The more I've looked into Banx (a group of companies led by Mark Lyford), the more convinced I am that it was a pure scam. There is no way it could have been legitimate business. Lyford has been lying, deceiving and misleading people the whole time.
Just recently one of Banx's investors, Phil Winfield, joined Steem and warned others about Lyford. I wrote about Banx already once, but no that I have been digging into this case more, I thought it might be a good idea to do a follow-up.
If you want to know more what Banx was supposed to do, check their prospectus. Some really grandiose plans in there.
July 2014
In this video (recorded 18th July 2014) he tells his investors that public selling is not permitted.
Practicly, what does that actually mean, it means we can't go online and offer shares to the public. But we can raise as much private investment as possible.
October/November 2014
Lyford was selling Banx Shares in C-CEX (later it was also added to alcurEX). So basically he is breaking the law already at this point. Apparently he wasn't able to sell shares to private investors so he started selling them in cryptoexchanges which means he was offering them to public. Chatlogs with C-CEX show without a doubt that it was Lyford himself who was selling the shares.
By this point it should have been clear to Lyford that he is not going to get the funding he is after. Private investors are not interested, and neither is anybody in the cryptoscene. According to the chatlogs, Lyford was very disappointed because there was so little demand for Banx Shares.
Every real businessman would have drawn the conclusions about the situation. If it was necessary to get enough funding to get things really running, the plan wouldn't be successful. There just wasn't enough money coming in. Lyford should have close down Banx at this point. But he didn't.
Instead of returning the money back to investors, he kept the "business" going. He knew he had to deceive potential investors to give him more money. If he had been honest about the situation, nobody would have invested more money.
In this chat Lyford is pissed off because C-CEX is letting free markets to set the price of Banx Shares to lower than Lyford is selling.
[15/11/2014, 18:33:11] Mark Lyford: YOU ARE LISTED ON COINMARKETCAP.COM
[15/11/2014, 18:33:20] Mark Lyford: thats my issue
[15/11/2014, 18:33:25] C-CEX.com: oh, let me think
[15/11/2014, 18:33:28] Mark Lyford: if you were not on CMC I wouldn't care
[15/11/2014, 18:33:41] Mark Lyford: fundamentally thats the issue
[15/11/2014, 18:33:44] C-CEX.com: so investors look coinmarketcap and make headake because of this?
[15/11/2014, 18:33:56] Mark Lyford: the trading of 1/4 of share price on your exchange effects my price on CMC, bottom line, thats the issue
[15/11/2014, 18:34:08] Mark Lyford: yes all my private non crypto investors look at CMC
[15/11/2014, 18:34:10] Mark Lyford: thats the issue
[15/11/2014, 18:34:20] Mark Lyford: they see shares being sold for 33 cents on your exchange
[15/11/2014, 18:34:26] Mark Lyford: they question, and it brings the price down
[15/11/2014, 18:34:30] Mark Lyford: bottom line thats my issue
[15/11/2014, 18:35:14] Mark Lyford: without us raising the money from private investors ( nothing to do with crypto traders etc) normal business people we have no business until we get the funding to pay the real profits we want, the profits we paid last week are just a small amount to what we want to be doing
So basically his plan at this point is to get Banx Shares ranking to go high in Coinmarketcap.com so that he can show it to private investors and deceive them to think that Banx is a successful business and give him more money.
28th November 2014
Banx Shares are moved to a new blockchain. Although from a cryptoperspective, this is done very badly because the process isn't automated. Lyford has stated that most of the shares were transferred to the new chain, apparently manually, but he hasn't shown any evidence for this. I haven't even seen any accurate information about how many shares actually existed at that time.
Correct way to handle the situation would have been automated transfer process, where shareholders send their share from the old chain to the new (something like Bitshares did when it was updated to 2.0).
The new blockchain and price manipulation
When the new blockchain was running, no other exchange could list Banx Shares except Banx.io, which happened to be owned by Banx.
