Just tried to find the numbers, wasn't easy. But surprisingly they've even a whitepaper now. Not surprising is that the numbers still are a total disaster.

Pre-mine: 15 Billion
Max Supply: 75 Billion
https://www.procommerce.io/static/site/img/Whitepaper_V7-Final.pdf

And that is without the inflation of 10-15 Coins pro Block.

Currently available supply, if this site is correct: 98 Million
https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/procurrency#panel


With a price of $0.01 the marketcap is at about $1 Million. But they hold coins for about $150 million! Not really of course because they couldn't ever sell this shit.

A project with economics like that doesn't even deserve a second look!

Ist die Info das es Fehl-Buchungen/Transaktionen gab sicher?

Surprised that this is still alive. Not surprised about the complaints... That was predicted about 14 months ago:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1747896.msg17656914#msg17656914


A 99.98% premine can't end well. When they've started they gave this shitcoin a total value of about $450 mln, holding >99% themselves, there wasn't even a whitepaper in place, but still: some guys sent them money.

Falls es wirklich zu Fehlbuchungen gekommen sein sollte wäre die elegantere und ökonomisch sinnvollere Methode eher den Token neu aufzusetzen. Bewegt werden kann er ja eh noch nicht, daher wurde auch noch nicht getraded.

Würde man den Total Supply einfach mit 3 multiplizieren wären es 30 Milliarden. Wenn man dem ganzen einen Wert von $50 M gibt, den in BTC umrechnet, kommt für den einzelnen Token auf einen BTC-Wert von: 0.00000018 BTC.
Die kleinste Größe in BTC wiederum ist..: 0.00000001 BTC


Problem: Jeder Preis-Schritt wäre gigantisch in %. Sollte der Kurs fallen, z.B. auf $25 M als total Value, wäre man sogar im einstelligen Satoshi-Bereich.

Vor zwei Jahren habe ich das bei SIA beobachtet. Der SIA-Kurs ist mittlerweile hoch, daher macht es nix mehr. Damals war es aber ziemlich verrückt. Ich nahm das übrigens als Zeichen das die ihre Ökonomie nicht durchdacht haben und sehe das auch immer noch so.

I also doubt that the release itself will move the price significantly if at all. The release itself is not surprising - I'm more surprised that there is no delay this time. ;-)

But, Factom becomes decentralized now and after M3 it may big steps towards real business-adoption and there are several signs that they already have a lot in the pipeline.

It's happening... M3! That will open some new doors.

Even if... you've still used your Investors and their money indirectly.

Yep, even with video:


In a interview with Bloomberg Television Thursday, Morehead said Pantera has about 10 percent of its investments in Bitcoins, which approached $20,000 apiece late last year before retreating to about half that in the following months. But the fund’s single largest bet is on Icon, which will let different blockchains -- digital ledgers -- talk to one another, he said.

https://www.bloomberg.com//news/articles/2018-04-26/pantera-s-morehead-says-bitcoin-is-screaming-buy-bets-on-icon?srnd=cryptocurriences&__twitter_impression=true

Currently they are in the process of delivering the airdrop to their ICO-Investors and those already will be "real ICX" (own Blockchain). I know because I'm one of them and had to go through a survey two days ago or so.

ICX on exchanges are still ERC20-token but the swap will also be done on exchanges. The ICON-Software to do it is already developed and ready but they want to start the swap simultaneous to the exchanges.   

Official infos about the Swap:
https://medium.com/helloiconworld/token-swap-status-update-9a41c8448006

@tobson2, thanks for the answers. I'll reply on your post a bit different. Your quotes in bold.


What could have been stolen in that moment is all the money which is not covered by an escrow, which is at least still enough for a CEO to survive for a long time. Besides that the escrow only holds the money until all tokens are minted, so it's more our call when we've finished it.

The problem is that you guys would have run into a contradiction that leads to confusion (and all kinds of other side-effects) in any case, which should have made you calling that off. What I mean is this:

Theoretical Scenario 1 - 100% in escrow:
You do your PR stunt and then you call for better ICO-standards (which include escrow of course). But at least part of your delivered message was, that you’ve even done an exit-scam despite having escrows. Since nothing was so powerful like the first message you’ve done damage to a security measure you try to preach now.

Theoretical Scenario 2 - 0% in escrow:
You do your PR-Stunt and what Yassir said would have been true (could have stolen all funds), and then call for high ICO-standards. In that case the contradiction would be that you have not met the high standards in your ICO you are demanding others to meet.

Executed Scenario:
What you did is a mixture of both. Some was in escrow, other money wasn’t (as far as I know it was especially FIAT that was not under escrow what would add another contradiction). That makes what he said in his video a) untrue (would have been easy to steal ALL funds) and b) it also contradicts the call for higher ICO-standards because obviously you have not totally met them yourself.

