Quote from: SpectroCoin_support on August 26, 2019, 08:10:20 AM

Bankera's ICO was held in SpectroCoin - meaning that BNK tokens were distributed through our platform. Additionally, the net transactional revenue is still distributed to those who keep their BNK there, so there was the need to include the agreement to SpectroCoin's T&C as well.

One of Bankera's communication channel with their community is their chat; many users there decided to join bitcointalk and participate in discussions, seeing that many others are not on Bankera's chat - you may join the chat yourself and check the situation with the others. For more details on both topics, you may reach Bankera's team directly through their thread.

The mention of "SpectroCoin" in the T&C pdf of Bankera is a complete failure as it does not explain in details who (and what) SpectroCoin are and it does not explain what their end aim and connection to the ICO or Banekra was/is. Bankera itself seems to be a failure as it does not seem to achieved much. The exchange looks like a dull website nobody wants to use.

Major concerns include:

The lack of information on the about us: https://exchange.bankera.com/about

Less than 2000 Twitter followers: https://twitter.com/BankeraExchange

BNK Systems Ltd is shown as the owner of Bankera: https://exchange.bankera.com/terms-of-service
BNK Systems Ltd is not mentioned once in the terms and conditions of the main website: https://bankera.com/docs/Bankeras-Terms-and-Conditions.pdf

What is abundantly clear is that Spectrocoin is the defacto owner of Bankera. Spectrocoin tries to portray itself as a separate entity from Bankera (which in legal terms it is) but morally it is the same team with the same people with the same agenda trying to achieve the same thing. That is something has been attempted continuously.

So if I have this correct, the ICO in March 2018 raised a staggering $151 million: https://icodrops.com/bankera/

Today it has a market value of less than $40 million: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bankera/

There is no real exchange, there is no payment card facility and there is a market value loss of over $110 million in less than 18 months of the ICO ending so it is not exactly a great success is it?

The ICO token price was 0.017 EUR each but currently stands at 0.0014 EUR each.

More of a monumental failure than a success I would say.

Considering that UAB Spectro Finance (Lithuania based company) which operates Spectrocoin effectively launched an ICO for a new venture called Bankera which is a watered down version of Spectrocoin - it raises ethical questions about why an ICO was needed for Bankera when all the tools, facilities and more already existed in Spectrocoin.

I will look around for more information and maybe will update here if I have anything else to say but now I would appreciate a response to the post you completely ingnored:

@ SpectroCoin_support

The other thing I picked up was the need for the sock-puppet accounts that had the one agenda and a sole purpose to pump the Bankera thread in order to imply the state of the ICO and the Bankera project was either in-demand or going well.

This thread, especially the OP provides excellent irrefutable evidence that a scam was being operated: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5174337.0

Could you kindly explain why it was considered necessary to implement a plan for spreading propaganda and attempting to create fake buzz by using either newbie or purchased sock-puppet accounts just so the Bankera thread remained pumped?

Thank you