More Than 50 ‘Demand’ Letters Sent To Prosecutors, Secret Service, In AdSurfDaily Case, Moriarty Tells Senator
UPDATED 12:21 P.M. EST (U.S.A.) Banks are failing. Unemployment is surging. Housing values are plummeting. Credit markets are tight. The economy is shrinking.
And “Professor” Patrick Moriarty wants the Senate to investigate the prosecutors and a Secret Service agent involved in the AdSurfDaily case, an alleged $100 million Ponzi scheme.
ASD President Andy Bowdoin, the operator of the scheme, already has ceded seized funds to the government “with prejudice.”
“With prejudice” means that Bowdoin intends to submit to the forfeiture and never reassert the claims to tens of millions of dollars seized. Meanwhile, the government is establishing a process by which ASD members can apply for refunds.
Despite the fact the money was seized as the proceeds of a criminal wire-fraud, money-laundering and Ponzi-scheme operation, Moriarty says the Senate should set its sights on the people who prevented the scheme from mushrooming globally — not Bowdoin, the person responsible for organizing the scheme.
“Over 50 individual and notarized DEMAND[S] FOR LEGAL EVIDENCE were sent to Jeffrey Taylor, US Attorney; William Cowden, Assistant US Attorney; and Roy Dotson, Special Agent, US Secret Service,” Moriarty said in a letter to Sen. Patrick Leahy, D.-Vermont. “Not once did any of these three Government Servants respond.”
Leahy is chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
“Innocent Americans have suffered and continue to suffer because of these incredulous and despicable acts” by prosecutors, Moriarty said.
Moriarty was a founder and former board member of ASD Members International (ASDMI), which registered as a Missouri nonprofit in October and threatened to litigate against the government because of its actions in the ASD case. Moriarty resigned from the ASDMI board in December, citing ill health. The entity now has dissolved.
ASDMI recruited members from within the membership ranks of the ASD Member Advocates Forum, a Pro-ASD site also known as “Surf’s Up.” At least three ASDMI board members also were members of “Surf’s Up.”
Last week, Curtis Richmond filed a motion to intervene in the ASD case, accusing U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer and the prosecutors of crimes and threatening prosecution and lawsuits under federal racketeering statutes.
Moriarty, on his website, touted Richmond’s approach to litigation. Richmond is associated with a sham Utah Indian tribe that has attempted unsuccessfully to have prosecutors and federal judges jailed. At least two people who employed the tactics of the tribe have been sent to prison, and Richmond himself was convicted of criminal contempt of court in California in 2007.
In his letter to Leahy, Moriarty discloses none of this. He also did not inform Leahy that a class-action lawsuit alleging racketeering has been filed against Bowdoin and alleged co-conspirators.
Court filings by Richmond last week claim that an ASD member named Alana Holsted was prevented from “Collecting on an Entry of Default Affidavit for $30 million for each Defendant.”
The Utah tribe routinely placed huge, fraudulent judgments against officers of the court or litigation opponents in what victims described as extortion bids. Victims sued under racketeering and mail-fraud statutes. U.S. District Court Judge Stephen Friot ruled the tribe a “complete sham” and ordered members to pay damages and costs of more than $108,000.
Records show that Richmond tried to force Friot to recuse himself from the “Indian” case by claiming the judge owed him $30 million. Friot refused to step down.
“I hope your office can review this situation and lend their support,” Moriarty told Leahy.
Surf’s Up Asks Members To Contact Leahy
Here is an email Surf’s Up members received today, alerting them of Moriarty’s letter-writing campaign to Leahy. The email was signed by Barb McIntire, a Mod at the Surf’s Up forum, and a former ASDMI board member. The email accuses the prosecutors of committing a “legal travesty” and of “incredible and despicable acts.” (Emphasis added):
A message to all members of ASD Member Advocates – Surf’s up Baby!
Hello ASD Members,
If timing is everything, then maybe our time for some type of justice has arrived. On February 8, Senator Patrick Leahy proposed a “Truth Commission” for the Department of Justice.
Mr. Leahy heads the Senate Judiciary Committee. According to the Washington Wire, he has proposed an independent commission to investigate allegations of wrongdoing by the DOJ during the Bush administration. As ASD members know, the warrantless wiretapping, the politically motivated firing of some US attorneys, and the highly controversial memos on treatment of detainees are not the only things the new administration must examine to find out what went wrong with the DOJ.
Please take the time and make the effort to write Senator Leahy about the “legal” travesty that was committed against the 100,000-plus members of ASD by US attorneys Jeffrey Taylor and William Cowden. Explain how they used the DOJ to seize $93-million under forfeiture procedures reserved for drug- trafficking crimes. Explain in your own words how our Constitutional rights were trampled on so the DOJ could control the millions in bank accounts, deposits, and property. We each need to explain how thousands of innocent Americans have suffered and continue to suffer because of these incredible and despicable acts.
Senator Leahy’s contact information is here: http://leahy.senate.gov/contact.cfm
You can find supporting documentation on Steve Watt’s site:
http://www.thejoyluckclub.com/ASD_Latest_News.htm
If you can, send your letter via USPS certified mail and request a return receipt. It will be the best $5 you’ve spent. Please don’t wait. The timing is right. Just do it!
Emails and phone calls to the Senator’s office are fine, but only after you send that first letter.
If we don’t do this now, we’ll have no one to blame but ourselves.
Please email me back and let me know you will do this. I’m counting on you for this support.
[Email Address Deleted]
Thank you!
