The comments section moderated because of spam.

Tuesday, 3 October 2017

Business For Home drops Ruja from a poll – Updated!

Bullshit For Home Review

Business For Home (aka Bullshit For Home) is a corrupted blog endorsing various MLM based scams from around the world. Although BFH has even some articles giving warning about scams - like this one - it's very obvious that BFH isn't a place of integrity and actual facts. 

OneCoin particularly has gained a lot of visibility on this blog ran by Ted Nuyten. Despite all the negative press, authorities waving red flags, arrested reps, and above all OneCoin being an obvious ponzi-pyramid-scam, Nuyten's blog has been a loyal lackey of the scam since 2015. 

In fact you can't find a single bad news about OneCoin on his blog – and it's not like there ever has been a shortage of them. OneCoin simply hasn't had any other way for positive news but paying for them.

Alexa-ratings of the two webpages might indicate the importance of OneCoin to BFH and vise versa. The collapse of OneCoin started in the late 2016. Since then also the traffic to BFH has been decreasing.

The BFH's marketing kit OneCoin has chosen seems to include several positions on the "Top Earner Ranks" list, which is infested with OneCoin reps.

Top Earner Ranks list filtered with word OneCoin. This screencapture shows the top ten earners from OneCoin.

BFH giving its blessing to OneCoin ponzi scam with grade A+.

Awkward Hartley Interview by Nuyten

Ted Nuyten himself was also interviewing Edward Hartley about OneCoin in this six minute video.

Ted Nuyten: "Now a difficult question. A lot of people say: Listen, OneCoin it is a ponzi. - That is of course an ögly one. Now, you are a forensic accountant, so give me a reason why is it not?" 
Edward Hartley: "You know what, look, I can't tell you it is not per se, because everyone's has a perspective..." 
Then Hartley goes on to blabber about how Bitcoin and other things have been considered being scams by some.

Despite Nuyten asked that "ögly" question, this really is just a marketing video for OneCoin. Well, at least Hartley's awkward answer to his question reveals that there wasn't a script to follow.

Ted Nuyten interviewing Edward Hartley. Video link here.

Business For Home drops Ruja from a poll

BFH also publishes yearly poll, "The Top Direct Selling CEO In The World Poll". Accordingly has OneCoin/OneLife been urging its members to vote Ruja Ignatova to the top every year. 

Despite Pierre Arens and Pablo Munoz being the current CEO's, Ignatova was once again appointed to the competition on the official Facebook page of OneLife. It's also worth mentioning that Pablo Munoz has disappeared after his last public appearance in Spring. The company has not made any comments about the absence of Munoz.

OneLife urging its members to vote Ignatova on the official Facebook page.

I recall checking out the poll during last week and noticing Ignatova occupying the second place with maybe 3.000 votes or so. I happened to check out the poll standings during Monday and Ignatova had been removed from the poll. – Didn't Ruja pay her bills anymore, Ted?

Business For Home deleting bad reviews

Surprisingly BFH gives an opportunity to anyone to write reviews about MLM companies and rate them. Also OneLife/OneCoin was available for reviewing so I decided to give it a go and wrote an honest review about it. I did mention that it was a ponzi and authorities from several countries had been giving warnings about it. I concluded with giving OneCoin the lowest rating, one star out of five. It didn't take long after my review was deleted.

Afterwards I have also seen other reviews giving bad ratings to OneCoin there and they all have been deleted.

– Now, Ted, that's a pretty ögly thing to do. Therefore I give your blog the highest turd-rating possible, five turds out of five.

Update 5 October

And now Ignatova is back at the second place of the poll.

Ted Nuyten has commented:

Yeah, you really showed them! – This must be the one and only poll in the whole world where thousands of dollars are paid to hackers just to win a meaningless poll on a blog.

It's not like there's any sense in this yearly poll of finding out the best scam CEO of the year, but accusing scammers of cheating in this poll? Come on, Ted! – Isn't this all about scamming in the first place!

