onecoin-logoAccompanied by a visual representation of a thief stealing money, yesterday saw Austria’s Federal Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Consumer Protection issue a warning against OneCoin.

For those unfamiliar with the Ministry,

it has a total of five departments and around 30 members of staff, of whom around half are legal specialists.

The Consumer Protection department is “AK Steiermark”.

AK Steiermark (AK) titled their warning “Real loss through virtual money”.

AK described OneCoin as a “new virtual money machine that supposedly functions similarly to Bitcoin”. Pointing out the difference between OneCoin and legitimate cryptocurrencies however, AK noted

Bitcoin actually has a market value established by supply and demand and a fluctuating exchange rate like real currencies.

Whether Onecoin will also go in this direction is doubtful. Free trade has so far not been established despite (OneCoin’s) supposedly great performance.

AK are referring to the inhouse value of OneCoin, which is set by OneCoin themselves. Unlike a legitimate cryptocurrency based on public supply and demand, OneCoin’s value has artificially only increased.

As part of their investigation into OneCoin, staff from AK attended various OneCoin presentations in Austria.

Interested people attending a (OneCoin) meeting in Western Austria were told “Those who jump in early can earn great money”.

Whoever buys Onecoins can benefit from the (coin’s) great performance. Traders who sell Onecoins are the front-runners to benefit from this performance.

“Accumulating a lot of points has a snowballing effect”, warns Mag. Bettina Schrittwieser, director of AK-consumer protection.

Obtaining preliminary information (on OneCoin) for those interested is currently not possible, because the Austrian Onecoin website has been offline since Friday.

“According to our information new investment is required to grow initial investment”.

BehindMLM reviewed OneCoin back in September, 2014. Based on OneCoin’s business model, which sees newly invested funds used to pay of existing investors, we concluded it was a Ponzi scheme.