So, yes, I moved platforms. Not bashing on BlockFi, its a great platform, but financially it made sense to move right now. I know BlockFi had their security issue and just hired a new security guy to beef up their security. CDC’s security was great, then just got strict’er. Meaning, they’re serious and yes, serious about security. I’m not being paid by CDC or BlockFi nor am I a registered ambassador. Just a user from USA. CDC allowed me and my family in Hawaii to open up an account with KYC, then get to work in buying bitcoin and other cryptos, putting them in Earn, and earning interest. On of my family friend members was early adopter of MCO and was able to afford the Obsidian black card, amazing. At that time, I had the ruby red. I was mainly on BlockFi first, then got into CDC last year, got their debit card, then started to upgrade with collecting more MCO, then hyperspace into getting the 500 MCO tier, and just within the last two weeks, the icy white 5000 MCO tier. My wife kept asking if CDC was legit and make sure it wasn’t a scam company. BlockFi is registered in New York under USA laws. Since CDC is allowed to operate in the USA and their bank with the Visa cards is Metropolitan Commercial Bank in New York, I decided to upgrade to that icy white card. I was going back and forth on whether I should move my funds, which majority were in BlockFi, to CDC’s earn since I am now in the icy white tier. At first, I was like eh....I dunno, maybe I should indeed spread my risk into multiple platforms and not all in one basket. Considering CDC is legit and they’re safe with insurance and that I beefed up my security on my end (email, 2FA, removed phone numbers to mitigate sim swap risks), I was confident with the move. I thought hmmm....bitcoin 6%, ethereum 4.5%, and litecoin 3.8% in BlockFi...hey interest is lower than CDC but safer right? Then I thought, wait, what the heck? I am missing out on bitcoin 6.5%+2% in MCO, ethereum 5%+2% MCO, and litecoin 5%+2% MCO, etc AND CDC is safe in earn, despite it being simple interest I knew I could compound it every 3 months. I was going back and forth on this since my greatest concern was security/insurance. Knowing that CDC has my back, I felt comfortable after speaking with their support crew about all this security/insurance. I thought finally, IT MAKES SENSE since I can earn extra 2% in earn with the 5000 MCO stake plus also get 8% interest on the MCO stake. Anyway, I’m still waiting for my funds from BlockFi to transfer since they were closed last Friday for Juneteenth. So far the icy white card has been amazing since I was able to make many purchases within my means and still get 4% cash back in MCO. I still use my Amex platinum and Amex gold from time to time for certain things, but the CDC debit card has been my main go to. I still have some stuff in BlockFi to maintain my client status and see where things go there with monthly compound interest, but I moved mainly to CDC to take advantage of the higher simple interest and earn extra interest rates. With the amount of stuff that CDC is developing and delivering, I’m staying aboard CDC. With this, I still have a ledger nano X, which I keep a small amount there, but majority in CDC’s earn. What do you think? Let’s hearing your stories.
Crypto.com is building its services on the MCO platform. It seeks to solve the problem of accessibility and usability faced by the wider blockchain community. They do this with their standout product: the MCO Visa Card. This card fulfills the plan of Crypto.com to link a Visa card with cryptocurrency accounts, enabling users to make daily purchases with cryptocurrency at points where Visa is accepted. Crypto.com not only offers the Visa card, they also have on offer the MCO wallet app and the MCO token. The most recent addition is Crypto Invest, which allows for easy crypto investments. Other products such as Crypto Credit gives users an MCO token- based credit line to hold as collateral and MCO private offers unique products and services for high net-worth individuals. https://preview.redd.it/3jygudd9pwp31.png?width=1080&format=png&auto=webp&s=41606e154341356d0ea99e42af75b2c82cde00c4
The MCO Visa Card
Crypto.com offers a portfolio of MCO Visa Cards ranging from Obsidian Black which requires a 50,000 MCO stake, to the Midnight Blue which does not have any staking requirement. Users can seamlessly spend cryptocurrency at over 40 million retailers accepting Visa globally by using their MCO Visa card and using their MCO wallet to settle the card balance. Crypto.com started to ship its MCO Visa Card in Singapore in October 2018. In November 2018, they subsequently announced their partnership with the Metropolitan Commercial Bank to roll out the MCO Visa Card program in the United States. The list of benefits for card holders is just as good as with some other Visa rewards cards. Users can enjoy using a Visa card without spending any annual fees, get free shipping, and receive up to 2% cashback on purchases. Select cards get unlimited access to airport lounges. In addition, users can make expenditures overseas and receive interbank exchange rates. With their Platinum Reward Program, users can get up to $10,000 sign-on bonuses!
