GlamJet review

Participate and Join the Investigation

Sascha Schlenzig — Mon, 10 Aug 2026 09:44:58 GMT

Dear Partners,
Dear Customers,

Please fill in now:

👉 GlamJet / MyCryptoConsult Survey
https://forms.gle/wPy7Qhb5w5C4yZAZ6

👉 Investigation & Information Group
https://chat.whatsapp.com/CcUA8QEreafH6yZEYdj5oP?s=cl&p=a&ilr=1

Please also think about friends, acquaintances, family members, business partners, or former team members who were involved with GlamJet.

Many people originally became involved through personal recommendations and networks.

Those same networks can now help ensure that as many affected people as possible are informed about the ongoing investigation.

The purpose is not to tell anyone what to think or to prejudge anyone.

It is about giving people the opportunity to contribute their own experiences, information, and documentation.

📊 Where We Stand Today

The current preliminary evaluation shows:

480 responses evaluated

Approximately €3 million in reported payments and investments

More than 90% are generally open to possible legal action

An approximately 20-page dossier has been prepared for an initial legal review

These figures do not constitute a final legal assessment.

However, they clearly show why the developments surrounding GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult should continue to be examined systematically and professionally.

⚖️ Legal Review Is the Next Major Step

In the German-language survey, 90.3% of participants stated that they would answer either “Yes” or “Maybe” when asked whether they would consider participating in legal action if a legal review identifies sufficient grounds to proceed.

The English-language survey also shows a very high level of general willingness.

This does not mean that a decision has already been made to initiate legal proceedings.

Nor has it been determined which legal route, jurisdiction, or potential claims might ultimately be relevant.

That is precisely what the upcoming legal review is intended to clarify.

📄 The Dossier Is Ready for Initial Legal Assessment

The information gathered so far has now been systematically compiled.

The dossier currently consists of approximately 20 pages and covers documented developments relating to GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult over a period of around eight years.

It brings together existing information, documents, developments, and unresolved questions.

The initial legal review is intended to assess, among other things:

▪️ Which facts and circumstances may be legally relevant?
▪️ Which additional evidence and documents may be required?
▪️ Against whom could potential claims possibly exist?
▪️ Which jurisdictions and legal avenues may be available?
▪️ Which further steps would be legally and economically reasonable?

The next steps will depend significantly on this assessment.

We do not want to prejudge the outcome.

We want a sound, independent, and professionally grounded legal evaluation.

🔎 376 Participants Report That GLAM Has Not Been Usable in Practice

Of the 480 responses evaluated so far, 376 participants explicitly answered “No” when asked whether they had ever been able to use, exchange, sell, cash out, or spend their GLAM tokens on products in practice.

Other participants answered “partially” or stated that they had not yet attempted to do so.

This issue will also need to be assessed objectively and legally.

At the same time, the publicly accessible Ethereum contract shows more than 15,000 holder addresses.

It is important to emphasize that a holder address does not automatically correspond to one individual person.

Nevertheless, the blockchain data indicates that the potential scale of the project may be considerably larger than the almost 500 responses evaluated so far.

👉 GLAM on Etherscan — can you find your tokens?
https://etherscan.io/token/0x21c2f2e8462d1090ac33d5a65cc03affb18bb504

❓ After Eight Years, Important Questions Remain Unanswered

GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult have been promoted since 2018 across several years and multiple countries.

There is therefore a legitimate interest in establishing, in a transparent and verifiable way, what actually happened.

Among the central questions are:

What was announced — and what was actually delivered?

What products or services were provided in return for the respective payments?

How were the funds and cryptocurrencies paid into the project used?

Through which companies, bank accounts, or wallets did these funds and assets move?

Who actually had decision-making, administrative, or disposal authority?

On what basis were GLAM values presented?

And why, after approximately eight years, do so many questions remain regarding the actual usability of the token and the products and services that were announced?

These questions are not accusations.

They are questions that should be examined through documentation, factual investigation, and professional legal assessment.

⚠️ No Prejudgment — But a Legitimate Interest in Answers

We expressly do not claim that any particular person or company has acted criminally, unlawfully under civil law, or otherwise illegally.

The outcome of any legal review must remain open.

However:

Avoiding prejudgment does not mean abandoning legitimate questions.