So the question is: Did Lyford continue to manipulate the price to get more money from investors? Everything suggests that he did.
In June 2015 people started to wonder how it's possible that Banx Shares are so high at Coinmarketcap.com. They started doubting if the volume is real what CMC was showing. Lyford's answered:
We believe in open communication and transparency which is why we are responding to this post. Thank you for pointing out your concerns but, as we will demonstrate, the suspicions raised here are unfounded.
After the evidence was clear that the volumes of Banx.io and CMC didn't match, Banx was forced to admit that there was some problem. But instead of admitting that they lied, they just claimed it was a bug and fixed it.
Allen Byron Penner aka ByronP
The guy who was running Banx.io exchange was ByronP:
The exchange may say Banx on it but it is still me writing the code and running it of which history has shown I don't play games and would not have anything to do with any company that is just out for a dollar.
Given that in his communication with C-CEX Lyford was very clear that he wanted to manipulate the price, it's really hard to believe that he wouldn't do the same thing in an exchange that he owns himself.
At the end ByronP had to fix the price API where CMC got their data because it was so clearly wrong. It's also really hard to believe that ByronP was totally unaware of Lyford's need to manipulate the market price. That's why I'm assuming that ByronP was the one that actually manipulated the price feed of Banx.io. Lyford himself seems to be incapable of doing anything so complicated.
By the way, I happened to notice that Byron is doing something with Steem currently. Not sure if that is something to be worried about, but maybe somebody should keep an eye on him. Upvote bot from a scammer doesn't sound nice.
Quantity of shares
I'm not fully aware how the quantity of Banx Shares has changed over time. Apparently it started with some premined/preissued shares and more came into existence with mining. By moving to the new blockchain it was changed to proof-of-stake and mining wasn't possible anymore. I think it was around 6 million shares that existed when the new blockhain was made.
Somewhere along the road the amount was doubled to 12 million. In 2016 it was increased to 120 million.
I haven't seen any reasonable explanation for this. So it's quite obvious that it has been just another trick to make market cap look bigger. Of course the price of one share didn't go down because Banx owned the only exchange where it could be traded.
Investors are very disappointed and police is investigating the case
Re: Are BanxShares as good as GAW Paycoin? April 23, 2016, 01:50:31 AM:
Here's something that all of Lyford's investors should be looking at, what exactly has he closed down?, there are no formal filings with companies house that I can see so perhaps all he has done is turn off the website & turn his back?, is he naive enough to think that this will suffice?
Then the question arises, what entity exactly sold the shares to the investors>, was it Banx Ltd?, if so than a formal liquidation needs to occur with a full winding up process undertaken with final tax returns filed,
or was it Mark Lyford as an individual? in which case, given that you cannot liquidate an individual if he cannot repay the investors he will need to file for personal bankruptcy (again), this will be a good thing as it will kill his directorships of any other company he may be associated with & offers the investors the opportunity to pursue adversarial proceedings against him to deny him bankruptcy protection from his debts,in other words, kill his credit for at least 20 years,small token,
something to watch
Re: Are BanxShares as good as GAW Paycoin? April 24, 2016, 12:29:55 PM:
a UK based investor managed to track Lyford down yesterday via 'phone, Lyford agreed to meet the investor to offer an explanation of what had caused the problems & a way forward, no one will be surprised to read that Lyford was a no show, no explanation no excuse he simply didn't turn up, he is a sociopath, he simply does not care about anyone but himself & he will do whatever it takes to get what he wants, he has hurt a lot of people & it means absolutely nothing to him, now the situation is that he sees himself as the victim, after all he has done for everyone!!
anyway, the investor went straight to the police & filed a complaint, best thing he could have done given the circumstances,
Re: Are BanxShares as good as GAW Paycoin? April 25, 2016, 06:30:21 PM:
"I know Mark didn't set out to scam everyone"
well,maybe not "everyone" but it's close, for my part I know that he stole $30k from me & tried to grab an additional $150k during 2015 & into 2016,in my opinion what he presented to me was pure fabrication from day one, the profits that were allegedly being generated and which he added to my balance statements (giving me a total declared value of $52k in Dec 2015) were bogus & had never been achieved by any legitimate means, (net value today $6.41...........maybe!)
