierte Entwicklungsschritte vorweisen können bekommen sie anteilig das Geld aus dem ICO.

Gleichzeitig: Wenn eine Gruppe von Personen die zusammen genommen die Kontrolle über das Geld hat verschwinden will kann sie es auch. Keine Regulierung kann davor schützen. Das geht auch bei jedem großen und total regulierten Konzern! Ihr habt absolut gar nichts bewiesen. Und Euer Glaube irgendwen wachgerüttelt zu haben entsteht wirklich nur dadurch das IHR die Newbies seid und letztlich vor allem Ahnungslosigkeit beweist. Das gepaart mit Eurer unglaublichen Arroganz führt dann in eine total unnötige Krise wie jene die Ihr jetzt losgetreten habt.



Du hast eine Frage "übersehen":

Was mich übrigens auch interessieren würde ist: Wie gedenkt Ihr denn Eure Investoren an Eurer neuen Beratungs-Geschäfts-Idee teilhaben zu lassen?

Haha... der redet einen Quark! Wieder die Prämisse man hätte ja so einfach mit der Kohle verschwinden können. Diese naiven Narzissten haben doch echt Null Ahnung wie genau sie das hätten anstellen sollen und was das bedeutet hätte.

Außerdem: Wann wäre das denn jemals nicht möglich? Was müsste passieren das z.B. ein CEO dem die Sicherungen durchgebrannt sind sich nicht einen Teil der Kohle abgreifen und in nen Flieger setzen könnte? Das könnte doch JEDER in JEDEM Bereich der in irgendeiner Form Kontrolle über Gelder hat.

Und natürlich sind diese Nullchecker die ersten die effektive Regulierung fordern.

Und jetzt sind sie ICO-Berater! Ich krieg mich echt nicht mehr ein. Was für Entertainer!

Was die Zukunft so alles an Savedroid-Beratungs-Möglichkeiten bereithält:

Wir fahren Autos gegen Wände - kommt in unsere Fahrschule um sicheres Fahren zu lernen! #savedroid
Wir fackeln Häuser ab - lernt bei uns das effektiver Brandschutz sinnvoll ist #savedroid
Wir haben bewiesen das beschädigte Kondome nicht vor HIV schützen - lernt von uns über Enthaltsamkeit #savedroid


@tobson2, bitte erklär doch mal wie ihr mit der Kohle durchgebrannt wäret ohne nach relativ kurzer Zeit in irgendeiner Form geschnappt worden zu sein und zweitens wie ihr dann von dem Geld total super im Exil gelebt hättet? Wie leicht wäre das tatsächlich gewesen?

Und: Mit welcher Regulierung könnte man verhindern, dass irgendjemand, bzw. eine Gruppe die Kontrolle über Geld hat mit einem Teil davon abhaut?

Schon mal was von Multisig und Escrow gehört?


Was mich übrigens auch interessieren würde ist: Wie gedenkt Ihr denn Eure Investoren an Eurer neuen Beratungs-Geschäfts-Idee teilhaben zu lassen?

Theoretisch muss ein Refund dann aber möglich sein. Es wäre nur extrem aufwändig, weil viele ICO-Käufer zuerst ihre Transaktionen von Börsen-Accounts nachweisen müssten um dann eine neue Refund-Adresse anzugeben. Der Nachweis ist nicht so leicht, weil ein Screenshot der Withdrawal-Liste nicht reichen würde.  

Die hatten doch einen KYC-Prozess oder? Hat der vor oder nach den ICO-Transaktionen stattgefunden, bzw. konnte man kaufen bevor das eigene KYC durch war? Falls das nämlich möglich war müssen sie irgendwelche Refund-Strategien haben, weil es bei Tausenden ja klar ist das einige beim KYC durchfallen und dann das Geld zurückgezahlt werden muss.


Edit: Es gäbe ne simplere Möglichkeit für einen Refund. Eine Buywall auf einer Börse und jeder der will kann da reinverkaufen. Ist aber vermutlich auch nicht superleicht, weil sie ja für viele verschiedene Cryptos verkauft haben.

Im Grunde ist die interessanteste Frage wirklich wie sie die Situation jetzt "heilen" wollen. Es gibt da m.A.n. mehrere theoretische Szenarien, gleichzeitig ist das Risiko recht hoch das keines davon funktioniert.

Szenario 1: Refund

Das wäre m.A.n. das Beste was getan werden könnte. Alles rückabwickeln und dann können sie ja noch mal versuchen ein ICO auf die Beine zu stellen. Da sie ja jetzt auch noch ICO-Berater sind wird das bestimmt super.

Aber ernsthaft, und das könnte das Problem sein: Ich weiß nicht, ob sie ausgeschlossen haben das Crypto-Investments von Börsen ins ICO geschickt werden konnten. Falls das nicht ausgeschlossen war ist eine automatisierte Rückabwicklung unmöglich und alles müsste manuell gemacht werden, was extrem langwierig und ein organisatorischer Alptraum wäre.