After approximately eight years, 480 evaluated responses, around €3 million in reported payments and investments, and numerous unresolved issues, there is a clear collective interest in understanding what happened and whether legal claims or other measures may be appropriate.

🎯 From 480 to 1,000 Participants

Our next major goal is 1,000 participants.

The more people participate, the broader and more reliable the factual basis becomes.

We are particularly looking for:

▪️ personal experiences — including positive, negative, or mixed experiences
▪️ payment records
▪️ wallet addresses and transaction data
▪️ contracts and invoices
▪️ screenshots from the back office
▪️ emails and chat conversations
▪️ presentations and announcements from that period
▪️ information about payouts, commissions, refunds, or repayments

Positive and mixed experiences are expressly welcome.

The purpose is not to create a predetermined narrative.

The purpose is to establish, as accurately and comprehensively as possible, what actually happened.

📣 Help Us Reach the Next 500 People

Please do not only complete the survey yourself.

Share it.

Contact the people you remember from your former GlamJet network.

Ask former partners and customers whether they know about the ongoing investigation.

Forward the survey to people who may still have documents, screenshots, transaction records, or other relevant information.

Every additional response can help complete the overall picture.

👉 Take Part in the Survey
https://forms.gle/wPy7Qhb5w5C4yZAZ6

👉 Join the Investigation & Information Group
https://chat.whatsapp.com/CcUA8QEreafH6yZEYdj5oP?s=cl&p=a&ilr=1

480 participants are the beginning.
Our next goal is 1,000.

Warm regards,

Sascha Schlenzig
for the ongoing collective investigation and review

Did you already read ?! Current Status of the GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult Investigation

Sascha Schlenzig — Sun, 09 Aug 2026 17:02:49 GMT

Dear Partners,
Dear Customers,

The ongoing investigation and review of GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult is entering its next important phase.

We have now evaluated 480 responses, documented approximately €3 million in reported payments and investments, and prepared an approximately 20-page dossier for an initial legal review.

But this is only the beginning.

Our next goal is to reach 1,000 participants — and to bring together as many experiences, documents, payment records, wallet data, and other relevant information as possible.

🚨 Participate and Join the Investigation

If you were involved with GlamJet or MyCryptoConsult, please take part in the survey and share it with other people you know from that time.

👉 GlamJet / MyCryptoConsult Survey
https://forms.gle/wPy7Qhb5w5C4yZAZ6

👉 Investigation & Information Group
https://chat.whatsapp.com/CcUA8QEreafH6yZEYdj5oP?s=cl&p=a&ilr=1

Please also think about friends, acquaintances, family members, business partners, or former team members who were involved with GlamJet.

Many people originally became involved through personal recommendations and networks.

Those same networks can now help ensure that as many affected people as possible are informed about the ongoing investigation.

The purpose is not to tell anyone what to think or to prejudge anyone.

It is about giving people the opportunity to contribute their own experiences, information, and documentation.

📊 Where We Stand Today

The current preliminary evaluation shows:

480 responses evaluated

Approximately €3 million in reported payments and investments

More than 90% are generally open to possible legal action

An approximately 20-page dossier has been prepared for an initial legal review

These figures do not constitute a final legal assessment.

However, they clearly show why the developments surrounding GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult should continue to be examined systematically and professionally.

⚖️ Legal Review Is the Next Major Step

The English-language survey also shows a very high level of general willingness.

This does not mean that a decision has already been made to initiate legal proceedings.

Nor has it been determined which legal route, jurisdiction, or potential claims might ultimately be relevant.

That is precisely what the upcoming legal review is intended to clarify.

📄 The Dossier Is Ready for Initial Legal Assessment

The information gathered so far has now been systematically compiled.

The dossier currently consists of approximately 20 pages and covers documented developments relating to GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult over a period of around eight years.

It brings together existing information, documents, developments, and unresolved questions.

The initial legal review is intended to assess, among other things:

The next steps will depend significantly on this assessment.

We do not want to prejudge the outcome.

We want a sound, independent, and professionally grounded legal evaluation.

🔎 376 Participants Report That GLAM Has Not Been Usable in Practice

Other participants answered “partially” or stated that they had not yet attempted to do so.

This issue will also need to be assessed objectively and legally.

At the same time, the publicly accessible Ethereum contract shows more than 15,000 holder addresses.

It is important to emphasize that a holder address does not automatically correspond to one individual person.

