Part of the purported INetGlobal training material on how to transfer money to a debit card. (Red bar added to screen shot by PP Blog to block account number.)
Training material purportedly produced in November 2009 and published online shows prospects of INetGlobal how to transfer money from the company to a reloadable debit card. The presentation reveals that INetGlobal was using the same debit-card firm that provided services for a Florida man implicated in October 2009 — just a month before the INetGlobal training material purportedly was produced — in an alleged international fraud scheme that gathered at least $22 million and made Ponzi payments to members via debit cards.
The training material is confusing in places, and the form in which it was published suggests that some INetGlobal members with Chinese names shared information to recruit Chinese prospects. At the same time, the training material and other information accessible at the same website suggests Chinese members also worked together to create instructional materials that showed other Chinese members and prospects how to offload their profits in cash at ATM machines and receive $300 sign-up bonuses that may not have been available to all INetGlobal members.
It is possible that a single member or group of members created the training material and the companion information. Whether the material, which does not purport to be hypothetical and appears to include no disclaimer language, used the names of real members was unclear. Also unclear is whether the approach had the approval of INetGlobal. What is clear is that the information was published openly online and purportedly reflects INetGlobal financial transactions that occurred among Chinese members in November 2009.
A “Contact” address on the website that published the information lists a street address in British Columbia, even though the domain itself lists a registration address in Mainland China. The British Columbia street address returns a page in Google search results that purports to lay out a conspiracy case against judges in Canada for issuing unfavorable rulings in what appears to be a matter unrelated to INetGlobal.
Just two months earlier, in September 2009, some Clickbank vendors were complaining that links to their businesses were being placed in INetGlobal’s advertising rotator without their knowledge. The Clickbank vendors also complained that INetGlobal was passing along bandwidth costs to them and that their businesses were experiencing a surge in unproductive traffic from China.
The author of the training document on debit cards was listed as Annie Zhang, according to the “Properties” of the document, which was published in PDF format.
The training document was published on a website whose domain-registration address was listed as “Xian, Shanxi . . . China.” The domain on which the information was published was registered to Jun Zhang. The website encourages prospects to submit their email address and wait to receive a return email “to get a referrer ID and referrer name that you will need in the registration process.”
Visitors to the website registered in China are told that, by registering for INetGlobal in this fashion, they can “Make Free Fast Money $300 Right Now.” The site instructs viewers to purchase a “$2000 Executive Business Package,” provide proof of the purchase by return email and wait to receive their bonus.
“We will send $300 free fast money to your V-Cash account,” the site tells viewers. “If you prefer, we can send $300 to your PayPal account too!”
Another URL at the same domain instructs prospects on how to register for a Clickbank account to promote products through INetGlobal. The instructions are available in multiple languages, including English, Chinese and Japanese.
The debit card featured in the PDF training material on the website registered in China is known as the “Exclusive One” card and is issued by Anres Technologies Corp. of Las Vegas. The Exclusive One card is pictured in the INetGlobal training material, and Anres’ name is referenced in court filings by the U.S. Secret Service in the INetGlobal case.
Anres’ name also is referenced by the SEC in a case filed last year in Florida against David F. Merrick, Traders International Return Network (TIRN), MS Inc., GTT Services Inc., MDD Consulting Inc. and Go ! Tourism Inc. Merrick and the companies were accused of running a Florida-based Ponzi scheme that used debit cards and claimed a presence in Panama.
Among the claims in the SEC case was that “Merrick and TIRN falsely represented that investors requesting a withdrawal of funds would receive a debit card loaded with their initial investment and return on their investments, when, in fact, the money loaded on the cards was money from other investors,†according to the SEC.
The PP Blog wrote about the TIRN case on Oct. 15, 2009. Millions of dollars were moved across borders, the SEC said.
“[A]t least $2.3 million of investor funds were transferred to accounts in Panama, Mexico, Malaysia, Switzerland and the Netherlands,†the SEC said. It added that about $8.8 million was placed on debit cards to make Ponzi payments to members..
Although TIRN was not an autosurf, debit cards have become increasingly popular in the autosurf universe. The TIRN case demonstrated that alleged fraudsters were relying on debit cards to pull off international financial schemes.
Anres was not named a defendant in either the TIRN case or the emerging INetGlobal case. The company has not been accused of wrongdoing.
In recent months, the FBI has expressed public concerns that criminal organizations were turning to preloaded debit cards to launder money and that users were taking advantage of a “shadow” banking system.
Card Highlighted In Instructional PDF For INetGlobal
The purported INetGlobal training material appears in a PDF that includes screen shots. The person (or persons) who assembled the material appear to have Chinese names, and the English-language material walks prospects through the process of converting electronic credits to cash that can be loaded onto an Exclusive One debit card and withdrawn at ATMs.
In February, the Secret Service said it believed INetGlobal was targeting Chinese members in an international Ponzi scheme. The purported training material lists IP addresses in the United States and Canada in a manner that suggests Chinese members in both countries were working together to train other Chinese members how to offload profits onto debit cards and also how to transfer money using INetGlobal’s internal system from one Chinese member to another.
Among the assertions against INetGlobal by the U.S. Secret Service was that the company was engaging in wire fraud and money laundering. The IRS now has entered the case, which suggests that the government also suspects tax crimes.
Material Suggests Account-Sharing And Cross-Border Planning
The second page of the 18-page PDF purportedly shows the back office of an INetGlobal member who appears to have a Chinese name. This page lists the member’s name as “Dong,” lists a five-digit INetGlobal member number, a six-digit V-Cash account number and an IP address that comes back to Minneapolis. The page notes that automatic repurchasing of additional “adpacs” was enabled and set for 50 percent. Viewers were prompted to click on a tab labeled “V-Services.” In the next step, viewers were prompted to click on a graphic labeled “V-Cash Online Payment Services.”
This page forwarded to another prompt to click on a V-Cash logo, which led to a login screen that prompted members to enter a user ID and a password. A “Welcome” screen followed, and members were instructed to click on a tab that prompted them to go to the “Member Center.”
Once inside the Member Center, members were prompted to click on a tab labeled “V-Cash.” This led to a screen that prompted them to enter a password for their V-Cash accounts. The next screen shot showed that V-cash was logging members’ IP numbers; the IP number logged in this screen shot came back to Toronto. Why the shot displayed a Toronto IP when the earlier shot displayed a Minneapolis IP was unclear.
The Exclusive One Card, as pictured inside the training material.
The next screen shot prompted members to click on a tab labeled “balance.” This screen noted a “Currency balance” of more than $3,038 in the account. The next screen was confusing because the currency balance had been lowered by $200. Why the balance was lowered was not made clear in the presentation.
In the next screen shot, the presentation provided the initial instructions on how to transfer money to the Exclusive One card, which is pictured in the document. This screen shot also purported to show that members could transfer money from their V-Cash accounts to other V-Cash accounts from within the company’s internal system. The presentation prompted viewers to select the option to transfer money to the Exclusive One card and press “Continue.”
Thereafter, the presentation showed a purported transfer of $2,000 to the Exclusive One card. The presentation noted a $30 fee incurred when making the transfer. The fee rate for the transfer service was described as 1.5 percent. The screen shot noted that the total amount transferred, including the $30 fee, was $2,030. Viewers were prompted to “Click to Confirm” the transfer.
Part of purported INetGlobal traning material. (Red bars added to screen shot by PP Blog to block account numbers.)
One of the screen shots that followed purported to show a “History” of transfers to and from the account. One of the transfers showed a purported transfer “from” Annie Zhang to an INetGlobal member in the amount of $3,000. It was dated Nov. 3, 2009.
A person named Annie Zhang purportedly is one of INetGlobal’s top recruiters. Some promos for the firm have asserted Zhang was making $100,000 a month as an affiliate of INetGlobal.
Parts of the PDF presentation are confusing. For example, the member’s name that appears on the second page of the presentation does not agree with the member’s name that appears on Page 6 — even though the INetGlobal member account number appears to be the same, as does the V-Cash account number.
On Page 2, the member’s name is listed as “Dong” with an IP number that comes back to Minneapolis. On Page 6, however, the screen welcomes a member named “Lei.” An IP shown on Page 9 comes back to Toronto — not Minneapolis.
In the document’s published form, both Dong and Lei appear to have the same 5-digit INetGlobal number and the same six-digit V-Cash account number. Why two purported INetGlobal members would have the same account numbers is unclear.
INetGlobal Now Has Links To Three Ponzi Cases
In February and March court filings, the U.S. Secret Service linked INetGlobal to the alleged AdSurfDaily Ponzi scheme, alleging that an undercover agent was introduced to INetGlobal by an ASD member. The Secret Service brought the Ponzi case against ASD in August 2008.
The appearance of the Exclusive One card in the purported INetGlobal training material links INetGlobal to a second Ponzi court scrape: the SEC’s case against the alleged David Merrick/TIRN Ponzi scheme, which appears to have used the same debit card as INetGlobal to pay members. The CFTC also filed allegations against TIRN, and the U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Florida also is investigating TIRN.
