These checkboxes are generalized, different exchange directions require different policies, e.g. for cash directions there is AML verification and no identity verification, for card deposits, the bank verifies the identity, this is their policy and we are obliged to warn the user.
About the link, we will fix it
Why do you have to resort to misleading claims in your promotions? Isn't it better to be transparent and straightforward?
No verification, but there is collection and even sharing of personal data? And how is it an advantage to have a minimum order amount of $1,000 locally and $3,000 worldwide? Also, your site claims that you've been operating since 2017 and you here is saying that you've been working since 2018. You might want to be more consistent about your details as it reflects your way of doing business.
I'm being as honest with you as possible right now
As for the different dates with the site, we will fix this error, perhaps content managers allowed it.
About the minimum amounts I can only say that any exchanger has them and as a rule more than ours. Everyone has their own reasons for this. Also I want to mention that from the date of the first publication it can change. For example, today we have set the minimum amount of 5000.
Verification - our main direction of exchange of cryptocurrency to cash and vice versa do not require verification, but there are services related to the bank and there is verification.
Also, your site claims that you've been operating since 2017 and you here is saying that you've been working since 2018. You might want to be more consistent about your details as it reflects your way of doing business.
They have passed verification and analysis on Bestchange, so I'm convinced that they couldn't lie to them for the years of existence. The official information on their page on the Bestchange website says that they are 3 years and 6 months old. So completely different from everything that is mentioned in this thread.
In this case, for now, I trust Bestchange, although it is quite unclear to me what this manipulation is about
I want to again draw your attention that each service in its own way assesses this aspect, on different services unfortunately this date is different, someone takes into account that we previously worked and was rebranded, someone else does not, someone else just considers that this is the first mention on the Internet, not taking into account that the business could only work offline, there is no manipulation!
Earlier we were
http://fincore.com.ua/ and since 2017 we have separated, if you want to see the brand mention in these years then see the date of creation of
https://t.me/BitmoreUA, and the site itself as a separate entity appeared according to whois
Hard to tell by just looking at the date of creation of a telegram channel whose username can just be changed at any time
By the way according to archive records fincore.com seems to have had nothing to do with being a cryptocurrency exchange or did I miss something?
Anyone can help check out --->>>
https://web.archive.org/web/20150915000000*/http://fincore.com.ua/
You have convinced me not to use this experience in aggregate, but I also want to emphasize that the date of domain registration does not tell you about the creation of a campaign. I will use the date of 2018, more specifically October 2017 to form a campaign that worked offline in Ukraine, and started in 2020 to appear online, and in 2022 made its website.