UTRUST

[matjas]

More red flags, unfortunately. See that big "regulated by FINMA" logo on their site?
https://utrust.io
Of course they're "regulated" by the FINMA, because they're active in Switzerland.
Their presentation suggests that they're actively working with them though.
Well, now I contacted the FINMA, and while their reply wasn't 100% conclusive, they literally said that "UTRUST doesn't have a direct FINMA authorisation for activities in the financial sector and are not a member of the SRO*" and that they will investigate this. Their complete reply actually sounds like they didn't hear about UTRUST until today.
If you don't believe me, feel free to contact them yourselves: https://www.finma.ch/en/news/2017/09/20170929-mm-ico/
I got a reply from fintech@finma.ch, so you might as well use that address. Please remember that you're dealing with a major financial regulation authority here, so try not to sound like you're a mad 14yo if you do.
While it's possible that they didn't get in contact with the FINMA yet because they're not yet doing active business in the financial sector, you'd expect them to have clearance for the ICO ahead of its start. And like somebody else already said, no matter if it's a positive signal for investors, I'm pretty sure you can't just change the conditions of the capital raising procedure at will while it's already running.
Possibly the case officer just didn't have the information required yet, or there's some other valid explanation. Until there's a clear statement on this, this is a major red flag for me though.
At least this is very dishonest marketing. But we already know they're paying people to shill in this thread and all over social media, so I wouldn't really be surprised.

* https://www.finma.ch/en/authorisation/self-regulatory-organisations-sros/

Thanks for your research! If this is true, it would not be good for UTrush reputation and I will be looking forward to the reply of Utrust representative on this

Thank you for the information. Conflict with authorities is never good, especially in current circumstances. Hope UTrust will comment on the situation as soon as possible.

[1715045539]

1715045539

[1715045539]

1715045539

[defender77]

Hi. Will you develop your own payment gateway or will you take the existing one and terminate its development?

[the_donald]

Why is there a figure of 500 million on the meter? The tokens for the UTRUST team and the bounty tokens are also on sale?

They announced that 50 million tokens for the Utrust team is now on sales, but I am not sure about the bounty tokens

The 500 million tokens on the meter are not only ICO tokens. The bounty tokens (50 millions) , the private investor tokens (100 million), the UTrust tokens (before 100 million, now 50 millions) and the pre-ICO tokens (50 millions) are part of the 500 million tokens that will be distributed. So for the ICO itself the max tokens that can be bought are 250 million.

Thank you for the clarification! I thought that all 500,000,000 tokens for sale.

It's better this way. it's more scarce so it should increase it's value

[clixcoin]

Hi. Will you develop your own payment gateway or will you take the existing one and terminate its development?

https://utrust.io/

You can find the all details from official website they have plan to establish a new payment platform like Pyapl. There is comparison chart available there and other some important links also listed there.

[flipmeister]

More red flags, unfortunately. See that big "regulated by FINMA" logo on their site?
https://utrust.io
Of course they're "regulated" by the FINMA, because they're active in Switzerland.
Their presentation suggests that they're actively working with them though.
Well, now I contacted the FINMA, and while their reply wasn't 100% conclusive, they literally said that "UTRUST doesn't have a direct FINMA authorisation for activities in the financial sector and are not a member of the SRO*" and that they will investigate this. Their complete reply actually sounds like they didn't hear about UTRUST until today.
If you don't believe me, feel free to contact them yourselves: https://www.finma.ch/en/news/2017/09/20170929-mm-ico/
I got a reply from fintech@finma.ch, so you might as well use that address. Please remember that you're dealing with a major financial regulation authority here, so try not to sound like you're a mad 14yo if you do.
While it's possible that they didn't get in contact with the FINMA yet because they're not yet doing active business in the financial sector, you'd expect them to have clearance for the ICO ahead of its start. And like somebody else already said, no matter if it's a positive signal for investors, I'm pretty sure you can't just change the conditions of the capital raising procedure at will while it's already running.
Possibly the case officer just didn't have the information required yet, or there's some other valid explanation. Until there's a clear statement on this, this is a major red flag for me though.
At least this is very dishonest marketing. But we already know they're paying people to shill in this thread and all over social media, so I wouldn't really be surprised.