Separately, INetGlobal operator Steve Renner was linked to a Ponzi scheme known as Learn Waterhouse in 2004. A company Renner operates — Cash Cards International (CCI) — provided payment-processing services for the Learn Waterhouse scheme, and Renner himself purportedly was an investor in the scheme, according to court filings.
The document recounts the history of the case, including astonishing allegations that Learn Waterhouse told investors that it “had invested $2 billion in a gold mine in Mexico, and [was] working on a billion-dollar Columbus-era ‘find’ on the bottom of the ocean.”
Renner was alleged to have provided payment-processing services for Learn Waterhouse through CCI and to have spent investors’ money on personal purchases.
Randall Treadwell, the ringleader of the Learn Waterhouse scheme, “often claimed that he had a God-given ability to make money, but in hindsight it appears that his talents lay in extracting funds from duped investors,” according to court filings.
Indeed, according to filings in the Learn Waterhouse case, the “purported investments
did not exist at all.
“By the time the defendants’ far-reaching Ponzi scheme collapsed, more than 1,700 investors throughout the United States had lost their investments. At trial, the defendants produced no evidence to suggest that any investment profit was generated by their companies.”
Losses in the Learn Waterhouse case totaled at least $44 million.
Federal prosecutors say they believe INetGlobal and its parent company — Inter-Mark Corp. — hired an attorney for employees to derail a criminal probe into the companies’ business practices by muting the voices of workers who could become witnesses in the case.
Prosecutors made the dramatic claim in response to INetGlobal’s request last week for a court order that would prevent the U.S. Secret Service and other law-enforcement agencies “from contacting these represented individuals and requesting interviews.â€
No attorney-client relationship exists between the workers and attorney Paul Engh, prosecutors argued.
“Mr. Engh indicates that he ‘was hired’ to represent these employees, but refrains from indicating who it was who hired him,” prosecutors said. They added that “many of [Engh’s] purported clients seem to have never spoken with him.”
Engh argued last week that government agents were approaching employees “on a cold-call basis, at [employees’] homes, at night or in the early morning hours, and all without notice to counsel.†He added that the government appeared to be ignoring his duty as counsel to INetGlobal employees “on some federalist notion of superiority or entitled sense of un-accountability.â€
Nonsense, the government said.
“The United States opposes these outlandish claims of sweeping representation, and respectfully asks the Court to deny the pending motion for a protective order,” prosecutors said. “On May 4, 2010, the corporate targets made clear what lies behind Mr. Engh’s motion. The companies joined in the motion for a protective order . . . and quite candidly admitted that they have done so because ‘statements taken by the government could be used against IMC (InterMark Corporation) in subsequent proceedings.
“This, of course, crystallizes the motive behind the motion for a protective order,” prosecutors asserted.
Minnesota-Based Case Takes California Swing
The prosecution’s move occurred against the backdrop of a revelation Tuesday by the defense that the government had filed a forfeiture complaint March 15 against a San Diego property allegedly acquired for $595,000 by Inter-Mark in August 2009 with criminal proceeds from a Ponzi, wire-fraud and money-laundering scheme.
Inter-Mark lists Las Vegas as its home; INetGlobal and other related companies operate from Minneapolis.
A Secret Service agent alleged that the San Diego property was acquired with funds from INetGlobal advertisers in a multistep transaction in which credit-card payments from customers were funneled through at least three Inter-Mark bank accounts to pay for the building, which is situated near a beachfront and bay.
Court records suggest that INetGlobal has known about the forfeiture action since at least April 19, leading to questions about whether the firm withheld the news about the action from the membership at large for at least 15 days in a bid to prevent its support base from eroding. The forfeiture case is proceeding on a litigation track separate from the probe into INetGlobal operator Steve Renner’s business practices.
In February, the Secret Service said it believed Renner was operating an international Ponzi scheme through his affiliated companies that largely targeted Chinese members, including members from Mainland China. No criminal charges have been filed, but the government has seized about $26 million in the case, alleging wire fraud and money-laundering.
Prosecutors said Thursday that the probe into Renner’s business practices was continuing and that the government was “carrying out its constitutional obligation to ‘take care that the laws be faithfully executed’ . . . by investigating credible allegations of serious criminal conduct.”
Whether INetGlobal members at large knew about the building in San Diego remains unclear. At least one prominent supporter of the firm said she did not. She added that she did not believe it was a crime to expand a business and open a branch in California, but the government never alleged that opening a legal business was a crime.
The allegation against Inter-Mark in the forfeiture case was that it used criminal proceeds to purchase the building and that the building itself was the proceeds of a crime.
On Thursday — in a filing peppered with the words clients and client encased in quotation marks in what might have been a bid to highlight an emerging theory that the other side was trying to pull the wool over the eyes of both INetGlobal employees and the court, prosecutors said the legal approach chosen by the Renner companies could backfire because the employees Engh says he represents could have competing legal interests. (Emphasis added.)
“The potential for conflicts of interest also does not seem to have been considered in any depth by the corporation,” prosecutors said. “The motion filed by Mr. Engh is silent as to what course of action he will follow should one of his ‘clients’ implicate another ‘client’ in wrongdoing, or what he will do when one ‘client’ directs him to negotiate favorable terms with the government under which the first client may impart information that may incriminate other ‘clients.’
“The lack of planning for these eventualities is itself circumstantial evidence that this blanket assertion of representation is more strategic than real,” prosecutors argued.
The legal situation confronted by INetGlobal’s 70 employees perhaps is analogous to a hypothetical case in which a corporation believed to have stolen money arranged blanket counsel for employees whose ranks could include workers who had knowledge about the theft and workers who did not.
If the same lawyer is representing each of the employees — and if the employees have competing legal interests — serious doubts about a client’s right to receive thorough representation could arise.
Prosecutors said they would “scrupulously observe the limitations that the law places on investigative activities,” but added that they would not submit to defense maneuverings designed to derail the investigation.
“[W]e need not, and shall not, voluntarily accede to sweeping assertions that entire categories of potential witnesses are out-of-bounds because the investigative target has retained counsel and declared that attorney to be the legal representative of those witnesses,” prosecutors said.
“If a person from whom agents request an interview declines the request, the agents will depart; if the person states that they wish the interview request to go through their lawyer (whoever that lawyer may be) that request will be honored.
“Otherwise, we plan to proceed with our investigation, and to make use of all the investigative tools at our disposal, to the fullest extent allowed by law, including contact and interviews with witnesses,” prosecutors concluded.
BULLETIN:UPDATED 1:47 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.) Federal prosecutors and the U.S. Secret Service have filed paperwork that says INetGlobal’s parent company — Inter-Mark Corp. — acquired a property in San Diego last year and intended to remodel it with proceeds from a Ponzi scheme.
Records suggest the purchase price of the property was $595,000 and that Inter-Mark intended to spend a substantial sum on renovations paid for with money from INetGlobal members’ advertising purchases.
Prosecutors have filed a forfeiture complaint against the property, saying it is the proceeds of a criminal wire-fraud and money-laundering scheme. The forfeiture case was filed March 15 and is proceeding on a litigation track separate from a criminal probe that was launched into the business practices of INetGlobal operator Steve Renner in February.
The case number for the forfeiture action was disclosed in court filings by the defense in the criminal investigation earlier this week. Records suggest that Renner, Inter-Mark and INetGlobal have been aware of the forfeiture case since at least April 19. It was not immediately clear if Renner or the companies took any steps to inform members that the government had opened a second litigation front amid allegations of criminal conduct.
In April, some INetGlobal members — apparently unaware of the government’s claim that money from advertisers was used to pay for and renovate a California building far removed from INetGlobal’s base of operations in Minnesota — suggested the prosecution’s case was disintegrating.
The property, whose address is 3864 Mission Boulevard, San Diego, Calif., was acquired in August 2009 after funds from customers’ credit-card purchases were used in a series of illegal transactions, according to the Secret Service.
“These deposits are believed to be from individuals who are ‘purchasing’ advertising,” the agency alleged.
“More specifically, the purchase of the defendant real property was funded by the following transactions,” the agency alleged. “During the month of July 2009 over $2.5 million dollars in credit card transactions were deposited to Wells Fargo Inter-Mark Account #665543xxxx. These funds were later used to purchase the defendant real property (italics added):
“a. On August 10, 2009, $350,000 was transferred to Inter-Mark Account #137922xxxx from Account #66543xxxx.
“b. On August 11, 2009, an additional $300,000 was transferred to Inter-Mark Account #137922xxxx from Account #66543xxxx.
“c. On August 31, 2009, $650,000 was transferred to Inter-Mark Account #224620xxxx from Account #137922xxxx.
“d. On the same date, $20,000 was wire transferred from Account #224620xxxx to Eaton Escrow in San Diego, California.
