dexa

🏒 The 2027 IIHF World Championship in Germany faces a geopolitical twist. Ukraine is confirmed in Group A. Russia's blanket ban was overturned in May, but the IIHF subsequently blocked its return for 2027. Russia has appealed to CAS. Could a new ruling reopen the possibility of a Ukraine–Russia showdown? #IIHF 📰 channelnewsasia.com/sport/ic…

Press WIN+ALT+CTRL+SHIFT

Almost 2 months since Scallop & E Money Network announced the $EMYC → equity conversion. Still no valuation, cap table, share rights or ownership % disclosed. The 45-day window has expired. Meanwhile, holders asking questions report being banned or blocked. No numbers. No answers.

On 3 Sep I asked these basic questions about the EMYC → Scallop equity conversion. I was blocked by the project accounts shortly afterwards. Now the 45-day EMYC price has been finalised at $0.00025 (+50% uplift = $0.000375), yet holders still haven't been given Scallop's final valuation, final share class/rights, cap table/share count or the legal conversion terms. So the questions in this post still stand: @TheFCA @reportfrauduk @scallopcom @raj_bagadi $EMYC #EMYC

EMYC’s side of the conversion is now locked: 45-day avg: $0.00025 +50% uplift: $0.000375/EMYC Yet holders STILL don’t know Scallop’s valuation, share price/count, final share class/rights or legal terms. How can anyone assess an equity offer when the other half of the equation remains undisclosed? @TheFCA @reportfrauduk @emoney_network @Scallopcom @raj_bagadi #EMYC $EMYC blog.emoney.io/announcements…

🚨 The $EMYC → Scallop “equity conversion” deserves serious scrutiny. The 45-day #EMYC valuation period is already running while Scallop still hasn't disclosed: • Scallop's valuation • final share class (“B-ordinary or similar”) • voting/dividend/liquidation rights • total/fully diluted share capital • % ownership EMYC holders will receive • final legal structure/provider Meanwhile EMYC is being wound down and delisted during the same period used to establish its market value. Their FAQ argues that $1,500 of conversion value is still “$1,500 worth of Scallop equity” whether Scallop is valued at $5m, $10m or $50m. But that's not remotely the same ownership. At $5m → ~0.030% At $50m → ~0.003% 10× less ownership. Same advertised “$1,500 value.” So here's the simple question: How can EMYC holders make an informed decision when one side of the conversion formula is running now, while the valuation, capital structure and rights of the shares they're receiving remain undisclosed? And if Scallop is a UK private company offering shares to EMYC holders internationally: Which legal entity is issuing the shares, and under what UK financial-promotion / securities-law basis is this offer being communicated? A disclaimer saying “not financial advice” doesn't answer that. Official announcement: blog.emoney.io/announcements… Official FAQ: blog.emoney.io/faqs/emyc-to-… @TheFCA @Scallopcom @emoney_network @raj_bagadi

