Two mornings in a row, I stormed into a Zoom meeting hosted by a name that rings alarm bells for anyone familiar with crypto scams: Munir Ali Kaid-Al Jannedy, also known as “Mr. JANNEDY.” Known for promoting countless Ponzi schemes under the guise of “financial freedom,” Mr. Jannedy’s latest project, BitNest, is a textbook case of how not to run a blockchain company.
As a journalist and scam investigator, I’ve built my career exposing fraudulent operations that prey on unsuspecting mum-and-dad investors. BitNest and its native token, Mellion Coin (MEC), might be the most bloated example of a scam I’ve seen this year.
What Is BitNest?
BitNest markets itself as a decentralized finance (DeFi) ecosystem that offers savings, lending, anonymous mixing, and cross-chain capabilities. The centrepiece? Mellion Coin, a BEP-20 token allegedly designed for seamless utility across a blockchain-powered financial ecosystem.
But dig a little deeper, and you’ll find there’s no real ecosystem, just a maze of buzzwords and Ponzi architecture.
CertiK Audit: A Thin Veil of Legitimacy
BitNest proudly flaunts a security audit by CertiK—a name well-respected in Web3 security circles. But here’s the rub:
- Major Risk: Centralization (BNC-01): The admin had overreaching authority over key functions. While BitNest claims this was resolved via a wallet renouncement, it leaves no assurance that backdoor functions aren’t still in place.
- Third-Party Dependence (BNC-04): The contract relies on third-party protocols. These are treated as “black boxes” in the audit, which means if PancakeSwap or another service changes, the entire system is at risk.
- Max Approve Vulnerability (BNC-05): BitNest authorized maximum token transfers without limitation. If compromised, this could result in complete asset drainage.
- Unused Return Value (BNC-03): Externally called functions don’t handle return values, leaving room for silent failures.
In total: 4 issues were found. Only 2 were marked as resolved. None were critical, but the audit itself concludes with a disclaimer warning that it does not verify the business model or validate the value of the token.
CertiK’s report does not endorse BitNest. It merely confirms that certain functions don’t cause the smart contract to spontaneously combust.
The Mechanics of the Scam
BitNest is a masterclass in Ponzi engineering:
- 0.4% Daily Returns: Promises a fixed daily return through the “Savings Box”. That’s a 12.55% monthly yield—a mathematical impossibility in any legitimate financial system.
- 17-Level MLM Referral Tree: To access higher commission tiers, users must deposit increasing amounts of MEC. Classic pay-to-play model.
- Queue Entry with Token Burn: To participate in savings contracts, users must pay a “ticket” in MEC, which gets burned. This artificially constrains supply while forcing demand.
- Mixing Service with MEC: A built-in anonymization service allegedly enhances privacy. In reality, it raises anti-money laundering concerns and regulatory red flags.
All roads lead back to a common outcome: Buy more MEC, recruit others, and hope you cash out before the rug pull.
The Fictional Future of Mellion Coin
BitNest promises:
- 50 million users
- $1000 MEC valuation
- Real-world retail use
- Cross-chain support
- High-speed transactions (300 TPS)
None of these claims are backed by code, tech partnerships, or whitepaper timelines. They exist only to excite bag-holders and draw in fresh capital.
They’ve even scheduled a quarterly coin repurchase and burn plan using “profits” from their mixing service. This is financial theatre—a performance meant to suggest value through supply reduction, even when demand is fabricated.
Why It Matters
I’ve spent years investigating Ponzi schemes, and the common thread is always the same: a charismatic leader, a phantom product, a fake ecosystem, and a desperate community clinging to hope.
BitNest is no different. It’s a scam, wrapped in smart contract jargon, served to retail investors on the blockchain buffet.
If you see Mr. Jannedy in a Zoom call promising passive income, close your wallet.
If you’re holding MEC and wondering whether to tell your friends about it, don’t drag them down with you.
If you’re looking for real DeFi opportunities, keep walking.
Recent Developments: BitNest Showing Clear Signs of Collapse
Since publishing this investigation, I have received new insider information from an active BitNest participant that strongly reinforces the conclusions already laid out in this blog. What is now unfolding inside BitNest follows a very familiar pattern seen in countless crypto Ponzi collapses.