“e. On September 14, 2009, $450,000 was transferred to Inter-Mark Account #224620xxxx from Account #137922xxxx.
“f. On September 14, 2009, $575,517 was wire transferred from Account #224620xxxx to Eaton Escrow. These funds were used to purchase a commercial building located at 3864 Mission Blvd., San Diego, California.
“g. On September 23, 2009 Eaton Escrow issued a check payable to Inter-Mark Corporation in the amount of $348.77 with a notation that the check proceeds was a “refund.â€
The Secret Service alleged that “[r]emodeling work is currently in progress to renovate the
defendant real property.
“Substantial sums of money have been invested towards the remodeling project,” the agency alleged.
On May 4, Renner, Inter-Mark and a related entity known as V-Media Marketing denied the allegations in the forfeiture complaint.
This promo by a Narc That Car member appeared on a .org website that used AMBER Alert's name in its URL. The U.S. Department of Justice, which administers the AMBER Alert program, denied in February that it had any affiliation with Narc. Days later, Narc removed a reference to AMBER Alert in its own video production to advertise the opportunity. The actions of both Narc and its promoters have led to questions about whether the company had come into possession of money based on misrepresentations that caused prospects to believe they were helping out worthwhile causes by joining Narc. The very first Narc promotions observed by the PP Blog were authored by members of AdSurfDaily and Golden Panda Ad Builder, companies implicated in a Ponzi scheme involving tens of millions of dollars.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Narc That Car says it is a private company and has no duty to reveal the names of its data clients. This essay challenges Narc’s arguments.
The public has a compelling interest not only in learning the identities of Narc That Car’s clients through appropriate channels, but also in learning the identities of the company’s data-gatherers who may hold jobs in the public sector and are supplementing their income by moonlighting for Narc as consultants.
Narc is a highly questionable business. Moonlighting by public employees in highly questionable ways is one of the elements in the Scott Rothstein Ponzi scheme in Florida. Rothstein is alleged to have employed off-duty members of law enforcement as bodyguards while he orchestrated a $1.2 billion fraud. Moonlighting also is an element in a recent case in which investigators in Georgia probed allegations of sexual assault against Pittsburgh Steelers’ quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, who employed off-duty police officers as bodyguards.
The assault allegedly took place in the women’s restroom of a nightclub. Roethlisberger was not charged in the case, but was suspended for six games by the NFL for conduct detrimental to society and the league. Two Pennsylvania police officers working for him potentially face disciplinary action for sullying the reputations of their departments and not extricating themselves from a situation in which a crime or crimes might have been committed in their presence.
Why Wouldn’t The BBB Have Questions
Today the PP Blog challenges its readers, including its critics, to read this essay, observe the sampling of graphics and answer a few simple questions: Why wouldn’t the Better Business Bureau, responsible businesspeople, journalists, law-enforcement agencies and taxpayers not have questions about Narc That Car? (Now suddenly known as Crowd Sourcing International after issuing checks to members under at least two different names earlier in the year.)
And why isn’t the company stepping forward with answers that enlighten, not deflect or hop-scotch, around key issues? The company should supply the information to the Better Business Bureau and any law-enforcement agency that asks for it. Information Narc provides could be kept private while any investigation ensues and released by the government if it is determined that wrongdoing has occurred.
Narc says it is in the business of paying people to record the license-plate numbers of cars for entry in a database that will be used by “lien holders” and companies that repossess automobiles when owners default on loans.
Members of Narc say they record plate numbers randomly — in places such as parking lots — on the off-chance the vehicle is or later will become a target of the repo man. Narc’s data-gatherers are required to provide the address at which the plate number was viewed and recorded. Because the location data likely will be stale and the car likely will be moved before it becomes the subject of a repo bid, there are legitimate concerns about the actual usefulness of the data to lien-holders and concerns about whether Narc is just an excuse for a business, not an actual business capable of making profits from retail sales to database clients.
There also are significant concerns about privacy, and the propriety, safety and legality of the Narc program. Some Narc members have advertised that they collect “extra” plate numbers and use them as incentives for prospects to qualify for commissions without gathering data themselves, a practice that leads to troubling questions about whether Narc members have provided corrupt data to the company. An unknown number of plate numbers recorded in Narc’s database may be third-party sightings passed along to incoming members who entered bogus addresses at which plates purportedly were sighted — all to qualify for payments.
Equally troubling is that Narc, which has to know that some members are providing plate numbers for downline recruits, does not reveal the names of its database clients, saying the information is proprietary. There may be no way for existing Narc clients to know whether the data Narc reportedly is selling has been corrupted by the practices of members so eager to earn money that they’re giving away plate numbers and the recipients of the plate numbers are fabricating addresses at which the plates were spotted.
Corrupt data is worthless data.
There are reports that Narc can verify the validity of a plate number — but it is inconceivable that Narc has the means to verify that the plate actually was spotted at a specific address. Adding to the ripples of a potentially corrupt data stream is that some Narc members have instructed incoming members in purported “training” videos not to bother noting the address at the time the plate number was sighted. Rather, the prospects have been told to go home and look up the address on the Internet or refer to a store receipt if they happened to be shopping at, say, Walmart or Giant Eagle, when they were doing their side business for Narc.
Members appear to be able to enter any address they please, whether the car was spotted there or not. Meanwhile, some members have openly said they don’t like their neighbors knowing they’re recording plate numbers for a fee, so they record the numbers in the same fashion a character in a spy novel hides behind a newspaper or makes himself invisible in plain sight. The casualty is transparency at virtually all levels, meaning clients don’t know if they’re buying reliable data, members of the public don’t know their cars are being watched and if profiles are being created, and Narc members don’t know anything other than the information Narc chooses to share.
Public Esteem For Police At Stake Amid Confusing Claims
Narc members say police officers have joined the Narc program as data-gatherers and upline sponsors. If true (and the PP Blog believes that police officers are involved in Narc), it is incumbent upon Narc to publicly identify the police departments for which the officers work.
Because of claims made by Narc promoters, the public has the right to determine if officers who belong to Narc are collecting data while on “city time” or during their off-duty hours and assisting Narc in ways that nonpolice members of Narc cannot.
Why? Because Narc largely operates in the shadows. Moreover, some of the public claims of its promoters have been beyond reckless — and only Narc knows the truth about how it is paying members and using the data they collect. If Narc has police officers among its ranks amid these circumstances, it means the officers are promoting a business they may know very little about.
Police officers should not be promoting a business they know very little about, especially amid these circumstances. That Narc is paying members is not evidence that no wrongdoing is occurring. All successful pyramid and Ponzi schemes pay members. Moreover, the advertising claims of Narc promoters alone give officers all the information they need to pull out of Narc today and potentially spare themselves and their departments embarrassment later — just as Rothstein’s bodyguards and Roethelisberger’s bodyguards should have pulled out.
That the officers are repping for Narc and not providing security services is immaterial. Narc emits the same kind of stink. It stinks even if it’s legal.
Few people would begrudge a police officer from supplementing his or her income in legitimate fashion — but that is not the issue here. The issue is whether Narc and many of its data-gatherers are legitimate. The Better Business Bureau has expressed concerns that Narc might be a pyramid scheme. Whether Narc is a pyramid scheme is not the only issue, however. This essay points out some of the other issues.
Only Full Transparency Can Lead To A Clean Bill Of Health For Narc
Absent full transparency from Narc, no police officer or nonpolice officer gathering data, asking people to send money to Narc and building Narc downlines — can determine if they are promoting a scam.
Period.
There have been reports in recent days that Narc — through its own unfiltered channels — has claimed the reason it does not publish data clients’ names is because such clients got “incessant” calls when it did publish the names.
This claim strikes us as the precise kind of dreck that cannot pass the giggle test on Main Street but somehow passes the plausibility test in the most florid hallways of MLM, which much of America and the world already view as a cesspool. Not only is the claim absurd, it also is contrary to promoters’ claims that Narc was employing a revolutionary MLM concept by which members would build the database product first and Narc would sell it to retail customers later. This approach could be illegal if Narc does not have “true” customers (database clients) in sufficient volume to destroy the pyramid concerns. Although some Narc promoters have claimed the company has “investors,” the claim itself only leads to more questions: Who put up the purported investment money if investors actually exist?
Narc promoter “Jah” (see below) has been telling prospects for months that Narc reps engage in “No Selling, Trying, Switching, or Using Anything” — in short, Narc’s data-gatherers do not buy the retail database product. Rather, they pay an up-front fee to earn the right to submit plate numbers, become Narc recruiters and have the prospect of earning more money by sponsoring more fee-paying members who pay for the right to submit plate numbers and become recruiters themselves, and Narc sells the database to another set of customers.
These claims and similar claims have led to concerns that Narc was operating a pyramid scheme. Such an approach also can be viewed as a Ponzi scheme. Absent continuous membership growth and real profits from sales to retail database customers to support the payments to Narc’s data-gatherers, the business could collapse.
