Let's discuss Bankera

[JohnnyDoe]

Speaking of them

This is the ad hominem rhetorical fallacy, more specifically the tu quoque fallacy.

Nobody wants to watch a Bankera/Swissmoney feud here.

The fact is that Bankera sucks and steals application fees from prospective clients.

 

[Konstanz]

This is the ad hominem rhetorical fallacy, more specifically the tu quoque fallacy.

Nobody wants to watch a Bankera/Swissmoney feud here.

The fact is that Bankera sucks and steals application fees from prospective clients.

I have never had experience with a bank who would return application fee for me if application is rejected. Maybe there are some. But normal practice is banks/EMI's charge application fees even if it gets rejected. "Steal" is a big word. You agree with bank terms in the first place.

 

[JohnnyDoe]

I have never had experience with a bank who would return application fee for me if application is rejected. Maybe there are some. But normal practice is banks/EMI's charge application fees even if it gets rejected. "Steal" is a big word. You agree with bank terms in the first place.

$50-100 is acceptable as an application fee. With the $500ish (I don’t remember the exact amount) charged by the Bankera clowns you would expect white gloves treatment, or at least basic literacy.
Btw, I didn’t pay a cent to the banks (real ones, not Lithuanian rubbish) representatives who came to my place at a time convenient to me to collect the documents and information they required.

 

[brunelloch]

Can anyone who has done proper DD about Bankera share a word or two? I see very mixed reviews here and on the web but the fact that there was 150mln raise caught my attention.

 

[Gediminas]

Can anyone who has done proper DD about Bankera share a word or two? I see very mixed reviews here and on the web but the fact that there was 150mln raise caught my attention.

When you read here in the forum something negative about Bankera, keep in mind it mostly comes from competitors or people who got their applications rejected.

Bankera has been in the market for years. None of the shady fintechs would last that long, especially with so many audits.

Bankera manages around 100M EUR of clients' funds, it's literally one of the biggest EMIs in the market.

Some others who are advertising here in the forum are like micro startups when you compare both.

I can only say the best words about them because I know they are running it properly and regulators love them. So if your business isn't shady, and you aren't playing around, this is your best online bank.

 

[brunelloch]

Bankera manages around 100M EUR of clients' funds, it's literally one of the biggest EMIs in the market.

So Bankera holds an EMI license itself? I checked the website and it says they are registered agent of another EMI. Curious why an agent and not own EMI for a company that must be valued at 1bln (assumption based on 150mln raise fact)

 

[Gediminas]

So Bankera holds an EMI license itself? I checked the website and it says they are registered agent of another EMI. Curious why an agent and not own EMI for a company that must be valued at 1bln (assumption based on 150mln raise fact)

Bankera is a brand name. The license holder is UAB Pervesk (Reliable & Secure Electronic Payment Services)

Both belong to the same people.

 

[brunelloch]

Bankera is a brand name. The license holder is UAB Pervesk (Reliable & Secure Electronic Payment Services)

Both belong to the same people.

Gediminas, are you part of the core team? I'm looking closer into Bankera, especially after reading about this substantial raise of 150mln.

Looking at the price performance of the BANKERA coin it seems like the asset price has tumbled by almost over 95% from the peak of $4.39 down to $0.16. Curious, in your opinion, if me as a potential customer should feel safe about opening an account with the company that has such a questionnable ICO and dissapointed army of investors behind?

Not a statement, just a topic of discussion, would love to hear your point of view.

 

[Gediminas]

Gediminas, are you part of the core team? I'm looking closer into Bankera, especially after reading about this substantial raise of 150mln.

View attachment 5673

Looking at the price performance of the BANKERA coin it seems like the asset price has tumbled by almost over 95% from the peak of $4.39 down to $0.16. Curious, in your opinion, if me as a potential customer should feel safe about opening an account with the company that has such a questionnable ICO and dissapointed army of investors behind?

Not a statement, just a topic of discussion, would love to hear your point of view.

I don't have much to say about the token price. It's unrelated to their banking services.

When it comes to crypto, it's a free market. If you are raising questions about why the crypto price has fallen, you must be new to crypto.

 

[brunelloch]

I don't have much to say about the token price. It's unrelated to their banking services.

When it comes to crypto, it's a free market. If you are raising questions about why the crypto price has fallen, you must be new to crypto.

But Gediminas, it's almost 100% decline in the asset value. We are talking about 150mln. I am certainly not new to crypto nor investing but when I see a company that has lost almost 100% of its asset face value since the fundraise, some questions arise. It just does not feel right from the security perspective. Especially when we are talking about the above mentioned:

Bankera manages around 100M EUR of clients' funds, it's literally one of the biggest EMIs in the market.

 

[Gediminas]

But Gediminas, it's almost 100% decline in the asset value. We are talking about 150mln. I am certainly not new to crypto nor investing but when I see a company that has lost almost 100% of its asset face value since the fundraise, some questions arise. It just does not feel right from the security perspective. Especially when we are talking about the above mentioned:

What are you talking about?

What does it have to do with their banking services?

Oh, Wilhelm, it's too boring.

 

[ilke]

But Gediminas, it's almost 100% decline in the asset value. We are talking about 150mln. I am certainly not new to crypto nor investing but when I see a company that has lost almost 100% of its asset face value since the fundraise, some questions arise. It just does not feel right from the security perspective. Especially when we are talking about the above mentioned:

The reason for this fall is the sort-of-but-not-really fulfilment of what they told investors they would do with the money. Bankera expected it to be easy for them to get a Lithuanian banking license (which quite a few EMIs have done actually, most prominently Revolut). However, primarily due to the fact that the investors were mostly unidentified (or not identified to the level expected by Lithuania), those funds were deemed unsuitable for the share capital of the bank (as well as a few other reasons). The reasoning for this matter is not as important as the final result - Bankera was unable to meet the promise to investors that they would get a bank license and connect fiat to crypto with their bank.