According to multiple consistent reports, BitNest has largely stopped paying users, begun locking or disabling accounts, and muted its public Telegram channels to suppress growing panic. Those asking where their money is are being ignored or given scripted responses blaming vague USDT/USDC “system mismatches” or wallet compatibility issues. These explanations change regularly and are never backed by verifiable on-chain evidence.
At the same time, BitNest has quietly shifted communication into private, invite-only Telegram groups, limited to so-called “team leaders” — individuals with large downlines and commission exposure. While the broader community is told to “wait patiently,” these leaders are being reassured behind closed doors and encouraged to keep their networks calm, a classic containment tactic used during liquidity failure.
Rather than fixing withdrawals, BitNest is now aggressively pushing Mellion Coin (MEC), paid “nodes,” and new buy-in opportunities. Investors are being promised airdrops, expedited support, and future value — promises that, in multiple cases, are already not being honoured. This shift away from paying existing obligations toward selling new products is a major red flag and historically marks the late stage of Ponzi schemes.
Adding to these concerns, BitNest has changed its primary domain, another well-documented behaviour seen shortly before exits, rebrands, or shutdowns. When combined with payment delays, muted communities, selective communication, and token distractions, the picture becomes unmistakable.
It is also important to address the role of Munir Ali Kaid-Al Jannedy, a visible promoter of BitNest. During Zoom presentations that I personally attended and disrupted, Munir publicly stated that BitNest was not a scam and dismissed critics as uninformed. Those assurances were given despite structural flaws that made the current outcome inevitable. When promoters continue defending a system while withdrawals stall and communities are silenced, they are no longer offering opinions — they are misleading others.
None of what is happening now suggests a temporary technical issue. It reflects collapse management: slowing payouts, controlling information, introducing new products, protecting top recruiters, and asking ordinary investors to wait while fresh money is still being collected.
For anyone reading this because payments have stopped, accounts have been restricted, or answers no longer make sense — you are not alone, and you are not imagining things. This is exactly what the end of a crypto Ponzi looks like.
Disclaimer: How This Investigation Was Conducted
This investigation relies entirely on OSINT — Open Source Intelligence — meaning every claim made here is based on publicly available records, archived web pages, corporate filings, domain data, social media activity, and open blockchain transactions. No private data, hacking, or unlawful access methods were used. OSINT is a powerful and ethical tool for exposing scams without violating privacy laws or overstepping legal boundaries.
About the Author
I’m DANNY DE HEK, a New Zealand–based YouTuber, investigative journalist, and OSINT researcher. I name and shame individuals promoting or marketing fraudulent schemes through my YOUTUBE CHANNEL. Every video I produce exposes the people behind scams, Ponzi schemes, and MLM frauds — holding them accountable in public.
My PODCAST is an extension of that work. It’s distributed across 18 major platforms — including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, and iHeartRadio — so when scammers try to hide, my content follows them everywhere. If you prefer listening to my investigations instead of watching, you’ll find them on every major podcast service.
You can BOOK ME for private consultations or SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS, where I share first-hand experience from years of exposing large-scale fraud and helping victims recover.
“Stop losing your future to financial parasites. Subscribe. Expose. Protect.”
My work exposing crypto fraud has been featured in:
- Bloomberg Documentary (2025): A 20-minute exposé on Ponzi schemes and crypto card fraud
- News.com.au (2025): Profiled as one of the leading scam-busters in Australasia
- OpIndia (2025): Cited for uncovering Pakistani software houses linked to drug trafficking, visa scams, and global financial fraud
- The Press / Stuff.co.nz (2023): Successfully defeated $3.85M gag lawsuit; court ruled it was a vexatious attempt to silence whistleblowing
- The Guardian Australia (2023): National warning on crypto MLMs affecting Aussie families
- ABC News Australia (2023): Investigation into Blockchain Global and its collapse
- The New York Times (2022): A full two-page feature on dismantling HyperVerse and its global network
- Radio New Zealand (2022): “The Kiwi YouTuber Taking Down Crypto Scammers From His Christchurch Home”
- Otago Daily Times (2022): A profile on my investigative work and the impact of crypto fraud in New Zealand
Smart Contracts Don’t Prove Legitimacy for BitNest
I reviewed BitNest’s smart contracts (via their own CertiK audit). But let’s be clear: simply having a smart contract doesn’t magically make a project legitimate. A smart contract is just code that executes predefined rules (essentially “if X event happens, then do Y action”). It guarantees nothing about the sustainability or honesty of the business behind it. In other words, an audit can confirm the code works as written, but it does not validate the project’s business model or economics.