The sheer length of time that Mark kept this scam running could very well be his undoing, there is no logical,sensible or believable explanation for what he was doing or why, we have a total mix of initial inducement to misrepresentation to bogus profit shares to a total lack of fiduciary duty,
It now appears that the folks who were assisting him are scrambling to make distance, I only dealt with Mark Lyford, I had no involvement with ByronP or Simon & I do not know who they are but it's telling that both have now made statements on this forum basically saying "nothing to do with me Guv"
Re: Are BanxShares as good as GAW Paycoin? April 27, 2016, 11:31:27 AM:
As of now I have managed to connect with 7 of Lyfords investors, we are uniting to lodge formal complaints with various authorities, is there any other investor out there that may want to join in?, you can message me via this forum,
I have to say that after talking to my fellow investors that this situation is nothing at all to do with bad luck, it has nothing to do with the world not being ready for Lyford's business, it has everything to do with it being a concerted effort by a morally bankrupt Lyford to scam as much money as possible from wherever he could get his thieving hands on it, he has lied & misled everyone, he is even now still trying to buy time to avert any negative action,
If you are an investor or anyone here knows of anyone that has opted to believe in Lyford at this late stage & to give him time to make things right, get in touch, share your experience, you will find that he is not legitimate, he has no plans to make anyone whole, I'm wondering where the off-shore money is stashed & just when he will hightail it out of Dodge,
Lyford is a con, it is that simple,
Re: Are BanxShares as good as GAW Paycoin? April 22, 2016, 11:47:09 AM
He deleted his post on Facebook and therefore all the comments that went with it.
I saw four of the comments he got before it was deleted:
Begin copy/paste from FB
Commenter number 1
Think you should hold your hands up and be a bit more truthful Mark. Half a million dollers investment and u created fuck all. Most investors are going to be wondering where the money has gone coz i believe you used Banx shares to pay for the exchange and other services etc. It was only one month ago you were mivering me for more money for investment when you know the company had already collapsed. I can honestly say the trolls were 100% correct, you were running a ponzi scheme and u were caught out. Everything they said was true and the worst scenario for investors has come to pass. I think you owe investors some detailed transparency of where the funds have gone coz as i've said u created next to nothing with alot of money. I hate to say this but its true, your monthly updates in videos etc have proven you to be either full of shit or your living in some kind of dreamworld. I hope you do the correct thing and produce some legitimate transparency where investors can see that you have'nt spunked the investment on other things. Most people as you said yourself invested in you, what a mistake this has proven to be
Commenter number 2
I couldn't have put it better myself
Commenter number 3
Well said Commenter number 1! Turns out the so called trolls have been right about this clown all along! He's spanked away half a million dollars and told us nothing but a pack of lies from day 1. My friends and I invested over £100k into this shambles of a company. I wonder how much of our money he actually has left in his bank? That's a nice big house he's sitting in, who's paying for that? (There were a list of names here) where has our money gone? No transparency whatsoever. Just smoke and mirrors!
Commenter number 2
All the bullshit he's been posting on the forum for the last few months as well. Whilst all long knowing this day was coming. What a scumbag of a human he turned out to be.
End copy/paste from FB
For me this looks like Lyford might very well end up in jail. It would be nice to know what's the current situation with investigation by the authorities. Does somebody know anything about it?
Was Banx a ponzi scheme?
Banx promised to distribute profits that it makes to shareholders. It's hard to know how much profits Banx really made and where those profits came because Lyford hasn't been open about that.
Banx actually did pay to it's shareholders several times. But it's quite suspicious because none of the actual businesses, that Banx was supposed to be doing, looked profitable.