Nevertheless, the blockchain data indicates that the potential scale of the project may be considerably larger than the almost 500 responses evaluated so far.

👉 GLAM on Etherscan — can you find your tokens?
https://etherscan.io/token/0x21c2f2e8462d1090ac33d5a65cc03affb18bb504

❓ After Eight Years, Important Questions Remain Unanswered

GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult have been promoted since 2018 across several years and multiple countries.

There is therefore a legitimate interest in establishing, in a transparent and verifiable way, what actually happened.

Among the central questions are:

What was announced — and what was actually delivered?

What products or services were provided in return for the respective payments?

How were the funds and cryptocurrencies paid into the project used?

Through which companies, bank accounts, or wallets did these funds and assets move?

Who actually had decision-making, administrative, or disposal authority?

On what basis were GLAM values presented?

And why, after approximately eight years, do so many questions remain regarding the actual usability of the token and the products and services that were announced?

These questions are not accusations.

They are questions that should be examined through documentation, factual investigation, and professional legal assessment.

⚠️ No Prejudgment — But a Legitimate Interest in Answers

We expressly do not claim that any particular person or company has acted criminally, unlawfully under civil law, or otherwise illegally.

The outcome of any legal review must remain open.

However:

Avoiding prejudgment does not mean abandoning legitimate questions.

🎯 From 480 to 1,000 Participants

Our next major goal is 1,000 participants.

The more people participate, the broader and more reliable the factual basis becomes.

We are particularly looking for:

Positive and mixed experiences are expressly welcome.

The purpose is not to create a predetermined narrative.

The purpose is to establish, as accurately and comprehensively as possible, what actually happened.

📣 Help Us Reach the Next 500 People

Please do not only complete the survey yourself.

Share it.

Contact the people you remember from your former GlamJet network.

Ask former partners and customers whether they know about the ongoing investigation.

Forward the survey to people who may still have documents, screenshots, transaction records, or other relevant information.

Every additional response can help complete the overall picture.

👉 Take Part in the Survey
https://forms.gle/wPy7Qhb5w5C4yZAZ6

👉 Join the Investigation & Information Group
https://chat.whatsapp.com/CcUA8QEreafH6yZEYdj5oP?s=cl&p=a&ilr=1

480 participants are the beginning.
Our next goal is 1,000.

Warm regards,

Sascha Schlenzig
for the ongoing collective investigation and review

Current Status of the GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult Investigation

Sascha Schlenzig — Sat, 08 Aug 2026 11:34:25 GMT

Dear Partners,
Dear Customers,

The ongoing investigation and review of GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult is entering its next important phase.

We have now evaluated 480 responses, documented approximately €3 million in reported payments and investments, and prepared an approximately 20-page dossier for an initial legal review.

But this is only the beginning.

Our next goal is to reach 1,000 participants — and to bring together as many experiences, documents, payment records, wallet data, and other relevant information as possible.

🚨 Participate and Join the Investigation

If you were involved with GlamJet or MyCryptoConsult, please take part in the survey and share it with other people you know from that time.

👉 GlamJet / MyCryptoConsult Survey
https://forms.gle/wPy7Qhb5w5C4yZAZ6

👉 Investigation & Information Group
https://chat.whatsapp.com/CcUA8QEreafH6yZEYdj5oP?s=cl&p=a&ilr=1

Please also think about friends, acquaintances, family members, business partners, or former team members who were involved with GlamJet.

Many people originally became involved through personal recommendations and networks.

Those same networks can now help ensure that as many affected people as possible are informed about the ongoing investigation.

The purpose is not to tell anyone what to think or to prejudge anyone.

It is about giving people the opportunity to contribute their own experiences, information, and documentation.

📊 Where We Stand Today

The current preliminary evaluation shows:

480 responses evaluated

Approximately €3 million in reported payments and investments

More than 90% are generally open to possible legal action

An approximately 20-page dossier has been prepared for an initial legal review

These figures do not constitute a final legal assessment.

However, they clearly show why the developments surrounding GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult should continue to be examined systematically and professionally.

⚖️ Legal Review Is the Next Major Step

The English-language survey also shows a very high level of general willingness.

This does not mean that a decision has already been made to initiate legal proceedings.

Nor has it been determined which legal route, jurisdiction, or potential claims might ultimately be relevant.