Most important is c) What you’ve left behind is just a lot of confusion and anger, also because you can not control how this case was and is reported and how it will be reported in future, how individuals interpret it and to what conclusions they come. You seem to expect mostly rational interpretation but that itself is not a rational expectation.


No that would not be fair, because the product plan is still valid, the token economics didn't change at all.

1) You’ve damaged your own reputation. One of the biggest issues here is that even the purpose and goal of your project is to manage other peoples money. You didn’t just undermine the trust of your Investors but also already existing and potentially future customers.

2) To promote your coming ICO-advisory-service you’ve used the imbalance of power between you and your Investors. That’s why I use the word „hostage“, because they couldn’t and still can’t do anything. And you do that while they didn’t buy this Savedroid-plan to become ICO-advisors. They’ve bought into what you’ve promised to develop.

3) ICO-Investors have to face all kinds of risks, buying into all kinds of scams for example. But also  the risk that a team simply is not good enough to deliver in some or all ways. And of course: All teams, even the best ones, make mistakes. That’s natural. So, let’s call your stunt a mistake… but at least I can’t see it as natural because it was intentionally and targeted own Investors, Supporters and Clients and the whole usecase and targets the only fundamental value that backs all others: Trust


No I would not agree to that

You can see the „Savedroid is a scam headlines“, you can see „Savedroid has executed the most stupid PR-stunt ever“ whenever you google your own company. You can see comments of own Supporters and Investors on all social platform your project is represented, which clearly show that many have lost trust - but you don’t agree that a damage of trust and credibility is the case. I hope for you guys that you’re just dishonest.


The investors have bought the tokens, as already mentioned the token economics and the product roadmap didn't change at all. Buying a token is NOT buying the full savedroid company.

Of course not. But if the existing team would do advisory service: It is not what your Investors bought into. If you should finance this new advisory service with the money you’ve raised: The money wasn’t meant for that. Plus: The trust issue that was caused due to an egomaniac but still intentionally PR-show.


That's our hypotheses, noone can of course predict the future.

Yassir said in the interview (about the price risk because of the stunt): „I don’t see it that way, otherwise we wouldn’t have done it. It was a crucial criterium for that action.“. That implies that you guys were totally sure that it will have no negative impact on the price, because & obviously: You  have  done   it. Now you say: Of course, no one can predict the future.

Don’t you recognize the contradiction? If you (and your team) would have come to the insight of unpredictability before the stunt - you wouldn’t have done it or what Yassir said was just a lie and you simply didn’t care. Both conclusions are not in your favor.


No we didn't expect that somone harms himself as that also didn't happen in previous real scams. We've investigated these scams a lot and checked what happened there. Besides that I hope that never anyone will invest so much money, that it's worse harming himself, neither for a scam, nor when a token-price drops which is not unlikely in this high-risk market.

Suicides because of fraud and huge financial losses happened, it's just not that easy to identify:

Financial Loss and Suicide
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3431736/

About MMM:

"This led to wide spread panic in the nation and even attempted suicides.[8] On December 14, LASEMA (Lagos State Emergency Management Agency) of Lagos State pleaded with Lagosians to dial their emergency number if they spot anyone trying to commit suicide. LASEMA took this action due to the number of suicides MMM caused in Russia[9]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMM_Global


Thing is: It would be irrational to assume that it didn’t happen just because you were not able to find articles about it. Those who have lost somebody because of such a situation have other problems than to run to the media to make it public.

It’s a simple thought: If you have >30k Investors you always have at least some who invested too much, in opposite to your „I hope that never anyone will invest so much money, that it's worse harming himself (…)“. More important: When it’s about thousands of people it’s stastitically safe to say that there will be some who may have psychological problems, like depression, are in all kinds of individual situations that may have additional effect.

That you guys took that risk, besides all others, leads me even more to the conclusion that you are not the right ones to teach anybody else about anything, because you didn’t think through the most important aspects and risks related to your stunt, or if, only superficially.


Of course some people will distanciate from us, especially the ones which have a motivation that the current status quo stays intact and no questions about that are asked.

That is a not very subtle accusation to critiques and I consider it as a cheap excuse and probably even self-deception. If you don’t get why Savedroid is roasted that hard you must still be in the egomaniac fish-bowl that made it possible to believe in your „genius“ plan and to perform it.

Let me tell you why many distances themselves: Because you’ve damaged the only real value which is trust/reliability/credibility.

Another thing you guys obviously never have thought about: A community is not only valuable as money-givers. They are the ones who would be your marketing-base, those who explain your project and it’s goals to others. No project, no matter which kind, can have success without what is called network-effect. Kill that and you kill your project. Now take a look at those who try to defend you. Not many are left and those who are can’t explain anything because nothing really makes sense to them. They are just kind of forgiving or too unexperienced to understand the problem or trapped in a stockholm-syndrome-status because their money is still locked and they hope for some kind of happy end (good price to get out). Take a look at your telegram-channel. You’ve successfully pushed the smarter minds out and what is left are „moon-kids“ (when exchange, which exchange, when moon, when lambo).