In October 2016 Ian DeMartino published an article in Coinjournal where he presented his findings that indicated Banx being a scam. According to the article, income that Banx was generating was quite unclear.
I asked Lyford several times where Banx Capital’s income was coming from, to the point that he started to express frustration, but there was an important reason I asked multiple times: Every time he told me something different. The first time I asked, Lyford pointed to BanxMint and Banx Platinum as the primary sources of income. Another time, it was trading activities and mining, and yet another it was Banx.io fees.
Eventually, after showing me JVZoo, he said the company’s income was from educational videos, affiliate selling of software and webinars. That fits into exactly what Banx Platinum claims to be.
Lyford hasn't revealed more details about the income, which of course makes the whole thing very suspicious. If there were no legitimate income, then the dividends for shareholders were not paid from profits. That's exactly like a ponzi – participants are paid as long as the company has some money left. Most important thing is to keep up the image that company is making money. The system of course collapses sooner or later when nobody is willing to invest any more money to it.
One thing that points to a ponzi is the fact that Banx was still claiming to do a very profitable business as late as March 2016. When DeMartino published his latest article in Coinjournal, Lyford accused him for using an old screenshot of their website that claimed that Banx was making huge profits.
But reading the discussion that Lyford and DeMartino had at Bitcointalk, it becomes very clear that Lyford was lying. DeMartino had bigger screenshot that showed the date (March 21st) when it was taken and it was also found from Google cache dated March 16th.
So Lyford was still trying to get more investors on board – why else he would have kept that falsified information on the website? – even when the whole system was pretty much collapsed. At that time Banx was moved to Bitshares as an asset. Lyford couldn't manipulate the price anymore so Banx Shares became very quickly worthless.
In my eyes this looks very much like a classic ponzi scheme.
Michael Taggart aka Michael X aka Murderistic
One person of interest in this case is Michael Taggart. According to a pdf dated 5th November 2015 Banx and Taggart had a deep businesspartnership. The pdf was meant for Banx holders and it presented the plan for 2016. There were at least four businesses that were owned by Banx and Taggart (Remittio, Lotto Shares, CrowdMy.com and DigitalMoneyTimes.com).
Banx owns 50% of Remittio.
Remember, Banx Shares holders ultimately get a part of the profits from Remittio, Lotto Shares and CrowdMy.com.
We are working closely with Michael Taggart and his staff, dealing with display advertising for the DMR [Digital Money Revolution] funnel.
We have some exciting news about DMT [DigitalMoneyTimes.com]. Michael Taggart and I have struck a deal for his company to take 50% of this website.
We currently have over $25,000 of investment into Lotto Shares.
CrowdMy.com will be a 50/50 partnership company with Banx and Michael Taggart’s company.
A couple of things indicate that Taggart knew very well what Banx was doing:
- Apparently Taggart and Lyford have known each other for a long time already. This isn't a new partnership.
- By the end of 2015 it should have been very clear to everybody that Banx is a scam and it will fail soon.
- Taggart and Lyford are currently doing business again together in Steem Cash, a get-rich-quick marketing scheme.
- Taggart has been defending Lyford very aggressively and denied that Banx has been a fraudulent business.
- Taggart has tried to hide the fact that he and Banx had a business partnership.
Banx investors might be interested to know if some of their money went to Taggart's companies.
Accounting books could tell a lot about this case
I can guess how Lyford will be answering to this post. "You are just a hater", "you don't know anything", "nothing I say could make you change you mind". But there is actually one thing that would make me change my mind about Banx being a ponzi scam.
If Mark Lyford and Michael Taggart want to prove their innocence, they should publish all relevant financial information of their companies that have been involved in Banx case.
If Banx was a legitimate business that just didn't work out because of bad timing and whatever, accounts could prove this. I'm pretty sure that investors would like to know this too. Lyford hasn't been very open about expenses. How much money actually came in and where did it all go?
- How much money you got from investors (in crypto and fiat currencies) in total? How much from private and how much from public investors?
