The answer to the above is: because that would be an out-and-out scam, a blatant open scam that would result in a criminal prosecution. Simple. The way this scam has played out has been much more subtle and it has been covered with some protection from accusations of fraud by running the business on the surface of it yet totally mismanaging everything related to it. Returning bankroll funds to investors does not warrant you deserving a medal nor does it give a seal for the rest of your life that you are a genuine and honest trader. You made plenty of money out of betking both pre-ICO and post-ICO.



So why not tell everybody? If you want to hide it from "everybody" at least tell investors and BKB token holders. We know of BKB tokens holders that did not get that information because if they did they would have elaborated and we would have known too.

I have no recollection of a figure of 600 BTC ever being mentioned before with regards to buy-backs. It was clearly stated in the past "I have bought back 70% of all tokens" and then on another occasion "I have bought back 90% of all BKB tokens" but it was never mentioned even once that 600 BTC of bankroll was used to do it. That figure I see has dropped back down from 90% to 70% again.

* Nobody knows exactly how much bankroll BTC remains
* No mention was made of the $1 million you tried to scam out of RHavar
* This is the first time a figure of 6 devs working for 12 months was given but no explanation why there was no physical noticeble changes on betking.io
* The white paper mentioned apps and new games and development but literally nothing happened apart from old games me re-added and later removed
* How much of the 600 BTC was used to buy up your own BKB holdings?
* Why use bankroll funds to buy BKB tokens when that is not what the bankroll funds were supposed to be used for?
* "Frugal" and "economical with information" are factual issues in this case because drips of selective information being released by a dictator as and when he pleases, is NOT the way forward. It never was.

Had there been more openness from the beginning then maybe much of the issues could have been addressed earlier.

Simple steps such as publishing post-ICO 2017 wallet addresses, monthly/quarterly bulletins stating number of buy-backs and at which cost as well as other information such as ALL expenses, ALL gross/net profits, traffic numbers and other info would have been a great start but all that was suppressed. The idea one can simply say that "businesses pivot all the time" therefore brush aside all concerns and not elaborate on issues of importance to investors or token holders - is unacceptable. Having the ICO did not allow a dictatorship to take place. Sure it put almost infinite control over the project but with that control comes responsibility. Throwing a tantrum and refusing to answer questions about the state of play is not the way any business owner should behave.

To say BKB tokens holders or ICO investors had that information but nobody else could or should have it is something that was a bad move on your part. Anyway not all token holders had ALL the information, they were searching for it themselves and had to wait until you gave it to them.

Had you at least answered some of the questions I asked at the time of the ICO and post-ICO then people would have been more informed. Even now the whole thing is close-guarded and clouded in secrecy.

Anyway, all the evidence suggests extremely weak business acumen at the very least and a much serious matter of a scam at the other end of the spectrum and the reason for those assumptions existing are because you yourself have created a toxic environment. You still have time to right some of the wrongs and gain some credibility before betking meets its eventual demise.




You honestly have literally next to nothing in social skills, you have no idea how to debate to engage with people/users/customers and you have written with that attitude to many users in the past.