Und falls es schon möglich ist Token zu versenden ist es vermutlich schon zu Ver-/Käufen abseits irgendwelcher Börsen gekommen.



Szenario 2: Durchstehen und liefern

Die Total Value ist extrem hoch, m.A.n. viel zu hoch für so eine App, selbst wenn die diesen PR-Stunt nicht gebracht hätten. Ich halte das Projekt ehrlich gesagt für Hype. Auch ohne diese dumme Aktion würde ich von tendenziell fallenden Preisen ausgehen, denn wie bei allen Projekten würde es Zeit für Entwicklung brauchen, Zeit um zu wachsen usw.

Das Problem ist hier: Sie haben ja nicht nur ihren ICO-Investoren einen Schock versetzt und jede Menge Sorgen bereitet. Auch potentielle App-Nutzer dürften abgeschreckt worden sein. Schwer vorstellbar das jetzt auf einmal viele Geld da reinschicken um diesen Dienst zu nutzen. Außerdem: Es könnte sein dass Banken nichts mehr mit denen zu tun haben wollen. Plus: Falls es stimmt das die ne AG sind, dann haben sie auch "echte Investoren", die echte Firmen-Anteile halten. Und da wird es dann vermutlich auch ganz reale juristische Probleme geben die ganz echtes Geld kosten.

Wenn sie dann gleichzeitig eher auf einer der kleineren Börsen rumhängen, angepisste und ungeduldige ICO-Investoren eher rauswollen... dann geht das Ding in den Boden. Und bei einer total value von ca. 50 millionen oder mehr (weiß gerade die Verteilung nicht), wäre vermutlich eh nicht so viel Luft nach oben.

Das Dumme bei dem Szenario ist: Es könnte sein das die das Projekt mittelfristig versanden lassen und die Millionen trotzdem behalten dürfen.


______________

Juristisch gesehen kenne ich mich nicht aus, aber es ist schwer vorstellbar das es da gar keine Komplikationen geben wird, weil es ja nicht nur um Crypto geht. Falls sie mit der Aktion durchkommen sollten, dann aus einer komplett paradoxen Situation heraus: Sie würden genau von dem profitieren was sie anprangern wollten.

Was ich persönlich auch unterschätzt habe, aber umso interessanter finde: Dass die Crypto-Szene hartes Feedback geben würde war klar. Gleichzeitig haben Crypto-Investoren oft schon so viel Scheiße erlebt, dass sie eher dazu tendieren nen Auge zuzudrücken und dann eben weiterzumachen. Aber diese Clowns kriegen echt hartes Feedback aus der deutschen Fintech-Szene. Man muss nur mal googlen was die letzten Stunden so an Artikeln rausgekommen ist. Zwei Beispiele:

Wie sich die Fintech-Szene immer wieder selber schadet
In der deutschen Fintech-Branche herrschte eigentlich gute Stimmung. Bis die Firma Savedroid diese Woche für Negativ-Schlagzeilen sorgte
https://www.capital.de/wirtschaft-politik/wie-sich-die-fintech-szene-immer-wieder-selber-schadet

OFFENER BRIEF
Fintech-Vertreter zeigen sich entsetzt von PR-Aktion des Start-ups Savedroid
http://www.handelsblatt.com/finanzen/banken-versicherungen/offener-brief-fintech-vertreter-zeigen-sich-entsetzt-von-pr-aktion-des-start-ups-savedroid/21196526.html


Es gibt echt viele solcher Artikel und Blog-Beiträge und ich habe nicht einen Artikel gesehen der diese Aktion irgendwie als positiv beschreibt. Insofern kann man davon ausgehen, dass die jetzt jede Menge Feuer von allen Seiten kriegen:

1: Investoren
2: Geschäftspartner, etwa deren Bank
3: Fintech-Szene
4: Juristisch
5: Kunden/User der App

Ein Problem, egal wie es weitergeht: Es ist ihnen auf keinen Fall möglich diese Situation und die Kommunikation noch zu kontrollieren. Wer in 12 Monaten Savedroid in Google eingeben wird, wird Überschriften mit den Worten "Scam", "dumm", "Betrug", "PR-Stunt", etc. finden und das auf fast allen Sprachen.

Sie werden also lange und an vielen Fronten im Krisenmodus sein und gegen Probleme kämpfen die sie ohne jede Notwendigkeit selbst verursacht haben. Selbst seriöse Startups haben eine Fail-Quote von etwa 90%. Toxisches Marketing dürfte das Risiko zu Scheitern signifiant erhöhen.

Guter Vergleich!

Ein anderer Vergleich der mir ständig vor Augen ist: Trump... der findet auch immer wieder irgendwas heraus das jeder schon weiß und behauptet dann und glaubt möglicherweise sogar: "Nobody knew!" Und auch er ist ja die Lösung für alle neu gefundenen Probleme.


Wenn die Savedroid-Kids konsequent sind manipulieren sie bald den Preis hoch und runter weil sie genug Kohle dafür haben und verkünden auch dass dann als neue Erkenntnis!