Barb
Visit ASD Member Advocates – Surf’s up Baby! at: http://asdmembers.ning.com
To control which emails you receive on ASD Member Advocates – Surf’s up Baby!, go to:
http://asdmembers.ning.com/profiles/profile/emailSettings
As the Advocates site have sent a request to nearly all their members to write to Senator Leahy, there is no reason why the members who do not want to see ASD money returned to the Bowdoin group shouldnt write to him as well.
It is to be hoped that a Government clean up will not include absolution for ponzi operators!
Hi alasycia,
“Differences” among ASD, ASDMI, Surf’s Up, Moriarty and Curtis Richmond are barely distinguishable.
It’s going to be hard for the participants to unring the bell. It looks like an organized effort to extort a result from litigation opponents.
Patrick
Regardless of one’s political bent, Leahy is a well-respected senior senator. I somehow doubt that he wants his legacy to be the senator who legalized Ponzi and pyramid schemes in the US, but who knows?
Hi Entertained,
The day the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee — regardless of party — permits himself or herself to become Spokesman-In-Chief for the legalization of Ponzi schemes — truly will be The Day The Earth Stood Still.
July 2008: Bowdoin claims he will sue critics.
Aug. 1, 2008: Bowdoin’s money seized amid wire-fraud, money-laundering and Ponzi allegations.
Aug. 18, 2008: Domain name for AdGateWorld registered.
Sept. 22, 2008: Domain name for AdViewGlobal registered.
Nov. 7, 2008: Domain name for BizAdSplash registered.
Hmmm. Three new surfs pop up within weeks of the seizure. All have common ties to ASD, either through membership, promoters or even management. All three purport to be registered offshore.
Oct. 30, 2008: ASDMI formed. Board consists of Surf’s Up members and ASD members.
Nov. 27, 2008: ASD gives the “Surf’s Up” forum its official endorsement on ASD Breaking News site.
Dec. 12, 2008: References to AdViewGlobal begin to appear online.
Dec. 22: Names of Gary Talbert and Juan Fernandez, both former ASD executives, are associated with AdViewGlobal.
January 2009: Surf’s Up Mods start forum for AdViewGlobal.
Jan./Feb. 2009: Three new offshore surfs launch, pushed by former ASD members.
Jan. 31, 2009: AdViewGlobal graphics appear on webroom controlled by ASD, become topic of Web reports. Graphics are removed.
Feb. 3, 2009: Chuck Osmin, former ASD employee, issues statement for AdViewGlobal, identifying Gary Talbert as chief executive officer of AdViewGlobal.
Feb. 4, 2009: News breaks that Curtis Richmond has filed a motion to intervene in ASD case. In the days that follow, Surf’s Up and AdViewGlobal forums hail Richmond as “hero.”
Feb. 10: Campaign by Patrick Moriarty, former board members of ASDMI and current members of Surf’s Up begins to petition Sen. Leahy for support.
He ain’t gonna touch it with a 10-foot pole. Touching it would make him the laughingstock of the political world.
What this is is an attempt to use a U.S. Senator to sanitize what the courts won’t sanitize and a bid to make ASD and autosurfs in general look legitimate by injecting them into the political process.
These people will be lucky if the Senate doesn’t open an investigation into them. Senators aren’t keen about being used as pawns to sanitize organized crime. It is not outside the realm of possibility that the government and the private attorneys who brought the RICO case will use all of this stuff to demonstrate evidence of a conspiracy and an organized attempt to expand a racketeering enterprise.
It is as far out as the “Arby’s Indians” — and even may surpass them in terms of unrestrained idiocy.
Patrick
I suspect Curtis Richmond was allowed to file his motion only to allow the judge to find him in contempt. If you threaten a Federal Judge and then find yourself in her courtroom, it’s likely you’ll have a very bad day.
Patrick,
Won’t you please write Senator Leahy and let him know that these same goombas have started another scam that’s going to be very costly to investigate and prosecute? These people have been told in no uncertain terms by Judge Collyer that the “surfing” model is an illegal Ponzi scheme and it hasn’t stopped them from starting another one. We need your voice in Washington!
What’s simply amazing is that the most ardent advocates of these protests have based their arguments on errors of fact, not even errors in law, and yet, their followers are following along blindly.
They claim:
1) “Improper use of the Patriot Act” when the Patriot Act is never mentioned in any of the complaints and the laws existed years before it was even necessary.
2) “Improper use of the drug forfeiture laws” Umm….Pardon…..
3)”Improper seizure” goodness, all that court time and all those attorneys and all those 100,000 sets of watching eyes… and it was all “improper”
4) “No charges have been bought” how many times does the difference between “civil” and “criminal” proceedings need to be explained. Hopefully none of these petitioners ever find themselves needing to institute legal action against a business or individual. With that understanding of law, their cases would be dead in the water.
5) The attorneys have ruined the lives of hundreds of thousands of people” Funny, I thought Bowdoin and his offsiders did that.
I can’t begin to imagine how much money or time will be expended answering these complaints (and all of it detracting from REAL work on processing refunds) Nor can I imagine the degree of frustration involved for the recipients when the complaints are based on nothing more than the purposely falsified “facts” presented by those behind the scenes.
Patrick,
Folks are looking for someone lucid enough to draft a petition to Senator Leahy’s proposed Truth Commission to look into possible misdeed of the DOJ. They are looking for someone with good writing skills and a real grasp of the ASD business model. You are much better positioned than I, but a draft could be:
“To The Honorable Senator Patrick Leahy:
We, the Members of the Ponzi scheme known as Ad Surf Daily (ASD) do hereby petition the Truth Commission under your leadership to fully investigate, and prosecute as necessary, the actions of the Department of Justice under the Bush Administration in the matter of UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. 8 GILCREASE LANE, QUINCY, FLORIDA, dated August 5, 2008.