We're surprised be the feedback of the FinTech-community, as this PR-stunt was not related at all to FinTech and only a critic at the crypto-scene.

Yeah, what a surprise. You, as a Fintech company, were not able to hit the target more precisely. But you really don’t understand their critique? You want to be something like a Crypto-Fiat-bank, you raise money, you trash all trust… what the hell did you expect? Applause? (more a rhetorical question). They must be embarrassed because you have achieved one thing: International headlines. Now they are scared that may have impact on their credibility as well because they understand one thing: Trust is only partially a rational result but more about subtle and often unconsciously impressions. You know the value of the „made in Germany - brand“ - you use it yourself for the „ICO-advisory coming soon“. Just turn that into it’s opposite and you understand the problem and why they are mad.


Of course we think about the brand, but don't think it'll have a long-term impact and the content at the end will survive.

Ok. Good luck by deleting Google, Reddit, Bitcointalk, etc. Hard to believe that you’ll ever make equally powerful headlines in a positive way to heal that. And to believe that you’ll make a change when it’s about your new goals to make this space „more sustainable“… you really have to wake up and stop your self-hypnosis.

And just btw: It’s always said that Crypto is so plagued by all kinds of fraud and shadiness, and yes, that is true. But the impression also results out of the fact that Crypto is more transparent. Things become more and faster visible. There is no lack of fraud in the established system as well. Main difference is that established systems already have all kinds of mechanisms to keep things more hidden. Regulation can even be part of that, because it can be deceptive („it’s regulated, nothing to see here“)  

The communication was definitely not ideal and has to be improved, totally agree on that.

See, everything what is expressed is communication under the line. That even includes „a lack of“ at the wrong time, because also that is interpreted. And communication is not just about „what“ but also about „how“ and intensity, context and timing and even if done near to perfect, there are unknowns because everything is interpreted subjectively by individuals. Your PR-Stunt was „high-intensity-communication“ on a very deep psychological level and included a lot of unintended aspects you didn’t even think about. Since that action you have to face all kinds of reactions you would have to analyze deeply to come to good conclusions. And that is simply not possible for you because you’ve caused psychological complexity you can’t fully understand. If you could, you wouldn’t have done it.

Experience will teach you guys more humility. That’s also why I believe you should refund those who would choose that option, because at the moment you make them pay for the lesson you need, while the lesson you’ve given was very simple:

Misuse an imbalance of power to push those who can’t even react but put trust in you into disillusionment and humiliate them and you get what you get - Isolation. Even supportive posts show that.  

Think through it on a psychological level and always think it into extreme scenarios, which is a method to make it more obvious/recognizable. You’ll see that you’ve done nothing of value but the opposite: You’ve performed an attack on value. Psychologically that is like breaking a natural law and when it’s about human topics (which are relations under the line), psychology is natural law.


Not that I'm aware of

Surprising. I would have believed that many call their lawyers and that especially those who hold equity in your company might have some leverage to sue. But my knowledge about legal stuff is limited.


That's definitely not true and we're already in contact with our legal department about these false statements. savedroid has NEVER sold or tried to sell user-data!

Ok, good to know (if true). See, I’m nobody who wants to assume the worst in others. But even I always recognize, whatever I read of you or others of your team: Very hard to believe in anything. And I don’t even have a horse in this race.

Feel free to answer on the following questions - but I guess that's FUD or I'm one of the repetitive people?

• It was claimed, the team wanted to prove with the PR-Stunt 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 now also your CEO confirmed that it would not have been possible to steal the funds. What did you prove then?
• Whenever asked for refund, the reply is that a refund only would have been possible until 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 and wouldn't it be fair to do that?
  
• In the AMA was said that there will be no refund because the project didn't change. But wouldn't you agree that Trust and Credibility are crucial and that the "Savedroid is a scam headlines" and "Savedroid has done the most dumb PR Stunt ever" have done significant damage?
• And wouldn't you agree that the Investors and their Investment were used to promote something they have not bought - the "ICO-advisory-service" you plan to offer?
  
• Yassir said in an interview with Gruenderszene 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 he/you/the team 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?
• Is it possible that there will be legal consequences for Savedroid?
  
• 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: Since you mention the FUD-problem - let's not forget who started the biggest FUD-campaign I've ever seen, targeting the own Investors and credibility of the own project. Shouldn't be necessary to word this as a question...

Dann bin ich gespannt. Bisher fällt es mir schwer euch irgendwas zu glauben, aber vielleicht irre ich mich ja.