Just to amuse ourselves, let's have a look at the results of the past polls. According to BFH there was about 100.000 votes given in 2015, about 40.000 in 2016 and about 17.000 now in 2017. 

The result of the last year's poll show that Ignatova got only 344 votes, even though OneCoin was urging its members to vote for Ignatova via newsletter and on the company's Facebook page as well. I guess the members just didn't value the efforts of their almighty leader that year.

Friday, 15 September 2017

Global InterGold - Bank changes and a scandal in Greece

Global InterGold's banking roulette continues

Global InterGold continues having problems with its bank accounts in Philippines. The most recent change of bank happened about week ago. Now the scammers are using Security Bank instead of EastWest Bank, which they had been using since June 12. The shell company used is still the same, Value Gold and Precious Metal Inc.

Frequent change of banks is an obvious sign of money laundering suspicions and thus frozen bank accounts. Therefore I find it strange that Global InterGold manages to find new banks in Philippines by using the exact same shell company.

What's even more puzzling, Global InterGold has two Bulgarian bank accounts that have been used for quite some time already. However, the holder of the bank accounts has some problems of his own.

The Embezzlement Scandal in Greece

The shell company holding Global InterGold's bank accounts in Bulgaria is MD7 Trade Ltd. According to the company's financial statement from 31 December 2016 the initial capital of MD7 Trade Ltd. was only about 255 euros. - Yeah, that's the company running bank accounts of this global gold business. 

The owner of the company is Mihails Subotins, an Ukrainian businessman who's connected to a scandal in Greece. Mihails Subotins has filed 97.2 million euros lawsuit against owner of Aris BC (Basketball Club), Nikos Laskaris, on March 31 2017. Coincidentally the lawsuit is about online gold trading and embezzlement. What's the whole story behind this is somewhat unclear. 

I managed to find this Greek article which gives some more light to this case. Subotins accuses Laskaris of embezzling 915 pounds of gold and 57 million euros. According to the lawsuit part of those assets were used by Laskaris to acquire shares of Aris BC.

One thing is sure. There's no doubt that those 100 million euros were not used to invest in gold to benefit the members of Global InterGold.

Here's updated list of Global InterGold's present bank accounts and their holders:

Bank recipient:
Security Bank
Bank address:
SBC Building, McArthur Highway, Balibago, Angeles City, Pampanga
Beneficiary's address:
Unit 3202-B Atlanta Center Annapolis Greenhills San Juan City, Metro Manila, 1502, Philippines
Beneficiary's account:

International Asset Bank
Bank recipient:
International Asset Bank
Bank address:
1303 Sofia, 81-83 Todor Alexandrov Blvd., Bulgaria
Beneficiary's address:
Sofia 1407, Lozenets area, No. 103 James Bourchier blvd., 1st floor
Beneficiary's account:

Bank recipient:
Bank address:
5 St. Sofia str., Sofia 1040, Bulgaria
Beneficiary's address:
Sofia 1407, Lozenets area, No. 103 James Bourchier blvd., 1st floor
Beneficiary's account:

Sunday, 10 September 2017

Bad OneCoin! Now, sit!

Things are not going well for the crumbling ponzi pyramid scheme, let alone the victims of this notorious scam. Not that there ever has been any good news surrounding OneCoin, but the amount of bad news has been accumulating since the late 2016 when the company lost the last ones of its money laundering bank accounts.

During recent months there has been 23 OneCoin reps arrested and charged in India. The trials are still ongoing with 22 of those charged (I don't know what happened one of them).

In Finland police started criminal investigation on OneCoin reps sometime during this year - supposedly before summer. The news about this was released only recently, at the point when the case was already going to be passed on to the prosecutor.

In August Italian AGCM (Antitrust and Consumer Protection Authority) ordered fines of 2.5 million euros to OneCoin because of running a ponzi pyramid scam. It remains to be seen whether or not OneCoin pays the sanctioned sum. Whatever the scammers decide to do, the verdict will remain.