We, the Members of the Ponzi scheme ASD seek the following:
1) Legalization of Ponzi and pyramid schemes under US Statutes. This will also include the legalization of money laundering and wire fraud, provided that such laundering and fraud occur in support of said Ponzi and pyramid schemes. The immediate economic impact of these law changes will be to greatly benefit thousands upon thousands of ASD members, who in turn can recycle their gains back into the economy during this severe downturn. The inherent fairness of this should be patently obvious to the Truth Commission. Those people who did the hard work of getting into ASD early and getting others to join should benefit disproportionately to the members who joined later, right? Of course, not everyone will benefit, but then life has its winners and losers, right? The first principle of commerce is caveat emptor, and we the petitioners believe that it is the duty of everyone to do their own due diligence prior to joining any program, regardless of the inherent mathematical impossibilities of the promises that our promoters may make. All’s fair in love, war, and business, right? The legalization of Ponzi schemes and pyramids thus forms the basis for our remaining demands:
2) Return of all funds and other tangible assets seized by the United States of America. These funds and assets have been ruled by the Honorable Judge Rosemary Collyer in the United States Court for the District of Columbia to be solely owned by defendant Andrew Bowdoin. We seek return of all funds and other tangible assets to Mr. Bowdoin. We further petition the Truth Commission to dissolve the receivership process currently contemplated by the Department of Justice and to deny claims from people who did not make money in the ASD Ponzi. They were either too lazy to recruit enough members in their downline to ensure their own personal gain or they were too slow to join ASD in the first place. They deserved to lose their money.
3) Criminal prosecutions of Assistant US Attorney William Cowden and others for their role in seizing the assets from Andrew Bowdoin. Since you will be making Ponzi schemes legal per petition item #1, and making these changes retroactive to at least January 1, 2007, this will make the Andrew Bowdoin seizure an illegal seizure retroactively.
4) Criminal prosecution of the Honorable Judge Rosemary Collyer, not in the least for her ruling against ASD on or about November 21, 2008. In that ruling, Judge Collyer ruled that ASD was an illegal Ponzi enterprise, and as such denied the motion of Andrew Bowdoin to release the seized assets. As now Ponzi schemes have been rules to be legal retroactive to January 1, 2007 per petition item #1, Judge Collyer’s actions are deemed illegal and thus subject to prosecution.
5) Direct damages in the amount of $3,000,000,000.00 to be paid to Andrew Bowdoin and the petitioners, split 50/50. The damages are calculated based on the rate of growth of ASD between June 2008 and the illegal shutdown of ASD on August 6, 2008. The extrapolated growth rate through February 1, 2009 amounts to the direct damages cited
6) Punitive damages of $50,000,000,000.00 to be paid to Andrew Bowdoin and the ASD members, split 50/50. The punitive damages arise due to the willful illegal behavior of AAG Taylor, AUSA Cowden, and Honorable Judge Collyer. Clear and convincing evidence that ASD was destined to be the next Google is available all over the internet. The $50 billion is but a fraction of the real impact to the parties involved, but we are willing to forego some of the damages in view of the extreme financial crisis impacting the country at this point. We are nothing if not patriotic!!
7) A Congressional Medal of Honor for the following individuals: Andrew Bowdoin, for his genius in developing the ASD business model. Professor Patrick Moriarity, for his selfless work on behalf of the ASD members in getting their Andrew Bowdoin’s money back from the government and for his connections to the third CMOH awardee, Curtis Richmond. Mr. Richmond is to be honored for founding a new nation, and making famous the important fast food restaurant chain Arby’s. The Arby’s Indian Tribe shall prosper for a long time under his guidance. We hereby petition for additional recognition from the inside promoters of ASD, particularly the gallant women who moderate the Surf’s Up forum. Without them, we could not be assured of the continuous stream of suckers new members that we need in order to make ASD a viable business, at least for the insiders.
We the undersigned do solemnly petition thusly….
PS: Disclaimer — This is sarcasm — not a real petition
Hi Marci,
Heck, Leahy’s staff will vet this thing in about 12 seconds. It is political poison, and they’ll see right away that somebody is trying to trade on the name of the boss to put lipstick on a pig.
Regards,
Patrick
LRM,
When I reflect on this situation, I think of the employee of the Utah Division of Child and Family Services who got a sham $300,000 judgment placed against him.
Here’s a man doing the good work of protecting children, and Richmond comes along and signs an arbitration “award” against him for $300,000.
The county prosecutor got hit for $250 million. Sheriff’s Department deputies also got stung.
They don’t make all that much money to begin with, and tackle tough jobs every day — and then have to contend with the Curtis Richmonds of the world.
It is unacceptable, dangerous and monumentally selfish to put public safety at risk to play such games.
Patrick
You know, Entertained, I’m laughing out loud right now.
This was an excellent piece of satire on your part and is also a good learning tool. Through the use of satire, you’ve neatly exposed this situation for what it is.
I mean, I know you intended to create a clever fiction and, in fact, did create one. But it’s not all that far from the truth, which is why your satire is so instructive.
Patrick
Marci,
We could also do the same….directing Senator Leahy toward AVG and the other scams. Here’s one of the Delusional’s (Jeff Vavra) letter to Leahy. Not too badly written, just missing a few salient facts, such as the ASD Ponzi angle. I’d be embarassed if I lived in the same state as this guy……what does it say for the MN educational system (which is supposed to be pretty good).
