Digitex Futures Response to the Spotware Article

False accusations and slanderous untruths.

Author
Recent Posts

JuiceStorm.com supported Adam Todd and the Digitex Futures since before the ICO on January 15th 2018. Support for the Digitex Futures was withdrawn 4th August 2020.

Completion Date 30th April and Product Delivery

Spotware claimed in the article that “it is not possible” to build a futures exchange within two months. They also mentioned that they took Adam on as a client because he “was desperate” and that “we chose to consider this project to help the man to stay out of trouble.”

While that may sound very noble of them, the fact remains that this is business, no one was asking for charity. If the company had no intention of delivering the project within the set date, they had no business taking our business–and our money (yes, we did pay them).

Furthermore, for the record, Adam did request April 30th as the official launch date and Spotware agreed. Bonus incentives were also offered and accepted for key delivery dates including a working demo for April 2nd and a finished product for April 22nd.

We were assured that the exchange would be delivered on time and according to the specs that were given. Once the cracks started to appear, they began to request more money (as much as 25K euros) to make small “changes” that were previously agreed upon (such as adding the last traded price and traded volume figures, which they failed to do).

No Intention of Launching the Exchange

Spotware made the false accusation that Digitex is a scam and that Adam had no intention of launching the exchange. However, the company previously mentioned that they were not familiar with the token business nor does it interest them.

In their own words, “We really did not want to be involved in their token business.” They did, however, accept bonuses in DGTX.

We can say with complete clarity that Digitex Futures is not a scam and that Adam had every intention of launching the exchange on April 30th.

He moved to Cyprus, sent over key computational equipment and rented space for one year (all this documentation is in Digitex’s possession). If he had no intention of working with the Spotware team long term, why would he have done this?

Moreover, anyone who is “familiar with the token business” can check Etherscan and see that none of the team’s wallets have moved. We’re still on Telegram around the clock, we are hosting live AMAs, and we are reachable through all the usual channels.

No Intention of Announcing Their Partnership with Us

This is absolutely untrue. In fact, after the article that we wrote on our blog about Spotware, the company received multiple calls for business and were extremely pleased with the marketing we sent their way. They were even working on a joint story with our marketing team and a press release (all correspondence is in our possession).

It is true that a couple of days later, they sent us new terms and conditions about not using their name, for reasons we are unsure of. However, we suspect that it is because they did not want to be associated with a product that was as catastrophic as the one they were building. Either way, this new contract was never signed by us and we never agreed to nor indeed were asked to remove material mentioning the Spotware name.

Spotware also accused us of wanting to “hijack their reputation” as if this were a bad thing. It is good business sense when one company works with another company that is recognized as experts in their field.

We were naturally seeking developers whom we felt were the very best and who promised us to deliver what we sought. Unfortunately, this partnership yielded neither of those results.

To Summarize

We sincerely feel deeply disappointed by our partnership with Spotware and Adam will address all your unanswered questions on his live AMA at 5 pm CET. However, we also hope to draw a line under this unfortunate experience and move on with a new development path forward.