You are welcome.
I just frankly admit that for me it is very strange when you blamed the project for scam, insulted the team, the participants and me with lies, etc. , and now speak as politely as if nothing had happened. But I am a normal person, so I can close my eyes to past events if you really conduct a "friendly conversation."
I just frankly admit that for me it is very strange when you blamed the project for scam, insulted the team, the participants and me with lies, etc. , and now speak as politely as if nothing had happened. But I am a normal person, so I can close my eyes to past events if you really conduct a "friendly conversation."
I have a different version of events to you.
I would unequivocally put the blame for the drop in etiquette on you and those that were blindly pumping Minexsystem/Minexcoin/Minexpay and Republia or doing it because they were receiving a payment. That then provoked a reaction from those that saw the misinformation/lies promoting non-existent business deals with CSOB and without even making relevant checks about Novarise as outright lies and scam.
Having said that, regardless of all differing opinions I have no interest in engaging with anybody unless it remains on cordial terms.
Minexsystem/Minexpay/Minexcoin seems to be working towards something far better than they were a few weeks ago. I would welcome any real progress on that project.
About Republia, I still have seen nothing so far that alleviates my concerns about it being a scam but that might change in the coming days/weeks
You either do not understand the essence of fraudulent projects, or are too absorbed in searching for fraudulent projects, which, in your opinion, is a complete deception. Look around - in fact, there are hundreds of coins that have not done anything even from the very first step, but simply deceived and hid. They do not need to wait more than 2 years to do a dirty business. And now from all these projects you have chosen Minex - the largest fraud in your opinion, which, in turn, has no direct relation to the Republic, but, nevertheless, you have already accused her of fraud. I just do not understand why you are doing this? Much work has been done, no one hides their faces, their names, their location, their telephone numbers, etc. Fully open to dialogue. But do you think scammers do it? Yes, look around again! Just projects collect money, even without everything from work, even without an action plan, hiding people, etc., and people donate money. Why are you not there? Why not protect poor people?
Or do you think that I have invested 10,000 dollars in the Republic (let's say), I do not understand what this project will be, and I would not see fraudsters? Of course, I would see it, since another investor is not a novice. Not everyone is stupid, especially now. This is not 2017. Everyone studies the project in length and across and assesses prospects, risks and legality ...
Therefore, if you engage in dialogue and doubt something, it does not mean that you are right in your opinion. Every person is right in his own way. But to assert without direct confirmed (I emphasize) the facts that there is no need for lies and fraud. It looks like slander.
Unfortunately,there is direct connection between Minex and Republia and it is impossible to negate.You can negate only if you dont want to see it.Minex and Republia do not share only same people, but almost same financial program with minor, irrelevant differencies.Only different part is whitelist technical plan.
I do not make judgements easily,but there is a few things which can make every investor very,very cautious:
- Both Republia founders, Daniel Shulayev and Vladimir Gyrych and advisor Boris Shulayev worked/work in Minex. 16.Dec.2016,while in pre-ICO, Minex gave statement to different crypto news portals,signed by PR manager,Daniel Shulayev(certainly approved by Boris) how Minex made a contract with one of the leading european banks to buy share in Minex by buying 1,092 millions of MNX for 1705.44 BTCs.
Now,we know it was a lie.Big one.Banks do not pay in BTCs and in that time Minex didnt exist as a company.It was founded 9 months later in 22.Aug.2017,so it was impossible to buy share in non-existing company.Reason for that lie was Minex obligation to refund investors if pre-ICO was unsuccessfull.This way they avoided it.
Question is how to believe to these people now,when they proved themselves as willing to do anything just not to return money to investors? It is valid question and in bussiness trust is extremely important.They didnt do minor but major violation of investors rights.
- why Republia took Boris Shulayev as an advisor? After disastruosly leading of Minex ,taking him as an advisor is sending very bad impression to potential investors and make any attempt to negate relations to Minex futile
- Republia whitelist is much more serious and difficult to achieve than Minex list.Costly too.Minex didnt succeed to realize much simplier list.By their own admission,Republia will need several years to achieve goals if everything goes well.For that time Republia will use ICO collected money and selling premined coins.