That is precisely what the upcoming legal review is intended to clarify.

📄 The Dossier Is Ready for Initial Legal Assessment

The information gathered so far has now been systematically compiled.

The dossier currently consists of approximately 20 pages and covers documented developments relating to GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult over a period of around eight years.

It brings together existing information, documents, developments, and unresolved questions.

The initial legal review is intended to assess, among other things:

The next steps will depend significantly on this assessment.

We do not want to prejudge the outcome.

We want a sound, independent, and professionally grounded legal evaluation.

🔎 376 Participants Report That GLAM Has Not Been Usable in Practice

Other participants answered “partially” or stated that they had not yet attempted to do so.

This issue will also need to be assessed objectively and legally.

At the same time, the publicly accessible Ethereum contract shows more than 15,000 holder addresses.

It is important to emphasize that a holder address does not automatically correspond to one individual person.

Nevertheless, the blockchain data indicates that the potential scale of the project may be considerably larger than the almost 500 responses evaluated so far.

👉 GLAM on Etherscan — can you find your tokens?
https://etherscan.io/token/0x21c2f2e8462d1090ac33d5a65cc03affb18bb504

❓ After Eight Years, Important Questions Remain Unanswered

GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult have been promoted since 2018 across several years and multiple countries.

There is therefore a legitimate interest in establishing, in a transparent and verifiable way, what actually happened.

Among the central questions are:

What was announced — and what was actually delivered?

What products or services were provided in return for the respective payments?

How were the funds and cryptocurrencies paid into the project used?

Through which companies, bank accounts, or wallets did these funds and assets move?

Who actually had decision-making, administrative, or disposal authority?

On what basis were GLAM values presented?

And why, after approximately eight years, do so many questions remain regarding the actual usability of the token and the products and services that were announced?

These questions are not accusations.

They are questions that should be examined through documentation, factual investigation, and professional legal assessment.

⚠️ No Prejudgment — But a Legitimate Interest in Answers

We expressly do not claim that any particular person or company has acted criminally, unlawfully under civil law, or otherwise illegally.

The outcome of any legal review must remain open.

However:

Avoiding prejudgment does not mean abandoning legitimate questions.

🎯 From 480 to 1,000 Participants

Our next major goal is 1,000 participants.

The more people participate, the broader and more reliable the factual basis becomes.

We are particularly looking for:

Positive and mixed experiences are expressly welcome.

The purpose is not to create a predetermined narrative.

The purpose is to establish, as accurately and comprehensively as possible, what actually happened.

📣 Help Us Reach the Next 500 People

Please do not only complete the survey yourself.

Share it.

Contact the people you remember from your former GlamJet network.

Ask former partners and customers whether they know about the ongoing investigation.

Forward the survey to people who may still have documents, screenshots, transaction records, or other relevant information.

Every additional response can help complete the overall picture.

👉 Take Part in the Survey
https://forms.gle/wPy7Qhb5w5C4yZAZ6

👉 Join the Investigation & Information Group
https://chat.whatsapp.com/CcUA8QEreafH6yZEYdj5oP?s=cl&p=a&ilr=1

480 participants are the beginning.
Our next goal is 1,000.

Warm regards,

Sascha Schlenzig
for the ongoing collective investigation and review

Personal Statement Regarding GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult

Sascha Schlenzig — Tue, 28 Jul 2026 15:24:23 GMT

Dear Community,

I would like to address you personally once again today and explain why I have decided that I can no longer support GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult.

This decision was not an easy one for me.

For many years, I supported GlamJet with great conviction, considerable personal commitment, and complete loyalty. I believed in the original vision and trusted that the numerous announcements would eventually result in a functioning, usable, and sustainable project.

However, after approximately eight years, I still do not see any reliable overall result that, from my personal perspective, lives up to the central original announcements and expectations.

Over the years, I repeatedly accepted postponements, new timelines, and new announcements. In my perception, previously announced initiatives were often not implemented, were only partially implemented, or were implemented substantially later than announced.

For me, an increasingly recurring pattern became apparent: deadlines or intentions were announced and subsequently postponed. In some cases, this was followed by long periods without reliable communication. New hopes were then raised, while the actual implementation once again fell short of the previous announcements.

In my view, many fundamental questions were also never answered comprehensively and transparently.