MCO Wallet App
Crypto.com released its mobile wallet app on August 31, 2017 to a positive reception. By combining the Crypto.com Wallet with the Card app, users can purchase Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, Ether, Binance Coin, Ripple, MCO tokens and USDM to hold as investments or to use as forms of payment.
MCO Crypto Invest
Crypto.com launched Crypto Invest, a new service for eligible customers in October 2018. This is a cryptocurrency portfolio and trading tool that makes investing and trading in cryptocurrencies simpler. Users can create their own customized portfolios and trade automatically based on market signals. Crypto Invest is different from other products in being not only a basket of cryptocurrencies but a set of trading strategies that perform in any market. It is great for those who have just started building their crypto investment portfolio, since users can get started with as little as $20.
MCO Credit Services
Another feature that will be released in the future is MCO Credit Services. This is a revolutionary product that allow you to get the credit you need by staking MCO tokens. A stake of MCO tokens worth $10,000 can get you a credit line of $6,000. Unlike with traditional credit cards, there are no statements and zero minimum payments. Credit advances can be paid off as you like. If you are not able to do this or don’t wish to, your debt will be paid off with your MCO tokens. MCO Token The ERC20 MCO is the utility token that powers the Crypto.com ecosystem . It was issued in an ICO crowd-sale that was held in June 2017. 26 million USD was raised by the first issue of the MCO tokens. MCO is an ERC-20 token, which means it can be stored in any ERC20-compatible wallet. However, balance requirements to qualify for an MCO Visa card is based on how much is stored in the official Crypto.com mobile wallet. In order to earn rewards on purchases, stake and pay for referrals, MCO is used in the ecosystem. MCO follows the rest of the market and peaked back in August 2017. Since that time, they have followed the rest of the market as 2018 entered bear territory. MCO is accepted in a number of popular cryptocurrency exchanges which include Binance, Bit-Z, Bittrex, Cashierest, Bithumb, OKEx, Upbit, ABBC, and Huobi. Daily, an average 10 million USD worth of MCO tokens is traded with trading pairs including BTC, ETH, and USDT. https://preview.redd.it/a4kzgc9ipwp31.png?width=1530&format=png&auto=webp&s=c433042f132dc822b40ba671f9e148c65d66397b
Crypto.com announced the launch of the Crypto.com Chain. This is a high performing native blockchain solution that allows merchants and users to complete transactions in crypto. The Crypto.com chain has its own token which is CRO. The Crypto.com chain supports the Crypto.com pay solution, which is a decentralized cryptocurrency payment solution that is built on blockchain. Crypto.com announced in December 2018, that it has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Ledger, a crypto security and infrastructure solutions provider to become the first merchant to use Crypto.com Pay on their online store. Crypto.com also announced it signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in January 2019 with a sneaker e-marketplace called YSNEAKERS to implement Crypto.com Pay.
The rebrand of Crypto.com to Monaco has been more than just a name change. Although it's ERC-20 token still bears a reference to its predecessor and is duly named MCO, the company has sustained efforts at delivering MCO Visa Cards to different types of cardholders. They have followed this up with the introduction of initiatives such as the Crypto Invest product. Their wallet is multi-functional and supports buying, selling and trading of fiat and virtual currencies. They plan on issuing prepaid debit cards linked to wallet balances which can be converted to currency inside the wallet before spending at a merchant. The wallet and the card app can be used on both Android and iOS devices and users can monitor crypto markets, engage in crypto coin trading and exchange fiat currencies at low fees.
"There are a bulk of accounts from Bitpay that are being closed by our compliance department", says manager of First View Bank in a recorded phone call.
