According to findings presented in US court proceedings, the network was used to defraud more than 1,000 investors of tens of millions of dollars. As early as 2021, US federal courts and regulators established the scale of the scheme: more than 1,100 victims, hundreds of millions of dollars in restitution and penalties, and lifetime bans from participation in US financial markets.
Yet rather than facing justice, Konovalenko has continued to shelter in Spain, while the Mayon network linked to him remains operational. Its websites are still active, it continues to present itself as a legitimate business, and it operates across multiple jurisdictions, creating risks for new clients, financial institutions, business partners and potential buyers.
In addition, the network is alleged to have been used to facilitate the movement and legitimisation in Europe of capital linked to sanctioned Russian companies involved in the online gambling industry and other sectors operating on the margins of legality. Only recently have Spanish law enforcement authorities intensified their investigation into Konovalenko’s activities and begun preparations for his extradition to the United States.
The story of RoFx, a large-scale international cryptocurrency and forex Ponzi scheme that left thousands of investors around the world out of pocket, is entering a new and potentially critical phase for its organisers. While US federal courts have already issued final judgments and the combined value of penalties and restitution orders has exceeded a quarter of a billion dollars, the scheme’s key beneficiaries appear to be attempting one final manoeuvre: monetising or transferring ownership of the surviving elements of their infrastructure before they too come under scrutiny.
At the centre of this process stands the Mayon group of companies and its alleged shadow operator, Ukrainian national Boris Konovalenko. From Europe, Konovalenko is reportedly seeking buyers for Mayon’s corporate structures, hoping to realise their remaining value before facing the prospect of imprisonment in the United States. For any potential purchaser, however, such a transaction would be far more than a conventional investment. Acquiring assets linked to Mayon could mean assuming significant legal, regulatory and reputational risks that may prove impossible to quantify.
How Mayon Built a Financial Labyrinth
Officially, the Mayon group of companies — comprising Mayon Holding Ltd. in Hong Kong, Mayon Solutions LLC in the United States and Mayon Solutions Ltd. in the United Kingdom — presented itself as a reputable provider of corporate and financial services. In practice, however, documents filed with the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida describe the network as a specialised money laundering enterprise designed to facilitate the movement and concealment of illicit funds.
Launched in 2018, the RoFx.net scheme attracted investors by promising unlimited profits from Forex trading through a purported “AI-powered automated trading system”, while guaranteeing full protection against losses. In reality, no genuine trading activity took place. More than $57 million — and as much as $75 million according to the class-action proceedings — allegedly ended up in the hands of the scheme’s organisers.
The central component of this “financial labyrinth” was the Mayon group itself. According to court filings, Konovalenko’s team structured the operation so that defrauded investors did not transfer funds directly to the operators of the website. Instead, money was routed through a network of US-based front companies, including Notus, LLC; ShopoStar, LLC (Colorado); Easy Com, LLC (New Hampshire); Global E-Advantages, LLC / Kickmagic LLC (Delaware/New York); and Grovee, LLC (Delaware).
From there, the funds were rapidly channelled through Mayon’s transit accounts and dispersed across offshore jurisdictions and cryptocurrency exchanges, making them significantly harder to trace.
The UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) raised concerns as early as 2019, issuing an official warning regarding RoFx’s unauthorised activities. Nevertheless, the financial machinery underpinning the scheme continued to operate until the platform’s sudden collapse in September 2021.
From a Small-Town Entrepreneur in Mariupol to an International Fugitive: The Story of Boris Konovalenko
The central figure overseeing the operational management of the transnational fraud network was Ukrainian national Boris Konovalenko. According to the case materials, he was responsible for initiating and coordinating the registration of front companies, arranging the opening of bank accounts, and supervising the receipt of payments from allegedly defrauded investors.
In Ukraine, Konovalenko’s background appeared relatively unremarkable. Until 2012, he was engaged in business activities in Mariupol, a city now under Russian occupation, and from 2006 he co-owned a small company in Donetsk together with his former wife. Court records also indicate that his ex-wife, from whom he divorced in 2021, has pursued legal proceedings seeking child support payments.
During the same period, Konovalenko was also listed as a founder of a non-governmental organisation. Among the other co-founders were his former father-in-law and the Nedin family. Notably, Eduard Nedin would later become the first director and owner of the UK-registered company Mayon Solutions Ltd. (Mayon UK), a position he held between 2016 and 2019.
At the same time, several Ukrainian banks initiated enforcement proceedings through the state enforcement service in an effort to recover overdue loans and outstanding debts from Konovalenko.
In what appears to have been an effort to shield his remaining assets from potential seizure within Ukraine, Konovalenko moved to remove his ties to publicly registered property and business holdings. As matters stand today, no real estate or other significant assets are registered in his name in Ukraine.
Shortly after the abrupt collapse of the RoFx platform in September 2021, and amid the prospect of impending criminal proceedings, Konovalenko left Ukraine and relocated to Europe, where he is alleged to have continued operating beyond the immediate reach of the authorities.
The US Verdict and the Spanish Trap
While Konovalenko remained in hiding, the legal proceedings against his network in the United States ran their course. As the organisers failed to appear before the court and effectively became fugitives, the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida issued a series of stringent default judgments against them.
The companies within the Mayon group — Mayon Holding Ltd. (Hong Kong), Mayon Solutions LLC (United States) and Mayon Solutions Ltd. (United Kingdom) — together with their beneficial owners, were formally found liable under the US Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), one of the most powerful federal statutes used to prosecute organised criminal activity, conspiracy and large-scale fraudulent schemes.
