CubeBit is attempting a third reboot of its Ponzi scheme, signaling a move to Binance Chain and embracing decentralized finance (DeFi) with a new brand called FinCube. The scheme, previously reviewed in October 2020 as CubeBit 2.0 and a successor to Romel Gumiran's Nexus Chain, announced a "grand virtual launch" event in late February.

Footage from this event, uploaded to CubeBit's official Facebook account, confirms the continued operation of the CubeBot Ponzi mechanism. Marketing materials offer little new information beyond what was disclosed in earlier reviews. The primary change driving this relaunch appears to be a migration from Ethereum to Binance Chain.

CubeBit's foray into DeFi is branded as FinCube, presented as the financial and research arm of the operation. This new venture promises "math incorporated products" and aims to "revolutionize the way value flows." Such language is typical of schemes that intend to launch various "shitcoins," providing an exit strategy for operators when the Ponzi inevitably collapses.

The first such cryptocurrency is set to be CubeCoin, a conversion from an existing ERC-20 token. These assets will be traded on Cubex, CubeBit's proprietary internal exchange. A significant claim made by CubeBit involves securing "banking licenses from the SEC" to operate globally as a money service provider.

Rommel Gumiran himself confirmed this referred to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). However, a review of the SEC's Edgar database on March 31st showed no registration for CubeBit or CubePay. The company has failed to register with any securities regulators since its launch. SEC registration would compel CubeBit to disclose its AdCube trading bot Ponzi scheme and submit regular audited financial reports, actions a legitimate Ponzi operator would avoid.

This DeFi relaunch, while unsurprising, would likely have gone unnoticed without recent reader inquiries and suspicious emails. Former CubeBit CEO Konstantin Janke contacted ScamTelegraph after receiving these emails. Janke's involvement raises further questions about the scheme's operations and its leadership.