Dennoch denke ich, dass Ihr jene aus dem Investment entlassen solltet / Refund, die ihr Geld nach Eurer Aktion wieder zurück haben möchten. Denn die Begründung es habe sich ja nichts am Projekt geändert ist einfach grundfalsch. Der Reputations-Schaden ist ein Fakt, und falls Du ehrlich mit der Situation umgehst, dann weißt Du das auch - auch wenn mir klar ist, dass Du es nicht öffentlich zugeben würdest.

Und das zukünftige Listing auf der betreffenden Top5-Börse habt ihr bekommen ohne dafür zahlen zu müssen? Und sie hat keine Probleme mit dem PR-Stunt, das eine Vereinbarung abgeblasen wurde?

Ich habe gestern abend nen ziemlich langen Post über die Börsen-Situation geschrieben. Wollte den erst auf deutsch schreiben und hier posten, hab mich dann aber für englisch entschieden:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2578161.msg35591368#msg35591368


Edit: Meine Schlussfolgerung, bzw. was ich für wahrscheinlich halte ist in etwa das:

Sie haben die Top5-Exchange während des ICO's angekündigt bzw. vier Tage vor dessen Ende. Intention war m.A.n. dem ICO einen letzten Push zu geben. Ich halte das für Hype. Das bedeutet nicht das es eine Lüge sein muss, aber was ich insgesamt denke ist das:

- Ich glaube nicht, dass die ein Listing auf einer Top5-Börse bekommen ohne das sie dafür zahlen müssen.
- Es ist denkbar, dass sie sich während und kurz vor Ende (als sie schon wussten das sie viele Millionen eingesammelt haben) dafür entschieden haben das bei einer  der Top-Börsen zu tun.
- Dann haben sie ihre PR-Show abgezogen und den eigenen Ruf damit in die Tonne getreten.
- Das hat die Situation in vielerlei Hinsicht verändert, für sie selbst möglicherweise mit unabsehbaren Folgen was die rechtliche und damit einhergehend auch finanzielle Seite angeht. Es ist denkbar das sie selbst nicht so sicher sind ob sie nicht doch Refunds werden leisten müssen.
- Außerdem: Auch Börsen listen ja nicht einfach Projekte die sich als Reputations-Problem herausstellen könnten. Und Savedroid ist zumindest in Deutschland mittlerweile toxisch.
- Yassin sagte während des AMA's das er dagegen sei für Börsen-Listings zu bezahlen.

Schlussfolgerung: Ich halte diese Aussage für die Vorbereitung einer Ausrede und glaube momentan nicht das die Top5-Börse kommen wird.

Logischerweise ist das nur ein mögliches Szenario... in dem englischen Post habe ich das alles ausführlicher dargestellt.

Since there is a lot of speculation going on about exchange-listings:

The following is a scenario, focused on the exchange-situation.


It’s a combination of what I know about exchanges in general and given informations from and about Savedroid. It will not be totally accurate or a safe prediction. I think in probabilites. But it is realistic and with some tendency to be likely in my opinion.


Background about the Savedroid-situation:


Information: Yassin Hankir said in the AMA that many exchanges demand high amounts of money for a listing, up to or even above $1 million. He also said about the announced top 5 exchange that he can’t say anything about it, because it’s under NDA.

And yes, it is true that at least some Exchanges sell listings for high amounts and also NDA’s during negotiations are common. They don’t like it to be public but it’s also not a secret. Btw, usually also projects don’t talk about bought listings. That he did and what his intention might be, … let’s get back to that later.


In this post I’ve already pointed on the fact that they’ve used the announcement of a top 5 exchange to hype their ICO, to give it a last push 4 days before it ended:

savedroid ICO: SVD Token will be traded on top 5 exchange
https://medium.com/@ico_8796/savedroid-ico-svd-token-will-be-traded-on-top-5-exchange-f45a453ca3ef

Sidenote: They have used everything they could think of to hype the shit out of the ICO. That’s visible everywhere. I mention that because it shows that they are not just greedy but also unexperienced/stupid/careless. There are several good reasons why legit teams don’t do that, rational reasons - not about idealism or whatever. But, I don’t want to write a book about that, so, back to topic:

---

A potential scenario regarding the exchange-situation:

They’ve started negotiations with such an exchange or probably asked all of the bigger ones during the ICO. It could have started with a simple question if there would be a way to get listed, if yes how much it would cost etc. But it’s not likely that anything was finalized. More likely is a Memorandum of understanding and that Savedroid had a financial strategy that could have looked like this:

- we are four days before the end of the ICO
- we already know that we have raised many millions
- we would have to pay xxxx Dollar for a listing
- since such an announcement is likely to give the ICO a last big push it would be beneficial to do it. Maybe it would not only pay for itself but even lead to much more money, plus: the market situation after the ICO would be better with a good listing (not even sure if they are capable to think more than just superficially about market-dynamics and potential effects)

Good exchange-listings have multiple, especially several psychological, effects. So there might be some probability that it seemed to be a good decision to come to an agreement, that they would pay for a listing. And that may have given them the option to announce a top 5 exchange. Why it is unlikely that anything was finalized at that time: They were not able to pay and are still not able to do that.