I recorded this call today regarding my personal Bitpay account that I've had for nearly two years. Here is the most damning 15 seconds of the audio: https://vocaroo.com/i/s14Q2bTqR48H She says in the recording, "There are a bulk of accounts from Bitpay that's just being closed by our compliance department without further information........They are not letting us know specifically the reason. They are just going through and closing these accounts." The bank name listed on the back of the Bitpay card is Metropolitan Commercial Bank, but First View Bank just seems to be the same bank going by two different names. Callers to both bank's numbers are greeted with the same message system. For weeks I have found it virtually impossible to use my Bitpay card while traveling in the EU. Countless hours of my time were wasted in a big endless runaround that I posted about in December: https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/a8elxy/bitpay_cards_blocked_in_european_union/ I gave up this week and attempted to remove the funds from the Bitpay card via an ACH transfer. The transfer was declined so I called the bank AGAIN today. I recorded the call due to odd behavior from bank employees on previous occasions. The volume on the bank's side of the conversation was so low that I had to hack up the audio pretty badly to make it intelligible, but if you listen closely it can all be heard. I removed most of the part where I was talking. The link below contains three minutes of the phone call. I was on hold 30 minutes to speak with the manager. https://vocaroo.com/i/s1NmIDrKsXDV The short version is that the bank closed my account without warning me or stating a reason. They sent a $600 check to my home address in the USA while I'm traveling in Europe for six months.
Tether Mistakenly Minted 5 Billion USDT and Immediately Burned Them
https://preview.redd.it/4whgiikmfea31.png?width=1024&format=png&auto=webp&s=ab9fa70f6951a800db7f592b5f20b22b99aaebca Stablecoin operator Tether accidentally minted and subsequently burned 5 billion USDT tokens, Whale Alert tweeted on July 13. Whale Alert — a Twitter account dedicated to reporting large cryptocurrency transactions — noted that 50 million USDT tokens were transferred from cryptocurrency exchange Poloniex to the Tether Treasury via the Omni protocol on the Bitcoin (BTC) blockchain. The account subsequently reported that Tether Treasury minted 5 billion USDT tokens on the Tron blockchain, after which it burned them. Then, Tether minted another 50 million USDT on the same chain, burned another 4.5 billion USDT, and finally transferred 50 million Tron-based USDT tokens to a wallet presumably belonging to Poloniex. In a tweet, Tether CTO Paolo Ardoino explained that Tether meant to perform a swap of 50 million Omni-based USDT tokens to the Tron blockchain, but a mistake was made with the decimals. Cryptocurrency exchange Poloniex confirmed in a tweet:
“Paolo is correct - this occurred while Poloniex was conducting a USDT chain swap with the help of Tether. An incorrect amount of USDT was accidentally minted, and this has since been resolved to the intended value.”
As Cointelegraph reported earlier this week, New York-based Metropolitan Commercial Bank has shut down accounts associated with Tether. The bank reportedly closed the accounts following a request last year.
IP.Gold: A Cautionary Tale of A Tarnished ICO — Part 4
最大のICO詐欺！ COMSA - テックビューロ株式会社 & 朝山貴生 100億円($95,000,000) 詐欺。 a multipart series told by the founders detailing how you can make all the right decisions and still fail. Part 4: Demand Letter & Silence So, after several launch delays, dozens of broken promises, misrepresentations and a complete lack of support and professional behavior from Tech Bureauテックビューロ株式会社 /COMSA we closed our ICO on the COMSA.Global platform, having wasted months of our lives, our reputations, tons of money and goodwill. And now the hard part began! After a few weeks of discussions with Tom Beno, the CEO of Tech Bureau USA, and a Tech Bureau Japan board member, who was responsible for COMSA.Global, where we laid out Tech Bureau/COMSA’s clear violations of the deliverables as outlined in the contract and our corporate communications with regards to our 3 week launch delay, lack of promised support, etc, it was clear we were getting nowhere. When we started to push back harder regarding their fiduciary breach of contract for not delivering the services under the contract in a way that supported the minimal successful operation of our ICO, they accused us of not being ready, causing all the delays, under-funding the project and more. So we pushed harder, asking for damages for breach of the contract, to which Tech Bureau/COMSA responded that we were simply trying to extort money for a failed ICO — then gave us the usual “silent treatment” again! Funny