Quote from: researcher194 on October 13, 2018, 08:28:22 PM

@xtraelv - # 1501

"Swifthub Ltd was struck off for failing to comply with the companies act 2006 but there is no evidence that that company is associated with worldcore."

I think here is clear evidence that swifthub.eu surely is associated with worldcore.eu:

http://links.giveawayoftheday.com/swifthub.eu

swifthub.eu and Swifthub Ltd are two completely different things. Swifthub.eu is a domain name and Swifthub.ltd is a private company.

It would be like saying RESEARCHER FORUM LTD Company number 08759523 owns the researcher194 account on bitcointalk because they both have the name researcher and it is related to forums. Grin

I have seen no evidence that Swifthub Ltd has had any links to swifthub.eu other than that it shares a symilar name.

The website swifthub.eu clearly states that it is

Lanbo group inc as the legal entity operating under the brand "swifthub"

https://web.archive.org/web/20150628010924/http://swifthub.eu/

Quote

The use of this website is regulated by terms of service. By pressing any key on this page you agree to use cookies. Lanbo Group Inc. is operating under the brand of Swifthub and is authorized to provide electronic payment solution, payment processing services for 3rd-parties and currency exchange services according to license #2611068-1-835374-2014-423938.

Quote from: Veleor on October 13, 2018, 08:41:28 PM

Quote from: xtraelv on October 13, 2018, 03:41:35 PM

Swifthub Ltd was struck off for failing to comply with the companies act 2006 but there is no evidence that that company is associated with worldcore.

Worldcore Payment Service Rebranding, Business Expansion and Recent Updates

Quote

Swifthub payment service has been rebranded to Worldcore and completed migration to Czech Republic as a regulated financial institution under the legal entity named EUPSProvider s.r.o.

Lanbo Group Inc. operating under the brand of Swifthub was changed to EUPSProvider s.r.o. operating under the brand of Worldcore.

Website swifthub.eu became worldcore.eu

Quote from: researcher194 on October 13, 2018, 06:15:44 PM

EUPSProvider - Rietumu Banka - Marineserv Ships Inc.

I suspect that Marineserv Ships Inc. was/is the main client of EUPSProvider. Read this document: http://www.marineserv.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/worldcore_transfer.pdf

What about this company?

Since August 2018 it´s registered in Greater London with one active director (Henrik Aspevik) and one active secretary (Stron Legal Services Ltd. - a company which offers pseudo-secretaries for a lot of companies). For a company like Marineserv Ships this management is very unusual. It seems to be only a one person company.

https://suite.endole.co.uk/insight/company/11501674-marineserv-ships-inc-limited

But there is another information about this company:

https://www.maritimejournal.com/directory-entries/marineserv-ships-inc

Oh, what´s that? Located in Panama City? Its address there: Mailbox No 09201, 0819 Panama City.

And here the company´s website: http://www.marineserv-ships.com/

Great site but big fake! One only can speculate about the role that this company played in Worldcore´s plan. Perhaps money laundering?

https://opencorporates.com/companies/pa/657230

The UK company status is "dormant" which means they just used it to reserve the name while the actual trading is done with the Panamanian company which is held on behalf of the owners by a Panamanian Law firm.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11501674

The company is run out of Panama.

Quote

Great site but big fake! One only can speculate about the role that this company played in Worldcore´s plan. Perhaps money laundering?

That is what they call an unsubstantiated assertion. It is neither helpful or accurate. I'm only interested in facts.

The problem with poor quality accusations is that people check them out and find they are wrong. It hides the true issues.

Lets approach this with an open mind and concentrate on what is provable.

Quote from: Veleor on October 13, 2018, 09:16:56 AM

There are lot of accusations against Worldcore but these three are indisputable facts:
1. Worldcore is linked to the scam Benson Union.
2. CEO Alexey Nasonov faked the Diploma of Higher Education.
3. Worldcore doesn't fulfill the Roadmap.

Quote from: Veleor on October 13, 2018, 06:00:10 PM

Please check these arguments also:
4. Worldcore lies that their customer base has increased by 12 times in 6 months, from 25 thousands to 300 thousands people. Although the number of visitors of worldcore.trade is 2400 per month.
5. Worldcore lies that Ernst&Young has valued the company at $30 million. (Article in English: http://archive.li/sDNrI#selection-617.81-617.245). But in fact, Worldcore wasn't audited.

Quote from: http://worldcore-review.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/EUPSProvider_EY_Presentation.Ru_.pdf#page=2

Please note that the financial statements of the Company provided to us were not audited and we were neither provided nor had access to audited annual reports or notes to the Companys financial statements.

So far my concerns are:

BOTs / Shills posting on the forum ☑

Veiled death threat ☑

1)Partly proven: ☑� I view this as evidence to support suspicion rather than evidence of proof.
Google code links sites
I'm not convinced that it proves ownership (on the balance of probabilities).
It could mean that the same web developer monitors those sites.

Quote from: suchmoon on October 13, 2018, 06:00:54 PM

So it's the same Google account. And the fact that they removed it from the Worldcore site strongly suggests that they're trying to sweep their tracks.

I agree that makes it more suspect. But the way that they have conducted themselves has not been that logical or ethical. In the same context as:

Quote from: suchmoon on October 13, 2018, 05:23:34 PM

That's what makes this whole Worldcore shitshow so irritating. Both sides are engaging in a factless Kremlin-propaganda-style shitposting contest.

They could have removed it because "it appeared suspicious" or because "it proved something". Unless there is other evidence I am still willing to give them the benefit of doubt on this one before progressing to the next assumption that the sites have the same owners.

The implications of being related to those other sites is very serious and I think more proof is needed to make such a serious accusation.

2) Proven: ☑
Fake qualifications.

3) Still to be investigated. �

The problem with a roadmap is that it is a plan. Sometimes plans change or are delayed.
It doesn't appear that they have "run off with the money" so delayed plans are not an indication that there is a scam.

4. Likely exaggeration ☑� I view it as exaggerated sales hyperbole.
While we do not have access to their customer database their website traffic does not indicate that they have 300 000 customers.

However their website traffic has substantially decreased since that statement in April

Quote

Worldcore, a global payment service provider had conducted a study on approximately 300,000 customers in total who are availing its service.

It is also not clear how they conducted the study on their customers. They may have "studied" sales data from since inception.

They also stated:

Many crypto related companies did see huge growth over the November 2017 to March 2018 period. I'd like to see Worldcore to provide some proof of those assertions. There does not appear to be any evidence that suggests that they have 300 000 customers.

5. Not proven. ☒

An Audit and a valuation are two completely separate things and different departments from Ernst & Young. Unless the valuation report is false (no evidence of such) then the valuation has occurred. So the accusation that worldcore lied about it is false / incorrect / mistaken.
The reliability of the report is questionable. "Reliance restricted" is a red flag. It means that worldcore paid E&Y to give them a valuation that they wanted for their ICO. It is as reliable as saying " someone who I paid a lot of money says my business is worth $xxxxx".

An audit is a series of tests done by an auditor to test the reliability of the accounting system. It checks that the data can be relied upon. It is of limited scope so it does not always pick up serious financial issues. It mainly checks that the accounting system is reliable.