There are two other possibilities:

1) The top 5 announcement was a lie. I don’t want to say that this scenario is likely but it’s not impossible. Reason: Since they don’t say which exchange they also wouldn’t have to be too scared that any of them would dispute, while such an announcement is safe to bring in more money.

2) That there is not even some kind of agreement, that they just thought: "Yes, we’ll pay what they told us" but without that the exchange already agreed.

---

Situation now - after the PR-Stunt


Important in that context is that there is a new situation now, that is unlikely to have no consequences. Potentially there are at least two important kinds of bad consequences:

They’ve successfully burned down their own credibility. What I can read out of the german media-echo is: They are toxic now. Even payment and banking (those who gave them the award and revoked it after the „Exit-Scam-Prank“) destroy Savedroid now publicly, brand them as snakeoil, not credible, buggy software and so on. Their reason to do so: Probably they want to come clean now and burn all bridges to Savedroid. And of course one can be critical about that move, but if focused only on facts, the given information in that article are true in my opinion. Savedroid is and never was what so many hoped to see in this project.

Another consequence is the financial side. Yassir said in his AMA that especially big Investors would like his PR-Stunt. What he says there between the lines actually is: Big and smart Fintech-Guys see how genius it was, just little and stupid Crypto-Kids still don't get it! But how likely is that? Sure, there is no lack of stupid and/or unexperienced millionaires. Rich guys are not necessarily smarter. But let's stay rational here. It's simply not possible that all of them liked it. I believe it’s the opposite. It's just that rich guys don’t write posts here. They call their lawyers. Yassin also said that not all the ICO-money was in Escrow. Savedroid has made contracts with individual Investors, maybe even with individual conditions. And it’s very likely that many of those contracts are now under review in law firms to find a way to get the money back. In case of NDA's nothing of that is likely to reach the public. The thing here is: Since lawyers tend to do research instead of taking action in an impulsive way, and they are not in a hurry, Savedroid could be in the bad situation that they don't even now yet what may come on the legal front and how much money they may be forced to give back. I believe he also said that big guys liked it to calm down other big guys who maybe didn't like it while he doesn't even know that until now.

Under the line: It’s something I can’t know but they may have to sell back huge amounts. Plus: Many bought into the ICO using Credit Cards. Those guys can reverse transactions (a reason why Savedroid will not give them token until the money is safe).

---

Now, keep in mind the above - back to the exchange topic:

Savedroid has burned down it’s own credibility and professional exchanges also have their „due diligence list“. Of course they want to avoid to list scams and projects that may turn out as that, because that would damage their own credibility. It’s simply not possible that a serious and professional exchange will just go over this insane PR-Stunt and say "yeah, great!" or "whatever". Much more likely is that they don’t want to list Savedroid anymore, or: that they’ve changed the conditions and that a listing would be much more expensive now.

Combine that with Savedroids situation on the legal and financial side, that it’s likely that they don’t know yet how much they’ll have to pay back, especially to big Investors and Credit Card Users, and that they don’t know what costs they will have to spend to clean up the legal side etc. There are many signs, that they are  scared like... #hopefully.

And if this guy here doesn’t lie, and I believe he tells the truth, this is how Savedroid reacts on guys who want to have their money back:

"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??)."

Source: Comment on FB

With other words: There is a reason that they try everything not to refund, because that could lead into a dynamic with a damaging result: That they would be left with legal costs but not that much money any more. Add that they are toxic now —> RIP.

Yassin said during the AMA that he doesn’t agree to payfor a listing while I consider it as highly unlikely that they were able to get an agreement for a top-5-exchange-listing without paying for that. That’s why I said in my last post:

„(…) it might very well be that he is already preparing excuses.“

But, just for fun: Let’s assume that I'm wrong and they really were able to secure an agreement for a listing without payment on a big exchange: How likely would it be that this exchange doesn’t care about their clown-show and doesn't step back?

If you consider that as unlikely you also know in which direction this goes if he says that he doesn’t want to pay for a listing now.

---

Some additional words about the legal side:

I can’t know how deep the trouble is which they are in. But it’s near to impossible that no Investor has called his lawyer. Probably it’s about hundreds who did that while Savedroid is maybe not even aware of all of them. What also most likely happened: Investors have written to the escrows, to exchanges, to their bank etc. - all to make pressure to get a refund. Smart guys don’t want this to be traded, because trading would significantly reduce the chance to get a refund.

I believe that it all will depend on how safe their own legal situation is. I didn’t check their legal stuff because I don’t have the competence to come to safe conclusions. But things like that are in a grey area quiet often. That's why I believe that they also have to fight with a lot of unknowns but maybe scary stuff.