This includes, in particular, the question of why the listing originally announced for 2020 did not take place as planned. From my perspective, the GlamX Exchange also did not develop into a permanently functional and reliable solution.

To this day, there is no functioning GlamJet ecosystem. The GlamJet Token cannot be used and has no value whatsoever.

For a long time, I tried to understand these developments as normal difficulties associated with an ambitious project. At some point, however, I had to honestly admit to myself that I could no longer maintain this explanation personally.

The decisive point for me was ultimately reached in the spring of this year.

One specific trigger was the development surrounding Nova Farms. After implementation had initially been announced for the beginning of 2026, the date was postponed to 28 February. It was subsequently announced again that implementation would take place at the beginning of March.

In my perception, this announced implementation also did not take place as stated.

For me, this was not merely another delay. Rather, it was further evidence of the pattern I had already experienced over a long period of time: months of postponements, insufficient or absent communication, and yet another announcement that was not fulfilled.

Since mid-2024, I had repeatedly made it clear to the person who presented themselves to me as the responsible project manager that such an approach was not acceptable to me.

This was not only about deadlines.

I had repeatedly pointed out that, in connection with new GlamJet-related projects, the actual usability of the GLAM Token had to be the central focus. In my view, there should have been a clear and functioning technical implementation through which the token could actually be used and given a comprehensible practical utility.

I also repeatedly pointed out that regulatory and legal questions had to be clarified clearly and reliably before new projects and intentions were announced.

However, even in 2025, I did not have the impression that these fundamental points, which I had raised several times, were being given the necessary priority.

Under these circumstances, a reliable and trust-based collaboration was no longer possible for me.

My Own Public Role

For many years, I personally conducted numerous webinars about GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult. In doing so, I relied on information and statements provided to me by those responsible for the project and which can also be found in the publicly accessible official newsletters.

I am aware that, through my many years of public support, I personally contributed to creating trust in GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult.

I do not wish to avoid responsibility for my own communication.

I was one of the project’s most visible supporters, spoke about it publicly, and communicated numerous statements and announcements to the community. I therefore do not wish to downplay my own role today or portray myself as someone who was merely standing on the sidelines.

For precisely this reason, I now consider it my responsibility to explain my changed assessment openly and to support the process of reviewing and clarifying what happened.

At the same time, I had no decisive influence over the operational, technical, legal, or financial implementation of the initiatives I communicated.

I was neither decisively involved in nor responsible for these operational, technical, legal, and financial decisions.

I had no authority over project funds and did not decide how they were used. Nor did I make final decisions regarding the technical development, the listing, the operation of an exchange, or the specific implementation of the announced projects.

For many people, the distinction between my public communication and the actual operational decision-making structures was probably not always apparent.

As a result, I increasingly faced the risk of being held publicly responsible for developments over which I had no decisive influence.

I therefore clearly recognise the risk of significant damage to my reputation, and for years I have experienced increasing pressure on my public credibility.

After all these years, I increasingly felt that I had supported a project with great loyalty without actually being able to influence the decisive developments or ensure their implementation.

At the same time, I increasingly developed the feeling that I had ultimately become a pawn in decisions made by others.

In May, I therefore decided to pull the emergency brake.

I decided that I would no longer support GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult and that I would end any further collaboration connected with GlamJet.

This decision is not a personal reckoning and is not directed against individual people on a personal level.

It is the consequence of my experiences over the past several years, my personal assessment, and my responsibility for my own credibility.

I did not write this statement in order to condemn anyone. I am writing it because, after all these years, I owe the community an honest explanation as to why I can no longer continue along this path.

Why I Support the Review and Clarification Process

Ultimately, only one path remained for me: instead of continuing to promote the project, I wanted to help review and clarify what had happened.

I would like to make it expressly clear that I am not seeking to claim any personal financial loss for myself. I therefore cannot claim to have suffered the same kind of direct financial disadvantage as many other people.

Above all, this is about the thousands of partners and customers who supported GlamJet around the world over many years.

It is about people who believed in the vision, trusted the project, and in some cases paid in substantial amounts of money. It is about those who repeatedly waited, hoped, and held on to new announcements.

The initial results of our survey already show that numerous people are reporting financial disadvantages and that many experiences, questions, and accounts are recurring.

My personal sense of justice does not allow me simply to accept this development without at least attempting to examine the responsibilities, payment flows, use of funds, decisions, announcements, and the actual implementation of the announced projects.