- What were the running costs?
- How did you actually invest the money you got from the investors? There were plans for several different businesses. How much money did you put in each of them?
- How much profits Banx made? Where did the profits come from?
- How much did Banx pay for it's shareholders?
- How many Banx Shares actually existed? There has been some unclarity what was the initial amount, how much shares miners mined, etc.
- What are the details of partnership between Banx and Michael Taggart's companies?
Banx was closed down in April, so everything should be pretty much clear now, if Lyford has finished the accounting books. It shouldn't be too hard to find all relevant information and publish it. Unless, of course, this is a scam and Lyford don't want to publish anything because the records would prove that he didn't have any intention to do legitimate business.
Let's keep Steem free of scammers
The more I've been digging into this case, the more convinced I am that this really is a pure scam. There should be no doubt about it in this point. If somebody can show evidence that indicate otherwise, please do.
I personally happen to hate scammers quite a lot. That has given me motivation to spend hours and hours googling around and reading messages from forums.
I don't like the idea of seeing these kind of people in Steem. There are two reasons for that.
- Communities that don't exclude fraudsters are weak. If dishonest people can come in and do business without an adequate protest, the whole community will suffer eventually. Strong communities can stay strong only if they kick out scammers and don't let them do anything potentially harmful.
- Scammers will do legitimate projects every now and then to fix their reputation. Steem Cash, which is a business run by Lyford and Taggart, might be their way of showing that "we can do legitimate business". After they have played nice and made some new friends, they will cash out with a bigger scam. Best way to prevent all kind of scamming is to show zero tolerance for scammers.
Sources
- Are BanxShares as good as GAW Paycoin? (Unsencored Bitcointalk thread)
- The case of Banx & C-CEX (my previous post)
- Ponzi Accusations Fly As BanxShares Is Set To Be Removed From CoinMarketCap Rankings
- Banx Three Months Later: No BitShares Integration, Less than 1% Sold, Network Is Down
- Mark Lyford Opens Banx Sales, Quickly Becomes Worthless
- Banx and how they mislead their customers, includes deceptive name, manipulation and PONZI ALERT (Bitcointalk thread)
- [ANN] Banx - Liquidity Paid Back In From Profits (Bitcointalk thread heavily edited by Lyford)
- Banxshare scam.. Fake market cap coinmarket (Bitcointalk thread)
- BanxShares was Removed From CoinMarketCap Rankings and NOT because of Ponzi Accusations – The official response from Mark Lyford
We have all a good and a bad side...
I must admit I saw his good side reading this post...
https://steemit.com/mentalhealth/@marklyford/the-phoenix-the-reality-of-depression-for-me
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
From a major investor of BANX: https://steemit.com/introduceyourself/@marklyford/the-truth-about-mark-lyford-and-banx#@carrinm/re-marklyford-the-truth-about-mark-lyford-and-banx-20160812t015609674z
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Mark is good at manipulating people. I wouldn't be surprised if that post was partially fake.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Talk about low. Not one single word of that post is fake at all. Want a bit more proof? >> http://mjpersonal.s3.amazonaws.com/Castle_Medical_Group_Letter.pdf A letter from my doctor. Although @philwinfield ever had the gaul to suggest that is a fake letter.
And yes that has my home address on it. A scammer doesn't publish his home address if he is worried.