---

What I believe will be the result of this shit-show:

(it’s speculation of course, because there are too many unknowns to make safe predictions and the situation is not static but vibrant)

1) I believe that several big guys will get their money back. They have some power Crypto-Investors don’t have - not just because of the legal side. Several of them also may have some influence. Savedroid would be stupid to create even more enemies in the German Fintech-space and risk more bad press. Maybe they’ll just give the money back to those who are influential without much complaining.  

2) I believe that Savedroid will do everything not to refund Crypto-Investors and small Investors in general. The reason is simple: If they would agree on that they would have to refund everybody who wants out. And while that would also help those who still would decide to give this a try (because less supply would reduce the risk of dumping later) the Savedroid-ppl want to keep the money of course. And they couldn’t know how many would want to be refunded if they would agree on that possibility. They could lose $20 millions easily. Since they've already proven to be hypocritical teachers who love to educate others about greed it's a safe bet that they’ll fight hard to become multi-millionairs. #this-project-will-never-generate-more-money-than-during-their-Hype-ICO

3) I don’t believe that this will hit a big exchange. Reasons are pointed out above.

4) I don’t believe that this will not lead to significant losses once traded. Even without PR-stunt… this is so damn overvalued. It would need some hype just to keep it’s value, but after a hyped up ICO and a burned down credibility - is there anything left to hype with? Development takes time, right? And how much time was spent on that before their Clown-Show? And now… exactly!

5) Probably they will put some effort in making "everyone" believe that the PR-Stunt also had a lot of positive effects, because they are known now - so much attention! And of course they say that they will keep on with their education, with their message to help this market to become more sustainable and so on. But what should they say else? Admit that they’ve fucked up like no project before while that would directly lead into refunds? Nope… they won’t do that.

6) But yes, the scam-brand and the „fucking-stupid-idiots-brand“ is nothing they’ll ever overcome. Just check the numbers, how much retweets they get, how much views on FB, how much activity there is on reddit etc. Compare that to their successful stunt! There will also not be much more „education“ and „messages“. It’s not even that Crypto would need to forget them. Crypto has never cared much and Investors are unlikely to build buy-walls for their new stupid-clowns-who-are-scam-or-fake-brand.

---

And yes, I know - some or even many here don’t like to read things like this. But that’s natural in situations without any good solution. My advice is also not to simply believe what I or others say. My advice is to think cold about it all, with some distance, to just take things into consideration, to think in probabilites and to come to conclusions that are not fix but about potential scenarios. Exactly that is what this team shows a total lack of ability in, while they still want to believe to be right. For me it’s astonishing to see such an insane combination of arrogance, hypocrisy and naivety and before all: That there was nobody internally who stopped those who came up with their great fame-creating-kamikaze-scam-let’s-call-it-education-prank-strategy. #welcometothejungle

Wow, Payment & Banking zerstört Savedroid mit nur einem Artikel. Ein paar Zitate:


Savedroid spielte vor allem mit der Angst der Nutzer und hat damit dem Thema und sich selbst geschadet. Vertrauen Kunden in Zukunft einem Unternehmen Geld an, welches durch solche Aktionen auffällt? Sicher nicht. In Anbetracht dessen, das Savedroid auch in der Vergangenheit mit dem Geld der Kunden eher lasch umgegangen ist, bewegt man sich auf dünnem Eis.

(...)

Savedroid: Snake Oil und Bananensoftware

Der Ablauf des ICOs war grenzwertig genug und das sich die Kollegen an keinerlei Kodex halten, haben die Kollegen von Gründerszene beleuchtet. Davon abgesehen ist das Whitepapervon Savedroid vor allem eines: Snake Oil.

(...)

Aber auch die 40.000 Nutzer sind vergleichsweise wenig, denn Savedroid ist keine App mit Alltagsrelevanz. Das dürften man auch erkannt haben, weshalb man im letzten Jahr diverse Aktionen unternommen hat um Geld in die Kasse zu spülen.

(...)

Schon vor dem ICO hatte Savedroid weder eine besonders erfolgreiche Lösung am Start noch war die Qualität herausragend. Trotz mangelnder Produktqualität sich vor allem (und ausschließlich) um den ICO zu kümmern und dann noch Zeit für einen “PR Stunt” zu haben zeigt die Arroganz gegenüber den Nutzern.

(...)

Nicht die Lösung zählt, sondern der eigene Fame.

https://paymentandbanking.com/warum-der-pr-stunt-um-den-savedroid-ico-nicht-das-problem-ist/

Just watched the AMA. Who didn't watch it, please do… it's worth it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41OuMFt_fMc

This guy clearly lives in a parallel-world in which he has a strong and very persistent ability to ignore his own lies and contradictions. He is able to say one thing and to contradict that just some sentences later, while he is not even aware. Actually he reminds me of Trump. It’s a different style of course, but the principle is similar and shows Conman-acting on a high level.