I cannot say today what the ultimate results of this review will be.

Nor can I promise whether any legal consequences will arise or what those consequences might be. This will depend on the available documentation, the further examination, and the decisions of the respective competent authorities and institutions.

What I can say, however, is the following:

I will continue to support the review and clarification process to the best of my ability.

I will help to compile information, make unanswered questions visible, and support affected individuals in securing their own experiences and documentation.

This is not about personal revenge, bitterness, or a public reckoning.

It is about responsibility, transparency, and ensuring that the experiences of the community are not simply ignored or forgotten.

I would like to express my sincere gratitude for the considerable support and the numerous responses received so far.

The personal messages, accounts of individual experiences, and offers of support show me that many people also have a strong need for an objective, fair, and thorough review of what happened.

At the same time, I know that some people are still considering whether they wish to support this initiative. I expressly respect that. Everyone must make this decision for themselves.

What Happens Next

In order to provide further information, I will set up dedicated information channels on WhatsApp and Telegram over the coming days. I will publish them as soon as they have been fully established.

Until then, you can contact me directly via WhatsApp at any time if you have questions or would like to participate in the review and clarification process:

📲 WhatsApp:

👉 https://wa.me/491601154517

You can also find current information about the review, as well as published analyses, articles, and developments, on our Substack page:

📄 GlamJet / MyCryptoConsult Review and Clarification:

👉

I know that not everyone will agree with my decision. Nor does anyone have to. However, I hope that everyone can understand why I made this decision after careful consideration.

I did not write this statement in order to condemn anyone. I wrote it because, after all these years, I owe the community an honest explanation as to why I can no longer continue along this path.

I would like to thank everyone who has accompanied and supported me over the past several years.

I would also like to thank everyone who is already supporting the review and clarification process or who may choose to do so in the future.

And I would like to thank everyone who continues to remain connected with me, independently of GlamJet.

I am always open to a factual and constructive exchange.

Thank you very much for your trust.

Yours,

Sascha Schlenzig

CURRENT STATUS OF THE REVIEW OF GLAMJET AND MYCRYPTOCONSULT

Sascha Schlenzig — Mon, 27 Jul 2026 11:38:54 GMT

_26 July 2026_

Dear Partners,

Dear Customers,

First of all, we would like to thank everyone who has already participated in our survey and provided information or documents.

The ongoing review is now supported by numerous responses, personal accounts, reports and documents from the former community.

📊 420 RESPONSES AND APPROXIMATELY THREE MILLION EUROS IN REPORTED FINANCIAL DETRIMENT

As of 26 July 2026, we have received a total of *420 responses*.

According to the current evaluation, which has not yet been completed, the financial detriment reported by participants amounts to approximately *three million euros in total*.

This figure is expressly not a final, independently verified or legally established total amount of damages.

Possible duplicate entries, payments received, commissions, repayments and the legal classification of individual items are still being reviewed.

Numerous responses contain recurring accounts concerning:

▪️ financial detriment;

▪️ announcements that were not implemented or were implemented only in part;

▪️ unresolved questions regarding the individuals and companies involved;

▪️ responsibilities and decision-making authority;

▪️ payment routes and the use of funds;

▪️ the development and actual usability of the GLAM Token;

▪️ the token values displayed in the back office;

▪️ and the actual status of announced products, platforms and services.

The survey does not replace a legal assessment. At present, it does not allow for a final determination of possible damages or a conclusive assessment of the personal or legal responsibility of any individual.

However, the results obtained so far reveal recurring issues and patterns.

In our view, there is therefore a substantial and concrete need for clarification and further examination.

Given the number of responses and the extent to which their content overlaps, the reported events cannot be classified as isolated individual cases without further examination.

📅 THE SURVEY WILL REMAIN OPEN UNTIL 31 AUGUST 2026

We will continue the survey until 31 August 2026, both in German-speaking countries and internationally, and will once again make a targeted effort to expand its reach.

In our assessment, there are still many former partners and customers who:

▪️ have not yet heard about the survey;

▪️ have not yet received the link;

▪️ initially wanted to review or compile their documents;

▪️ or have only now decided to share their experiences.

GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult have been promoted across national borders since 2018.

The responses received to date therefore cannot yet provide a complete picture of all experiences and financial consequences.