A video promotion in February by another Narc member showed a tab labeled “Clients.” The video was recorded inside the member’s Narc back office and appeared on YouTube — after Narc had been operating for months. “Don’t worry about that right now,†he said of the “Clients” tab. He did not explain why members should not concern themselves about the tab, which led to questions about whether Narc had data clients in sufficient volume to quash concerns that members were getting paid exclusively or almost exclusively with money from other members — not retail sales to database clients.
This Is ‘Training?’
The promo was described as a teaching tool in a YouTube headline titled, “NarcThatCar Training Video.†In the same video, viewers were told that the parking lots of libraries, schools and universities provided a steady stream of license-plate numbers to be harvested and entered into the Narc database.
“So, carry a pen and paper with you,†the narrator instructed. “You can go to parking lots. You can go to libraries. You can go to schools. My wife goes to the university, and just goes through the parking lot and collects license-plate numbers.â€
An address in the video suggests plate data was recorded in or around the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. The address is the same street address as the UNLV campus. Indeed, one Narc promoter after another has pointed one prospect after another to sources of license-plate data, implying that cars parked on both public and private property were fair game for downline commissions.
Not even public schools, universities and libraries were off limits in Narc’s universe of members. Narc itself has said its database will be used to locate people, boats, cars and any item imaginable. Data is being mined on both private and public property, and Narc itself says the plate numbers are checked against “the DMV,” commonly known in many U.S. states as the Department of Motor Vehicles.
If Narc’s data is checked against the DMV, then Narc’s business is the public’s business. The public has an interest in determining the identities of Narc’s data clients in no small measure because the data potentially could be used to monitor private citizens and people who hold sensitive jobs in government, science, research and the military.
Narc’s explanation that its clients’ names are proprietary is unacceptable. Its own members are claiming plate numbers are “public” information and “training” prospects to drive through “university” parking lots and the lots of retail stores and restaurants to get a supply of tags, which are checked against DMV records.
If you’re shopping at Walmart, for example, your plate number could be recorded and entered in Narc’s database by a Narc participant in search of MLM commissions and interested in recruiting prospects who could record your plate number elsewhere, leading to even bigger commissions and an even greater loss of your privacy. Incredibly, some Narc promoters have anticipated the public’s objection to such a pursuit, answering it with a chilling argument that people who’ve done nothing wrong have nothing to fear.
That is just downright creepy. Is it any of Narc’s business where you park your car because it wants to help the repo man repossess your neighbor’s car? And what if the repo man isn’t Narc’s only client?
What if a company poses as a repo company or a “lien holder” company and has an objective totally unrelated to the repossession of collateral? What if a suspicious husband with a violent streak, for example, wants to monitor sightings of his wife’s car? What if a private investigator wants to determine where you spend your time? What if the government wants to determine if you’re seeing a shrink? What if an unfriendly government wants to monitor the whereabouts of an important government official or scientist?
Narc’s purported assurance that members don’t record the plate numbers of government vehicles is hollow because government employees own private cars and do not always travel in government vehicles. The sensitivity of their jobs does not vanish if they are in their private cars whether on-duty or off, and the prospect that a data profile on the movement of these cars can be created and offered for sale is unacceptable.
It is unacceptable whether the target for monitoring is employed by the government or is just an ordinary citizen employed by any private company. Cars are inexorably linked to their owners. To track the car is to track the owner. Left unchecked, Narc could be used as a data source by private and public entities to monitor people. That is inconsistent with liberty and privacy. It is offensive by its very nature because it potentially puts people who don’t know they are being watched under a microscope, and it is offensive to any notion of propriety because it potentially puts private citizens in the business of spying on other private citizens to qualify for downline commissions. That Narc’s own members are cheerleading for the supposed the riches to be made by helping the repo man theoretically get the neighbor’s car causes one to wonder if America is taking leave or its senses and willing to package and sell anything.
What’s next? News releases from Narc that announce yet-another successful repo brought about by the company’s army of commission-based spies?
A World-Class Example Of MLM Excess
MLM has served up a doozy this time: Peel away the hype and Narc emerges as a private spy-agency-in-waiting. At last count, 52,000 people have expressed a willingness to help Narc build the database and share in the joy of knowing they’ve helped the repo man separate a struggling, single, stay-at-home Mom from the car she shares with her laid-off husband who lost his job when the economy went in the tank.
Lien-holders do have the right to seize their collateral if a car owner is in default. Lenders do have a corresponding duty to be responsible to investors and depositors to protect assets. But to create a cheerleading section for the repo man when unemployment is at 10 percent is something only the darkest minds in MLM could serve up. That people seem actually to be comforting themselves with the thought that they’ve performed some sort of civic duty by ratting out their neighbor to the repo man and somehow made America a better place is one of the surest signs yet that a big pocket of U.S. commerce has become morally bankrupt.
And that’s before the Narc privacy and security issues are examined in any detail.
Does anyone really want Narc to come into possession of data that could be used to create movement profiles on private citizens in any context — all under some implausible theory that the repo man needs extra help?
Sensitive research — including research paid for by the government — is performed by some universities. The data could be used to monitor people who hold sensitive jobs. This makes it the public’s business to determine precisely what Narc is doing and how and why it is doing it.
A ‘GOOGLE Opportunity Like Never Before’
Narc, according to an email members received, also is blaming the media for not understanding what it is doing. Its response to the bad press it has received recently was to tell members not to worry, that Narc remains a “GOOGLE Opportunity like Never before” — and then close the email with insipid, flowery motivational drivel, including this gem: “EVERYTHING is funny when you [sic] making MONEY!”
Even dispossessing your cash-strapped neighbor of his car, apparently, is funny as long as it pays a downline commission.
The email remided us of the now-defunct Surf’s Up forum, which promoted the now-defunct AdSurfDaily Ponzi scheme by instructing members that “there are no prizes for predicting rain, only for building arks.” Perhaps finding the fuel they needed in Surf’s Up’s trite prose, many members of ASD pressed forward, introducing prospects susceptible to the harmful power of trite prose to one Ponzi scheme after another.
As we proceed in this essay, we ask readers to note that check-waving videos and “earnings” reports produced by some members of MLM programs are not evidence of success or honesty. It often is the case in the MLM sphere that promoters who throw caution to the wind and pitch programs they know little or nothing about end up the biggest winners, with the vast majority of participants breaking even or losing both money and time that could be better spent trying to make ends meet by other means.
Moreover, it often is the case that willfull blindness and forced ignorance are the dominant traits displayed by promoters. Incongruously, a lack of knowledge about companies and products is what often drives MLM profits.
Practiced hucksters often prefer ignorance themselves, while also preferring prospects who will not ask hard questions and are willing to pass along hype and unchecked information as though they were the high gospel of truth.
BBB’s Concerns Grow
Although Narc That Car provided the identity of a single, purportedly “major” client to the Better Business Bureau April 27, the BBB now says “the client’s identity only raises more concerns” about the company.
The BBB did not disclose the name of the Narc client or reveal why its doubts were heightened after Narc provided the information. On its website, however, the organization said it is “communicating” its concerns about the client to Narc. The BBB also noted its inquiry into Narc advertising claims remains open. The advertising inquiry began Jan. 18. It has been unresolved for nearly four months.
On March 3, the BBB noted, the organization asked Narc to provide a “comprehensive” list of clients. Narc responded April 27 by providing the name of “one of its major clients,” a development that not only did not dampen the BBB’s concerns that Narc was using a pyramid business model and did not have a product with true value, but also ramped them up.
Narc That Car has identified Rene Couch as its vice president of marketing. He also has been listed by titles such as executive vice president and chief field advisor, leading to questions about whether Narc and its promoters were making things up as they went along.
Narc already has an “F” rating from the BBB, the lowest score on the organization’s 14-point scale. In the past two weeks, at least two television stations in major markets in the United States have aired reports about Narc, questioning Narc’s business practices, the level of knowledge Narc’s promoters have about the Dallas-based company and Narc’s willingness to address the questions in an atmosphere of transparency.
Meanwhile, some Narc promoters have been attacking the BBB and accusing the TV stations of biased reporting — instead of insisting that Narc get out in front of the stories and concerns and put the issues to rest.
BBB Under Attack
One of the promoters attacking the BBB is Ajamu M. “Jah” Kafele. Kafele once was accused in Ohio of practicing law without a license and ordered to pay a civil penalty of $1,000 by the Ohio Supreme Court after the bar proved its case against him.
Attorney or not, Kafele is no stranger to the courts. What follows in the passage below is an exchange between Kafele and the attorney for a law firm he had sued for attempting to collect a debt. The exchange started after the lawyer asked Kafele how old he was. In response, Kafele attempted to assert his 5th Amendment right not to answer the question — in a case in which he was the plaintiff, not the defendant, and a case in which a federal judge admonished him that his “invocation of the Fifth Amendment in response to that question was improper.”