“Senator Patrick Leahy Wednesday, February 11, 2009
United States Senate
Committee on the Judiciary
224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510
Hello Senator,
My name is Jeff Vavra from the state of Minnesota. I understand that you are forming a “Truth Commission†to investigate the Dept. of Justice under the previous Administration. I would like to bring your attention to a matter that has affected over 100,000 citizens of the United States and the injustice that has been portrayed on them. The case involves US Attorney Jeffrey Taylor and Asst. William Cowden versus AdSurfDaily, Inc. At Mr. Taylors direction $93 Million dollars were illegally seized under the forfeiture provisions of the Patriot Act, normally reserved for drug trafficking or terrorist money laundering operations. I am just one of the 100,000+ members of AdSurfDaily (a legitimate online advertising company) who have been greatly affected by this seizure and am neither a drug trafficker nor a terrorist. I feel that the Constitutional Rights of all these citizens have been grossly violated by the actions taken under the direction of the aforementioned. Those actions have caused significant and extreme financial hardship towards myself and the entire AdSurfDaily Membership base. Sometimes, when a new business model or concept comes along that is innovative and unfamiliar, especially with new technology available over the internet, there can be a misunderstanding of how the business plan works and how so many people are making money. I can assure you, Mr. Leahy, that it has absolutely nothing to do with drug trafficking or terrorism and everything to do with creating wealth through advertising for ordinary citizens and business owners within these great United States.
Please direct your newly formed Truth Commission to review the actions of US Attorneys Taylor and Cowden and help to restore the Constitutional Rights to more than 100,000 great American Citizens.
Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey O. Vavra”
…..more bad news for the Surf’s Up crowd, and yet they still posted Senator Leahy’s speech on their site and continue to write, and urge others to write, Sen. Leahy on gbehalf of ASD and its biz model. Unfortunately for them, Sen. Leahy will be pushing for stronger anti-fraud laws (too bad, ASD/AVG/PBX, etc), as opposed to listening to the letters from the ASD supporters asking him to legalize Ponzi schemes…..
Excerpted from the speech at Georgetown U, 2/9/09:
“The Judiciary Committee has a full docket with matters ranging from review of expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act, and reforming our patent laws in order to help revitalize our economic engine, to passing personal data protection legislation and strengthening our anti-corruption and anti-fraud laws. I hope that this year we can also strengthen penalties for violent crimes motivated by prejudice and hate. The President has already moved to increase transparency in government, but we can make even greater improvements to the Freedom of Information Act, and we may finally be able enact a media shield law. These are all issues that you will be hearing about in the days, weeks and months ahead.”
Marci,
Here’s another better, and perhaps more punitive solution. Ensure that the senator’s aides send all of the letters requesting that the ASD Ponzi be reinstated to AUSA Cowden and the folks in the DOJ overseeing the restitution fund.
If it were me inn the ASD member shoes, I’d think twice before writing to Senator Leahy. I’d only write to him if I lost money in ASD and had no intention of filing a victim’s claim form because I would have to believe that my odds were greater with that approach than with the DOJ fund…
Situation 1: You lost money in ASD. You filed a claim form with the DOJ, where you filed under oath stating that you lost money to the illegal fraud activities of ASD and Andy Bowdoin. Now you are writing a letter to the government claiming that ASD was a legal enterprise and that Sen. Leahy should restore it to its former state. I think that you run the risk of perjury because you are making contradictory statements, one of which was made under oath. At the very least, I think that there is a high risk that the DOJ will deny your claim because of your assertions to the government that ASD is/was legal, in contradiction to your statement under oath of its illegality.
Situation 2: You made money in ASD, so you did not file a claim form (if you DID file a claim form, you have provided the government the information needed to go after your positive outcome). Your letter to Sen. Leahy will also state that ASD was legal. If the final resolution is that ASD is/was an illegal Ponzi (any bets against this, Crazy Cat????), your letter to the government may well be self-incriminating (Jeff Vavra’s was). This will also help the government track down the ASD winners in order to garner additional funds for the Victims Restitution Fund.
It seems almost incredible to me that the “legitimate advertising company” red herring is still being promoted by advocates of this letter writing campaign.
Since when does what online scam targets “think” they were doing or purchasing have anything to do with the outcome ???
Are Madoff ponzi “victims” to be treated differently because they “thought” Madoff was legitimate, or are the Earn By Loaning/ Craig Jolly targets entitled to a full refund because Jolly was clever enough to fool “some of the people some of the time” ???
Are the charities sent broke by Madoff to be exempt from bankruptcy because of their Christian/charitable status or what they “thought” they were doing with their donations??
Are we to grade despicable, unthinkably devastating scams on the degree of belief of the “victims” or the moral standing of those ripped off ??
The prosecutors allegations were that Bowdoin was running a scam designed to LOOK LIKE an advertising/social networking business. Allegations with which Bowdoin agreed with via his “with prejudice” acceptance of the complaint/s.
It matters not WHAT the ASD “members” THOUGHT they were doing/buying/investing in.
The fact remains, it was, is, and always will be a fraud made to LOOK like a real business, and every molecule of anger, frustration and disgust should be aimed squarely at Bowdoin and his accomplices.
Hi Entertained,
The situations you lay out above neatly expose the dilemma of the folks writing to Sen. Leahy: They can’t at once be victims and perpetrators.
For now, at least, they’re painting themselves victims of a rogue government (or, as one site puts it, a “rouge” government). But the government controls the refund purse strings. We’ll see if the deniers still play the rogue-government claim when it comes time to submit a sworn statement to get a share of the compensation pool.
As you point out, they are leaving a paper trail.
Honestly, though, this is virtually impossible to take seriously. The Surf’s Up folks have a history of complaining about unfair media coverage and how no one wants to look at the “other side of the story.”
Well, plenty of people have looked at the other side — and determined that it can’t pass intellectual muster or even the giggle test.
As things stand, some members of Surf’s Up literally are asking the Senate Judiciary Committee to endorse Ponzi schemes and investigate the people who stopped the ASD Ponzi scheme from mushrooming. There is not an ounce of rationality anywhere in the equation.