For investors it means that Republia would not be able to keep promise about maintain exchange rate in tight range due to lack of funds for it.Not without massive external financing.On the contrary, using premined coins for financing will make situation even worse.As time passes, initial funds will be depleted and Republia will need to sell more and more coins to finance developping.It will make greater and greater pressure on market and price and one by one,investors would dump theirs coins with a loss.Then,Republia will need to sell even more coins to finance it and here we come in vicious cycle of hyperinflation generated by parking 70% rate and premined coins selling,like Minex did.
Now,a month before ICO sale ,despite promises to change financial plan,Republia did nothing.Every investor before initial sale would like to see these changes of financial plan and not to rely on ICO leadership promises.Promises that something will be done after sale, no investor will buy as a truth.
All above problems made me very,very sceptical about project.When someone make ICO based on a disastruos financial construction (proved in earlier ICO),with a lot of same people involved in it, I cant qualify that any more as incompetence but as an intetion.
This is why this project has so high probabilty to turn scam.Not because people fudding it,but because serious problems and flaws described in text above.
Unfortunately, you want to wishful thinking. There is no direct connection between projects. If you consider the kinship of the consultant Boris and his son, one of the co-founder
Daniel, direct linking of the projects is stupid. Did Daniel create his project and this is a connection? What nonsense. Direct communication is a complete copying of an idea, copying products, a blockchain, etc ... This is not the case here.
Absolutely new innovative blockchain, which is written from scratch, not fork.
Absolutely innovative opportunities to create contracts and projects on a new platform.
Absolutely innovative approach to security and the ability to integrate other projects ...
And a lot of things .... Did you read white paper? What is the connection with minexcoin? Bank? So even it is modified and will act according to its algorithm, in different directions ...
Therefore, do not be silly.
Yes. All your judgments that supposedly "not enough money", "not enough coins" - this is only your opinion and desire. The financial model was created not by fools, but by people who have an economic education. Well, you can not know what will be implemented after the fact, you can not know what will be modified, because the project completely eliminates hard forks and is subject to change, depending on the participants жeл desires ’by voting.
And I appreciate your concern for your concern with the Republia project, but you read the questions I wrote earlier and answer them better. How did Republia deserve such attention? Why not hundreds of other projects that are really scam?
I understand that nothing just happens. And once you are here, it means that you are pursuing some goals. Therefore, I am very “skeptical” about your sincerity ...
Iam sincere believe or not. I have not desire to ruin anything just to clarify some things that are worring any investor.
As you could read in mine post , when I linked Minex and Republia I specified that connection between 2 projects are in people and in financial part ,not whitelist.Core of the Republia team and Minex is the same,financial part is copy of Minex one,so this connection is very real.
Major problem is trust. How to trust people which made false announcement(signed by Daniel Shulayev and approved by his father Boris, in the time when both Republia co-founders and advisor worked in Minex) about leading european bank buying a share in Minex(which was registred 9 months later and was not possible at that time) for 1705.44 BTCs, just to avoid to return money to investors,because they didnt succeed to realize pre-ICO selling. Such negative audacity to do anything to avoid to return money to investors would scare the hell out any investor.It puts major SCAM sign on the project. No investor would like to see such negative reputation.
You are right that both economic models(which are same) Republia and Minex was not created by fools.These people have economic education and that fact scares me even more,because it means that Minex fall and Republia copy of Minex economic model was made on purpose to be unsustainable.Bad consequences for investors were not coincidence,but intention. People with economic education would know from the beginning that 70% interest rate will cause hyperinflation and make any price regulation attempt futile. They knew that promises to investors of massive interest and tight regulating of price was lie from the beginning ,made as a trap for naive and greedy people.Making in Minex OTC option only for selling coins is not coincidence,but intention,because everybody,not just people with economics education know that OTC selling without rebuying option will cause constant price decline which we all witnessed in Minex. That is SCAM sign No.2.
Nobody from Republia team ever gives any explanation how Minex proved unsustainable economic model will make better in Republia and why.
In this case I would call on Einstein quote "Stupidity is doing same thing over and over and expecting different results"
I'll tell you a clever thing. If the goal was to conceal a team with something, and in this case "links with minexcoin", could it hide it? I will give the answer for you - in the end, yes. Did someone do this? Of course not. Therefore, it is not necessary to look for some otherworldly connection. Republia is an open project and even it will take into account the experience and shortcomings of other projects .. This is also not a secret.
