Vision.One & NOMO: New Promises Despite Insolvency

VOO Travel: A Relaunch—sometime, maybe…

According to the latest message, the “reorganisation” of VOO Travel is still ongoing. After months of complete silence, the operators now claim to be negotiating with lawyers about the “legal situation surrounding usage rights” – but provide no concrete information about responsibilities, losses, or outstanding claims. Remarkably, they admit that offering a timeline is extremely difficult, yet still name Q1 2026 as the target for relaunching the app.

Setting a relaunch date for an app whose original operating company is insolvent, and whose technology is slated for liquidation according to insolvency documents, appears more like an attempt to keep the community calm. In parallel, an “alternative solution” is supposedly being developed – again without details, names, or any verifiable structure.

Copper Project: Big Marketing, Little That Can Be Verified

The so-called Copper Project continues to be promoted aggressively. Several new announcements have now been made: a token listing on multiple exchanges, allegedly including BitMart; an audit report by Deloitte for “Tempestats Copper Inc.”; USD 40 million in copper to “secure liquidity”; and payouts that will begin once the listing goes live.

But as usual, crucial information is missing:
Who exactly represents Tempestats Copper Inc.? In which country is the company registered? Which Deloitte office supposedly prepared this audit? What tokenomics apply? Where are the copper reserves held?

Similar claims have been used in the past to suggest legitimacy – without ever providing independent evidence. The current communication follows precisely the same pattern.

And, as so often is the case: Concrete proof is nowhere to be found. In the past, similar figures were circulated by VOO/AVINOC/Safir – numbers that later turned out to be unverifiable or significantly overstated. The presentation focuses less on actual product functionality than on visions, narrative building, and the promise of being part of a “global game changer.”

Notably, the NOMO ecosystem is positioned as a foundational layer for all previous projects – VOO Travel, VOO Shop, and Copper.ONE included. In effect, past failures are retroactively rebranded as stepping stones of a larger plan.

Vision.One: The Community as a Revenue Source & Opaque Payment Channels with the “VouGee” Confusion

The most critical part of the communication concerns financing. The operators emphasise that every member is vital and that projects “only work if we all believe and support them together.” They write, quite literally: “We are building a house together, and the roof is not yet finished.”

The annual membership fee, EUR 100 per person, is collected via Stripe, but not by the cooperative itself. Instead, it is processed through the company “VouGee Gesellschaft”, an entity without proper details.

The operators state that the money is “allocated to the cooperative accordingly” – a phrase that can mean everything and nothing, and which offers zero verifiable transparency.

The role of the so-called “VouGee entity” is particularly perplexing. According to Vision.One, annual membership fees are to be collected via Stripe through this organisation. Yet the communication provides neither a company address nor a registration number. It therefore remains entirely unclear which specific VouGee unit is actually handling these payment flows.

In reality, several different iterations of the name exist. There is an Austrian company called VouGee GmbH, for which the Alpine Creditors’ Association (AKV) has published insolvency proceedings. Alongside this sits the website vougee.com, which is still active but features a separate legal notice — and may not, in fact, be the same entity as the insolvent company.

The implications for members are serious: they are paying fees to an organisation whose identity cannot be clearly established.
Such uncertainty about who receives payments, how the company is structured, and who is ultimately responsible is highly unusual in the financial sector — and yet another indication of how little transparency the operators provide regarding even the most basic mechanics of their own system.