Blocktrade: The next worst case scenario for marketers?
Hubert Freidl and his associates have always denied any connection to Blocktrade. But as already researched and documented in detail in earlier reports, written evidence exists that refutes these claims. After a period of relative calm around the platform, there are now again grandiose promises: a new management level and a ‘strategic realignment’ are supposed to help Blocktrade to a ‘rocket-like ascent’ and promise a promising future for all involved. But can that really be believed?
In this first part of our article series, we take a critical look back and examine the links between Blocktrade and Hubert Freidls corporate network. It is no coincidence that the lack of transparency in these structures is reminiscent of the infamous general terms and conditions (GTC) of Lyconet – and that is not a compliment.
A look back in time: the connections to Freidl and Co.
The Blocktrade platform was launched in 2018 as an up-and-coming trading platform for cryptocurrencies. But shortly afterwards, connections to Hubert Freidl and his extensive network of companies came to light.
Blocktrade S.A., originally registered in Luxembourg, was founded by the EliteClub Foundation, a foundation based in Dubai. The foundation held 100% of the capital and all voting rights of the platform. Crucially, the beneficial owner of the foundation was Silvia Freidl, the wife of Hubert Freidl. This meant that Blocktrade was ultimately indirectly but effectively controlled by Hubert Freidl. Although this was repeatedly publicly denied, the partnership agreements of the EliteClub Foundation prove this connection beyond doubt.
In 2019, the Swiss company Cryptix AG acquired the Liechtenstein-based digital asset exchange Blocktrade. One of the aims of this takeover was to apply for a MiFID II investment firm licence in order to operate as a Multilateral Trading Facility (MTF). The licence would have enabled Cryptix AG to significantly expand its activities in the area of digital financial services.
A key figure at Cryptix is Bernhard Koch, who serves as the company’s ‘Chairman’. Koch, a former managing director of Lyoness and a close associate of Lyoness founder Hubert Freidl, was instrumental in developing projects such as ‘eCredits’. These projects were regularly pitched to Lyconet marketers and aimed to expand the network of Freidl’s company.
According to current knowledge, however, the requested MiFID II investment firm licence was not granted. The exact reasons for a possible rejection are still unclear. Enquiries about the background have been made to the relevant authorities, but an official statement is still pending.
This development raises questions about the strategic direction and regulatory future of Cryptix AG. Further information is eagerly awaited.
The next change of ownership followed in 2022, when Blocktrade was taken over by Web3 Investco AG – a company that was in liquidation shortly afterwards. Interestingly, Web3 Investco AG consisted of only two people at the time of the takeover, and the seller was once again the EliteClub Foundation. This takeover looked more like a cosmetic measure to distance Blocktrade from Freidl’s corporate network. But the usual suspects – including Christian Niedermüller, Bernhard Koch and Anja Frauwallner – remained active in the background.
The most recent development: a change without a clear strategy
In the summer of 2024, an Estonian investment group led by Fred Kaasik took over Blocktrade. Kaasik was initially appointed as CEO, but was replaced by Sam Tan just a few months later. At the same time, the FSR Group, another company with a dubious background, took over the majority of the voting shares. The FSR Group has only existed for a short time, and its links to the original investment group and Kaasik remain opaque. These changes raise further questions about Blocktrade’s transparency and long-term plans.
A recent statement on the Blocktrade website adds to the uncertainty: on 7 November 2024, it was announced that the platform would no longer be using its licence in Estonia and would in future be operating under Slovenian regulations. According to Blocktrade, this is a purely ‘administrative change’ that will not affect quality and security. But why take this step? The change raises significant questions about regulatory challenges and possible instabilities.
Conclusion: obvious connections and non-transparent structures
Blocktrade’s story shows how deeply the platform is integrated into the structures of Hubert Freidl’s corporate network. Despite repeated denials, the facts speak for themselves: written evidence, personnel overlaps and recurring names such as Koch or Niedermüller leave no doubt about the entanglements.
And now? In the next parts of this series, we analyse the current developments at Blocktrade. Particular attention is paid to the statements regarding the planned IPO, the new CEO Sam Tan and the lack of prospects for monetising the platform.
Stay tuned for our further documentation of the risks behind Blocktrade’s dazzling facade.
Sources: Blocktrade, Northdata, Lichtenstein-Business,
Note: As always, those affected are welcome to comment, or if someone has more or different information, they are welcome to share it with us. We are not interested in making false claims and our primary goal remains to provide complete documentation.
Leave a Reply
Want to join the discussion?Feel free to contribute!