thing is, during the time that all of this was going on, Tom Beno, told us that the Tech Bureau/COMSA board had, in light of the situation, decided to not invoice/charge us for the $100,000 fee as outlined in the contract, as a goodwill gesture! Wow, you screw us on launching and supporting our ICO over and over again, and now you’re going to be nice guys and not charges us for the services you either delivered late or didn’t deliver at all! While it was nice of Tech Bureau COMSA to not charge us for services they delivered late or did not deliver at all in support of our ICO, the monetary and reputation damage they caused by not launching us on time on the COMSA.Global platform, were far greater than the $100,000 service fees outlined in the contract. Tech Bureau/COMSA clearly knew this and knew they were directly at fault for what happened — why else would they be so willing to not come after us for the $100,000 because they were getting off pretty cheap for not delivering on the still active contract and they got a scapegoat out of it that bought them another few months of time to keep drawing out their “long con” and laughing all the way to the bank! It’s not as if the $100,000 was real money out of their pockets they spent on launching the IP.Gold ICO, it was ours. At this point, we asked Tech Bureau/COMSA to come to the table to discuss remuneration for our losses due to their delays and failed promises, as well as other options for resolving their obvious and blatant breach of contract and fiduciary responsibility. Nothing, silence. This is the normal response from Tech Bureau/COMSA at this point regarding any issue. So, we were left with no choice but to send a lawyer advised demand letter to Tech Bureau EU and the Tech Bureau executives in Japan. We sent certified registered mail to Comsa & Tech Bureau EU as per the contract, but the address was no longer valid we sent to the listed address on their EU site and the Japan site. We also emailed copies to Tom Beno, Patrick Spiess and Takao Asayama 朝山貴生 . The Demand Letter Sent: — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — August 23, 2018 Delivered via Certified Mail and Email Tech Bureau, Corp. c/o Takao Asayama 10th Floor, Mifune Honmachi Building, 1–5–18 Utsubo-Honmachi, Nishi Ward, Osaka, Japan Re: Breach of Contract and Fiduciary Representation of IP.Gold ICO/Token Sale I am writing to inform you that Tech Bureau Europe SA/Tech Bureau, Corp./COMSA (“TB/COMSA”) is in breach of the terms of the Agreement signed with IPG Holdings, Inc. on April 23, 2018, as well as its fiduciary responsibilities as a business partner to the agreement as the service provider under this agreement. We are requesting a meeting immediately to take action to cure this breach of terms and fiduciary responsibilities. Services to be delivered under this agreement by TB/COMSA in support of the IPG Holdings, Inc./IP.Gold ICO/Token Sale were not delivered on time or in a commercially acceptable manner. Additionally, promises and commitments made by TB/COMSA management were not kept, withheld, severely restricted and/or not delivered or acted upon, often at or just before a planned coordinated marketing plan effort made by IPG Holdings, Inc./IP.Gold. All of which resulted in a cascading and escalating erosion of marketing momentum, ICO community support and market confidence for the IP.Gold ICO/Token Sale, costing IPG Holdings, Inc./IP.Gold hundreds of thousands of dollars in time, direct marketing expense and an untold amount in lost contributions, as well as the business and personal reputations of the founders and team members of IPG Holdings, Inc./IP.Gold. Further confirmation of a breach of this agreement and TB/COMSA’s fiduciary responsibilities came on August 8, 2018 with TB/COMSA publishing of a blog post on its official corporate site, https://comsa.io/en/54626.html, in which it states categorically, among other things, under Item №1, the development of COMSA Token Sale Platform is “Not yet completed”, and further, that “Planned to be implemented domestically by this company. However, not to be done until the environment is prepared. Planned to be implemented overseas by Tech Bureau Europe SA (mainly in Switzerland)”. This further affirms that TB/COMSA knew full well that its team and ICO/Token Sales SAAS platform were not commercially ready to support the IP.Gold ICO/Token Sale, or any other ICO/Token Sale, a clear violation of TB/COMSA’s fiduciary responsibilities and commercial terms of service under the agreement as a service provider. Starting just days before the signing of the agreement between the parties and continuing through the Private Sale and the IP.Gold Public ICO/Token Sale, TB/COMSA made statements, promises and commitments that were never followed through on or turned out to be patently untrue.
TB/COMSA management and development team represented that their SAAS Platform was fully prepared to commercially support the IP.Gold ICO/Token Sale.
Tech Bureau, Corp/COMSA charmain, Takao Asayama, implored IPG Holdings, Inc. management to “sign the agreement, as I have private investors to introduce you to”. To date no investors of any kind have materialized from Takao Asayama or TB/COMSA.
Service defined in the agreement were either not provided in a timely manner or not provided at all:
Tech Bureau, Corp/COMSA failed to launch the IP.Gold ICO on the agreed upon launch date of May 2, 2018, instead launching in on May 28, 2018 — a full 26 days later. All marketing spend and marketing momentum IPG Holdings, Inc. had developed and coordinated for its launch date was lost. The impact of which is thousands of hours and dollars spent by the founders and other team members were wasted. Not to mention years of goodwill, industry & personal reputations and market confidence.
IP.Gold could fully accept all of its funding currencies on the COMSA platform for a further 14 days after the adjusted May 28, 2018 launch date.
An agreed upon apology statement/letteemail from the Charmain, Takao Asayama to the COMSA Community for the late launch of the IP.Gold ICO was never sent
A marketing email to be sent by Tech Bureau, Corp/COMSA as part of the apology for launching IP.Gold 26+ days late to approximately 800,000 COMSA CMS token holders and ZAIF exchange members was only sent to a limited group of 40,000 CMS token holders
No attempts were made by COMSA, Tech Bureau or its management to support IPG Holdings, Inc./IP.Gold, its ICO or its founders and team publicly or in the markets, leading to a further erosion of market confidence in IPG Holdings, Inc./IP.Gold and its founders/team
Tech Bureau, Corp/COMSA’s chairman and senior management chose to show no support to the COMSA global platform, development team and the launch of the IP.Gold ICO
Tech Bureau, Corp/COMSA and its chairman have shown no remorse, contrition or taken any responsibility whatsoever for the delayed launch of silence the IP.Gold ICO and the significantly damage that it had on the funding of the IP.Gold ICO and the continuing damage it is having to the operation and reputation of IPG Holdings, Inc., as well as its founders and team members, both personally and professionally.
The ongoing silence of Tech Bureau, Corp/COMSA and its management in the COMSA community with respect to itself and the IP.Gold ICO, are serving to further accelerate the claims that both IP.Gold and COMSA were just one big coordinated “money grab” scam to bilk investors and manipulate the CMS token price for “insider” COMSA gain.
The excuse from TB/COMSA and its Chairman, Takao Asayama, that Tech Bureau, Corp/COMSA’s “hands were tied” because of the FSA investigations appears hollow and does not match the facts, as several other multiple Japanese ICO companies similar to Tech Bureau, Corp/COMSA who were also “under investigation by the FSA” were conducting business as usual, promoting their platforms, ICOs, communities, and tokens, going to industry shows and generally supporting their contributors and communities.
Of more than 5,000 people completed a very complex Know Your Customer (KYC) process and accepted Terms of Service on the COMSA Platform, only 53 of them invested. This is both statistically insignificant at .011% of fully validated potential contributors and far below the average of 5% reported by several other ICOs interviewed. IPG Holdings, Inc./IP.Gold, its advisors, and many successful ICOs to believe that there were either significant anomalies in the acceptance of funds in the COMSA platform or Tech Bureau, Corp/COMSA deliberately siphoned off or blocked funds from potential contributors.
Went to my bank today to send ALL my money to Coinbase.
Walked into my bank (which I am not here to shill for so shall remain nameless but is NOT Chase, Citi, BOA, or WF) on Park Avenue today, and told them to sweep (almost) every penny from my accounts to my personal account and wire to it to Metropolitan Commercial Bank f/b/o Coinbase f/f/b/o My coinbase account. He smiled and said "I did mine this morning, looks to be a great day" as he prepared the wire form. Then they offered me box of Godiva chocolates, and gave me an umbrella as I walked out with less than $100 total left across all my accounts. Moral of the story? Fire your bank if they don't let you buy bitcoin, and get a new one that understands that it is perfectly legal to buy bitcoin as an investment. edit: I did NOT fire my good bank! I just took all my "old" money out (until my next paycheck hits with some "new" money). edit edit: What I did not expect was to be called a liar! wtf!?
Coinbase's bank, Metropolitan Commercial Bank, confirms receipt of my funds and provides me red herring phone number for Coinbase wire support.
Update: On Monday I wired a large sum of money to Coinbase. Since then, the money has not appeared in my account. I spoke with my bank and Metropolitan Commercial Bank (Coinbase's bank) who both have confirmed the movement of the funds. Coinbase has had my money since Tuesday morning and has yet to notify me or responding to my support tickets. I spoke with the wire room at Metropolitan Commercial Bank regarding contacting someone from Coinbase about this situation. First they provided me contact information that leads to a bot that tells you to email Coinbase, another dead end. I called the bank back after I realized that the bank is playing this game of red herrings as well. I spoke with the same lady in the wire room who admitted she has direct contact information for wire support at Coinbase, that she calls when dealing with issues, but refused to call them regarding my situation. Its quite obvious that the bank deals with Coinbase issues almost continuously as they knew I was calling regarding Coinbase from the moment they answered the phone. Banks are money service businesses and are responsible for the same KYC/AML information that is always preached about in the bitcoin space. That means knowing your clients and the way they do business. How many complaints does it take for the bank to realize, they are responsible here too? Next step is an FDIC complaint regarding Coinbase and Metropolitan Commercial Bank.
“We can say there are trades going on in the millions some days and tens of millions other days and I would say the number of clients we have is in the triple digits.”
Signature is one of the few banks in the U.S. that will provide deposit accounts to cryptocurrency startups, a group that also includes fellow New Yorkers at Metropolitan Bank and Silvergate Bank in San Diego. But while these clients were the first group to adopt Signet, the bank says non-crypto businesses are signing up as well. In addition to the previously announced American PowerNet, an independent electrical power trading firm that made Signet the payments platform for its renewable energy customers, DePaolo said Signature is bringing on two other “ecosystems” where rapid movement of money and property is important. “We will shortly onboard a substantial cargo ecosystem and wholesale diamonds,” he said, declining to name either organization. He also said Signature is in talks with a title insurance company. Explaining why such an entity would be interested in real-time payments, he said:
“If you’ve ever been involved in a commercial real estate closing, usually all the lawyers are sitting around eating lunch waiting for the wire transfer.”
Signet vs. JPM Coin
With $45 billion in assets, Signature Bank is less than 2% the size of JPMorgan, the largest bank in the U.S. So it’s perhaps understandable that DePaolo and Signature chairman Scott Shay clearly took some pride in pointing out that JPM Coin, announced Thursday, is remarkably similar to what they already have. A rather subtle similarity between Signature’s blockchain system and JPM Coin is that both run on private variants of ethereum technology. In the case of JPM this is Quorum, a data privacy-oriented fork of the ethereum public blockchain code. The Signet platform, built in conjunction with trueDigital, is a proprietary blockchain which also uses ethereum as its base. Another commonality is that both involve stablecoins, with real-world dollars deposited at the bank in exchange for tokens that clients can send each other via a distributed ledger, then redeem again 1-to-1 with the institution. The goal of replacing wire transfers with a blockchain is also reminiscent of crypto-friendly rival Silvergate Bank’s SEN system that instantly connects to its clients 24/7. But Signature chairman Scott Shay claimed the broad uses of Signet sets it apart. “If you happen to be an exchange [SEN] is useful, but we developed Signet to be tailored to a wide variety of industries. It’s not crypto exchange-focused,” he said. Returning to JPM Coin, Shay pointed out that Signet has already received approval from the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS). By contrast, JPMorgan said in its announcement that as it gets ready to launch the new product, “we will actively engage our regulators to explain its design and solicit their feedback and any necessary approvals.” Shay concluded:
“The difference is we are actually out there doing this.”
Heads up: Alloya Federal Credit Union is refusing all transfers to Gemini!