Patrick
A defense for ASD requires a tortured construction and a complete dismissal of facts.
LRM,
Exceptional comment. Thanks for sharing it.
Patrick
ASD members all 100,000 of them are lunatics
Cops don’t lie
Neither does the gov. or any officials judges etc tied to gov.
All dogs go to heaven
Seriously,Folks what a sad day. After having read the above comments it is clear to me that none of you know the facts. Y’all just eat up what your fed. Next time the term “sheep” is used to describe individuals who blindly do and believe what they are told they are referring to people exactly like you. Go ahead,accuse me of what you will,thats fine,but you know,deep down, you didn’t do your homework. As a matter of fact the right people are starting to take notice. More people,not affiliated with ASD, are coming out now,reporting that the same thing happened to their business. So why didn’t they come out at that time, you ask? I can’t speak for them, but I am guessing it because they thought no one would believe them that the gov could do such a thing! Must have been illegal if the gov. stepped in! Here’s the thing though. Ya’ll still think the gov. could do no wrong,even though ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PLUS people are stating otherwise. So what chance did a couple dozen stand? You will see. ASD was not a ponzi or whatever you want to call it. The gov is working so hard to get us our money back,then where is it? Officially the proper action would have been to immediately began getting ASD members back their investments. According to the gov. we where tricked into this. So what,the gov gets our money? Saying we should get our money back from Andy Bowdoin is so amazingly stupid,and shows that you don’t know the facts. The money was seized,and still remains in the gov possession. How could I ask Bowdoin for it back? In another story on this site at the following: sitehttps://patrickpretty.com/2009/02/10/breaking-news-following-richmonds-lead-second-motion-to-intervene-filed-in-adsurfdaily-forfeiture-case/
QUOTE”Wilkey did not explain how the two entities that spent a combined $78,000 to advertise Vemma expected to recapture the expense.”ENDQUOTE
They bought advertising. As in ANY form of advertising there is no guarantees,and none where made by ASD. I think that deep down every one of you that took the time to put down ASD and it’s members,wishes you had the balls to make a move. Alas,it will not be. Try not to go over the deep end when we win. Why not just be honest and say what you are thinking like “what about me” and “why am I always a step behind.” “if I can’t win nobody should” I remember you from my childhood. You took your ball and went home,cuz you didn’t get picked,vowing to show us all(the winners,go-getters)one day. Ask yourself: “why?”
Steelerfan,
Congrats on your team’s Superbowl win. Big Ben was great, and Santonio Holmes must have size 15’s to keep his tippy toes in bounds on the final TD. One of the best SB’s ever, and the better team won.
I can pretty much assure you that I am not one thinking “what about me” or “taking my ball & going home.” More likely I’d have dunked on your a$$, and in my business life as well.
Please provide just a single piece of data, evidence, or sound theory that refutes the ASD Ponzi charge. Bowdoin and his team of high-proced lawyers couldn’t do it, nor has any poster on any forum. It’s just the usual “trust me, I am right” or “I have inside information, we’re going to win” or in your case “Try not to go over the deep end when we win.” I will be the first to recant my posts on the ASD Ponzi status the instant someone posts credible: Large external sources of revenue, thereby avoiding the Ponzi element of using new member funds to pay off old members; or shows mathematically that the Black Box analysis is wrong. Forget what the government did — doesn’t matter. It’s what Bowdoin did.
Ball’s in your court…..
PS: What percent of the 100,000 do you think agree with you? Bet you can’t come up with hard data…..data is all anyone here is asking for, not words.
Steelerfan,
True Steeler fans don’t cover for international money-launderers and career con men who thieve from widows and churchgoers while invoking the word of God.
It therefore follows that you are an imposter Steeler fan. You have no Steeler bona fides if you attach your name to a statement such as this — “Try not to go over the deep end when we win” — when the “we” means ASD.
If you believe in the Bowdoin business model so much, try to sell it to Mr. Rooney. Tell him you know a guy who could install a surf on Steelers.com and the Steeler franchise and the entire Steeler Nation could get rich by viewing ads for Steeler-endorsed jockstraps.
Make sure you tell him no one would have to buy even a single Steeler-endorsed jockstrap to make this happen.
Maybe, if you have a free minute, you could pitch the Bowdoin program to the state of California, which is laying off employees by the thousands, and the state of Kansas, which is not issuing tax-refund checks.
They could use Bowdoin’s genius to right the ship.
Patrick
To everyone:
first I calculate we can all except that the gov. performs a grand job!(the Kansas Cali declaration)You gotta affirm Patrick that is shrewd!having voiced that,LOL,I would prefer to apologize. No sense it putdowns,additionally I had been irritated yesterday.I am sorry. I do not comprehend the posters catalysts. I just desire my investment back. If I acquired the ad cycle I garnered I would still be perturbed,however I would possess I bankrolled for,hence no quarrel. I am just gonna establish what I reasoned had been “going on” when I prevailed in ASD. I amassed adspace for my separate enterprise interest. I did not presume collecting my lay out back,as it had been advertising. Again,if I would have bagged totaly the adspace I garnered, I would not be composing this. I just believed advertising my biz would benefit it broadens it.It performed. ASD presented me an opportunity to acquire that funds back,by being a “surfer” “adviewer” whatever. They allowed a possibility to partake of the fortunes the team brought about(no guarantees). I can perceive this is where the perplexities materialize. The interpretation of PONZI(one of them):someones not gonna collect deposited. How can you compensate the final investor? splendidly,the manner I comprehended it, had been that the rebates arrived from the products ASD vended,such as adspace to proprietorship,Website design,domain names etc. numerous folk just obtained adspace,not to mention did not desire to surf. There exists some unaffiliated bankroll. ASD never certified these rebates,ergo why would I pledge it to Mr. Rooney? everything you remarked about pitching to Mr. Rooney had been precise,Patrick,rebut one reality. The claim,of a return on his investment. No certifications where brought about. just like numerous dissociated investment,the potential had been demonstrated,no promises produced. I believe(can’t remark for him) that MR. Rooney would have simply acquired the advertising. This would have brought ASD numerous external capital,cash allotted by an individual who did not partake of the rebate process. just a few of the examples you probed for of unrelated factors of dough to generate the rebates.