The broader, more international and better documented the responses are, the more accurately we can:

▪️ compare different experiences;

▪️ identify recurring processes and statements;

▪️ trace payment routes and the structures involved;

▪️ verify reported financial detriment;

▪️ avoid possible duplicate entries;

▪️ take account of services, payments and repayments received;

▪️ and identify unresolved questions concerning roles, responsibilities and areas of authority more precisely.

We therefore expressly invite all former partners and customers to participate, regardless of whether their experiences were positive, negative or mixed, and regardless of whether they personally suffered any financial detriment.

👉 PARTICIPATE IN THE SURVEY HERE:

https://forms.gle/wPy7Qhb5w5C4yZAZ6

👉 GUIDE TO SECURING AND COMPILING YOUR DOCUMENTS:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/11H5T2OrHreHYTMJQoeVYovlcFA3XwMTg/view?usp=sharing

Participation does not constitute a power of attorney or binding consent to any particular course of action.

Each person decides independently how they assess their experience and whether they wish to support or take any further steps at a later stage.

Please provide only information that you can report truthfully and to the best of your knowledge and belief.

Your own observations, information received from other people, assumptions and personal assessments should be clearly distinguished from one another.

The survey does not replace individual legal advice.

❓ KEY QUESTIONS REMAIN UNRESOLVED

At the beginning of July 2026, we sent Wilhelm Morant a catalogue containing a total of *18 specific factual questions*.

Since August 2018, Wilhelm Morant has appeared in connection with GlamJet and MyCryptoConsult as a central and publicly visible point of contact for the community.

In documented webinars and presentations, he introduced the project and its development, explained current developments and promotions, and announced planned next steps, products and developments.

Among the titles he used to describe his role were “Project Manager” and *“Head of Community”.

These role descriptions and his public appearances are documented by existing recordings and visual material.

Describing him as a central point of contact refers to the communication and presentation role he actually performed publicly.

It does not constitute a final statement regarding any formal corporate-law position, internal decision-making authority or personal legal responsibility.

The extent to which this role was actually associated with internal decision-making, administrative authority or control over assets, and what legal responsibility may result from it, remains part of the ongoing review.

THE 18 FACTUAL QUESTIONS ADDRESS, AMONG OTHER MATTERS:

▪️ the companies involved;

▪️ the roles, responsibilities and decision-making authority of the individuals involved;

▪️ the receipt and use of funds and cryptocurrencies paid in;

▪️ payment routes, accounts and wallets;

▪️ the development and functionality of the GLAM Token;

▪️ the basis for the displayed token values;

▪️ the products, platforms and services announced over a period of several years;

▪️ organisational and regulatory issues;

▪️ and possible solutions for individuals who have reported financial detriment.

As of 26 July 2026, we have not received a substantive response to these 18 factual questions.

We have also not yet received a substantive response to our proposal to discuss, in principle and without prejudging the outcome, the possible examination of a transparent and neutrally administered compensation arrangement for individuals with plausibly documented financial detriment.

This statement relates exclusively to the current status of the substantive response to our questions and proposals.

It does not constitute prejudgement or a final assessment of personal, financial or legal responsibility.

🔎 THE FACTUAL REVIEW WILL CONTINUE

By 31 August 2026, we intend in particular to:

▪️ further complete the existing documentation;

▪️ include additional documents and personal accounts;

▪️ present payment routes, wallets, companies and areas of responsibility;

▪️ examine the reported financial detriment more closely;

▪️ take account of payments, commissions, repayments and other services received;

▪️ avoid possible duplicate entries;

▪️ conduct an in-depth evaluation of responses that are particularly well documented;

▪️ and provide a structured template for documenting individual experiences.

31 August is not an ultimatum to Wilhelm Morant or any other person.

It is solely our own organisational timeframe for the next phase of the review and for the continued distribution of the survey.

Once this phase of work has been completed, the compiled information and documents are to be assessed by legal counsel.

Only on the basis of this professional assessment will a decision be made as to whether any further steps appear appropriate from a factual and legal perspective and, if so, which steps.

The future course of action deliberately remains open.

We will continue to distinguish clearly between:

▪️ documented facts;

▪️ personal statements made by individual participants;

▪️ information that has not yet been verified;

▪️ information reported only by third parties;

▪️ unresolved questions;

▪️ personal assessments;

▪️ and legal assessments.