A. [Kafele]. I don’t recall my age. Next question. Q. [Defense counsel]. What was your date of birth? A. I don’t recall my date of birth. Q. Do you have a driver’s license on you? A. No, I don’t. Q. Do you have any form of identification on you? A. No, I don’t. Q. Where were you born? A. I don’t recall. Q. Do you have parents? A. I don’t recall. Q. Do your parents — are your parents living or deceased? A. I don’t recall. Are you going to ask me some relevant questions to the defense and claims or are you going to find out about my livelihood for your personal gain? Q. You’ve indicated you don’t recall whether — A. That’s right. Q. — or not you have parents. Do you have siblings? A. I don’t know. Q. Are you married? A. I don’t recall. Q. Where do you live? A. I don’t recall. Q. What’s your home address? A. I don’t recall. Q. How long have you lived there? A. I don’t recall. Q. What’s your current occupation? A. Who said I had an occupation? Q. Are you gainfully employed? A. Who said I was employed? Q. I’m asking you a question. A. I’m asking you, who said I was employed? Q. Are you employed? A. I don’t recall being employed.
Three-figure, check-waving YouTube video by "Jah," who publicly announced his downline group was "not going to be out here flashing, you know, five-figure checks.†The video, which featured a claim that repping for Narc was like working for the "Census Bureau," later was removed from YouTube's public site. Why it was acceptable to publish a three figure-check but not a five-figure check was never explained.
Strikingly, Kafele, who once believed it was prudent to sue lawyers who were trying to collect on a debt, now has thrown in his lot with Narc That Car, which says it wants to help repossession companies collect their collateral when buyers default on loans. The case cited above did not have a happy ending for Kafele: A federal judge tossed the preposterous lawsuit he had brought, saying Kafele had engaged in “egregious” conduct.
“Plaintiff’s repeated and persistent refusal to participate in the discovery process has clearly been willful and done in defiance of the express and unambiguous orders of this Court,” U.S. District Judge John D. Holschuh said. “As a result, the defendants have been denied virtually all discovery in this case. Moreover, plaintiff has been warned — most recently in the April 4, 2005, Opinion and Order granting defendants’ motion to compel and awarding monetary sanctions against plaintiff, . . . that his continued refusal to participate in the discovery process would result in the dismissal of the action. Nevertheless, plaintiff persists in attempting to transform the litigation process initiated by him into a game. Under these circumstances, no sanction other than dismissal of the action is appropriate.”
Kafele now is telling prospects he is an authority on Narc That Car. He said he has hundreds of members in his downline. He has been conducting meetings in Ohio to recruit even more prospects, according to his website.
Fox TV Reports Exposed Promoters’ Willful Blindness
Not a single Narc promoter approached by Fox 5 in Atlanta in a package aired recently could identify a single Narc data client — and yet the promoters were out in force recruiting people for the firm. Meanwhile, Fox 11 in Los Angeles recently visited YouTube and reported on unsubstantiated claims passed long by Narc promoters to a worldwide audience, noting that California Attorney General Jerry Brown was seeking information on the firm.
It is known that attorneys general from at least three states — Georgia, California and Texas — are aware of growing doubts about Narc’s business practices.
Narc’s approach — and the approaches of its promoters — have caused even longtime proponents of multilevel marketing (MLM) to question whether the often-controversial industry had reached an all-time low and whether participants would buy into any scheme under the sun. It is clear that promoters either do not know if Narc is engaging in legitimate commerce or do not care if it is not
Narc promoter shows prospects that parking lots at the University of Nevada Las Vegas are an excellent source of license-plate data. Narc prospects in this promoter's YouTube video were given no guidance on whether the university or campus police needed to be consulted before recording the plate numbers of students, faculty and employees. The promoter said "libraries" were excellent sources of license-plate data.Â
— as long as commission checks for recruiting members keep streaming in.
As things stand, there is no way to determine if Narc is operating legally. The reason there is no way is that Narc does not reveal the names of clients, will not step out of the shadows, put an executive and attorney on TV or consent to a probing interview by a print journalist to answer the doubters and publish verifiable financial data audited by a CPA that shows inputs and outputs and the sources of revenue.
Any argument that suggests members are not entitled to this data or that the data is proprietary because Narc is a “private” company is not going to fly. The company’s promoters are saying that license-plate numbers are “public” information available for the harvesting by a membership roster of 52,000 people for the purpose of populating a database that Narc itself has said is going to be used to locate people, cars, boats and any item imaginable. That alone makes it the public’s business. Beyond that, promoters say Narc is using government databases to verify data. The assertion that Narc is using the DMVs of America’s 50 states to verify registration data gives the public a compelling reason to demand answers from the company.
Narc has a duty to tell the public through appropriate channels precisely what database it is using to cross-check data entered by members and how it is accessing the database. It also has a duty to reveal the names of its clients, explain how it screens clients, explain how it screens its data-gatherers, explain whether Narc is able to connect a car to a person when members enter license-plate numbers and explain how the data is secured.
Absent complete transparency, the privacy of every person whose tag number is entered by a Narc member is a potential casualty. It is inconceivable that Narc is empowering itself to collect your license-plate number — no matter where you park — because it has secret clients in the business of repossessing cars and there is a small chance that you are behind on your car payments or a person you do not even know parks his or her car in the same parking lot as you and is behind on his or her car payments.
This is the business Narc has chosen to enter — and the public has a compelling interest in knowing precisely how it operates.
Narc Subjecting Own Promoters To Embarrassment; Promoters, Company Blame It On Media
Narc exposed its own Atlanta-area members and prospects to embarrassment after a Fox 5 reporter showed up to a pitchfest with a hidden camera and could not get answers even to basic questions, but the company has not issued a statement that addresses the concerns in any real way and is suggesting the media is to blame.
No part of the Narc story is consistent with transparency or ordinary business practices — and the media attention likely is only now beginning. Viewers in Atlanta and Los Angeles — two of the largest markets in the United States — now have been treated to an appalling lack of professionalism in the MLM sphere, which only will fuel the public’s legitimate doubts about the industry as a whole.
Why wouldn’t the public believe the Internet is just one giant cesspool after viewing the reports on Fox here and here? If you’re a Narc fan and want to argue that Narc was ambushed, you need to know that Narc had plenty of opportunities to answer questions from journalists before they started hiding their cameras. The PP Blog, for instance, has attempted to contact Narc multiple times. The Blog is aware that other news sites have met dead ends in bids to get Narc executives and knowledgeable employees to answer questions, including NBC-5 of Dallas-Fort Worth and others.
The Fox 5 Atlanta report neatly exposed promoters’ willingness to cheer for a program, duck responsibility for their claims and then hide behind the skirt of a company when the heat became too intense.
The trouble with hiding behind Narc’s skirt, however, was that the skirt provided no cover for members. Promoters found themselves in the awkward position of taking heat for a company that did not defend them in any credible way. Narc’s skirt provided no cover at all, and yet some members merrily continue to promote the opportunity and apparently see no incongruity at all.
Let us spell it out: If you’re going to say the media must get answers from the company rather than promoters in the field, you are hiding behind the company’s skirt. And if the company does not provide the answers, you have no cover at all. This creates the appearance that the prospect of making money is the only thing you value. You certainly don’t value transparency if you’re hiding behind the company’s skirt, and the company certainly does not value transparency by ducking questions, avoiding them altogether or spinning things to create the appearance that the media are responsible for Narc’s lack of transparency.
The media are not responsible for Narc’s bad press; Narc and its promoters are. One Narc promoter created a red banner on a .org site to create the appearance that sending money to Narc was like donating to the Red Cross. Other promoters appropriated the name of the AMBER Alert program to do the same thing on a .org website. At one point the message became so impossibly butchered that a promoter urged prospects to “Help AmberAlert and other organizations find repossessed cars.â€
Some Narc members made much ado about a TV anchor referring to Narc as a “job,” but dozens of Narc members posted ads on craigslist that advertised Narc as a job. Promos for Narc have been reprehensible. One member claimed Narc would be used to help the Department of Homeland Security find terrorists. Others claimed that the FBI and the AMBER Alert program endorsed Narc.
These were blatant misrepresentations — plain and simple. If the MLM world wants the rest of the world to take it seriously, it has to quit serving up this slop and stop apologizing for its chefs and the seemingly mindless cheerleaders who cheer for the chefs even when roaches are swimming in the soup.
In the AdSurfDaily case, for instance, the Secret Service said the chef served up a Ponzi scheme. How did the cheerleaders respond? They called the Secret Service, the agency that guards the President and the Treasury, Nazis and “Satan.”
Now, amid a circumstance in which the BBB — one of America’s most recognized business organizations — has questioned whether the Narc chef is serving up a pyramid scheme that potentially affects tens of thousands of people, the cheerleaders are responding by trying to plant the seed that the BBB has a secret agenda and is infested with roaches. It is reprehensible — and it must not stand.
Myriad questions about Narc remain, including these:
Why are Narc promoters so willing to represent a company they know so little about?