OneCoin itself only gives a cold shrug of shoulders to bad news or publish illogical press releases blaming everything on independent reps. It's funny though that while accusing their reps about wrong doings, the company leaders and key speakers have been cancelling events in India. Of course, OneCoin has also given up Italy and Germany.

While waiting for the inevitable end of its deteriorating scam business, OneCoin can only sit and wait for more bad news to emerge. They just had to awkwardly drop their IPO plans, DealShaker (aka DealShitter) hasn't been much of a boost to the scam, and above all more and more people know about the true nature of the scheme already.

- Hmm, what to explain to the ponzi investors?

OneCoin abandons its Chinese investors

Citing the headline from an article posted Wednesday on BehindMLM:
"OneCoin to exclude Chinese investors from ICO, no refunds?"

The government in China really pulls the rug from under the wobbly feet of the ponzi. This week a committee led by China’s central bank announced an immediate ban on ICO (Initial Coin Offering) funding.

According to

"The Chinese committee voiced concern that some ICOs are financial scams and pyramid schemes. That echoes a recent warning from Singapore’s MAS."

- Well, well, OneCoin certainly isn't a stranger to Singapore's MAS. It was monitoring the investigation on OneCoin's bank account for money laundering in United Overseas Bank during November 2016.

China was also the very first country to act against OneCoin by arresting ponzi reps during the Spring of 2016... And, wait, I'm just getting this fresh report: 35 Chinese OneCoin affiliates arrested, jailed & fined. Looks like the authorities in China are really trying to kick OneCoin's ass in their region.

The ponzi claims to have most of its members from China. Now that China has banned scams like OneCoin from operating via ICO scheme, there's going to be a lot of members asking questions from their uplines and the company itself. 

However, one thing is certain, there's going to be no refunds by OneCoin. The only thing members can do to try to get their investments back is to file police reports and have bank accounts of scammers frozen before their investment goes through money laundering.

Over 400 visits to my blog by banks, government officials and police

I took a look at the visitor statistics of my blog starting from August 2016 up to this day and found out the following details: 

- Well over 300 visits came from various banks all over the world. 
- Over 100 visits by government officials, police etc. 
That been said there has been over 400 visits by officials investigating these scams featured in my blog, that's roughly one visit every day during the last 12 months. I guess it goes without saying that the most investigated scam by the visitors has been OneCoin.

Friday, 8 September 2017

OneCoin drops IPO plans

People who already knew that OneCoin is a scam have been used to reading news about the ponzi publishing awkward press releases, announcements and postponing pretty much everything. 

However, this latest announcement must hit hard the believers of the ponzi. OneCoin and its reps have been touting the IPO plan over six months already. Now that the company drops the IPO plans without any warning the top scammers have a lot of explaining to do.

Even many of the ones opposing the scam were suspecting that OneCoin might be able to find a shell company to launch a sad little IPO - or at least drag this charade to the bitter end until revealing the failure of the IPO.

"No more IPO"

The awkward news about the IPO failure was not announced by the company itself but via live stream on Muhammad Zafar's Facebook page while he and other Diamond-and-whatnot-misleaders were visiting Sofia.

Muhammad Adeel:
"Well, the biggest news, the biggest changes that there's no more IPO. It's ICO."

Muhammad Zafar tries to explain why this happened:
"Now why the company changed from IPO to ICO. That's what you want to know more. - Because ICO has been popular, and the company can't ignore the fact that the company has to protect the interest of all the leade... (OOPS!) ... all the members." 
- IPO and ICO are two totally different things, so Zafar's explanation is just pure nonsense to distract scam victims believing that everything is alright.

Back in May at the Macau event Ruja Ignatova was strongly urging the members to exchange their coins to OFC's for the IPO:  
"I recommend to you to change as many coins as you can in OFC's."