And for those small amount of people who do care reading this. I am great now. medication working very well and I am working my ass off on turning things round ...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Nobody is asking you details of your personal life. Instead of publishing your medical history which is none of our business, why don't you publish the accounting books and financial statements as well as legal bankruptcy documents of Banx which are totally our business? Nobody is blaming you about the fact the business failed. What you are being asked to prove is that Banx was actually making the profits you claim it did when you were trying to attract new investors, and how a company that made consistently profits could suddenly blow up in a matter of a couple of month, and ultimately and most importantly where did all the money go?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The Truth About Mark Lyford and Banx >> https://steemit.com/introduceyourself/@marklyford/the-truth-about-mark-lyford-and-banx
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
That's yet another rehash of the same tired story, not an explanation of how a supposedly profitable company that was paying dividends to its investors out of its alleged profits went belly up in a quarter.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
thank you. but of course the post didn't raise more than $4
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Nice post @samupaha
This due diligence adds the Ebay "feedback quality" character to the user community here at steemit. Let's hope those who choose to give someone a neutral / negative rating really do a fair and thorough evaluation as you have done here... ô¿ô
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
you got me when i read that one guy's nickname is "murderistic" :')
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
lol wow, so easy to control your mind. Murderistic...comes from "Murderistic Women", comes from "Come in Number 51 Your Time Is Up", comes from "Careful with that Axe Eugene".
My favorite Pink Floyd Song.
Conspiracy solved.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
man i was joking. i dont care about the feud going on here. i dont know anything about banx and i dont plan on reading it all up. it seems like not every detail was told yet and there could have been some more information but even that iam not sure of. that steemcash is literally just a new business which is also completely fine. iam not a fan of those "how to become rich" marketing things you see often in forex and roulette but whatever itsa business. so iam cool mr. murderistic :)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
just to make it clear though, i still smiled a bit reading murderistic after you guys names are up on steemit every day..
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
My official post about this subject:
https://steemit.com/introduceyourself/@marklyford/the-truth-about-mark-lyford-and-banx
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
And again you fail to address all the relevant points.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
the kind of question that Marky boy likes is "how is your dog" or " would you like a drink"
if, on the other hand you said " can you explain why countless entities controlled by you are forcibly dissolved", or " say Mark, any problems with Tax accounting for Banx Capital Ltd, like VAT,PAYE, Corporation tax?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Do you have any up-to-date information about Banx investigations by authorities?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
not that can be posted here
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Didn't realize this whole thing was still under investigation, I thought this was all old news. That being the case though, you should be careful saying this was definitely a scam. If it turns out to just be bad business practices, this could be seen as libel.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It's not, it's just the same stuff brought up because he has some big hard-on for Mark...
Mark has already admitted publicly to screwing up a startup multiple times and is still trying to make good, but folks like this guy keep trying to knock him down.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
So far I haven't seen anything that would make this "just bad business practices". Lyford has been caught so many times lying that there is no way this could have been a legitimate business.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Lyford is not in a position to take any form of legal action, impossible, he cannot & dare not go there,
hey Mark, why not just do as I suggest end all of this nonsense, publish Banx audited accounts, I would dearly like to know the amount of money that you embezzled, you had to get it out of the company one way or another
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I probably should not have stuck my nose into this whole situation =P Was just trying to emphasize that unless you have 100% proof something is a scam, saying so could backfire on you later. Even in situations where you are 99% sure.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
When you call something banx then you can already feel it is not going to be very pleasant.
What is next: banxter?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
What about Banx Platinum? Doesn't that sound cool? It cost only $297 per month!
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1181883.msg12636036#msg12636036
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
maybe fraudcoin. short froin.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Luckily most people are very hostile when strangers on the internet ask around for their credit cards. I am just sick of these scams.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You overlooked an interesting detail in the chat you copy/pasted (emphasis is from me)
That sounds very much like an admission that Banx was paying profits out of investor funds, which would make Banx a ponzi scheme.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Sounds to me that he means until they get enough runway to get more operations turning a profit to pay profits from. You can read into anything from snippets of conversation . During that time it could be some businesses had some profit, just not the kind of profits people were wanting.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Well, we could easily see what the truth is if Lyford would publish the accounting books.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
he never will, they don't exist, the surest sign of fraud & embezzlement
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It's not like if there were not many other elements that are consistent with my interpretation of this "snippet of conversation".
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Banx was a ponzi,illegal by definition
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I wish that was true
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
yes, only in written form, not in reality
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Typo?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Whoops, yeah. And I can't edit the post anymore. But the link is right and from there people can see the real date.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit