🚨 DETENIDO HOY EN DUBÁI EL MAYOR ESTAFADOR DE CRIPTOMONEDAS DE ESPAÑA.
David Merino. 3.000 millones robados. 60.000 víctimas en 30 países. Llevaba 3 años escondido en Dubái. La UCO fue a buscarlo y lo encontró en un centro comercial. Nadie se escapa. 🇪🇸 RT
@globiance Good to hear some users are receiving refunds.
But some questions remain.
What about Europe? Why is Europe missing from the updates again? 🇪🇺
Transparency works best when all regions are visible.
@XDC_ian@revine86 No, Globiance IS a partner, and not just in a general side by side way. The #XDC@XDCNetwork Founders are actually equity holders (shareholders) in #Globiance according to Globiance’s recent Medium article (since deleted). Screenshot attached.
@globiance Lies!!!!! Your business use to say Hong Kong and your website claimed you had a Singapore operations. You claim employees are at fault let lawyers handle that . You have lied to the community about debt cards, silver , staking and gbpay . Take responsibility for your actions
Today’s refund update includes Hong Kong, Singapore, Brazil, Australia, and Japan.
But where is Europe / EU?
If regional refund progress is being published, why is Europe missing entirely especially considering the historical Lithuania / UAB Globiance LT connection?
No EU figure?
No explanation?
@globiance
65% vs 10%
User Count-Based vs Value-Based
10%という数字は、返金されたユーザー数ではなく返金された価値ベースで見れば、むしろ実態に近いのかもしれません。
『価値ベースで見れば、返金はまだ全体の約1/10しか進んでいません。』
☝️私たちは公開されている情報から推測しているだけです。
ですので、都合の悪い推測だからといって「誤情報」と決めつけないでください。
あと、返金期日が過ぎているんですがコメント無しですか?
@globiance
If refunds were supposedly funded voluntarily by “shareholders” and not by legal obligation of Globiance itself, what exactly are users being asked to rate here?
The shareholders?
The refund process?
Globiance as a company?
Communication and transparency?
Also, if “shareholders” are the ones funding refunds, why is there no direct communication or explanation from them to the affected community?
Globiance also stated that legal advice allegedly recommended closure and bankruptcy, yet operations continued. This naturally raises questions about the legal structure, funding mechanism, and oversight behind this alternative path.
If refunds are framed as the goodwill of shareholders, why should this automatically translate into a positive review of Globiance?
These do not necessarily seem like the same thing.