Does Narc not understand that vague, ambiguous claims on its own website and its apparent unease in addressing media questions are what’s driving the story?
Why has a Narc PR spokesman not emerged to address media inquiries and become the face of the company? Why aren’t Narc executives stepping out in front of the cameras?
Why have the statements Narc has issued not explained the incongruity of insisting that license-plate data is “public” information while at once insisting the public has no right to know who its clients are, how they are being screened, how data-gatherers are being screened and how the information is being indexed and sold?
Why does Narc insist it has the right to collect your license-plate number and offer it for sale to a third party whose identity and motives are unknown to you?
Why do tens of thousands of Americans suddenly seem so willing to waltz through parking lots of major retailers to record the plate numbers of their neighbors and to recruit others to do the same — when they have knowledge in advance that troubling questions are being asked about the firm?
Why does the repo man suddenly need the help of a commission-hungry MLM army to dispossess people going through lean times?
Any chance that the “buy here, pay here” car business and the title loan business are backing Narc because the industry’s practice of approving anyone for a loan actually is driving repos?
Why are prospects so willing to hand over money when neither sponsors nor Narc itself are willing to provide information that could make the concerns go away?
How many data clients does Narc have and when did the clients become clients? How much revenue do the data clients generate for Narc weekly and monthly?
Is it possible that Narc is selling data to itself through a process in which it formed another company to become a Narc client or is relying on an alter ego of some sort or close association with another firm to create a client out of thin air?
Is Narc closely connected to the “buy here, pay here” automobile business, meaning an entity with a close association with Narc is making high-risk, front-loaded, usurious loans to disadvantaged consumers?
Is Narc closely connected to the title-loan and payday loan business?
Is Narc closely connected to the repossession business?
Does Narc have an investment angel? If so, what is the source of the money and was a private offering involved?
Is Narc making pyramid or Ponzi-style payments to members?
Narc promoter tells prospects the company was started to provide data to the Amber Alert system.
Who are Narc’s executives beyond CEO William Forester?
What are their names, job descriptions and backgrounds?
Do they have high positions in the MLM organization and rely mostly or exclusively on commissions or do they draw a salary?
Who are the members of Narc’s board of directors?
Are police officers involved in Narc? If so, are they collecting information off-duty or on-duty — and are they complying with the policies of their departments and their cities in their efforts to increase their income?
Promoters have claimed that Narc is authorized to verify license-plate data through the DMVs of all 50 states. Is that true? If so, is Narc able to view the names and addresses of vehicle owners and the makes and models of vehicles as police officers could do? If untrue, is Narc verifying the data entered by members through another process — for example, querying databases to determine if a plate number already is “taken” in a state and thus unavailable to any other party, and then concluding the plate is valid simply because it is unavailable to another party?
Is is possible that police officers are querying restricted databases on Narc’s behalf?
The parking lots of these famous companies are sources of license-plate data for Narc affiliates, according to a promoter. Whether any permission is required of store managers or motorists to record plate numbers for entry in a private, for-profit database is left to the imagination.
Are police officers and nonpolice officers alike collecting scores of plate numbers and using their supplies as incentives for people to join Narc? (The PP Blog has observed multiple instances in which Narc sponsors suggested they would supply the first 10 plate numbers to incoming recruits, thus qualifying them for an immediate payment from Narc.)
What part of the approach in the question above is consistent with an attempt to build a valid database, especially if Narc cannot verify that a “gift” plate number actually was viewed in a specific location by the recipient of the gift?
Why has Narc not publicly and loudly renounced the practice of providing the “gift” of plate numbers to incoming prospects? Can Narc tell if entire downline groups are simply trading or recycling existing plate numbers among members and instructing members and prospects to fabricate an address where the plate was sighted?
How can Narc possibly know if the cars members say were parked at a specific location actually were parked there?
What specific event occurred that caused Narc to remove a reference to AMBER Alert in a video promotion and insert the name Code Amber instead?
About Data Network Affiliates . . .
We’ll close this essay by asking a few questions about Data Network Affiliates, Narc’s purported competitor in the business of collecting license-plate numbers:
Is is possible that DNA saw that Narc’s new business of recruiting members to record license-plate numbers was resonating in the MLM universe? And did DNA then engage in a cynical ploy to build a customer base by incorporating Narc’s message — including references to law enforcement and AMBER Alert — simply because it was “working” for Narc?
DNA declares "GAME OVER – WE WIN" repeatedly in a hype-filled email pitch to announce a $10 unlimited cell-phone plan. The company had been in the cell-phone business only days when it claimed to be able to beat virtually every other competitor on earth on cell-phone pricing. Only weeks later DNA claimed it had been hoodwinked into believing it could offer such a price, removing the offer and claiming to be excited about its future.
DNA quickly backed away from emphasizing data collection after it observed Narc becoming the focus of critics who raised concerns about the propriety, safety and legality of Narc — and then DNA morphed into a sort of anti-Narc, saying it existed to help law enforcement only and would never share data with repo companies that wanted to take away cars owned by poor people.
What follows are DNA’s own words (italics added):
“DNA Affiliates STAY ALERT – They are watching out for their neighbors children. If DNA has 1 million affiliates that is 1,000,000 more people watching out for and caring about children world-wide.
“Other companies may collect data to sell to REPO COMPANIES to take cars away from many people who are just down on their luck. A single mom, a dad out of work or 100 other good reasons why good people just can not make a payment. One DNA Affiliate just had his car repossessed because he owed 3 payments and offer to pay two of them and they said no and picked up his car.
“DNA will have no part in such cases. At DNA we collect car data for one purpose and that purpose is that there is a small chance that this data in the right hands could help save a child or help prevent or solve a crime.
“We do not boast of 6 figure contracts with REPO COMPANIES. At the end of the day a DNA Affiliate knows that what they are trying to do will only be a FORCE FOR GOOD in their community…â€
DNA also positioned itself as the “free” Narc, before springing a $127 upgrade on customers to purchase a data-entry tool that worked faster than the clunker provided the “free” members at no cost. Free members were not told they were getting a clunker until the upgrade program was announced. Before long, DNA announced it was in the cell-phone business — and plenty of other businesses willing to sell products to members who thought they were joining a “free” business.
Could DNA’s approach be the most cynical, ribald effort in the entire history of MLM? And does the DNA braintrust not recognize that MLM has so many critics precisely because of the obnoxious and absurd approach of the man behind the green curtain and the men letting him get away with serving up ceaseless, hyperbolic slop?
In our view, DNA is the worst example of wretched excess the MLM trade has ever served up — and Narc is close on its heels for enshrinement in the Hall of Shame. To be sure, Narc is not the next Google, DNA is not the next anything — and the industry has demonstrated once again that many, many of its members think that trite talk about arks is the same thing as building one.
UPDATED 6:57 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.) The operator of the INetGlobal autosurf has been sentenced to 18 months in federal prison for income-tax evasion.
Steve Renner also was ordered by U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank to cooperate with the IRS “in the assessment and payment of taxes still due,” federal prosecutors said.
Renner was convicted in December of four felony counts of tax evasion after a six-day jury trial. The case stemmed from his operation of Cash Cards International (CCI), a payment processing company.
He was not taken into immediate custody after today’s sentencing and perhaps has “several weeks” before he is scheduled to report to prison, said Jeanne Cooney, a spokeswoman for U.S. Attorney B. Todd Jones.
Cooney added that the IRS is in the process of determining how much money Renner still owes to the government, which is why Donovan ordered him to cooperate with the agency.
Even with his sentencing today, Renner’s legal troubles are not over. In February, the U.S. Secret Service said there was probable cause to believe he was operating an international Ponzi scheme through INetGlobal and affiliated companies.
Federal prosecutors have seized about $26 million in a probe into INetGlobal’s business practices. Renner has not been charged in the case, which prosecutors described as a “major” money-laundering investigation.
In the tax case, prosecutors said Renner diverted customers’ money held by CCI “to pay his living expenses as well as to make personal investments in coins, oil wells, art, stamps, and vintage musical instruments.
“He also used client funds to promote his blues-rock band, ‘Stevie Renner and the Renegades,’” prosecutors said.
An attorney who represented AdSurfDaily President Andy Bowdoin in state court in Florida has been nominated by President Obama to become the new U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Florida.
If confirmed by the Senate, Pamela Cothran Marsh would replace Thomas F. Kirwin as the top federal prosecutor in the region, which encompasses 23 counties.
Marsh, who holds the title of “of counsel” at the Akerman Senterfitt law firm, was among a number of attorneys employed by Bowdoin to contest civil charges that he had operated a pyramid scheme from a former floral shop in Quincy, Fla.
Bowdoin went on to fire an unclear number of attorneys representing him in state or federal court in ASD-related litigation. It was not immediately clear if Bowdoin had fired Marsh, whose name appears in Leon County Court records as one of Bowdoin’s lawyers.
There has been no docketed action in the Florida case since Jan. 20.