Further. Please do not lead the conversation in such a way that the event has already happened, namely the collapse of the "financial system". This is especially true of the Republia project, which has not even passed the ICO stage yet, and you have already decided its fate in the future. Do not make yourself a professor of economics. Needless to say, you're smarter than everyone. It is your opinion. The opinion of the team is painted in white paper, but not in the fullest extent. I will not speak for minexcoin plans - that is their business. I can not imagine them, but just an ordinary investor. The Republia project is discussed here.
ps Moreover, do not fantasize about the bank in which the cards are issued. Well, you do not know! Why are you doing libel now that cards will be issued in Ukraine?
I repeat - you want to discuss the Minexcoin project - they have their own topic.
You are right about one thing - Republia cant conceals connection with Minex despite all theirs denial.It is futile job.
Republia and Minex has different whitelist,no doubt in it.But Iam not questioning Republia whitelist ,Iam questioning integrity of people who lead it .What they did in Minex pre-ICO phase was deliberate lying of investors how pre- ICO selling was successfull.Doing it, they avoided to return money to investors. That was not some minor offence,but major breaking of investors rights and trust.In business world they will go to jail for that.
Another question - if Republia leadsership wanted to make a break from Minex why they put Boris Shulayev as advisor? About what he can advise them,after trashing disaster with Minex? How to ruin everything and get away with it? He can be just liability,not asset. Putting Boris as advisor they were put only big warning sign to all investors - Danger ! Scam in progress !
About financial model of Republia - mine question is why Republia leaders didnt make any meaningful explanation to investors how and why they think that Minex financial model which Republia using would not make another crash ,now with Republia. To explain it to you little more colorful - after some time, people realized that one type of cars has a construction defective brakes which can be deadly to drivers and passengers.Now,you go to buy car and cars salesman wants to sell you similar,new type of car ,but with same defective brakes.You ask salesman isnt such defective brakes gonna kill me and he replies to you: Dont worry ,just drive ,everything will be OK. Will you believe to him??
ps. Didnt want to talk about Minex card here,just responded to Jollygood question
So, I found out that your only “distrust” argument for Republia is that Boris is an adviser? I remind you that, apart from Boris, there are 3 other advisers who are no less competent than him. No wonder that he acts as a guarantor of investments in mnx.
All of your “facts” are not as such, since you have no evidence — for example, copies of papers, contracts, or direct witnesses. This is just your attitude to the project. Therefore, to continue the discussion further probably does not make sense. I heard you.
Financial model Republia working. I am grateful for your opinion, but the team itself expects what it should be and what its goals are. The goal of higher interest rates for the first time is to saturate the market with additional liquidity, and moreover gradual. Unlike EOS, which released almost 90% of its tokens as a result of ICO within a few months, Republia reduced this number (full pre-mine) almost 7 times, which will positively affect the price of the coin. Further, the bank’s interest will be reduced to the minimum to ensure a long-term model for 25 years of coin mining.
Major reason No2:
- Republia financial model is copy of Minex - same parking program and rate ,same undefined price tight regulations, same debit payments program...
This model proved catastrophical in Minex and nobody from Republia team give any reasonable explanation how this program will not cause collapse of Republia too.You are talking that they will make some changes in program, but you are not member of Republia team and your words have not weight as theirs - until they put changes in official whitelist I cant take it for granted.
Taking EOS is a bad example. EOS raised 4 billion dollars ! They had so much buyers that even 1 billion tokens were not enough. That is complete different situation.
You said: "The goal of higher interest rates for the first time is to saturate the market with additional liquidity, and moreover gradual. "
That is so wrong.Saturation of market with coins in situation when you dont know how big is real demand is a recipe for disaster(it will suck up all liquidity from the market) and puts a red flag on team incompetence too. During initial phase you have to slowly releasing coins until balance between buy and sell side is reached. After it ,you need to have tools and funds to maintain it. Republia didnt predicted having such tools or funding for them(just look at theirs expenses sheet list),so they will not be able to do it.
I give the answer to the second question.