Fourth (final?) update (3/5): Opened an account with SunTrust (h/t ytrfd) and transferred 95% of my money to them. Just keeping the credit union for smaller bills that have to be paid in fiat. Third update (2/22): I called both Signature Bank and Metropolitan, Signature didn't have much of a problem with it but I have to go into a branch to open an account. Metropolitan seems like a bad choice, in my case. They said I'd still have to wire the money to Coinbase's account (wtf?) and it would cost $40(!) per wire. Second update: I just heard from my credit union, this time Alloya clarified they won't process any Bitcoin-related transactions. Time to pull my money! I've been doing semi-weekly buys at Gemini via Wire Transfers for the past six months. Never a word or even a question from my (small, local) credit union about the transfers. Today I get a call saying Alloya (their wire processor) is now refusing all wires to Gemini! I asked if they banned all Bitcoin-related transfers and the employee didn't know. Guess I'll have to try a wire to Coinbase on Tuesday. :( Does anyone know of a bank or credit union that would be OK with such transfers? EDIT: I'm going to check into an account with Signature New York (which is Gemini's bank) or Metropolitan Commercial Bank (Coinbase's bank, they have personal accounts too). If I can open accounts there I'll see if Coinbase or Gemini would allow no-fee transfers as it's in the same bank. I'll post an update with my findings.
i know that taxes are to be reported and paid on us exchanges but if you use an exchange based in russia for example does the us tax law only kick in when the us dollar is brought back into the united states? i am using livecoin witch is an exchange and sort of like stock market. right now i have bought and sold other coins like eth and made a few cents profit. livecoin.net has a usd wallet and i think it may be more profitable to use usd rather than bitcoin thereby i can invest in bitcoin. there is a site called bitpay witch you can send bitcoin and they convert to usd on a visa card witch is powered by a us bank . does the tax laws then only kick in if i send the bitcoin to the bitpay debit card? am i safe converting usd <-- crypto on livecoin as long as the funds stay there? anyone familiar with bitpay debit card know if they bitpay or Metropolitan Commercial Bank reports incoming btc for taxes or even monitors the users that closely ? Metropolitan Commercial Bank in the usa powers the bitpay visa card.
I have a lost wire for 17 days that I sent to GDAX and Coinbase wont answer!
This message is to Justin from Coinbase or anyone from Coinbase: I see that you are helping people with issues. I have a big one. I sent a $20k wire on 2-2-18 (first time I use the wire option) and the money left the account but is NOWHERE in my GDAX account! I have been contacting Coinbase ever since and I got someone on the phone 2 times and supposedly it was in a high priority issue list and here on 2-19-18 I still have NO ANSWER on where the money is. At this point I need it returned or deposited to the GDAX asap. I lost the opportunity to buy Bitcoin when it dropped at $5,700 (which it was around the time I did the wire) and now is back at almost $12k and this is UNACCEPTABLE from Coinbase to hold us back like this. I also called the Metropolitan Commercial Bank with NO LUCK either, nobody seem to want to answer the phones in Coinbase nor the bank! I need someone to take care of this matter asap! Please tell me what you need from me to help me.