1. Adspace dealt to business’s ( again not everybody co-operated in the rebate program)
2. Website design
3 domain labels
4 I understand they helped enterprise garner set-up. educating them through the procedure as well as paperwork connectedly becoming a LLC or ‘C’ corp for instance
The “high priced lawyers” did “lay out the facts.” They displayed how the enterprise brought about an exotic gain. The objection to this had been crafty!still it will never be sufficient,they babbled about therefore who determines what enterprise’s are gonna be fruitful?
ASd never assured the rebates.let’s classify that solo for a moment,however. let’s debate that albeit not assured the belief brought families expectations up. Not promising it had been purely a loophole on account of it was never gonna occur. That is an observation. My hypothesis is that the rebates would have been triumphantly brought about,that it would come to pass. I do not reason it is even-handed to preach,”well we do not envision its gonna occur,we do not envision your activity is going to be beneficial,hence preceding anyone else invests,shut it down,additionally snatch the investors fortune. Again forfeiting currency sucks,however I absorb it if the enterprise flops,not the gov. rescuing me by confiscating it. I fairly assume that humanity construct determinations for themselves,that’s all. bottom line ASD developed separate capital,therefore getting it out of the PONZI category.the contention continued that ASD had been a scheme on account of it compensated yesterday’s investors with today’s cash,when in certainty the capital had been cultivated from products along with services provided. ASD demonstrated that. instantly the counterattack was that it could never be abundant,…opinion! The manner that ASD continued broadening it had been a contradictory observation at that. ASD formed foreign wealth,hence they would not have to abandon that final person.
How,sir, do you connect me being a fan of the Steelers to my opinions on ASD? What does that have to do with anything? I mean besides slinging mud? Thanks for your factless bullspit. They invented the telephone,and the telephone tough guy was invented. No one thought a bigger douche-bag could exist. Then came the internet,and the introduction of the internet tough guy,an even lower form of douche emerged. Here’s the difference between you and me. Yeah, I had some remarks about your opinion. They where deduced from the comments and statements you made.On the other hand you are a mental midget for the following reason: Connecting the fan thing to this. No facts just excitable babble to get your crowd going. A favorite way to play smoke and mirrors the likes of Fidel Catsro and Hitler used. Now that’s a fact. It be like me saying something like “hey Patrick your an a-hole because your name is Patrick.” I would have liked this site to be a place of great factual debates. Yet,what I assume to be the moderator,just slings mud. Thank you ENTERTAINED for your opinion. Although I disagree,I can see that you believe in what you are saying,and I respect that. I disagree whole heartedly,but I respect your opinion. See what I am getting at Patrick?
How,sir, do you connect me being a fan of the Steelers to my opinions? What does that have to do with anything? I mean besides slinging mud? Thanks for your factless bullspit. They invented the telephone,and the telephone tough guy was invented. No one thought a bigger douche-bag could exist. Then came the internet,and the introduction of the internet tough guy,an even lower form of douche emerged. Here’s the difference between you and me. Yeah, I had some remarks about your opinion. They where deduced from the comments and statements you made.On the other hand you are a mental midget for the following reason: Connecting the fan thing to this. No facts just excitable babble to get your crowd going. A favorite way to play smoke and mirrors the likes of Fidel Catsro and Hitler used. Now that’s a fact. It be like me saying something like “hey Patrick your an a-hole because your name is Patrick.” I would have liked this site to be a place of great factual debates. Yet,what I assume to be the moderator,just slings mud. Thank you ENTERTAINED for your opinion. Although I disagree,I can see that you believe in what you are saying,and I respect that. I disagree whole heartedly,but I respect your opinion. See what I am getting at Patrick?
Steelerfan,
I was less polite to you than I should have been.
Honestly, though, your command of the facts of the ASD case could be better. You have three or four posts here now. I haven’t seen a single fact yet. What I have seen is a pattern of posting rants simply because you disagree with the views of this Blog.
Hitler? Castro?
Take you own advice and make this place a “place of great factual debate” by citing some facts and arguing your case around those facts. Since August, I’ve heard a lot of people make the claim that ASD wasn’t a Ponzi scheme — and haven’t seen a single fact to back up the claim.
My apologies to you for being impolite. I feel bad about that and wish I’d engaged you in a more meaningful way.
Patrick
I’m sorry, I can’t read all of SteelerFans arguments. Such tortured logic gives me a headache. But these stood out:
Yes, it was an investment, wasn’t it. Of course, investments need to be registered & regulated with the SEC. Was your investment registered as such? I doubt it. The sale of unregistered securities is a crime, it just so happens that Andy hasn’t been charged with it. Yet.
So why do you want your “investment” back? The rebates are zero, were not assured. You knew this before you invested in this investment opportunity, didn’t you?
All the “bad government” guff is just a distraction.
Ok Patrick,we’re cool,and again my apologies. I’m back so I must like debating this with you. Oh,and sorry for double posting,it was an accident.