* https://www.finma.ch/en/authorisation/self-regulatory-organisations-sros/

Thanks for your research! If this is true, it would not be good for UTrush reputation and I will be looking forward to the reply of Utrust representative on this

Thank you for the information. Conflict with authorities is never good, especially in current circumstances. Hope UTrust will comment on the situation as soon as possible.

"Of course they're "regulated" by the FINMA, because they're active in Switzerland."
And that's all...
They don't say we are actively working with... or in a partnership with...
So it's ok. They follow the FINMA rules and that's why they are regulated by...

[Elkmar]

Bitcoin is taking huge blows, we will see how it will impact the markets, I hope alts will keep rising and it will benefit ICOs.

[SEELE^^01]

More red flags, unfortunately. See that big "regulated by FINMA" logo on their site?
https://utrust.io
Of course they're "regulated" by the FINMA, because they're active in Switzerland.
Their presentation suggests that they're actively working with them though.
Well, now I contacted the FINMA, and while their reply wasn't 100% conclusive, they literally said that "UTRUST doesn't have a direct FINMA authorisation for activities in the financial sector and are not a member of the SRO*" and that they will investigate this. Their complete reply actually sounds like they didn't hear about UTRUST until today.
If you don't believe me, feel free to contact them yourselves: https://www.finma.ch/en/news/2017/09/20170929-mm-ico/
I got a reply from fintech@finma.ch, so you might as well use that address. Please remember that you're dealing with a major financial regulation authority here, so try not to sound like you're a mad 14yo if you do.
While it's possible that they didn't get in contact with the FINMA yet because they're not yet doing active business in the financial sector, you'd expect them to have clearance for the ICO ahead of its start. And like somebody else already said, no matter if it's a positive signal for investors, I'm pretty sure you can't just change the conditions of the capital raising procedure at will while it's already running.
Possibly the case officer just didn't have the information required yet, or there's some other valid explanation. Until there's a clear statement on this, this is a major red flag for me though.
At least this is very dishonest marketing. But we already know they're paying people to shill in this thread and all over social media, so I wouldn't really be surprised.

* https://www.finma.ch/en/authorisation/self-regulatory-organisations-sros/

Thanks for your research! If this is true, it would not be good for UTrush reputation and I will be looking forward to the reply of Utrust representative on this

Thank you for the information. Conflict with authorities is never good, especially in current circumstances. Hope UTrust will comment on the situation as soon as possible.

"Of course they're "regulated" by the FINMA, because they're active in Switzerland."
And that's all...
They don't say we are actively working with... or in a partnership with...
So it's ok. They follow the FINMA rules and that's why they are regulated by...

still there should be a statement incoming from the devs regarding this, otherwise it is really a major league red flag in my eyes.

i really hope that it is not so.

[Kakumei]

FINMA make the rules and we follow and therefore we are - as you say - regulated by them. We have KYC & AML in place and comply with all the current regulations laid upon us by them. More importantly, we have never stated anywhere that are partners or have any kind of partnership with them, so please stay true to the facts here.

This is not difficult to explain. Many ICOs that are located in Switzerland don't do KYC&AML and are not compliant to FINMA's regulations and therefore act in non-compliant manners. What this means for them in the future is anybody´s best guess.

Another hint is that Filipe is going to represent UTRUST in a conference in Switzerland very soon.

See the companies that are going there:
http://forums.theasianbanker.com/switzerland-wealth-innovation-tour/speakers

Regarding being registered as a financial payment provider or authority: Of course we are not yet, these registrations come hand in hand with large amounts that need to be paid and we are still in the fundraising stage at this point.

Hope this helps!

[Trrrt]

I think Utrust is a good project, I’m not so afraid but I can be wrong. The project is really disruptive and has a huge potential, I think Utrust has big change to have an incredible value a day.

[matjas]

FINMA make the rules and we follow and therefore we are - as you say - regulated by them. We have KYC & AML in place and comply with all the current regulations laid upon us by them. More importantly, we have never stated anywhere that are partners or have any kind of partnership with them, so please stay true to the facts here.

This is not difficult to explain. Many ICOs that are located in Switzerland don't do KYC&AML and are not compliant to FINMA's regulations and therefore act in non-compliant manners. What this means for them in the future is anybody´s best guess.

Another hint is that Filipe is going to represent UTRUST in a conference in Switzerland very soon.

