Ansault thanks for that. I suppose it depends on the interpretation of currency exchange. My interpretation was an extension of SC functionality as a brokerage exchange converting fiat between fiat/ fiat to the big crypto's, crypto back fiat. A trading platform/exchange for just crypto is a different beast all together IMHO.
Given the crypto/blockchain background of this project, I don't think it's a stretch to take it to mean crypto-centric exchange. Spectrocoin's platform was already operational during the ICO and so was the (trading) exchange demo, which any ICO participant could test drive. I don't see any kind of misleading or obfuscation there.
Why is the exchange suddenly a problem anyway? It's a revenue generating mechanism that benefits all token holders.
The exchange isn't a problem as is. The problem lies in the fact that they are moving away further and further from the original plan. The plan was to make a crypto bank! BANKERA not EXCHANGERA If you have read everything correctly i have asked multiple times if and when they applied for a banking license.
The answer to that was:
that it would be a waiste of time and resrouces to go and get a banking license because Pervesk already has one.
Next to that we always have been told that pervesk was part of the whole "eco-system", but yesterday they told us there will be no wr from Pervesk.
So to keep it simpel. The revenue which should make our wr is now done by a sister company which they can let charge every price as they are the owners and whatver goos into Pervesk they don't have to share with you and me.
And for Bankera there will be no banking license what was the idea what attracted me to the project.