Selgitustaotlus

Saatja: "Pivotalcoin" <[email protected]> Saaja: [email protected] Teema: Request to Halt Unjustified Delisting of Pivotalcoin (PVC) Kuupäev: 2025-12-06 15:35 Tähelepanu! Tegemist on välisvõrgust saabunud kirjaga. Tundmatu saatja korral palume linke ja faile mitte avada. TO: Rachel Liao, CEO ProBit Global Services Limited CC: * Probit Support Team * Probit Legal/Compliance Department DATE: 06 December 2025 RE: Pivotalcoin (PVC) Listing Agreement dated May 3, 2023 _____ Dear Ms. Liao and ProBit Leadership Team, We write to you with significant concern regarding ProBit's decision to delist Pivotalcoin (PVC) on Monday, December 9, 2025. This decision is not only unjustified but fundamentally contradicts the principles of transparency and good faith cooperation that should define professional cryptocurrency exchanges. We respectfully but firmly request that ProBit halt this delisting and reconsider this decision for the following reasons: 1. PROBIT'S INCONSISTENT AND CONTRADICTORY ACTIONS The sequence of events leading to this delisting demonstrates troubling inconsistency: Timeline of Inconsistency: * ProBit proposed additional fees: $500/month + $2,000/month for liquidity management * Pivotalcoin agreed to these terms without hesitation * Pivotalcoin requested standard written documentation (addendum to our existing agreement) * ProBit refused to provide written terms * ProBit threatened immediate delisting for requesting documentation The Fundamental Problem: ProBit proposed commercial terms, we accepted, and then ProBit punished us for requesting the basic professional courtesy of written documentation. This is not consistent with how legitimate financial service providers operate. Question for ProBit: Why would you propose fees, have them accepted, and then refuse to formalize them in writing? This inconsistency raises serious questions about ProBit's internal processes and transparency. 2. VIOLATION OF INDUSTRY STANDARDS FOR TRANSPARENCY The cryptocurrency industry was built on principles of transparency, immutability, and trustless verification. ProBit's refusal to document proposed services directly contradicts these foundational values. Industry Standard Practice: * ✅ All legitimate exchanges document fee structures * ✅ All professional market makers provide written SLAs * ✅ All financial service providers formalize commercial terms * ✅ All reputable platforms maintain transparent agreements ProBit's Practice: * ❌ Propose fees verbally or informally * ❌ Refuse to provide written documentation * ❌ Threaten delisting when asked for standard contracts * ❌ Operate without accountability mechanisms The blockchain industry demands transparency. How can ProBit, as a cryptocurrency exchange, refuse to provide transparent, documented terms for services? This goes against everything our industry represents. 3. BREACH OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING We entered our listing agreement with ProBit in good faith, demonstrated by: Our Financial Commitment: * $80,000 USDT in integration fees * 1 BTC worth of PVC (approximately $95,000 at current values) * Total investment: ~$175,000 Our Trust in ProBit: We chose ProBit because we believed you were a professional, trustworthy exchange. We had great respect for your platform and your reputation in the industry. That trust led us to invest nearly $200,000 in listing fees - a substantial commitment for any project. ProBit's Response: After receiving our substantial payment, ProBit is now: * Refusing to document proposed additional services * Threatening delisting for requesting standard business practices * Acting in a manner inconsistent with the good faith we showed This is not how trusted partners behave. 4. DEVASTATING IMPACT ON PIVOTALCOIN HOLDERS AND USERS This delisting doesn't just affect Pivotalcoin as a company - it severely harms innocent token holders and users who trusted both our project and ProBit's platform. A. Direct Financial Losses to Token Holders PVC holders on ProBit Exchange will face: Immediate Market Impact: * Forced liquidation pressure as users rush to withdraw before delisting * Price suppression from panic selling * Loss of liquidity during critical trading period * Spread widening as market makers exit * Estimated holder losses: $500,000 - $2,000,000+ depending on market reaction Trading Disruption: * Users who bought PVC on ProBit based on trust in the listing * Long-term holders forced into emergency exits * Active traders caught in positions * Loss of trading opportunities during migration Withdrawal Complications: * Technical issues during mass withdrawal periods * Network congestion and high gas fees * Users unfamiliar with wallet management facing risks * Potential loss of funds for less experienced users B. Holder Trust and Confidence Destruction Impact on PVC Community: * Psychological impact: Holders question project stability * FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt): Community forums filled with concern * Investor confidence: Potential investors view sudden delisting as red flag * Market cap damage: $50 million market cap at risk from perception damage Real People, Real Losses: These are not abstract numbers. These are: * Retail investors who saved to invest in PVC * Community members who believed in our tech-backed model * Users who chose ProBit as their trusted exchange * Holders who made financial decisions based on ProBit listing stability C. Migration Costs and