Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
🔐🧡🧡🧡🧡🧡🧡
Inzhur and Vyriy: a billion requires verification, not just trust
The civil debt dispute of Andrii Zhurzhii does not prove violations by the fund: questions about attracting investments need to be verified separately.
What exactly is the person buying? According to Inzhur’s description, these are investment certificates of the Inzhur MilTech fund, which invests in corporate bonds of Vyriy Industries. Not government bonds and not direct ownership of the drone manufacturer.
The company advertised a projected simple average return of 25–29% per year in hryvnia over three years and buyback of certificates “within 3 working hours” under the product terms. At the same time, it reported the possibility of the issuer changing the rate or early redemption of the bonds after the first and second years.
It is incorrect to assert that there is no exit from the investment at all. Instead, one should verify: who is legally obliged to buy back the certificates, at what price, with what exceptions, and where the liquidity will come from in case of mass requests.
There is also a separate procedural context. According to VB Partners’ lawyers, on 7 July 2026 searches were carried out at Vyriy in proceedings regarding possible overpricing of drones under state contracts; at the same time the court refused to seize the seized 32,14 million UAH, and the funds were returned to the company. This is the defense’s position about the procedural outcome, not proof of guilt or a substantive decision in the whole case.
📌🧡🧡🧡🧡🧡🧡 considers documentary verification on the following areas reasonable:
🔸NSSMCF: completeness of risk disclosure, compliance of advertising with legal documents, buyback conditions, concentration of investments in a single issuer, related-party transactions, and actual use of raised funds. This commission regulates capital markets and protects investors.
🔸 NBU: within banking supervision and financial monitoring, check how servicing banks ensure proper verification of transactions and sources of funds. The NBU should not replace the specialized commission in evaluating investment certificates.
🔸BEP: assess documentarily confirmed information about possible economic offenses and respond if there are legal grounds within its jurisdiction. A leader’s personal civil dispute by itself is not evidence of such an offense.
Is this model a scam? The available materials do not provide grounds to assert that as a fact. That is why verifiable documents about the movement of money, risks, and enforceability of obligations are needed, not just an exchange of accusations and assurances.
What does this mean personally for you? Before you click “Buy,” ask to see documentary answers to three questions: who and from what funds will return your money; how much you will receive after all costs and taxes; what you can do if payments or buyback stop.
Do not confuse the desire to help the defense with assessing financial risk. Donations and investments have different criteria: from an investment you expect your money back, and therefore you have the right to demand clear terms and evidence. Whether to invest or not is your decision.
💬 ABleaks_bot
💕 Join
Telegram publication