What is also interesting: He is not aware how naive it is what he says. Just one example: He was so surprised that pishing sites popped up. He must be not only new to Crypto but to the Internet! But yeah, please Savedroid, help to regulate this shady stuff away! Already an idea how to achieve that? ;-)

He talks about Savedroids role to make the market as a whole more sustainable and that would be in favor also for SVD-token-holder. I think he already showed how to achieve that using his own project as example how to trash trust and undermine the value of the own token. Yes, good approach! The Crypto-space will take him seriously and ask for advice!

He points on all the GREED in this market! That's bad, isn't it? It comes from a hypocrite who just raised about $50 mln by selling a token that is not necessary at all (besides exactly that purpose) using hype, buzzwords and a price-prediction-chart.  

They want to come up with a due-diligence checklist for ICO's to help Investors to come to an informed decision. Please, everybody with some experience in Crypto: Take a deeper look at Savedroid and imagine it’s about 1 week before ICO-start. I just can say for myself: My due-diligence-checklist would have ruled this hype-project out within 15 minutes. After their trash-all-trust-PR: 1 second.


More important for Savedroid-Investors - Clear lies and deception about refund, provided messages and more:


He gives a "no" to all who want to be refunded. Reason: The project hasn't changed. Interesting statement that reveals something quiet concerning but not surprising at all: He does not understand, or intentionally ignores, what the real value is about that backs everything else: Trust. But yes, that didn't change after all the headlines that Savedroid is a scam and after all the lies, deceptions and confusion...

He gives insights about the own escrow setup and he clearly says that it would NOT have been possible to steal those funds. But in his "And it's NOT gone-video" he said that he 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 (...)"

Isn't that a lie? Ah, let's not care about such details and talk about his lies or it would also be necessary to talk about the trust issue, right? Nothing to see here, nothing has changed.

He points on the message he pretended he has given and he does that again and again and still believes it to be good and that it will have positive impact. He also advices his viewers to check if a project that runs an ICO uses an escrow-services. Let's take a deeper look at the provided message and the given advice:


Action taken during ICO: Savedroid used an escrow.
Message: Savedroid is a safe Investment on that front

Action taken after ICO: The team faked an exit-scam
Message: Oh no, Yassir vanished to a beach in Egypt and took all the money. Damn, if that is true, not even escrows can be trusted anymore!

Action taken after PR-Stunt: He explains in his video that it was just a PR-Stunt but that he could easily have executed an exit scam with all the funds
Message: Did he just confirm that he really could have taken all the funds despite having an escrow? Damn, it’s true, not even escrows can be trusted anymore!

Action taken to explain the mess: Ama yesterday, saying that he would NOT have been able to steal the funds, explains his viewers the advantages of escrow-services
Message: WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TEACHING HERE? ;-)


Some Facts about the real message Savedroid delivered:

Savedroid-is-a-Scam-message was delivered internationally, probably to millions who will continue to connect the words Savedroid and Scam and continue to believe that Savedroid is exactly that - question probably is if that is wrong under the line ;-)

Message that Savedroid has done an insane and irresponsible PR-Stunt on the back of all others was also delivered powerful

AMA yesterday was delivered to, in best case: a few thousands.

Result: Some believe "this" and others "that“, others already came up with own theories that are quiet often a damaging combinations of both, like "they tried it but got scared and backed off". The majority will just not care much more about this. Who does really believe that Savedroid will ever be taken seriously by any real professional in this space, or just guys like me who have a real „due-diligence-checklist“?


Something funny besides: On the german AMA he explains that he was surprised and that they didn’t expect that the Exit-Scam-Info would have international impact. He believed that would be limited more to Germany. Additionally he didn’t expect (and is deeply sorry about) that it had impact in the Fintech-Space.
But what the hell did he expect? Surprise, Crypto is international and surprise, Savedroid is a Fintech. But he believed he could place his trash-trust-PR focused on Germany and not international and everywhere in Germany but not in the Fintech-space? What did he smoke?

Funny as well: Especially big Investors liked his PR-Stunt... sure!



Exchanges:

A loooong explanation that some exchanges would want millions in USD to list SVD, that he doesn’t agree with that and doesn’t want to pay for such a listing. I tend to agree with him as well. But: Wouldn’t it be a good first step to a more sustainable market to make such exchanges public? Or is it maybe just not true?

Top5 exchange: Nothing to say about that… all under NDA.

That’s an interesting combination btw. I would not hope for a listing on a bigger exchange at all, because it might very well be that he is already preparing excuses.


 
Most important fact:

They have the millions and won't give any of that back, because: nothing has changed.

Let’s forget deception, contradiction, hypocrisy and proven lies. Why paying attention to such details when it’s about the better of the whole industry, less scams and a more sustainable market. Everybody should take Savedroid and it’s high standards of honesty and transparency as example, right?