At least three Bowdoin attorneys have been subpoenaed to appear in a separate case involving ASD that was filed under seal in federal court. The PP Blog has tentatively identified the subpoenaed attorneys but is withholding publication of their names pending verification.
Marsh and members of her firm who formerly represented Bowdoin are not among the attorneys who have been subpoenaed. Bowdoin contested the subpoenas in a federal appeals court, but the court dismissed the appeal Friday for lack of jurisdiction, according to records.
How the case will proceed is unclear.
Bowdoin is known to have fired at least two attorneys without notice, acted as his own attorney briefly, and then hired at least two new attorneys, according to court filings.
Marsh received Obama’s endorsement to replace Kirwin on April 14, according to the White House. She is a former assistant U.S. Attorney currently in private practice.
The pyramid case against Bowdoin was filed in August 2008 by Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum. Assets connected to ASD — including more than $80 million seized from bank accounts — are part of Ponzi scheme litigation brought by federal prosecutors in the District of Columbia just prior to McCollum’s filing of the pyramid allegations.
Like the federal prosecution against ASD’s assets, Florida’s prosecution of Bowdoin has been marked by strange developments. During a conference call, Bowdoin told ASD members that Ponzi allegations had been dropped against ASD in Florida, a claim that prompted some members to race to forums to announce the good news.
McCollum’s office responded to Bowdoin’s claims by saying that, not only had Ponzi allegations not been dropped in Florida, they had not been brought to begin with. Earlier, some ASD members participated in campaign to have McCollum charged with Deceptive Trade Practices for holding the view ASD had broken the law. The members also campaigned to have a Florida television station charged with the same offense for broadcasting news they deemed unflattering to ASD.
Bowdoin’s forays into federal court in the Ponzi litigation have been equally strange. Documents he has filed frequently have been at odds with themselves.
Fox News 11 in Los Angeles visited YouTube to collect information for an investigative report on NarcThatCar, also known as Crowd Sourcing International.
A company that recruits members to record the license-plate numbers of cars for entry in a database now has drawn the attention of the attorney general of California, Fox News 11 in Los Angeles is reporting.
Although it previously was known that Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott was working with the district attorney of Henderson County, Texas, in a Narc inquiry, Fox News 11 became the first outlet to report that California Attorney General Jerry Brown also is seeking information on the firm.
Narc That Car, which recently changed its name to Crowd Sourcing International, was the subject of an investigative report by Fox 5 in Atlanta last week. The Atlanta station interviewed Georgia Attorney General Thurbert E. Baker, who raised questions about the manner in which Narc purportedly was verifying license-plate data through the state’s Department of Driver Services. The station shared video with the Fox station in Los Angeles, which has video from its own investigation into Dallas-based Narc.
As part of its Narc report, Fox News 11 (Los Angeles) aired video from a YouTube sales promo by former Narc promoter Jeff Long, who jumped ship earlier this year and threw in his lot with Data Network Affiliates (DNA).
It is possible that DNA could become part of any government probe that evolves in California, Texas or Georgia because the firms are known to have promoters in common and because of claims made by promoters.
DNA, which uses a Cayman Islands address in its domain registration and a free gmail address from Google to conduct customer service, purportedly is a competitor of Narc. Long started out by pitching Narc, instructing prospects in a YouTube video to record plate numbers on their cell-phone cameras as they strolled through Walmart parking lots, according to his YouTube video.
But Long then switched to promoting DNA, according to the YouTube site.
“This video talks about NARC That Car… IF YOU ARE PLANNING ON MARKETING THIS BUSINESS ON THE INTERNET DO NOT JOIN!!!!! NarcThatCar CANCELED AND DISABLED My distributorship because I put this video on YouTube…I’m now the #1 leader and sponsor in their BIGGEST COMPETITOR’S BUSINESS…DataNetworkAffiliates. Again…don’t join NarcThatCar if you plan on marketing on the internet!!!!!! JOIN DNA WITH ME FOR 100% FREE!” a screaming message on the website says.
Long, who reportedly went on to become DNA’s largest affiliate, participated in a DNA conference call to tout Narc’s supposed competitor. DNA, which gained a reputation for authoring bizarre communications, suddenly then announced it had gotten into the cell-phone business and was offering an unlimited talk and text package for $10 a month.
Even Dean Blechman, DNA’s former CEO, described some of the communications authored by the company as “bizarre.” Blechman quit in February after only a few weeks on the job. DNA waited nearly a week to announce his departure, then butchered the announcement, Blechman said in an interview with the PP Blog.
DNA claimed on April 26 that it had been snookered into believing that it could offer an unlimited cell-phone usage plan for $10 a month and withdrew the offer. The withdrawal — and the ceaseless hype that has emerged from DNA — has led to questions about what, exactly, the company is offering and whether it was engaging in bait-and-switch tactics.
Questions also have been raised about the worth of both the Narc and DNA databases. Long, for example, said he gathered extra license-plate numbers and offered them for free to prospects so they could qualify for their initial multilevel marketing (MLM) payouts by entering data he supplied.
Other Narc promoters have used the same approach, which could lead to a polluted data stream. If a promoter in Florida supplied plate numbers to a prospect in Alaska, for example, it could lead to a result in which a car sighted in Florida was listed in Narc’s database as having been sighted in Alaska — or any state the prospect chose.
Such an approach could undermine Narc’s claim that it exists in part to assist law enforcement and the AMBER Alert program for missing children. Experts say corrupt or untimely data actually could hinder efforts to locate abducted children, and the Justice Department, which manages the AMBER Alert program, has denied it has any affiliation with Narc — despite promoters’ claims to the contrary.
Even if a Florida sponsor, for example, provided an accurate address at which a car was sighted, the mere fact an Alaska prospect was asked to input the data as though he or she actually had seen the car in Florida leads to troubling questions about whether Narc members were simply gaming the system to earn commissions.
And there may be other questions in any probes that emerge: Are police officers — off-duty and on-duty — helping Narc and DNA collect data? If the officers are collecting data on-duty, is it an appropriate use of their time? If they are collecting data off-duty, are they participating in a pyramid or Ponzi scheme?
Not a single Narc promoter interviewed by Fox 5 in Atlanta could identify a single data client of Narc. Narc itself says its clients identities are proprietary, but the Better Business Bureau, which gave Narc an “F” rating, has received thousands of inquiries on the company. The BBB also said it is concerned about Narc advertising claims.
Some promoters have claimed the firm was endorsed by the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. Others have claimed it was endorsed by AMBER Alert. Narc removed a reference to AMBER Alert from a sales video after the Justice Department denied it had any affiliation with the firm.
Still other promoters have used craigslist to pitch Narc as though the company were a jobs-provider, rather than an MLM opportunity in which members are independent contractors reliant on their ability to recruit new members to make money. Some members even have started .org websites, as though joining Narc was the same as donating to a charity.
Reckless advertising claims have led to questions about whether both Narc and DNA had come into possession of money as a result lies told by promoters. The claims also have caused some MLM observers to wonder if the industry had reached a new low. Despite the uncertainty about both Narc and DNA, promoters are in the field recruiting members. DNA now says its has more than 125,000 members.
One year ago today, President Obama announced a crackdown on international fraudsters. On the same day, the AdViewGlobal autosurf announced a new, offshore wire facilitator. By November, the president had created the interagency Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force.
Longtime readers of the PP Blog may scarcely believe a year has passed since the AdViewGlobal (AVG) autosurf announced a new, offshore wire facilitator — on the same day President Obama announced a crackdown on international fraud.
Obama delivered his remarks at 11:37 a.m. By 5:54 p.m., a member of an AVG forum operated by some of the Mods and members of the Pro-AdSurfDaily Surf’s Up forum announced that AVG members could wire money offshore from the United States after the company’s bank account had been mysteriously suspended earlier in the year.
AVG highlighted its purported “offshore” location in sales promos.
The date of the wire announcement — May 4, 2009 — was an important one in the history of the PP Blog. In the following weeks, the Blog came under attack by advocates for autosurf Ponzi schemes. In the months that followed, however, one autosurf scheme after another came crashing down — including AVG.
Not even the collapse of one autosurf Ponzi scheme and HYIP scheme after another, however, has caused serial promoters to renounce these sordid pursuits. Too much money is involved. Why fret over the national-security implications if a downline commission is on the line in this shadowy and unseemly pocket of reprehensible commerce populated by greedsters, MLM hucksters and just plain criminals and racketeers?
In this seedy world of constantly expanding rationalizations for criminal conduct and personal profit, the bomb or missile probably will land on a neighborhood that deserves to be destroyed. Right? Longtime readers of the PP Blog know the Ponzi advocates reshape their stories whenever the need arises. Any fanciful, made-up reality will do.
Some of the Blog’s readers — and the Blog itself — came under near-ceaseless attacks last spring and summer from people who desire to legalize Ponzi schemes. Although the proposition itself is absurd, it was championed by the Blog’s Kool-Aid-drinking critics. Indeed, some of them believe, for example, that all commerce should be legal.