An official ruling by the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) imposed sanctions of an unprecedented scale. Among other measures, the defendants were ordered to pay more than $56 million in restitution to affected investors, in a case involving over 1,100 victims. In addition, a civil monetary penalty exceeding $169 million was imposed, bringing the total value of US financial claims to more than $225 million.
The ruling also resulted in a permanent ban on any trading, brokerage or registration-related activities within US financial markets.
Today, Boris Konovalenko remains in Spain, apparently hoping that European jurisdiction will shield him from imprisonment in the United States. At the same time, he is reportedly attempting to extract whatever remaining value can still be realised from the Mayon brand and its associated assets.
Yet Spain may ultimately prove not to be a refuge, but a trap. What once appeared to offer protection from US enforcement efforts is increasingly becoming the very jurisdiction from which those efforts may finally reach him.
His record already includes a period of detention and imprisonment in Spain in connection with the US case. On that occasion, however, he succeeded in securing his release — albeit only temporarily. Spain is not a safe haven for international fugitives. As a fully participating member of international law-enforcement cooperation mechanisms, including Interpol, the country has consistently demonstrated a firm stance against cross-border financial crime and fraud. Spanish judicial authorities appear to be steadily advancing towards the stage at which an international extradition request could be executed, placing Konovalenko directly within the reach of the US justice system. Should Madrid ultimately approve the request submitted by the US Department of Justice, the consequences are likely to extend far beyond the individual case. Any corporate structures associated with Mayon across multiple jurisdictions could face immediate scrutiny, regulatory action and potential dissolution, placing the future viability of the entire network in serious doubt.
Mayon as a Laundering Network for Illegal Russian Online Casinos
The investigation uncovered another significant aspect of Mayon’s activities, one that further increases the level of concern among international regulators. Evidence suggests that the RoFx scheme was far from the only client making use of this transnational financial infrastructure. According to the findings that have emerged, Mayon’s network appears to have provided services to a broader range of operators seeking to move funds across multiple jurisdictions while obscuring their origin and ultimate destination.
For many years, one of the principal sources of off-the-books revenue for the Mayon group and Boris Konovalenko is alleged to have been the provision of operational services to illegal Russian online gambling operators across a range of international jurisdictions.
Using a global network of front companies allegedly controlled by Konovalenko — including Notus LLC, ShopoStar LLC, Easy Com LLC, Grovee LLC and Global E-Advantages LLC — the Mayon group is alleged to have constructed an extensive financial infrastructure for processing illicit funds, engaging in payment miscoding practices and facilitating the movement of money out of Russia in circumvention of international sanctions and regulatory restrictions. According to the findings of the investigation, the structure effectively operated as a universal payments hub for prohibited Russian online gambling operators. Its activities reportedly included the incorporation of seemingly legitimate legal entities in the United States, the United Kingdom and Hong Kong to disguise gambling-related payment flows; the establishment of merchant processing and banking facilities to ensure the uninterrupted receipt of player funds; and the transfer, mixing and dispersal of proceeds through offshore accounts and cryptocurrency exchanges, making such transactions exceptionally difficult to detect through conventional financial monitoring systems.
The alleged links to sanctioned sectors of the Russian economy elevate the Mayon case beyond the realm of financial regulation and into an area of potential national security concern for Western governments. As a result, Konovalenko’s activities have attracted attention not only from financial regulators and law-enforcement agencies, but also from intelligence and security services tasked with investigating hybrid financial threats, sanctions-evasion networks and other forms of transnational economic activity deemed capable of undermining international security frameworks.
Why Acquiring Mayon’s Assets Could Amount to Complicity
Despite its disastrous defeats in the US courts, the websites mayon.solutions and mayon.hk remain active, Hong Kong financial licences formally remain in force, and the company’s Facebook page continues to be updated, projecting the image of a legitimate business. According to information emerging from the investigation, this façade serves a single purpose: Konovalenko is allegedly seeking to sell Mayon, transfer its licences, or repackage the structure as a supposedly legitimate consulting business.
Any prospective buyer, however, should be under no illusion about the risks involved. Following the publication of the facts surrounding the case, any party entering into a transaction involving Mayon can no longer credibly claim to be an innocent or uninformed investor. The information is now firmly in the public domain. Acquiring the brand or its Hong Kong licences would mean assuming ownership of an organisation burdened by allegations of large-scale fraud and money laundering linked to Russian online gambling operations — and, inevitably, attracting the attention of regulators and law-enforcement authorities. From the perspective of US regulators, the FBI and many European financial institutions, such a transaction could be interpreted as an attempt to preserve or continue activities associated with a network already implicated in serious misconduct. Banks, payment processors and counterparties choosing to engage with Mayon-related assets may therefore face heightened regulatory scrutiny, compliance reviews, financial restrictions and, where appropriate, further investigative action.
It is also increasingly difficult to argue that Boris Konovalenko can expect a quiet and comfortable future in Spain. Investigations into his activities appear to be gaining momentum, and the authorities involved seem determined to pursue the matter to its conclusion. Should the legal process ultimately result in extradition to the United States, he could face significant criminal exposure, while any purchasers of Mayon-related assets would assume substantial financial and legal risks. Meanwhile, the broader Mayon infrastructure remains under scrutiny from investigative journalists, regulators and law-enforcement agencies across multiple jurisdictions. That scrutiny extends beyond Spain and the United States to key jurisdictions including the United Kingdom and Hong Kong. As a result, any future enforcement action is unlikely to affect only Konovalenko and his business associates; it could also have serious implications for the wider network of companies, licences and assets associated with Mayon.