Some words to Yassin: You have done a powerful job to give your company the scam-brand and it’s totally deserved. You also say that the situation is still too emotional and that you expect that to calm down over time. And yes, you’re right. Exactly that will happen and you’ll see: In a few weeks the public will just not care much about this project anymore. You already can see that dynamic. The media has thrown this project into the scam-or-dumb-section and that is what you asked for. Some will probably make some fun about you like I do, but attention will continue to decrease significantly - and with that a lot of potential. What will be left? My guess is: Damage to your Investors - that’s it.

To the rest of the team: I would make a bet that not all of you disagree with what I try to explain here, even if I do it in an insulting way to the company that pays your checks. But think about where that money came from and ask yourself just two questions:

1) Do you really believe it’s deserved?  
2) Do you also believe that a refund should not be given because nothing has changed? #trust?

See, you accuse me to be manipulative, but just take a look at how you "quote" me. Of course you doesn't need to learn anything from me. Unlike to your favorite team I don't force anybody into anything. But just for the record, this is what I said about "lessons":

"I'll give you a simple lesson: Not just a given information is important, but also context and timing. Now let's take a look at their announcement: (...)"


Lesson 2: When it's about communication of a team it can tell you a lot if you pay attention on what they DON'T reply on.


If you are honest with yourself and just 1) think about what I've said there (actually that is pretty basic) and 2) if that is visible in this thread and pretty much everywhere Savedroid communicates and doesn't communicate and how they do it: It's possible to analyze a project pretty deep just with that approach.

What do you think about the AMA-sessions? Did he give the long awaited confirmation on the big exchange they claimed to have for SVD for example? Did he reply on the hard questions at all?

I didn't even have time to watch it. I clicked on it in the middle of the english session, but only for a few minutes because I had to leave. And no, I didn't ask any questions directly, but I had written down questions that I would have asked if I would be invested (and would have an Account on FB) here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2578161.msg35429122#msg35429122

Maybe I'll watch it now, but I can't say that I expect more than a lot of nothing. ;-)

1) Yes, I only posted about Savedroid since last week and I was not active on this forum before for some time. But what does that mean? My history goes back to 2014 while your account was registered in march 2018. Couldn't I come up with similar theories about you, just the other way around? But see, I wouldn't even care if you are a paid shill or not but always focus on what you say instead on theories I couldn't ever prove (I wouldn't even see much sense in doing that).

2) My Nr. 1 Intention is not to be helpful. I came because I was a) curious about what this is about, b) angry, because I have zero respect or understanding for what they've done, c) fascinated by the psychological situation.

3) You are free to believe whatever you want to believe. And if you really believe what you say about me I consider that as wishful thinking. Questioning my intention gives you the freedom to ignore questions you maybe should have about this project and the team behind.



Let's not forget that the concerns and fear this community is trapped in was not caused by me or anybody else who is like me. Critique about this is effect, not cause. That's number 1.

2 is: I wouldn't be able to write the price down. May I have influence on some readers? Yes, but not that many because this thread is not that important. You can see that if you compare the numbers. Most Investors have never clicked on this topic, not even once.

3: Your theory would only make sense if I would have any measure where the price should be and that it would come back after a crash. Since this team has acted with more insanity than some scammers I've watched over the years I wouldn't want to risk that. I don't see much sense in playing games and taking risks like that.


Interesting point because it implies that I believe that. But I don't believe anything what came from them or at least nothing what was used to hype.

I'll give you a simple lesson: Not just a given information is important, but also context and timing. Now let's take a look at their announcement:

savedroid ICO: SVD Token will be traded on top 5 exchange
https://medium.com/@ico_8796/savedroid-ico-svd-token-will-be-traded-on-top-5-exchange-f45a453ca3ef

Given information: SVD will be on a top 5 exchange
Context: ICO
Timing: 4 days before end of ICO

And there is more context: They've hyped with everything what came to their mind. Conclusion: That is hype. It's not necessarily a lie but the risk is too high it could turn out as that, at least in my opinion. And I don't buy things like that because I don't trust hype. This is a high-risk-market with a lot of shady stuff and I see zero sense in buying into anything that just has a little shadow. I have learned what they pretended to teach long before they've joined this space.

Now there is, in case that info was not a lie, also another scenario: It's possible that this exchange called it off because they don't want to be associated with this project. Did you notice that I've asked that question but didn't get an answer? Do you believe I'm surprised that no answer was given?

Of course, they don't have any reason to like/respect me. But they could give the info to you and others, right?

Lesson 2: When it's about communication of a team it can tell you a lot if you pay attention on what they DON'T reply on.



The community will NOT solve any problems. Only the team could do that. A good start would be not to cause more damage and to give you and all others the deserved respect. In this case it would be a sign of fairness and respect to give those their money back who want that.