- The fact that Republia took the idea of a bank from mainexcoin is no one denies. And why is this amazing? Do you know whose idea it was originally? And if this was the idea of Vladyslav Gyrych several years ago, then he could use it as well in Republia? The answer - of course he could. And nothing is bad here. Tomorrow (maybe) some sort of coin will also take this idea, because how good is it and what now? At a minimum, the financial banking system is very different. Read white paper. And do not make people laugh ..
- About the cards even more fun. Why can't Republia use them? If she has her own branded cards, her own financial system, ultrafast blockchain, a real bank, etc. May use. Any project can use.
- EOS is not a bad example, but the most correct one. The main reason: it will be the main competitor of the RPB. Competing RPB will be its innovative blockchain, transaction speed, user security, platform for creating ICO, platform for asset exchange, and much more ... And the amount of fees for ICO is not an indication that the project will be successful, but quite the opposite . The fact that EOS collected such huge funds and still cannot show anything worthwhile is very bad. Such a huge saturation of the market with tokens, namely more than 90% of the total issue of coins - this is the maximum demand. There will not be so many buyers to pick them up. This is absurd. Republia, in turn, does a lot smarter. Instead of not overdubbing the market with coins, after the end of the ICO only 15% of the total number of coins will be issued. Further, the RPB will very smoothly (within 2 years) saturate the market with coins, and then make this saturation minimal.
So. Thereby:
1. There will always be increased demand, as the number of coins is limited and moves smoothly.
2. It will be possible to take measures to reduce volatility due to a sharp increase (decrease in demand).
3. To stimulate the holders of the nodes and masternode for many years of coin mining.
Sometimes it seems to me that you have not read any RPB documents and say absolutely weird things. So you think that selling 90% of all coins (or 100%) at the ICO stage is normal, and 15% is not normal. Strange.
P.S. Regarding your "facts", I ask you not to use words of such a meaning:
- Naturally
- Undoubtedly
- I see
- It is already given, etc.
All your words, like mine, that are related to internal RPB or MNX documents, which are not attached by facts in the form of copies (photos) of documents, video (audio) or written statements of team members - are not FACT. This conjecture, reasoning, discussion, desires, etc.
Yes, I am not part of the RPB team, but I am their representative (ambassador) and have the right to discuss the project. If I need to know some details, I ask the co-founder and get a response from the original source of the Republia team (or I don’t get it if it is completely secret). That is the difference between me and you here. And if you don’t like to read my answers, since you think that I’m not competent, I don’t force you.
Thank you for understanding.
Finally admittion that Republia and Minex shares same financial model. Thank you !
But mine question is why Republia is using this model which already proved as deeply flawed in Minex case? Sure ,Republia can use same financial model as Minex but why is that despite all its flaws, it remains mystery. It is like putting company in self-destruct mode from the beginning.
Republia cant compete with EOS. Period. EOS is 1000x bigger and far more serious project,financed by more than 4 billion dollars,backing by many big investors and companies. You can only dream to have such financial and technical support as EOS.I stayed speechless on your assumption that EOS didnt accomplish anything.Go to theirs site and see for yourself how is that "little".They are working in full speed.
EOS didnt saturated market at all,but demand for theirs tokens largely overwhelmed supply.Huge difference. Republia wants to saturate market without knowing the size of demand.Minex did it and we all know what happenned when supply overwhelmed demand.Basic economics - flooding market with coins when demand is low goes to hyperinflation.That is why is so wrong to compare EOS and Republia financial models.It is irrelevant will you put 15 or 90% of tokens on the market. What is matter is how big demand for them is.You can put only 5% of total supply on market ,but if demand is for just 2%, the price of it will decline significantly.
Size of demand should define size of supply,not opposite. Republia is far smaller project than EOS ,so it should be extra carefull not to flood market with too many coins and certainly have to reject parking option because it is major cause of hyperinflation in the system and leaves mining as only source of new coins.No way you can make stable system with 70% parking rate.
So,if Republia persists on present model I can explain only that as they are incompetent amateurs in economics which do not know demand-supply relation or that system is intentionally made flawed to attract naive and greedy people with big parking rates and promises of price regulation which cant be fulfilled.
Honestly, I dont mind because you are not official RPB team member.Though I think that would be much better for any project if its creators will speak directly much more with community. Listen to community ,dont be stubborn,because it is potential investors and as we all know - buyer is always right.