- If OneCoin was a real cryptocurrency, that would have been totally bizarre suggestion. Furthermore there isn't a stock exchange in the world who would accept a company that has only toy money for its capital. 

But we are talking about a ponzi pyramid scheme, so anything that makes no sense is just what it needs for its fuel. It's all about beliefs, not about facts. Like George Costanza once taught us:

What about the ICO?

OneCoin's ICO (Initial Coin Offering) doesn't go exactly by the books. The company has been selling its coins since the day one so how is an ICO related to all this? I don't think this is how an ICO is supposed to work.

I believe onecoiners consider ICO meaning the day when will be reopened and the coin goes "public". I'm still puzzled about the meaning of going public though. Since anyone willing to obtain onecoins has to become a member of OneCoin and go through a KYC-procedure, what's the actual difference to the current situation? Furthermore the sales of the coin will still be limited by the almighty Ruja, so this market is far from being free - and very likely even worse than was in the first place.

Strangely - or might I say conveniently - the domain of is set to expire just before it is supposed to reopen: 

Well, back to Zafar: 
"Dr Ruja or Mr Pierre is not the company, we all are company, we're a community." 
- Actually the members have absolutely no control over anything that happens in OneCoin.

Friday, 25 August 2017

Naturalstone scam - following the footsteps of Recyclix?

I just spotted someone advertising this scam to a Facebook group related to Recyclix. I don't know yet if there are any actual connections to Recyclix scam, but there's definitely some resemblance.

On their website Naturalstone claims to be an international company that deals with investments in the Natural Stone sector. According to the website the scam has just recently been launched, 15th of August 2017 to be exact.

Just as any legitimate company would not see any reason to do, Naturalstone takes special care to underline:
- We are not MLM
- We are not HYIP program
- We are not PONZI scheme
- We are real company with real product

Web Security Specialists from the Stone Age

It seems like the scammers setting up this scheme haven't started with a great belief on their success. 

The FAQ section states:

Well, maybe you should take another look on those "specialists in web security", because you're running your business through an unsecured website:

I suppose they are fishing at first if there was enough gullible victims to continue with this scheme before improving the appearance of the ponzi.

The website of the scam presents also a video clip showing some stone quarry men in action. The video clip has been stolen from a YouTube channel and it was originally published on YouTube 22 October 2009.

I couldn't find the actual name of the registered company - if there even is one. The company is using Bitcoin and Payeer to collect ponzi money. No bank wire transfer is available. Considering that bank wire is still the most used means of payment, I would predict a rocky start (heh) for this ponzi business.

The website contains also a section showing the latest investors and their investments made into the scheme. It looks like the bitcoin address of Natural Stone uses doesn't match with the claimed investments. I don't know about the investments made via Payeer but at least all Bitcoin payments seem to be just bogus information to attract victims to join to the ponzi. Also, I'm very sure that the member "HaistaVittu" didn't make that deposit on the list:

I only hope that none of these sums are real. At least I know for sure that HaistaVittu didn't make that deposit.

All in all Naturalstone is very similar to Recyclix. Instead of garbage this new scheme claims to share substantial profits from "Natural Stone" section.

The bottom line: Naturalstone is an obvious scam and no-one should invest a dime in this.

Wednesday, 23 August 2017

Criminal investigation started on OneCoin in Finland

The Ostrobothnian police department has started criminal investigation on OneCoin in Finland. The Ostrobothnia region is known from having a lot of OneCoin infected people.

As usual regarding ongoing criminal investigations, police doesn't say much in public, other than vaguely stating that they are investigating financial crimes.

The commissioner of police Antti Perälä states that the investigation was started after several police reports were made during 2017. Finnish Tax Administration was among the ones filing a report. Mr. Perälä also lets us know that one Ostrobothnian OneCoin representative has been arrested in summer.

According to the police the ongoing criminal investigation isn't related to the investigation about OneCoin conducted by the Finnish National Bureau of Investigation during 2015 and 2016.