I feel like I listed the way I believe the outside oncome was generated above. I believe this becuase I saw the website that offered these products. OUTSIDE INCOME. Maybe I’m wrong,please dispute
As for the Investement thing
The gov says we should get our money back. They have a website with a form to make your claim. Left in their hands I don’t believe I’ll see that money,but the fact remains that is their public stance. That we got rip-offed and should get it back.
If I put in the money with just the hope of a return,ok. That would be different. But I bought advertising,and didn’t get it. Get it? Not asking for product AND my money back,just one or the other.
So you think we have an honest gov.? I don’t. The scandals,lies,and crimes that are uncovered every day are why you shouldn’t believe in it. ASD is not the reason I distrust the gov. I have been lied to by the justice system. I am not a criminal that just hates the cops,that’s not my thing. I just have witnessed people in power, in the justice system, and the gov. lie for their gain,and the people’s loss. I guess until you see it for your own eyes,one day…
GOOD MORNING PATRICK!
Please read TONY H.
Here’s my thing amigo. I do not know if I am accurate. I do not attest to possess data,just my interpretation of the company and my analysis of what the Website discussed. I believe I am broad-minded enough to alter my reasoning. I am not going to proceed sightlessly forward for the sake of not proclaiming I had been mistaken. conceivably I just do not get it. I recognize I am not flawless. Here’s what vexes me however: People like TONY H. debating that according to MY contention,I should not receive my fortune back. I understand I petitioned this above,nevertheless it continues truly irking me. Like I discussed above if I would have garnered all the ad period I funded for, I would still be bothered it did not perform,still I would perceive the basis of not acquiring my purchase back, IF I accumulated all the ad duration I bankrolled for. Let’s say I where to be won over that ASD had been no good. I would still conclude that I deserved the currency I invested in advertising back,on account of I did not get the advertising. I got into ASD comprehending full well the probabilities of me collecting the rebates was tenuous as well as not promised your are 100% accurate about that. The matter endures nevertheless, if I would have perceived I was not going to obtain anything for my funds I would not have invested. I did it for the advertising,that had been “guaranteed” please answer to me why I should not acquire what I paid for. Not the rebates but the advertising. I am not debating Mr. H that you should endorse with me or that your nonsensical if you don’t,but please clarify why you made the contention in so many words that in my own words I forfeited my investment and sometimes you lose investments. That is a reality you are correct about,but that is not the grievance here.
Heres what I am looking for:
Why shouldn’t I acquire my cash back if I did not collect the product? Try to leave out name calling if ya can, I would appreciate it,thanks.
Steelerfan,
It is common for surf companies to claim they have “outside income.” This helps them plant the seed that the surfs have the ability to rely on resources beyond fees members pay, thus taking Ponzi concerns out of play.
But the next time a surf has adequate external resources to pay rebates will be the first time. Some people will try to throw you off further by stating that even $1 in external revenue defeats the Ponzi assertions. It is not true. Don’t listen to them.
Search the Blog for Entertained’s explanation of the Black Box. People can wail, gnash teeth, call the government crooks — but none of it adds up to an argument that can defeat the math.
Also, know that the government NEVER has lost an autosurf Ponzi case. People will bob and weave and come up with all kids of complex explanations on how a company that uses only 50 percent of its revenue somehow can pay 125 percent of members’ expenditures back to them.
ASD was a relatively slow-motion Ponzi. In some respects it was more dangerous than a flameout Ponzi because the slow-motion nature enabled it to collect more money.
You got fleeced. It wasn’t the government’s fault. The government prevented people who would have joined ASD after you from getting fleeced.
There is a chance you can back some of your money by filling out the government form. There also is a class-action lawsuit filed by ASD members. That is a possible outlet for you.
Under Bowdoin’s contract, ad spends were nonrefundable and rebates weren’t guaranteed. The contract was designed to trap members. You are due advertising only.
Patrick
So what is stopping Uncle Andy from giving you the advertising that you have paid for? I’ve read reports that any servers that were impounded have been returned, web hosting etc doesn’t cost very much. I’m sure a business genius like Uncle Andy could spend a few hundred $$ on a bit of hosting, bandwidth etc. There is no reason why he could not supply the advertising he promised. The only person stopping you from getting the advertising you have paid for is Uncle Andy himself.
By the way, I notice that you have backed away from the “return on investment” argument. Probably wise. Don’t want to dig yourself too big a hole.
P>By the way, I notice that you have backed away from the “return on investment†argument. Probably wise. Don’t want to dig yourself too big a hole.
I did not back away. I had to use a whole new post saying the same thing because You took my use of the word “investment” out of context creating your own definition. Whether I am right or wrong,any rational person can see I meant it as a purhase. Think of it like investing in lead sheet for example. You pay for (or make an ivestment) in potential client information.Thats in i-n-v-e-s-t-m-e-n-t Now,if those people don’t become clients, you can’t cry about return of your “investment” but if you never recieve the lead sheet then you should recieve a return in your investment.
Secondly, do you really believe your argument? In thie midst of all this legal hooplah ASD should still attempt to advertise? Clearly whether right or wrong in this case that would be a bad decision. If I was in this kind of legal trouble, I wouldn’t either.
Lastly,Patrick, as far as the whole not enough money thing. WE will never see eye to eye on this. There was outside income and I don’t think it’s up to the gov. to judge if it was enough or not. I think there was enough money to pay everyone the rebates they had earned. Something like 12dailypro is bogus because they only take in investors money. They didn’t create a way to pay the investors.ASD did.
another reason we will never agree is because you trust the gov is telling the truth. I don’t
Sorry I forgot something:
If ASD was not legitmate advertising how did I aquire clients in my business I advetised only on ASD?
