Wault Finance Initial Marketing Team Dissociates Due to Claims of Malpractice

Shocking news broke in our exclusive AMAChella that there was a dissolution of the original Wault Finance team.

Did Wault Finance Rugpull Their Own Team?

Wault Finance was rocked by a scandal revealed during the first BSC News AMAChella. Creppy, the Wault Finance founder, never distributed the marketing team’s tokens after the 3 month lockup period. Further accusation followed that Creppy bypassed internal vetting processes the Wault team had promised to hold in high regard.

These key accusations were outlined by the marketing team in a medium blog. The events resulted in the disbanding of the initial team.

“After Holder launched [we] were essentially removed..” stated the marketing team. 

Creppy revealed that the “[core team] kept all the information from [the marketing team]” as he felt they jeopardized the success of Wault. He explained that “none of them are core team members and [they] haven’t done anything for a while.” 

Dissenting Opinions

This is where the clarity begins to break, as the marketing team was a part of the initial team but they were quickly removed from the core team. The initial team consisted of 5 members, two of which were the marketing team — JB and Marcelo. 

It is clear that ever since the Hodler Finance presale on May 9th, the marketing team was isolated from the “core” team. 

Prior to the removal from the “core” team, all parties participated in the process of onboarding Hodler Finance. Both parties agreed to the distribution of team tokens to the marketing team early on. Creppy has stated that no specific amount was set in stone for the marketing team but as none were distributed, this still leaves the marketing team locked out of their earned tokens. 

There was over $600,000 USD in total team tokens that were not distributed upon the token unlock. Regardless of the amount, the marketing team was initially allocated team tokens that were never distributed.

Many accusations follow regarding Creppy potentially being a “ghost” founder of multiple Wault Launchpad projects. We will wait to address this as there isn’t strong enough evidence to be convincing. 

A Lack of Communication and Mysterious Vetting Process

The issue at hand has stemmed from a lack of communication between the initial team members. Creppy decided to disregard the initial members from the core team. The marketing team continued with their tasks but from the outside, unable to voice concerns.

Creppy seemed to unofficially “fire” the members, stating “[he] didn’t want to actually fire them because they were [there] since the beginning.” This lapse in communication left the marketing team in the dry, while the project moved forward.

One of the key concerns the marketing team had was the lack of internal vetting after the Hodler Finance presale. Other than the routine audits from third party auditing service, RD Auditors, little is known about Wault Finance’s screening process. This has brought up questions of legitimacy. Members of the vetting team have declined to comment on the internal vetting and screening process used to insure project security.

Unconfirmed Accusations

The marketing team has also made claims of Creppy creating Swirl Cash, a project incubated by Wault Finance. The marketing team has compiled data showing similar contract codes and domain registration to Wault. The issue here is that there is no concrete evidence to prove this.

It is known that the developer of Swirl is a one man team. It makes sense that Wault, as an incubator, would aid in the development and launch of the Swirl platform. 

It is explicitly stated in the Wault Finance docs that they “help new companies get the support they need, [not] hindering them from what they should be doing: innovating and executing.”

Looking at the docs it is to be expected that Wault would aid in the launch of partnered projects.Based on this evidence we have no reason to believe Creppy was behind the launch of Swirl.

It seems he was solely a contributor, helping incubate his “friends” project. This does beg the question of what internal screening process was used to vet the project. Unfortunately, the core team declined to comment, solely mentioning the inclusion of RD Auditors third party service.

What We Know

There is a lot of uncertainty in this story as there are solely accounts from the conflicting parties, both of which contradict the other. After corroborating evidence, a couple things are clear. Marcelo and JB were removed from the core team early on. They continued to express concerns on the internal vetting process of which they received limited info. As the marketing team they continued to carry out limited work while engaging in other side projects.
Meanwhile, the team token-unlocking approached and Creppy did not pay the team their tokens. No amount was ever agreed upon but it is clear that the marketing team was told they would receive some tokens.

As a result of these events the initial team members have completely disbanded from the team and are continuing with their existing endeavors.

Source : bsc.news