After doing nothing for almost a year while the Crowd1 Ponzi scheme spread like wildfire, South African authorities have clarified the company operates illegally.

Well, sort of.

Rather than take any initiative, the FSCA clarified Crowd1 was operating illegally in
response
to a public Twitter enquiry.

As above, it was only after being reached out to that the FSCA clarified Crowd1

is not an authorised FSP, nor a representative of an authorised FSP and there is no record of an application to become an authorised FSP with the FSCA.

They are not authorised to render any financial services as contemplated in the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services (FAIS) Act.

This is the equivalent of a securities fraud warning, although I have no idea why the FSCA is providing it on Twitter instead of their own website.

In light of Crowd1 operating illegally in South Africa, the FSCA advises;

Members of the public are warned to not conduct any financial services business with any individual or entity associated with Crowd 1.

Whether they follow up with local enforcement authorities remains to be seen. Not holding my breath though.

In the early stages of Crowd1 recruitment was concentrated in South Africa. At the time of publication Alexa ranks Crowd1 as the 
seventeenth
most visited website in the country.

South Africa still makes up a large percentage of Crowd1 investors, however recruitment has picked up elsewhere in the world.

Update June 24th 2020 – 
The FSCA has now published an
official statement
confirming Crowd1 is a fraudulent business opportunity.

🤖 Quick Answer

What action did South African authorities take against Crowd1?
The Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) clarified that Crowd1 operates illegally and is not an authorised Financial Service Provider (FSP). The company lacks authorization to render financial services under the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, with no record of pending applications submitted to the FSCA.

Why did the FSCA announcement come so late?
The FSCA responded to a public Twitter inquiry after approximately one year of inactivity while the alleged Ponzi scheme operated. Rather than initiating independent regulatory action, the authority provided clarification only when directly contacted by the public through social media.

🔗 Related Articles

- AladdinBOT Review: AI trading bot ruse Ponzi scheme
- PGI Global’s RV Palafox sentenced to 20 years
- ArbiStar’s Santi Fuentes prosecuted for €92 mill+ Ponzi
- Axiome Review: AXM token Dubai Ponzi scheme
- DavorCoin securities fraud cease and desist issued in Texas