BCC obtained via August 1 fork — problem with Bitcoin.com wallet import

[Theordore]

Hello, and help please. At https://www.blocktrail.com/BCC/address/ ... gNQ2s2f4pt , a credit of 0.0995 BCC is shown, and this corresponds to 0.0995 BTC I held on August 1, and whose last address (before being moved yesterday) was 3HicmPMRmFLZHPu8zstsQdAegNQ2s2f4pt.
This is the same address shown at the URL cited above, and I have the private key that applied to it when the funds were in an Electrum wallet. I am guessing that Electrum associated the private key with BTC only; because when I tried to use that key to import the BCC funds into my Bitcoin.com wallet today the system comes back and says there is “no positive balance”.
If private keys applicable on August 1 (such as the one I have) are for BTC only, then the amount showing for the same address at https://www.blocktrail.com/BCC/address/ ... gNQ2s2f4pt is essentially an orphan in the BCC system — no private key was assigned to the 0.0995 amount that was created in the BCC system. Is that wrong?
Moreover even if a private key exists today, no one can prove that I have exclusive right of access to that private key, even though I was the person who spent the fiat money to get the BTC coins. So, as far as I can see, the said amount of 0.0995 BCC now shown by blocktrail.com at the address cited above has no practical meaning for me. That is, I should regard it as being no better than zero **for me**. What's wrong with this line of thinking?
N.B. I am *not* saying there is no private key in the BCC system for the said address. I am saying that, at a minimum, I have lost access to it, any right I may have to it is non-demonstrable, and thus my BCC holding is zero despite what is shown at block trail.com for an address my funds occupied.
If there is a large number of people with this issue, an appropriate authority should offer some sort of public clarification; because this situation creates an unfortunate image, from my viewpoint. If you can tell me why I am seeing this all wrong, i will appreciate the education and also be relieved from the frustration.
I do not care if my BCC holding is zero; because I felt on Day One (August 1) it had zero value until market traders came along and set a price based on demand and supply. If its value has risen from zero to 50-odd dollars, big deal!
What forces explain the emergence of a non-zero pricing after Day One is the interesting question, to me. I am *not* saying the forces are illegal or bad in any sense. I am saying it's good to understand them, since we eventually say/believe that the current price represents *value* in some sense.
In what sense? I am not suggesting the answer is "in no sense". I am saying we should probe for (debate) proposed answers.
Cheers!

[michelf]

BCC and BTC use the same private key for an address. Otherwise no one would be able to extract BCC from an existing address at the moment of the fork. I think the problem is with the app.

Can anyone import BCC from a paper wallet with the Bitcoin.com app? Scanning the private key tells me there are no funds at this address. But I also note that it only offers to import in BTC-denominated accounts. My guess that importing BCC by scanning a private key is not implemented at the moment.

[Theordore]

Thanks for a helpful response. It seems to mean that I should just sit and wait, and someday there will be software that allows people to do a cut-and-paste in providing their private key to the import procedure.
I am neither a trolling nor a fighting person; but there is a feeling that's big at this point. Some high-powered programmers built and tested the fork over many months. Why does it seem that it was it decided that low priority would be accorded to writing the software that would allow all kinds of legitimate routes to import legally received coins (via the fork process) into the BCC system?
I suppose one answer is that by forcing people to come in via a "BTC-denominated account", we make sure that they have a legitimate right to the BCC coins. Okay! But what about people like me who aggressively removed their coins from exchange accounts and kept their private keys at home in an encrypted file or printed on paper, as your comment suggests?
I am thinking that the challenge of writing more 'accomodative' user-interface software has to be a lot simpler than that of designing the fork; so having the needed user-interface software come rolling out many weeks after the fork date doesn't look great as P.R., in my view. Or do I have this all wrong?

[michelf]

Since you seem to be familiar with Electrum, you might have better luck with Electron Cash. https://www.electroncash.org