See the companies that are going there:
http://forums.theasianbanker.com/switzerland-wealth-innovation-tour/speakers

Regarding being registered as a financial payment provider or authority: Of course we are not yet, these registrations come hand in hand with large amounts that need to be paid and we are still in the fundraising stage at this point.

Hope this helps!

This helps a lot, thank you for the clarification!

[Jay2408]

FINMA make the rules and we follow and therefore we are - as you say - regulated by them. We have KYC & AML in place and comply with all the current regulations laid upon us by them. More importantly, we have never stated anywhere that are partners or have any kind of partnership with them, so please stay true to the facts here.

This is not difficult to explain. Many ICOs that are located in Switzerland don't do KYC&AML and are not compliant to FINMA's regulations and therefore act in non-compliant manners. What this means for them in the future is anybody´s best guess.

Another hint is that Filipe is going to represent UTRUST in a conference in Switzerland very soon.

See the companies that are going there:
http://forums.theasianbanker.com/switzerland-wealth-innovation-tour/speakers

Regarding being registered as a financial payment provider or authority: Of course we are not yet, these registrations come hand in hand with large amounts that need to be paid and we are still in the fundraising stage at this point.

Hope this helps!

Thanks a lot for your quick clarification! I think with taking part in such events and the general visibility of UTRUST they wouldn't stay long below the radar of Swiss authorities if they don't comply with all the regulations.

[mrsaint]

FINMA make the rules and we follow and therefore we are - as you say - regulated by them. We have KYC & AML in place and comply with all the current regulations laid upon us by them. More importantly, we have never stated anywhere that are partners or have any kind of partnership with them, so please stay true to the facts here.

Wrong. You tell people to stay true to the facts while you are the one who is deciving investors by spreading incorrect information. See Finma regarding the "Regulatory treatment of initial coin offerings":

https://www.finma.ch/en/~/media/finma/dokumente/dokumentencenter/myfinma/4dokumentation/finma-aufsichtsmitteilungen/20170929-finma-aufsichtsmitteilung-04-2017.pdf?la=en

Under 2. Regulation:

ICOs are currently not governed by any specific regulation, either globally or in Switzerland.

and

Owing to the wide variety in structure of ICO models, FINMA can only carry out a conclusive regulatory assessment in specific cases.

Are you saying utrust is such a specific case and that FINMA carried out a conclusive regulatory assessment about utrust? Isn't it strange than that nobody of Finma, when contacted, was aware of you or your ICO? I am not surprised either, given that your company was just registered about a week ago. I wonder... under what company umbrella did you raise money during the pre-ICO? Can you please answer this.

This is not difficult to explain. Many ICOs that are located in Switzerland don't do KYC&AML and are not compliant to FINMA's regulations and therefore act in non-compliant manners. What this means for them in the future is anybody´s best guess.

Oh, and you think you're better than them? Again, you are talking about "FINMA's regulations" even though there are clearly NO REGULATIONS in regard to ICOs given by FINMA or anyone else at that point.

Please help me out: When I bought tokens during the pre-ICO, from whom did I purchased those tokens? What was the company and where was it registered? And more importantly, what happens now with my tokens since the ICO is under a different company under different terms and conditions that I did not agree on during the pre-ICO.

Another hint is that Filipe is going to represent UTRUST in a conference in Switzerland very soon.

See the companies that are going there:
http://forums.theasianbanker.com/switzerland-wealth-innovation-tour/speakers

Uh? What does him doing some networking at some Fintech event have to do with Finma?

[block.chainer]

i'm new here

I bought some Utrus tokens and created an account at HITBTC. What should I do now?

just waiting untill the ico finisched?  What happens with my tokens after the ICO, and how can I sell them? please somebody can explain to me?

[lobat999]

FINMA make the rules and we follow and therefore we are - as you say - regulated by them. We have KYC & AML in place and comply with all the current regulations laid upon us by them. More importantly, we have never stated anywhere that are partners or have any kind of partnership with them, so please stay true to the facts here.

This is not difficult to explain. Many ICOs that are located in Switzerland don't do KYC&AML and are not compliant to FINMA's regulations and therefore act in non-compliant manners. What this means for them in the future is anybody´s best guess.

Another hint is that Filipe is going to represent UTRUST in a conference in Switzerland very soon.