The news about the police investigation were first published by Vasabladet and soon after that by Tivi magazine. The article on Vasabladet is behind paywall.

Tivi magazine sure doesn't shy from calling OneCoin a scam:  
"Onecoin is a pyramid scam built around fictitious crypto currencies, which has been around the world since the government's teeth in the world since 2015. The core characters involved in it have marketed "mining" around the currencies and training packages, for example, at gas stations and various conference venues."

Strong suspicion of crime

The original article on Vasabladet tells that according to the police, the suspicion of crime is so strong that the case will be passed on to the prosecutor.

The newspaper also concludes that since the current investigation isn't related to the one conducted by the Finnish NBI, it means that the police are not currently looking for an investigation into whether Onecoin is legal as a crypto currency, but looking for economic crime in connection with it. - Well, there isn't much anything else but economic crime connected to OneCoin, so this is a healthy approach by the police.

As I have stated before, police are pretty much helpless what comes to stopping international ponzi pyramid scams. Handling these kind of scams falls on each country to sort out by themselves. By the time police interferes usually the damage has been already done and there is only an ugly mess left. From there on follows years of investigations and trials.

Well, eventually all scams come to an end. We have already seen many countries taking a stand against OneCoin and I'm sure more will follow.

Friday, 11 August 2017

OneCoin - The clogged DealShitter

The text below is from a contributor who has investigated thoroughly OneCoin's merchant platform called DealShaker (aka DealShitter).

By a contributor:

This post is about the Dealshaker platform. It is the merchant platform of OneCoin/OneLife - a ponzi fraud. Like any Ponzi fraud, OneCoin has continuously struggled to be able to hold the members from withdrawing their profits out of the system. The reason is very simple: In a Ponzi fraud the only income is the money of new investors so there is no money to pay out the promised profits. 

Let's look at OneCoin business model: 

In their newsletter OneLife markets a "Power Pack educational package", which can be bought from OneLife for 48.750 €. That package will produce 1.089.163 OneCoins. 

Therefore anyone can get 22,3 OneCoins per euro or (equally) at a price of 0,04 € per OneCoin. While selling the educational packages, OneLife promises that the coins are currently worth of 12,35 € per OneCoin  270 times more than the money needed to buy the coins. 

In order to pay the profits to existing investors OneLife would either need 270 times more money than it has, or 270 times more members (who on their behalf cannot try to withdraw any money from the system). This is how a Ponzi fraud works. 

OneCoin/OneLife has already played almost all tricks from the scammers playbook: daily limitations for selling the coins, transaction fees, KYC identification (through a process that can literally take months to complete) and so forth. At the same time a platform where the coins can be used for purchasing goods has been in the promises too. The one of the most noticeable come from the Finnish Country director of OneCoin/OneLife in his speech held 23.02.2016. The speech is in Finnish but I'll translate from 21 minutes and 36 seconds onwards: In Finnish:
Meillä aukeaa nyt jo 2.3.[2016] ensimmäiset kaupat - meille tulee ulkopuoliset kauppapaikat. Tarkoittaa sitä että meille tulee oma kauppapaikka-alusta. Sieltä te voitte ostaa suoraan OneCoineilla mitä tahansa tuotteita ja palveluita. Sinne tule 50.000 kauppapaikkaa nytten ihan ensimmäisten joukossa.
And same in English:
We will open now March 2nd [2016] first [web] stores - we will have merchants outside [OneLife/OneCoin]. This means we will have our own merchant platform. From there you can purchase any goods and services paying directly on OneCoins. There will be 50.000 merchants aboard right now at the beginning.
The Finnish country director had earlier passed his press release that stated the merchant platform will be opened when 30 % of coins have been "mined". Please note: first store "will open" on that day. Not "might open" or "may open" but "will open". And what comes to the 50.000 merchants, they "will" be there. These were the promises on which he sold the OneCoin opportunity for investors. They were given a clear picture that 50.000 merchants are lined up ready to jump in when the platform opens. 