Risks for Users Financial Burden on Users: * Withdrawal fees from ProBit * Network transaction fees (gas fees) * Deposit fees to new exchanges * Trading fees to reestablish positions * Price slippage during migration * Estimated per-user cost: $50-$200 × number of PVC holders on ProBit Technical Risks: * Users must manage private keys (many are not experienced) * Risk of sending to wrong addresses * Potential smart contract interaction errors * Time pressure leading to costly mistakes D. Lost Opportunity Costs What Users Lose: * Access to ProBit's liquidity during migration period * Trading opportunities in volatile markets * Staking rewards if positions are disrupted * Strategic positions built over time * Trust in exchange partnerships E. Broader Market Confidence Ripple Effects: * Other PVC exchange listings may be questioned * Potential partners may hesitate * Market perception: "If ProBit delisted them suddenly, something must be wrong" * Reality: We were delisted for requesting written documentation The Message to Users: "ProBit will delist projects that ask for professional standards. Your investment on ProBit is not secure if the project requests transparency." Is this the message ProBit wants to send? F. ProBit's Responsibility to Its Own Users ProBit owes duties not just to us, but to YOUR users: Your users chose to trade PVC on ProBit because: * They trusted ProBit's due diligence * They believed ProBit maintained professional standards * They expected stable, long-term listings * They relied on ProBit's commitment to the projects it lists By delisting PVC unjustifiably, ProBit betrays its own users' trust. Your platform facilitated their investment. Your platform encouraged them to trade PVC. Your platform bears responsibility when those users suffer losses from an unjustified delisting. 5. DAMAGE TO PROBIT'S REPUTATION AND INTEGRITY This delisting will not only harm Pivotalcoin and its holders - it will significantly damage ProBit's reputation in the cryptocurrency industry. Reputational Consequences for ProBit: A. Loss of Trust Among Projects: * Other projects will learn that ProBit refuses to document proposed fees * Future listings will be reluctant to invest substantial sums * ProBit's credibility as a professional exchange will be questioned B. Loss of Trust Among Users: * "ProBit delists projects without justification, putting my investments at risk" * "I cannot trust that my chosen tokens will remain listed" * "ProBit caused me financial losses by sudden delisting" * User exodus to more stable exchanges C. Industry Perception: * "ProBit delists projects that ask for written agreements" * "ProBit proposes fees but won't formalize them" * "ProBit punishes transparency requests" * "ProBit doesn't protect its users from unjustified delistings" D. Regulatory Scrutiny: * Multiple regulatory authorities have been notified * Questions about ProBit's business practices * Concerns about operating without proper documentation * User complaints to regulators about losses E. Community Response: We will be forced to share our experience with the broader cryptocurrency community, including: * Detailed timeline of events (all documented) * ProBit's refusal to provide written terms * Warning to other projects about undocumented fee requests * Documented user losses and community impact This is not the legacy ProBit wants. You have built a platform serving millions of users. Do you want to be known as the exchange that harms innocent token holders by delisting projects for requesting professional documentation? 6. BLOCKCHAIN INTEGRITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY The blockchain exists to create trustless, transparent, verifiable systems. Every transaction on a blockchain is: * ✅ Documented * ✅ Transparent * ✅ Immutable * ✅ Verifiable Yet ProBit refuses to apply these same principles to your own business operations. How can an exchange that serves the blockchain industry refuse to document its own commercial arrangements? This contradiction undermines blockchain integrity itself. 7. OUR REASONABLE REQUEST Let us be absolutely clear about what we asked for: What We Requested: * Written addendum to our existing Listing Agreement * Documentation of the fees ProBit proposed * Service level agreements for liquidity management * Standard commercial terms that protect both parties What We Did NOT Request: * ❌ Reduction in fees * ❌ Special treatment * ❌ Anything unreasonable or unusual This is basic business practice. Any legitimate service provider documents their terms. We are not asking for anything extraordinary - we are asking for the minimum standard of professional service delivery. 8. COMPARISON TO PROFESSIONAL EXCHANGES Let us contrast ProBit's approach with how professional exchanges operate: Professional Exchanges (Binance, Coinbase, Kraken, etc.): * Provide detailed fee schedules in writing * Document all service agreements * Formalize market making arrangements * Maintain transparent terms of service * Protect user investments through stable listing policies ProBit's Approach: * Propose fees without documentation * Refuse to formalize commercial terms * Threaten delisting when asked for written agreements * Harm user investments through sudden, unjustified delistings Which model builds trust? Which model serves the industry? Which model protects users? 