See the companies that are going there:
http://forums.theasianbanker.com/switzerland-wealth-innovation-tour/speakers

Regarding being registered as a financial payment provider or authority: Of course we are not yet, these registrations come hand in hand with large amounts that need to be paid and we are still in the fundraising stage at this point.

Hope this helps!

Thanks a lot for your quick clarification! I think with taking part in such events and the general visibility of UTRUST they wouldn't stay long below the radar of Swiss authorities if they don't comply with all the regulations.

This clarification would certainly erase doubts about the project and will surely instill trust from investors. Imho.

[cantdecide]

FINMA make the rules and we follow and therefore we are - as you say - regulated by them. We have KYC & AML in place and comply with all the current regulations laid upon us by them. More importantly, we have never stated anywhere that are partners or have any kind of partnership with them, so please stay true to the facts here.

This is not difficult to explain. Many ICOs that are located in Switzerland don't do KYC&AML and are not compliant to FINMA's regulations and therefore act in non-compliant manners. What this means for them in the future is anybody´s best guess.

Another hint is that Filipe is going to represent UTRUST in a conference in Switzerland very soon.

See the companies that are going there:
http://forums.theasianbanker.com/switzerland-wealth-innovation-tour/speakers

Regarding being registered as a financial payment provider or authority: Of course we are not yet, these registrations come hand in hand with large amounts that need to be paid and we are still in the fundraising stage at this point.

Hope this helps!

Thanks for clarifying this so fast! I love that you guys are this active here

[bitcoinbulk]

i'm new here

I bought some Utrus tokens and created an account at HITBTC. What should I do now?

just waiting untill the ico finisched?  What happens with my tokens after the ICO, and how can I sell them? please somebody can explain to me?

The tokens will get sent to your ETH wallet after the ICO completes. Once you get the tokens in your wallet its up to you what you want to do with them. You can hang on to them to watch the market or if you want to sell them right away you can send them over to HITBTC.

[levyashin]

FINMA make the rules and we follow and therefore we are - as you say - regulated by them. We have KYC & AML in place and comply with all the current regulations laid upon us by them. More importantly, we have never stated anywhere that are partners or have any kind of partnership with them, so please stay true to the facts here.

This is not difficult to explain. Many ICOs that are located in Switzerland don't do KYC&AML and are not compliant to FINMA's regulations and therefore act in non-compliant manners. What this means for them in the future is anybody´s best guess.

Another hint is that Filipe is going to represent UTRUST in a conference in Switzerland very soon.

See the companies that are going there:
http://forums.theasianbanker.com/switzerland-wealth-innovation-tour/speakers

Regarding being registered as a financial payment provider or authority: Of course we are not yet, these registrations come hand in hand with large amounts that need to be paid and we are still in the fundraising stage at this point.

Hope this helps!

Thanks for clarifying this so fast! I love that you guys are this active here

Yep, in this kind of issues, a fast clarification is the best. Otherwise, fud will hurt both ico and investors.

[imtiazmahmood]

Utrust hardcap going to hit on top, i think left 10%, hurry up guys Utrust going on moon. already sold out tokens 24,622,539/500,000,000. don't miss this opportunity. Utrust platform will on top for online payment processor.

[cantdecide]

Utrust hardcap going to hit on top, i think left 10%, hurry up guys Utrust going on moon. already sold out tokens 24,622,539/500,000,000. don't miss this opportunity. Utrust platform will on top for online payment processor.

I think you missed a 4 in front of the sold out tokens Otherwise it would be a bit disturbing

[Basicball]

2 things I would have liked to see differently:

Burning half of their own tokens hurts the bounty hunters (Unless there's a solution now? i didn't read the last few pages.),
Of course if the ico goes 50M over what it was on the previous end time, they would still get the same as they would have,
but they would still be 5% of 50M=2.5M(!) short of what they would have had if they hadn't burned those 50M.
You can easily correct this by only burning 497.5M instead of 500M.

You could also argue that there are BHs which were counting on the money to buy something, which they now can't do until a later date. I don't think there's much of a solution for this one.

It would have been better if they had increaced the price of the tokens to 7 or 7.5c when the first round ended.
this would increase token price at launch a bit, and give incentive to start trading. It's too late for this though unfortunatly.