SteelerFan,
You’d have to ask the government. ASD WOULD have been legal if they paid no rebates. Andy also could have gotten the Ponzi charges (more technically the seizure) overturned in an instant had he had any serious outside revenue streams. Even a know-nothing law person (inc. me) would have done that, and ASD members were told that Bowdoin hired a top-flight legal team. If they had outside revenue of any significance, ASD would have been reinstated. Bowdoin choose not to present that argument, and the most likely reason is that there wasn’t any…..I suppose it is possile that ASD had billions in external revenues, but I wouldn’t bet on it. No one has presented any evidence of that whatsoever, esp. Bowdoin himself.
btw, if you got lots of new clients, it sounds like you did receive your advertising. Does that mean you really don’t have a claim? Seems to me you can claim ALL of the funds you put into ASD minus any rebates, on the government claim form. I think you are arguing that you can claim a much smaller amount (the amount I think you can claim minus one dollar for each ad that was viewed). I’d go with my numbers…..good luck!
I’ll be back gotta go to work,but I’ll leave you this to ponder. In early 2008 (around Feb) ,the same gov officials(exactly the same people in Tallahassee,Fl who run the ASD investigaion now,AND have recently been found GUILTY of selling Florida residents Diver License info),looked at the ASD business model,and gave it the gov. approval. WHY? What changed between FEb 2008 and August 2008? The amount of money they could steal.
I will claim to acknowledge this is stimulating!
This query exists for ENTERTAINED. This is a serious contemplation,I am not being insulting. You possess my respect,due to the way you approach the challenges I debate.I can summarize you absorb everything in my reply. Cannot voice the equivalent for TONY H. HERES THE challenge:
Which is it? Is it not permissible advertising as you presented above,or was it permissible advertising as you debated above “sounds like you got your advertising” with all-inclusive destined regard sir you cannot monopolize it two ways. This variety of circle jerk disappoints me.
SF,
First off, I think my opinion doesn’t matter all that much — I’d guess the government’s opinion is what matters most (they have the money, and the plans to disburse that money to the victims). My position though is that I would for sure NOT classify it as advertising. If nothing else, that is because the government is not treating it as advertising (and they control the $$$ at this point). If it were me in your shoes, I would file a claim on the total amount I put into ASD for two reasons. First, my claim would be larger, and second, that is what those who control the money are asking for. My somewhat tongue-in-cheek response to you was to suggest that if you really, really believed in ASD and its advertising value (and you very well may), then shouldn’t your claim of a loss just be the amount of advertising that you did not receive? In this adjusted claim, you can’t claim any unused Ad Packs you might have receive for your surfing. My apologies if I left the impression that I want it both ways, I don’t really. Again, I wouldn’t treat funds paid to ASD as “advertising” if I were in your shoes, because it would reduce my claim amount AND go against the psotion of the government (who has Andy’s money)…..
My opinion matters little as well, but I have the right and opportunity to express it, as do others. The fact that I haven’t earned the respect of a ponzi supporter is something I can live with. I hope I can keep up the same standard in the future.
The “advertising” aspect of ASD wasn’t illegal – which is why Uncle Andy has no restriction of providing this service. He could set up a system to provide the “advertising” that has been paid for. The fact that he has not can only be attributed to the fact that he has no interest in providing such a service.
The “advertising” provided by Uncle Andy was over priced in comparison with the competition. Google will provide similar “advertising” for a fraction of the price to a much greater audience. The only reason a person with a real product to “advertise” would use Uncle Andy’s service is because of the “rebates”. Why would a real business advertise within a limited closed system which may be shown to a 6 year old child? The value of the “advertising” was very limited. The only way anyone would want to use Uncle Andy’s “service” is for the rebates alone.
And it is the “rebates” that offer the true return on the investment. This is proven that folk were encouraged to “advertise” a non-related company, just so they can receive the rebates.
Steelerfan, I will assume that you were one of the very few who had a real, genuine product or service to “advertise” via Uncle Andy. I will assume that you were not one of the many “advertising” some other snake-oil MLM fruit drink, fuel additive, or e-books. Did the number of additional “clients” you gained offset the expense of “advertising” with Uncle Andy?
not to mention the chief contention you have that ASD was not proper advertising is that the gov debates it was not? incontestabley they will triumph,they are the gov. What I anticipated had been that someone would summarize for me why they have arrived to that assessment. Why was ASD unlawful advertising?
tony H,you cannot debate what products where fraudulent or not. indisputably, you did not research them all completely.
[…] Mods at one time sent blasts if Bowdoin or favorite sons cleared their throats. They used the forum to champion ridiculous, pro se pleadings after Bowdoin […]
[…] practices were known, some ASD members embarked on a letter-writing campaign to the Senate and asked members of Congress to investigate the prosecutors, not the alleged […]
[…] of Surf’s Up members participated in letter-writing campaigns on Bowdoin’s behalf. Surf’s Up sent an email to members in February 2009, speaking approvingly of the […]
[…] Read about the Moriarty/Surf’s Up letter-writing campaign to the Senate Judiciary Committee. […]
[…] members of the alleged AdSurfDaily Ponzi scheme in Florida really write to the Senate Judiciary Committee in the post-Madoff Ponzi era to elicit support for the Ponzi scheme business model — while […]
[…] this story from February 2009 about the Moriarty/Surf’s Up letter-writing campaign to Leahy. In a letter to Leahy, Moriarty claimed that “[o]ver 50 individual and notarized […]
[…] in which — as Moriarty described it — more than 50 “individual and notarized DEMAND[S] FOR LEGAL EVIDENCE” were sent to two federal prosecutors and a U.S. Secret Service […]
[…] February 2009 story about ASD-related letter-writing campaign to Sen. Leahy by ASD figure “Professor” […]