They made an acquisition of Pacific Private Bank, which they considered meeting the promise - they did in the end product a bank. The bank is still operating and legally licensed in Vanuatu since its 1997 inception. Investors considered this a success when it happened in 2018 with statements like "A banking license is expected to be acquired by early 2019." coming up, because it seemed that if Bankera was able to buy a full bank and be supported by Santander, UniCredit, UBS and Standard Chartered, they would probably be able to get licensed.

The co-founders talked about this later, saying they were also working on bank licenses in other countries, and in some, they were moving even quicker than in Lithuania. Well, it's now 4 years later and no banking license here unfortunately. What happened with Pacific Private Bank when it was supposed to be used as Bankera's offshore processing? No-one knows.

Since Bankera did launch a product, they just use the Pervesk UAB EMI license given to the cofounders separately, and launched Era Finance Ltd. in Malta - which is registered as an agent of Pervesk. Pervesk is practically the same company (same pricing plans, setup, etc.), but Era Finance owns the trademark and acts as an agent. Bankera is also registered in Lithuania as Bankera UAB, not to be confused with Bankera itself. Bankera UAB has the employees (65 of them) and does "IT work for the banking and EMI sectors". It also has just under 10K EUR in Social Security debt (not too crazy, just a bit strange for a relatively large company).

I don't have much direct experience with Bankera except for a colleague of mine using it - since I wasn't really interested in paying hundreds of EUR just for them to look at my docs. It seems a bit unreasonable. From what I have heard, the solution is not bad and works well with crypto activities, which are nearly unbankable elsewhere. But, the SWIFT fees are super high. Might be alright for SEPA.

 

[brunelloch]

What are you talking about?

What does it have to do with their banking services?

Oh, Wilhelm, it's too boring.

First of all who is Wilhelm and second of all - would you trust company with your money who's fundraise has ended up with 90% fall in the price of the asset? it's a simple question. I don't see where I am not clear.

 

[Gediminas]

First of all who is Wilhelm and second of all - would you trust company with your money who's fundraise has ended up with 90% fall in the price of the asset? it's a simple question. I don't see where I am not clear.

Yes, I would trust like I have trusted for years. And so do many others. You can look at data, no need to speculate with random nonsense.

who is Wilhelm

Thats a person who previously changed his name and most likely because he was running a phishing banking website (and got convicted) and now runs a questionable banking scheme.

 

[Konstanz]

I used Bankera for years for my company. I also have personal account. I do have other accounts at other EMI and banks. I have not had any problems with Bankera so far. Yes, they ask questions about payments. But it's normal.
I can say from my experience if there is institution who do not ask questions you can be sure it will not stay long in the market.

 

[brunelloch]

The reason for this fall is the sort-of-but-not-really fulfilment of what they told investors they would do with the money. Bankera expected it to be easy for them to get a Lithuanian banking license (which quite a few EMIs have done actually, most prominently Revolut). However, primarily due to the fact that the investors were mostly unidentified (or not identified to the level expected by Lithuania), those funds were deemed unsuitable for the share capital of the bank (as well as a few other reasons). The reasoning for this matter is not as important as the final result - Bankera was unable to meet the promise to investors that they would get a bank license and connect fiat to crypto with their bank.

They made an acquisition of Pacific Private Bank, which they considered meeting the promise - they did in the end product a bank. The bank is still operating and legally licensed in Vanuatu since its 1997 inception. Investors considered this a success when it happened in 2018 with statements like "A banking license is expected to be acquired by early 2019." coming up, because it seemed that if Bankera was able to buy a full bank and be supported by Santander, UniCredit, UBS and Standard Chartered, they would probably be able to get licensed.

The co-founders talked about this later, saying they were also working on bank licenses in other countries, and in some, they were moving even quicker than in Lithuania. Well, it's now 4 years later and no banking license here unfortunately. What happened with Pacific Private Bank when it was supposed to be used as Bankera's offshore processing? No-one knows.

Since Bankera did launch a product, they just use the Pervesk UAB EMI license given to the cofounders separately, and launched Era Finance Ltd. in Malta - which is registered as an agent of Pervesk. Pervesk is practically the same company (same pricing plans, setup, etc.), but Era Finance owns the trademark and acts as an agent. Bankera is also registered in Lithuania as Bankera UAB, not to be confused with Bankera itself. Bankera UAB has the employees (65 of them) and does "IT work for the banking and EMI sectors". It also has just under 10K EUR in Social Security debt (not too crazy, just a bit strange for a relatively large company).

I don't have much direct experience with Bankera except for a colleague of mine using it - since I wasn't really interested in paying hundreds of EUR just for them to look at my docs. It seems a bit unreasonable. From what I have heard, the solution is not bad and works well with crypto activities, which are nearly unbankable elsewhere. But, the SWIFT fees are super high. Might be alright for SEPA.

Thanks for such a detailed explanation. You saved me from hours of manual google crawling haha.

Yes, I would trust like I have trusted for years. And so do many others. You can look at data, no need to speculate with random nonsense.

I don't understand why you are getting so offensive when I ask simple questions. But I see your financial risk apetitte is very high, especially when it comes to personal wealth/income management. For me, personally, I like to dig out more information about the companies where I plan to deposit my personal funds and 150mln fundraise failure seems like a bit of a red flag to me. In short, it seems like our risk apetite as consumers differ and there's no need for you to attack me.

 

[Gediminas]

I like to dig out more information about the companies where I plan to deposit my personal funds

let me know when you find one.

 

[csp dubai]

these are finacial istutituion , should be availble on line