Nothing happened on March 2nd 2016. The counter on the webpage of OneCoin was showing that 30 % of coins had been mined on 18th of April 2016, over a month after the exact date the stores "will open". Guess what? On that day nothing happened either. No merchants, no explanations, no new deadlines, nothing. As usual with OneCoin, the investors were left hanging on thin air, like Wile. E. Coyote after he has ran over a cliff. 

It took until late 2016 before the Dealshaker platform was announced and up to 16th of February 2017 before it was open for buyers. Currently it is the only place where OneCoins can be exchanged to something that has a real world value. Here's how it works:
  • Merchants set up "deals" where one or more items of the same goods is available.
  • After the "start of deal" date users can buy coupons with OneCoins (or a combination of euros and OneCoins where Dealshaker platform charges 25 % of the euro sum as a mandatory "fee").
  • Coupons can then be used for actual purchase of the goods – outside the Dealshaker platform.
  • And when the expiry date of the deal is reached, the deal goes off from the list of available deals and is no longer available for purchase.
It seems that for some reason OneCoin/OneLife does not want the coins to be exchanged directly into anything of value. My guess is that upon the inevitable collapse of the Ponzi scheme they want to be able to say that the coins were never supposed to have any monetary value. Let's now take a look at the Dealshaker platform and witness that it is not only poor implementation but also a combination of similar forgery as the OneCoin Ponzi fraud itself.

The registered businesses

Remember the 50.000 merchants the Finnish country director had promised for the very opening of the merchant platform? On the DealShaker landing page two counters are shown: the "Registered Businesses" and "Individual Logged In Users". When the platform was opened for merchants in January 2017, the counter showed 2 000 merchants as signed up. That's a far cry from the 50.000 merchants that were supposed to be lined up ready to join. 

In February when the platform was opened for users, the counter hadn’t even reached 10.000. The counter finally got over 40.000 on August 5th 2017 and at the time of writing this it still hasn’t reached the 50.000 merchant marker. 

But that's not all. I've Googled for old publications and gathered the numbers from discussion forums, blog posts, OneLife newsletters etc. After combining them you can see below what the progress of the number of merchants looks like. 

This graph is not realistic as it is too linear – new merchants have apparently been signing up on pace of 100 businesses per day  ever since the day 1. The merchants were signing up on a steady pace before the platform opened for buyers and they continued in that pace afterwards. 

Please do understand how impossible this chart is to be true: 100 businesses per day, each day, regardless of such things as the Easter (in western nations), or the Chinese New Year in China, or the summer holiday season of the Europe and so forth. The graph should have variation that takes place weekly, monthly and seasonally but any such variation is totally missing. In fact the variation we see here comes almost exclusively from the sources where the date of publishing is visible but number may be day or two older as well as from the fact some of the publications were using rounded numbers. 

And what are these merchants doing? There are supposed to be 40.000 registered businesses but if we go into the Dealshaker deals, there are only 11.155 open deals. 10 % of those come from handful of merchants (more of that later), which means that even if we assume that there is only one deal per merchant, three out of four of the "registered businesses" have never put a single product for sale! 

Clearly the number of "registered businesses" is not valid. The most logical explanation for the linearly increasing (and clearly too high) number of registered businesses is that the number of the counter is automatically generated by some machine script, and is not showing the real amount of merchants that have signed up for the platform.

The individual logged in users

According to the Dealshaker landing page there were at the time of writing this 247.963 individual logged in users. I suppose it is needless to say that I've gathered a graph of that too: 

Once again the graph is almost linear. New users are signing up on a pace of 3000 users per week, every week. Once again most of the variation comes rounded numbers and inexact days. And the same as with the registered businesses graph, it is equally unrealistic that the users were signing up at that steady pace both before and after the platform was opened for buyers. Or that the very same holidays and seasonal variations are missing. And by rights there should be initial rush of new users at the time of Dealshaker launch, followed by a slowed down period and possibly some faster increases as any news of the platform are being broadcast. None of that is visible. The most logical explanation for this unrealistic growth of users? The same as for the number of registered businesses: the number of the counter is automatically generated by some machine script.