The EMYC → Scallop share conversion gets worse the more you line up the timeline. It is being presented as a “voluntary” conversion with a 50% uplift. But what was the actual position of holders — especially stakers? 14 Aug: Share conversion announced. EMYC is to be valued using a 45-day average market price, then given a +50% uplift. At the same time, holders still do not know the basic information required to value the shares they are supposed to receive: • Scallop Group Ltd valuation • cap table / fully diluted share count • share class and rights • assets and liabilities • subsidiaries • IP/software ownership • intercompany debts • exact conversion contract Yet the 45-day emoneytoken:native pricing clock starts immediately. Then the exit routes start disappearing. 26 Aug: Gate announces #EMYC delisting. 2 Sep: Gate trading ends. During all of this, people with EMYC in long-term staking still have their tokens locked in BSC staking contracts. So “you could always just sell instead” was not actually an option for those holders. Then comes KuCoin. KuCoin deposits for EMYC had already been disabled, so even once stakers eventually regained access to their tokens, they could not simply send them to KuCoin and sell. Even bridging: BSC EMYC → EMN EMYC doesn't solve anything if KuCoin won't accept EMYC deposits. 4 Sep: staking contracts finally open. By then: ❌ Gate trading already gone ❌ KuCoin deposits unavailable ⏳ KuCoin itself about to delist EMYC 📉 liquidity collapsing So for freshly unstaked holders, the practical liquid exit becomes basically: PancakeSwap / whatever thin DEX liquidity remains. And this is why the “50% uplift” headline is misleading without context. If you originally spent $1,000, but the collapsing 45-day average values your EMYC at $200, the calculation becomes: $200 + 50% = $300 Not: $1,000 → $1,500 The interesting number isn't the 50%. It's the value before the 50% is applied. And that market-price average is being calculated while: • the project has announced its wind-down • Gate disappears • KuCoin disappears • deposits are unavailable • stakers are unable to access tokens for much of the period • remaining liquidity becomes increasingly thin Meanwhile, the valuation of the private company shares on the other side remains undisclosed. Then there is the legal side. When the final conversion agreement appears, holders need to check extremely carefully for: waivers release of claims non-reliance clauses “full and final settlement” covenants not to sue releases of directors, officers or affiliates confidentiality / indemnity clauses Because accepting shares should not quietly become: EMYC + your existing legal rights → Scallop shares. None of this by itself proves that the delistings, staking timing and pricing methodology were deliberately engineered to depress the conversion value. But the effect is clear: A supposedly “voluntary” conversion is being offered while realistic alternatives disappear one after another. So the real question is no longer just: “Is +50% a good offer?” It is: “What are these shares actually worth, what does Scallop Group Ltd actually own, and exactly what are EMYC holders being asked to give up in exchange?” Many holders been banned/blocked from projects official channels for asking basic questions about this offer. @TheFCA @emoney_network @Scallopcom

The deeper problem with the $EMYC → Scallop share offer isn't simply that EMYC has collapsed in price. Holders are being advertised a “50% uplift”, while apparently still lacking the basic numbers required to determine what they're actually receiving. No disclosed Scallop valuation. No complete cap table. No clear % ownership for EMYC holders. No proper disclosure of share rights, liabilities or future dilution. Meanwhile, the EMYC side is valued using a 45-day market-price average during a period when CEX liquidity is disappearing, exchanges are delisting EMYC and staked holders remain locked. That raises some very basic questions: Can “50% uplift” be meaningfully advertised when holders cannot calculate the value of the shares on the other side? Could advertising that apparent premium encourage holders not to sell during the same 45-day period being used to calculate the EMYC value? And there's another issue worth investigating. There have been longstanding questions about team/treasury-linked EMYC being transferred to exchanges during previous periods of selling pressure. Transfers to an exchange do not by themselves prove those tokens were sold or deliberately used to suppress price. But if market price is now being used to determine what holders receive, the historical supply entering that market becomes highly relevant. The legal/regulatory concern isn't simply: “The price went down.” It's whether holders were given enough clear and material information to make an informed, time-limited financial decision — and whether advertising a “50% uplift” is fair and meaningful when one side of the transaction can be priced, but the other side still can't. @TheFCA @Scallopcom @emoney_network @raj_bagadi

Interesting development after yesterday's posts. I asked publicly how the $EMYC → Scallop share conversion can be properly evaluated without a disclosed company valuation, while the EMYC side is being valued using a 45-day market average during collapsing liquidity, exchange delistings and continued staking locks. About 10–20 minutes later: @raj_bagadi → blocked @Scallopcom → blocked @emoney_network → blocked Today I've also been removed from the Telegram Price Chat. Could be connected to those posts. Could also be because I subsequently asked why Scallop isn't using E Money Network's own RWA/tokenisation infrastructure for the shares — despite that infrastructure being part of the proposition presented to investors when funding for the project was being raised. I don't know which question did it, or whether the Telegram ban is connected at all. But it's quite an interesting communications strategy when the questions are basically: What's the valuation? When do stakers get their tokens? How is the 45-day price fair under disappearing liquidity? And why aren't you using the RWA platform you built? Anyway, the questions are considerably more interesting than the bans.@TheFCA