9. THE REAL COST OF THIS DELISTING Cost to Pivotalcoin: * Loss of $175,000 investment in listing fees * Disruption to our operations * Time and resources for migration * Reputational impact Cost to PVC Token Holders (ProBit's Users): * $500,000 - $2,000,000+ in estimated market losses * $50-$200 per user in migration costs * Loss of trading opportunities * Forced liquidation pressure * Price suppression from panic * Technical risks during withdrawal * Lost confidence in their investment * Emotional stress and uncertainty Cost to ProBit: * Reputational damage in the industry * Loss of credibility with projects * Loss of user trust and confidence * Liability for user losses from unjustified delisting * Regulatory scrutiny * Community backlash * Proof that ProBit lacks professional standards * Users migrating to more reliable exchanges Who benefits from this delisting? Nobody. Total estimated damages: $2,000,000+ including user losses - and for what? Because we requested written documentation. 10. WHAT PROFESSIONALISM LOOKS LIKE If ProBit operates as a professional exchange, the resolution is simple: Option 1: Provide Written Documentation * Draft a simple addendum formalizing the proposed fees * Include basic service level terms for liquidity management * Both parties sign * We pay immediately * Relationship continues professionally * Users protected from unnecessary disruption Option 2: Continue Under Current Agreement * Withdraw the additional fee proposal * Continue under our existing May 3, 2023 agreement * Maintain current listing status * Both parties honor existing terms * Users continue trading normally Option 3: Professional Separation * Provide 90-day notice period for orderly withdrawal * Allow users adequate time to migrate without panic * Issue joint professional statement * Part ways amicably * Minimize user losses through managed transition What ProBit Should NOT Do: * ❌ Immediate delisting on Monday * ❌ Punish us for requesting documentation * ❌ Operate without written agreements * ❌ Damage both parties' reputations * ❌ Harm innocent token holders with sudden delisting 11. OUR FINAL APPEAL To Rachel Liao, CEO: You built ProBit to serve the cryptocurrency industry. You have millions of users who trust your platform. You have hundreds of projects who chose to list with you. But most importantly: You have users who invested their money in PVC on YOUR platform, trusting YOUR due diligence, believing in YOUR professional standards. Is this how you want ProBit to be remembered? * As the exchange that refuses to document its own proposals? * As the platform that delists projects for requesting transparency? * As the company that contradicts the very principles of blockchain? * As the exchange that caused millions in user losses over a documentation request? We appeal to your sense of fairness, your commitment to the industry, your responsibility to your users, and your reputation. We invested $175,000 in ProBit because we believed in your platform. We trusted you. We had great respect for ProBit's role in the cryptocurrency ecosystem. Our token holders invested in PVC on ProBit because they trusted your platform to maintain professional standards. Do not betray that trust - ours and theirs - over a simple request for documentation. OUR REQUEST We formally request that ProBit: 1. Immediately halt the Monday delisting 2. Provide a written addendum for the proposed fees (we will sign immediately) * OR - 3. Continue under our current agreement without additional fees * OR - 4. Provide 90-day professional notice period for orderly separation that protects users We request a response by Friday, December 6, 2025, at 5:00 PM UTC to allow adequate time for resolution before Monday. CONCLUSION ProBit stands at a crossroads: Path 1: Professional Resolution * Document proposed terms * Honor transparency principles * Maintain reputation * Demonstrate integrity * Protect user investments * Uphold professional standards Path 2: Unjustified Delisting * Damage ProBit's reputation * Demonstrate lack of professionalism * Face regulatory scrutiny * Lose community trust * Cause $2,000,000+ in user losses * Prove ProBit doesn't protect its users The choice is yours. We hope ProBit will choose the path of transparency, professionalism, and blockchain integrity. We remain ready to resolve this matter immediately upon receiving proper documentation. Our token holders deserve better. Your users deserve better. The blockchain industry deserves better. The real victims here are the innocent token holders who trusted both Pivotalcoin and ProBit. They invested their money believing in professional exchange operations. They deserve protection from unjustified delistings over simple documentation requests. We await your response and hope that ProBit will demonstrate the professionalism and integrity that led us to trust your platform with our substantial investment - and that led our community to trust your platform with their investments. _____ Respectfully but firmly, Ben Hare CEO & Co-Founder Pivotalcoin (PVC) Contact Information: Email: [email protected] Project Information: * Token: Pivotalcoin (PVC) * Market Cap: $50 million * Listing Agreement: May 3, 2023 * Investment in ProBit: $80,000 USDT + 1 BTC (~$175,000 total) * Estimated PVC holder base on ProBit: * Estimated user losses from sudden delisting: $500,000 - $2,000,000+ _____ CC: * Seychelles Financial Services Authority * Estonian Financial Intelligence Unit * Korean Financial Services Commission * Our legal counsel * Our community (will be shared publicly if no resolution)