Number of open deals

The Muro BBS Forum had number of open deals in Dealshaker platform posted by users, coupled with dates the numbers were taken. This made it possible to create the following graph: 

Let me start by saying that this graph looks more organic than the previous two. There is no linearity, there are plateaus as well as ups and downs (although the amount of accounts before could not have downs anyway). I have added one data point, which is the amount of deals on day zero and that is zero initial deals (as it is reasonable to assume there were zero open deals before the platform opened for merchants). Yes, it would have helped if there were more data points but even now we can see the timeline:
  • Initially new deals were created on a rapid pace (and there were no "expired deals" to affect the amount of open deals).
  • After about 120 days the amount of open deals started to decline (as the expiry times of the initial deals had been reached and there were more expiring deals than there were new deals added).
  • Around 150 days timestamp there happened a burst of new deals as a "corrective action" - the amount of new deals jumped up literally in a matter of days.
  • Amount of open deals has been in decline since (as once again the deals expire and there are no new deals to replace them).
I count there to be two clear "bursts" of new deals: the initial burst when the platform opened and the second, corrective burst at around 150 days. Without those, the amount of deals would have gone downwards for a while now. 

Then if we look at the deals per category: 

We can see that during the second burst there was a massive move of deals from "Products" category and "Services" category to "Home & Auto" category. As said that burst took less than a week to take place, I wonder why so many of the merchants happened to log in at the same time to change their deals? Okay, that was a trick question – it is unrealistic that the merchants logged in at once unless that was somehow organized or then some sort of corrective actions were taken by the platform itself. 

This funeral service that was moved from "Services" to "Home decor products" strongly suggests that the merchants did not alter the deals by themselves, but the Dealshaker platform did it for them. What is more interesting is that the merchant has not changed it back. If we want to understand that better, we have to check the merchants a bit.

The merchants behind the open deals

Now that I mentioned the "bursts" of new deals added to Dealshaker, I should perhaps point out that in the most recent dump of new deals a large number of new merchants appeared (although that is not visible in the registered businesses counter at all). These new merchants each were selling only some 1-10 deals and no more. But those merchants do not seem to be very legitimate:
  • User names are something that I don't think is easy to remember, like "lyt678899a". (Nope, that is not a password!)
  • The "real names" are not some realistic "John Doe" or "Jack's car repair shop". Good heavens no! These merchants have told their full name is something more simple like "hanpang292". (Nope, that is not the user name, user name was "hp08".)
  • No web page to the own website of the merchant. If there is a link, it leads to somewhere that has nothing to do with the subject, like in this merchant profile.
The initial burst of deals happened before Dealshaker was open to public (and quickly after that) and for all that I can tell, less merchants were added then. Actually so few merchants took part of that burst that even today there are 15 accounts that together sell over 10 % of ALL open deals in the Dealshaker platform. Imagine if there were 150 of them – the remaining 40.000 merchants would not be needed at all! (This is improving, though: originally there were 10 merchants selling over 10 % of the deals but some of them have 0 open deals left as all of their deals have expired and no new deals have been added.) 

Usually any criticism towards OneCoin is quickly refuted as a hoax, as hate speech or as made up numbers. Therefore I'm now listing those 15 merchants here. (Please note that this is the current situation, as the deals expire or are added, the numbers will change)
  1. Merchant with 121 open deals.
  2. Merchant with 118 open deals.
  3. Merchant with 102 open deals.
  4. Merchant with 100 open deals.
  5. Merchant with 94 open deals.
  6. Merchant with 75 open deals.
  7. Merchant with 72 open deals.
  8. Merchant with 66 open deals.
  9. Merchant with 64 open deals.
  10. Merchant with 62 open deals.
  11. Merchant with 57 open deals.
  12. Merchant with 54 open deals.
  13. Merchant with 53 open deals.
  14. Merchant with 50 open deals.
  15. Four different accounts of "weikabao", (1, 2, 3, 4) that together have 75 open deals. (I still count that as one merchant.)
And not all of the deals these merchants have set open for sale are that legitimate either. They are mostly copy-pastes of each other, like these: 