Verifiable corrections, exculpatory information and differing accounts will, of course, also be taken into consideration.

🤝 DIFFERENT EXPERIENCES ARE PART OF A COMPLETE REVIEW

We are aware that experiences and assessments within the former community differ.

Numerous people report substantial financial detriment and disappointed expectations.

Others received payments, commissions or other services, did not personally suffer a financial loss, or assess their personal situation differently.

Positive, mixed or differing experiences are also part of a complete and credible review.

What matters is that the information is presented in a transparent and factual manner and, wherever possible, supported by existing documents.

📁 PLEASE SECURE ALL DOCUMENTS COMPLETELY AND WITHOUT ALTERATION

Please secure in particular:

▪️ evidence of payments and transfers;

▪️ relevant bank statements;

▪️ wallet addresses and transaction data;

▪️ contracts, invoices and package confirmations;

▪️ back-office screenshots;

▪️ complete emails and chat histories;

▪️ presentations, webinars and announcements made at the time;

▪️ information concerning payments, commissions, services or repayments received;

▪️ and previous support enquiries and the responses received.

Personal accounts should, wherever possible, be limited to the person’s own observations and documents.

Information that has only been reported by other individuals should be clearly identified as such.

Messages, emails and documents should, wherever possible, be secured in full and not merely as isolated extracts removed from their original context.

Personal data relating to uninvolved third parties that is not required should be redacted wherever possible.

At the same time, the original files should be retained securely and without alteration.

⚖️ CALL FOR OBJECTIVITY AND MUTUAL RESPECT

We expressly ask everyone involved to conduct the continuing discussion in an objective and respectful manner.

A serious review does not require prejudgement, insults or speculation.

This means in particular:

▪️ no insults or personal disparagement;

▪️ no unsubstantiated allegations of criminal conduct;

▪️ no presentation of assumptions as established facts;

▪️ no unauthorised public disclosure of confidential documents or personal data;

▪️ and no calls for pressure, intimidation or other unlawful actions.

Critical questions, clear criticism and the factual presentation of documented events remain both possible and necessary.

Objectivity does not mean downplaying unresolved questions.

It means examining them transparently, on the basis of evidence and without prejudgement.

💬 WE REMAIN WILLING TO ENGAGE IN DIALOGUE

We remain interested in an objective and constructive clarification process and continue to be open to discussions.

Our aim is to clarify the existing questions transparently, include different perspectives and, wherever possible, examine viable solutions together.

For us, a willingness to engage in dialogue and a consistent review process are not mutually exclusive.

From our perspective, this includes in particular:

▪️ transparent answers to the questions that remain unresolved;

▪️ a clear explanation of the respective roles, responsibilities and decision-making and control authority;

▪️ clarification of payment routes and the use of funds;

▪️ a transparent presentation of the actual stage of development of the announced products and services;

▪️ and an open-ended examination of a neutrally administered compensation arrangement.

This willingness to engage in dialogue does not mean that any claims, amounts of damages or responsibilities have already been conclusively established.

A possible out-of-court solution and the continuation of the factual review are not mutually exclusive.

🎯 CONSISTENT CLARIFICATION WITHOUT PREJUDGEMENT

Our objective is not a personal dispute or public prejudgement.

The aim is to provide a transparent clarification of the central questions:

▪️ What has been announced since 2018?

▪️ What was actually implemented?

▪️ Which products and services were developed or provided?

▪️ What funds and cryptocurrencies were paid in?

▪️ Through which accounts, wallets, individuals or companies were these assets routed?

▪️ Who had actual decision-making, administrative or control authority?

▪️ On what basis were token values or other economic values presented?

▪️ Which financial disadvantages can be substantiated by documents?

▪️ Which payments, commissions, repayments or other services were provided?

▪️ What exculpatory or differing information is available?

▪️ And which questions remain unresolved?

The responses received so far clearly demonstrate that these questions cannot simply be disregarded.

They must be examined seriously, transparently and without prejudging the outcome, on the basis of the available information and documents.

Thank you to everyone who has participated so far and who is helping to ensure that the different experiences and available documents are recorded as completely as possible.

*Please also forward this information to former partners and customers who may not yet have heard about the survey.*

We will continue to provide objective updates on the progress of the review.

Kind regards,

Sascha Schlenzig

_on behalf of the ongoing community-led review_