11-23 05:12 - 'Please help, Coinbase lost 25,010 from wire transfer on 11/16' (self.Bitcoin) by /u/AlisonPonce removed from /r/Bitcoin within 101-111min
''' So I am having the exact same issue to what was experienced by the individual in this thread. I sent a wire transfer of $25,010 to my GDAX/Coinbase account on 11/16 from Bank of America and the funds were received by Coinbase (Metropolitan Commercial Bank) but never credited to my account. I opened a ticket on 11/21 and have only received a generic email from their team. The issue seems to be something that is not uncommon and from the link I sent above, it is clear that they know how to return the funds to the originating bank account and can do so quickly. I just need to get the attention of someone at GDAX/Coinbase to get this done. I saw how Reddit brought visibility to this previous users issue and would greatly appreciate your support here again in drawing attention to this. My Case # is 2505797 I am beyond frustrated with the GDAX/Coinbase customer support and just hoping to get my funds returned ASAP . ''' Please help, Coinbase lost 25,010 from wire transfer on 11/16 Go1dfish undelete link unreddit undelete link Author: AlisonPonce
08-20 20:02 - 'Same problems in the United States. I own apartment buildings and I decided to offer a small 4 unit one in Indianapolis for sale for bitcoins equal to $120,000 USD, a below market price for a property generating $240...' by /u/BoatyboatMcBoatface removed from /r/Bitcoin within 7-17min
''' Same problems in the United States. I own apartment buildings and I decided to offer a small 4 unit one in Indianapolis for sale for bitcoins equal to $120,000 USD, a below market price for a property generating $2400 a month, but one I hoped would encourage a "bitcoin sale", something I would love to see in the larger real estate market. Bam. I hit a brick wall. No buyers with much bitcoin in this part of the midwest; I could find nobody in the real estate or title company community here prepared to transact in Bitcoin and nobody knew of anyone who had tried. I only know of BitPremier, which is Silbert's brother's company, and its trying to market luxury niche products in exchange for bitcoin, and that includes villas and mansions around the world, but not run of the mill commercial grade real estate like you might find in midwestern cities. I'm so immersed in bitcoin I forget there are huge majorities of people who don't have a clue what bitcoin is or who have never heard of it. I would think banks and title companies would prepare for clients requesting bitcoin transactions, but no. This is the type of thing we need to change and promote; bitcoin has to work buying a cup of coffee, or a car, or a house, and not just in San Francisco, but in Indianapolis and Memphis and Provo. It needs to work for the bitcoin millionaire, but also the guy who wants to buy his first condo, or his first car. And by the way, that BitPremier site, I don't think its even working. I tried posting a listing there and it went "pending" for weeks. I wonder if they've had success in any transactions whatsoever. I see endless discussions by developers here on bitcoin about scalability and being able to transact thousands of transactions, but I'm not seeing any transactions in this metropolitan city of 1.5 million people. I'm glad there's a coffee shop in Silicon Valley where a retailer will sell you a donut for your bitcoin. But when does bitcoin become currency in the real world? This question will hold down bitcoin prices. We cannot count on Japan and South Korea to prop up bitcoin prices forever. ''' Context Link Go1dfish undelete link unreddit undelete link Author: BoatyboatMcBoatface
Metropolitan Commercial Bank , another of these entities, recently shared data about the crypto segment as part of 2019 results included in its latest investor presentation. According to the ... Metropolitan Commercial Bank has in the past year experienced a steady decline of deposits emanating from businesses in the crypto-verse. This is an indication that the bank is now witnessing more competition than it did a few years ago. It’s a scenario that was unimaginable three years ago when the commercial bank was only one of the few players in town. To Metropolitan Commercial Bank, they’re “pioneers.” At least, that’s how the New York financial institution’s chief technology officer, Nick Rosenberg, describes them. Metropolitan Commercial Bank and its affiliates are not responsible for the content on third parties. Continue Cancel. Remote Support × Dear Customer, On Friday (April 17), there will be scheduled API maintenance from 8pm EST to Saturday 4am EST. We will be using this time to add more capacity to our infrastructure and speed up our overall services. We apologize for the inconvenience that ... Metropolitan Commercial Bank, a New York banking institution that has been openly serving the cryptocurrency space, has posted an increase in crypto-related deposits for the first quarter of the year.
Learn How to Transfer Funds from your Bank to Your MOVO Card
***** If You Find My Video Useful Then Don't Forget To SUBSCRIBE My Channel By Hitting On This Link https://bit.ly/2YFRSLc ***** Direct deposit from movo to bank, activate newly created movo by ... The rich in Germany been never been as well-off as they are today and assets have never been so unevenly distributed. But who are they? How do they live? And... The card costs $10 USD to purchase, and the card is issued by Metropolitan Commercial Bank in the U.S. and Wavecrest Holdings for European ca Category People & Blogs The UAE Commercial Companies Law (CCL) requires that each company established in the UAE has one or more UAE national partners who hold at least 51 per cent of the company's capital. Companies ... Wir, die Küchenspezialisten, sind auf dem Weg zu Ihrer Traumküche von der ersten Inspiration bis zum Einbau und auch danach an Ihrer Seite. Bei uns finden Si...