Raid on "Gorbushka" and in "City": why shadow crypto infrastructure is invulnerable
The recent searches at "Novaya Gorbushka" and the detentions in "Moscow-City" are not just targeted strikes against illegal crypto exchangers, but part of a more complex game. However, as my observations of the market show, such measures, despite their public spectacle, cannot eliminate the root cause of the shadow exchange's existence in Russia. This is only a temporary closure of channels, which the market quickly compensates for.
The mechanics of the raids: what exactly law enforcement targets
The logic of the operations is simple and clear. Phone scammers, as a rule, do not work with bank accounts directly—this is too risky due to oversight by FinCERT and blocks under Federal Law No. 115-FZ. Therefore, illegal exchangers become the key link in their logistics. They accept cash from couriers, convert it into cryptocurrency, and transfer it to foreign wallets. The searches in "City" and at "Gorbushka" are aimed precisely at this node. Detaining staff, seizing equipment, and freezing channels temporarily breaks the chain, giving victims a chance to recover part of the funds and inflicting tangible damage on criminal groups.
The second aspect is demonstrating the inevitability of punishment. Real arrests and the prospect of criminal cases under Part 4 of Article 159 of the Criminal Code (up to 10 years of imprisonment) have a sobering effect on ordinary executors. Unlike virtual warnings, real sentences force potential couriers and operators to think about the consequences.
Why the problem is not being solved
The main reason the shadow market does not disappear is the lack of a legal alternative. As long as Russia does not have a sufficient number of official exchangers with transparent rules, demand for illegal services will persist. The infrastructure quickly recovers, but in more hidden forms: through P2P platforms, online exchangers, droppers, and crypto ATMs.
Moreover, raids often hit the "pawns"—cashiers and couriers who do not know the organizers. The organizers themselves are usually abroad or use multi-level intermediary schemes. This only creates the appearance of a fight without affecting the real beneficiaries. We should not forget about corruption risks: physical locations cannot exist without "protection"—from landlords to local officials. As long as these connections are not exposed, closing some locations will only be compensated by opening others.
Risks for legitimate business
What is especially alarming is that law-abiding market participants also find themselves in a zone of legal uncertainty. Due to unclear criteria, they may become targets of operational measures and blocks. The raids themselves harm landlords and neighboring stores, scaring off customers and creating a negative atmosphere. The state, while fighting illegal operators, indirectly punishes those who work legally as well.
My conclusion: Raids are an effective tactical tool for gathering information and disrupting specific operations, but strategically they do not solve the problem. Without creating legal exchange infrastructure, controlling online channels, and internationally pursuing the organizers, the fraudulent conveyor belt will recover faster than law enforcement can conduct new searches. This is a race in which the shadow is still winning.