CertiK Audit Red Flags
BitNest’s CertiK audit actually exposed several red flags in the code itself – hardly a clean bill of health:
• Admin Centralization (BNC-01): The contract gave the admin sweeping control over key functions. BitNest claims they fixed this by renouncing the admin wallet, but there’s no guarantee hidden backdoors don’t remain. Such centralization risk is a huge trust issue in any “decentralized” project.
• Third-Party Dependence (BNC-04): The smart contract relies on external protocols (like PancakeSwap) as black boxes. If any of those outside services change or fail, BitNest’s whole system could break. That’s a fragile design.
• “Unlimited” Token Approvals (BNC-05): BitNest’s code allowed maximum token transfer approvals without limit. In plain terms, if an attacker exploited this, they could potentially drain all tokens from users’ wallets – a serious security lapse.
• Ignored Return Values (BNC-03): The contract doesn’t even check the outcomes of external function calls . Functions could be failing silently, and the system would never know. This is sloppy coding that could hide issues or malfunctions.
In total, CertiK found 4 issues in BitNest’s contracts (only 2 were marked as resolved). Crucially, CertiK disclaimed any role in validating BitNest’s business model or token value. In their own words, the audit “does not endorse BitNest” – it merely checks that the smart contract won’t spontaneously combust on technical grounds. In short, a code audit is not a green light for the investment scheme itself.
Ponzi Economics and Impossible Promises
The business model is where BitNest truly falls apart. All the on-chain code in the world can’t save a project built on unsustainable, Ponzi-like mechanics:
• 0.4% Daily ROI – Impossible Math: BitNest promises a fixed ~0.4% return per day via its “Savings Box.” That’s about 12.5% compounded per month, which is a mathematical impossibility in any genuine investment or legitimate financial system. No real business yields those returns daily without massive risk or fakery.
• 17-Level Referral Commissions – MLM Structure: BitNest touts a 17-level deep referral program (yes, 17!) where you earn commissions as you recruit downline investors. To unlock higher tiers, you must stake more of their MEC token. This pay-to-play multi-level marketing setup is classic Ponzi scheme behavior – it incentivizes recruitment of new investors to pay off earlier ones.
• Forced Token Burning – Fake Scarcity: To participate in BitNest’s savings contracts, users have to buy a “ticket” in MEC that then gets burned (destroyed). This creates an illusion of scarcity (supply going down) to prop up the token price. Forcing people to burn tokens to enter the scheme doesn’t create real value; it’s an old trick to generate FOMO and make the token look deflationary.
• Phantom “Coin Mixing” Profits: BitNest claims to offer an anonymous coin mixing service (for privacy) as part of their ecosystem . Not only does this raise money-laundering red flags, but the project also alleges that this service produces “profits” used for quarterly buybacks of their token. There’s zero transparency or proof of any such profitable activity. In fact, even BitNest’s own promo material essentially admits this is “financial theatre” – a show to suggest value by burning tokens with so-called profits, when in reality both the demand and the profits are likely fabricated.
Every aspect of BitNest’s model screams Ponzi: guaranteed daily interest, rewards for recruiting new investors, artificial token scarcity, and an opaque story of external profits. These are textbook tactics to circulate money from new entrants to old ones until the whole pyramid collapses.
Bottom Line
Having a smart contract (even one audited for basic security) does not make BitNest legit. At best, the audit proves the code does what the developers tell it to do – it doesn’t prove the business isn’t a scam. BitNest’s own audited code had multiple vulnerabilities and did nothing to fix an economically unsound model. Promising high daily ROI and multi-tier commissions is simply unsustainable and indicative of a Ponzi scheme. In the end, as one analysis succinctly put it, “BitNest is a scam, wrapped in smart contract jargon”. No blockchain wizardry or audit badge can legitimize an investment model that is fundamentally a house of cards. The evidence speaks for itself: BitNest is a scam, and a smart contract audit doesn’t change that.
Which crypto investment is genuine for us to invest in
There are no Crypto investment opportunities that are legitimate stop looking and save yourself a lot of grief become entrepreneurial find a product or service to sell and build a business and stop looking for Crypto investments every single one is a Scam