The items rounded with red are just three incarnations of the many identical items in Dealshaker. I'll link you three of them that are not only the same but in addition from different merchants: 
Internal health instrument, seller user name "dyzhang001". 
Internal health instrument, seller user name "lhy987". 
Internal health instrument, seller user name "dyzzq888888".
  • All of these deals have the same photo of the product.
  • All of these merchants sell multiple deals of the same product. (I wonder why, when they could just have more of these for sale in one deal?)
  • All of the deals from all of the merchants have the same (long) description of the product.
The most logical explanation for the merchants and goods that do not look authentic is that they were mass-produced (copy-pasted etc.) in order to fill the store with items. This would also explain the sudden corrective action to fix the decreasing amount of open deals (using fake deals to fill the store) and it would also explain the existence of the very few merchants that sell over 10 % of all open deals. (Please note: I'm not saying that all the Dealshaker accounts are fake. Definitely some of them seem to come from OneCoin affiliates that think there is something in the platform. But they will get disappointed in the future as you can see next.)


OneCoin has advertised itself as the future of payments – something that will replace the traditional currencies. From that aspect I find it quite interesting that when OneCoin price (in euros) increases in the OneCoin/OneLife backoffice, the prices of goods in Dealshaker are automatically adjusted down so that the price keeps its euro value! 

It must be quite confusing for the merchants that priced their goods in Onecoins but later found out that their already set prices have been set cheaper automatically by the system! The explanation is of course that the system stores the prices of goods in euros, not in OneCoins. 

It seems very impractical that "the future of payments" stores its prices in a currency that is supposed to be "past of payments", but all in all none of this is not really a problem due to one point that should be made: It is illogical to expect any merchant to actually sell goods in order to receive OneCoins, at least not on the face value of OneCoin (which currently is 12,35 €). Reason for this is that through "Power Pack educational package" anyone can buy OneCoins and get 22,3 OneCoins per euro (or equally: an OneCoin can be bought for 0,04 €  270 times less than the value stated by OneLife). 

Any sane merchant would either sell goods for a price that is 270 times higher than it should be according to the face value price of OneCoin... ...or then they would just go and buy the coins via the educational package, if they really wanted to own OneCoins. 

Let's assume someone has OneCoins and he/she expects them to be worth 12,35 € each. What can he/she buy with his/her coins, then? These deals look extremely interesting:
At least these merchants have understood the real value of OneCoin. That phone (from year 2016) can be bought for less than 100 euros according to websites from India - 1/610 of the price of the coupon. 

There are also some real-life users that seem to genuinely believe the system works, like the two restaurants in Finland that sell food and take payments 100 % in Onecoins. The prices of those two restaurants are around 3 times as high as they should be by the face value of OneCoin (a Pizza was set to cost ~30 euros "worth" of OneCoins - i.e. using coin value of 12.35 euros - when a proper price would be at 10 euros). And even then those prices are still too high compared to the price coins can be bought for (0,04 € / OneCoin). 

And as a last problem in selling goods 100 % in OneCoins: the merchants who receive OneCoins as a payment cannot use the coins to refresh their inventory, they can only try to find another user who is silly enough to sell goods for OneCoins. That is a process trying to find "the greatest fool". The merchants as a whole are going to make loss when selling in Dealshaker.


Dealshaker platform official numbers are unrealistic and can best be explained by being a forgery. That also applies to several of the open deals and the merchants behind them. There are open deals also from good willing OneCoin affiliates but those form a minority and are going to only result to losses of the seller. Like pointed out several times before, forgery is the nature of this scam.