Some of them are so out-of-touch that they appear not to recognize they are advancing the argument not only for economic misery and the steady supply of drugs for the schoolchildren of America, but also for slavery and human bondage. Their argument is one that would set Bernard Madoff free if society placed any credence in it at all. Madoff victims would be out billions of dollars, 80-year-old people fleeced of their pensions and savings would be forced to reenter the workforce because “that’s the breaks” of capitalism — and yet Madoff would be set loose to run a brand-new scheme of his choosing.
No part of that vision for America computes. It is a desperate argument of convenience advanced by people who are willing to embrace crime as long as some people make money. In short, it’s the delusional argument for Enron-style capitalism applied to Ponzi schemes. The scalding irony is that some of the very same people who championed Andy Bowdoin of AdSurfDaily did not do the same for Madoff. The hypocrisy — the disconnect — is stunning. If the basis of a pro-Ponzi argument is that all commerce should be legal and that the government wields too big a stick, then both Madoff and Bowdoin should be equally championed — victims be damned.
So what if Grandma, 92, is greeting customers at Walmart because Madoff needed another big house? And so what if Enron employees and stockholders lost jobs and what they believed to be their financial security? That’s the breaks. Right? It’s much better to follow the lead of some AdSurfDaily members in calling for the prosecutors to be jailed and the judges to be brought up on charges for violating their oaths? Right?
Today the PP Blog invites readers to visit its archives.
You’ll see a story about the announcement of AVG’s purported new, offshore wire facility here. You’ll find a related story here.
You’ll find a story about the collapse of AVG here. The collapse occurred about 23 days after we received the note from the purported attorney. As a side note, the story about the collapse also points out that AVG threatened its own members.
Finally, we encourage you to read this story. It’s one of a number of stories we’ve done on what the President of the United States is doing to combat the insidious amount of financial fraud.
American Integrity Financial Co. existed in name only, the SEC said today. Its operator, Matthew J. Ryan, 45, of Troy, N.Y., used the bogus company to fleece senior citizens in a Ponzi scheme by telling them they’d earn “guaranteed” return rates of 3.85 percent to 9 percent each year.
It was the second Ponzi scheme to rock the Albany area — and the third major case of financial fraud in New York state — in the past two weeks.
“Ryan obtained these investments by fostering the false impression that American Integrity is a legitimate, substantial financial services firm, with numerous employees and for which he was merely an employee,” the SEC charged.
‘Phony Manhattan Address’
“To perpetrate this fraud, Ryan used devices such as a phony Manhattan address, and fictitious names and titles of purported American Integrity employees, and he misrepresented to investors that their investments were safe and insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) or the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC) and that American Integrity was qualified to offer IRAs and other tax-deferred investments,” the SEC charged.
American Integrity was a “classic Ponzi scheme,” the SEC said.
‘Merely The Name On A Bank Account’
The firm “is not even an entity, let alone an operating financial company and investments in it are not in any way insured,” the SEC said. “It is merely the name on a bank account that Ryan opened and controls. Ryan simply took investors’ money and deposited the money into the bank account. When he needed money to pay investors the returns he had promised or principal amounts they sought to withdraw, Ryan simply withdrew funds from the same bank account.
Investor funds were used to pay Ryan’s lenders “and to pay for his own personal expenses, including luxury cars,” the SEC said. “As of March 31, 2010, it appears that American Integrity owed investors at least $3.5 million, while it had less than $8500 in cash on hand.”
Recent New York Frauds
Just days ago, the SEC charged McGinn, Smith & Co. of Albany in a fraud case investors said was a Ponzi scheme. Separately, the SEC charged Gryphon Holdings Inc. in a bizarre stock-tips scheme. Five people were arrested by federal agents in the Gryphon Holdings case.
Gryphon “touted offices on Wall Street and around the world while, in reality, defrauding investors from a strip mall on Staten Island,†David Rosenfeld, associate director of the SEC’s New York Regional Office, said on the day the complaint was filed.
The SEC said Gryphon was a “sham designed to separate clients from their money.â€
Attorney General Eric Holder briefs reporters on the Times Square bomb plot.
A naturalized U.S. citizen born in Pakistan was arrested at JFK Airport in New York late last night after he was removed from a flight bound for Dubai, authorities said.
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced the arrest of Faisal Shahzad in an extraordinary news conference in the middle of the night. President Obama was informed about the arrest at 12:05 a.m., the White House said.
The arrest was made by the FBI and officers of the New York Police Department, authorities said.
Shahzad is suspected of packing a Nissan Pathfinder purchased through craigslist from a seller in Connecticut with propane tanks, fertilizer, firecrackers and gasoline to make an alarm-clock triggered bomb that would detonate in Times Square when it was filled with people.
The New York Daily News reported that the craigslist transaction was an all-cash deal.
A disposable cell phone also was part of the planned terror attack. Investigators were able to link the cell phone to Shahzad, according to reports.
Here is Holder’s early statement on Shahzad’s arrest (italics added):
Earlier this evening, Faisal Shahzad was arrested in connection with the attempted car bombing in New York on Saturday. Mr. Shahzad, an American citizen, was taken into custody at JFK Airport in New York as he attempted to board a flight to Dubai.
Since this plot was first uncovered on Saturday night, the FBI, prosecutors and intelligence lawyers in the National Security Division of the Justice Department and the U.S. Attorneys Offices in Manhattan and Connecticut, along with the NYPD have worked night and day to find out who was responsible for what would have been a deadly attack had it been successful. Over the course of the day today, we have gathered significant additional evidence that led to tonight’s arrest, which was made by agents from Department of Homeland Security’s Customs and Border Protection.
This investigation is ongoing, as are our attempts to gather useful intelligence, and we continue to pursue a number of leads. But it’s clear that the intent behind this terrorist act was to kill Americans.Â
FBI agents are working with their state and local counterparts in New York, Connecticut and other jurisdictions to gather evidence and intelligence related to this case. We are also coordinating with other members of the President’s national security team to ensure we use every resource available to the United States to bring anyone responsible to justice.
We continue to gather leads in this investigation, and it’s important that the American people remain vigilant. The vehicle in Times Square was first noticed on Saturday by a citizen who reported it to authorities, and, as always, any American who notices suspicious activity should report it to the appropriate law enforcement agencies.
This investigation is ongoing, it is multi-faceted, and it is aggressive. As we move forward, we will focus on not just holding those responsible for it accountable, but also on obtaining any intelligence about terrorist organizations overseas.
Because of the fast-moving nature of this investigation, I am not able to make any further information public at this time. But the American people should know that we are deploying every resource available, and we will not rest until we have brought everyone responsible to justice.
Here is a special statement issued by U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara of the Southern District of New York, FBI Special Agent-in-Charge George Venizelos, and New York City Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly (italics added):
At approximately 11:45 p.m., Faisal Shahzad was taken into custody. Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and detectives of the New York City Police Department arrested Shahzad for allegedly driving a car bomb into Times Square on the evening of May 1, 2010.
Shahzad, a naturalized U.S. citizen born in Pakistan, was taken into custody at John F. Kennedy International Airport after he was identified by the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Customs and Border Protection while attempting to take a flight to Dubai.
The defendant will appear in Manhattan federal court (500 Pearl Street, 5th Floor, New York, N.Y.) tomorrow [meaning today] at a currently undetermined time to be presented on formal charges. No further details are available at this time.
We applaud the collective work of the New York Joint Terrorism Task Force and the prosecutors and investigators in the Southern District of New York, who have worked around-the-clock for the last two days in this investigation. We would also like to recognize the diligent work of the Customs and Border Protection agents and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut.
EDITORIAL ASIDE: The PP Blog writes about Ponzi schemes, including “autosurf” Ponzi schemes and their close cousins: HYIP frauds.
These schemes are pushed by serial promoters and routinely defended as legitimate businesses, despite the fact that the purveyors do not have a clue about the motives of the operators or the identities of their autosurfing or HYIP neighbors.
Tremendous sums of money pass through the schemes, which mostly operate in the shadows and rely heavily on offshore-payment processors, debit cards and what the FBI describes as a “shadow” banking system.
Someone tried to detonate a bomb in New York City Saturday to kill people and destroy property. That the bomb did not “go off” is not the point.
The point is that the bomb could have gone off and that the source of funding for the bomb-making materials is unknown. The money has to come from somewhere. From the terrorist’s point of view, the less traceable the source, the better.
If you are participating in an autosurf or an HYIP, it is possible you are funding terrorism. This is the only reason you should need to say no — even if you know some of the people involved in the autosurf/HYIP, even if it “pays,” even if the payments you’ve received have improved your quality of life, even if the payments you’ve received are the only things that are keeping the wolf from your door. The purveyors want to play on your greed and/or desperation.
What will it take to get you to stop promoting these filthy, miserable, dangerous businesses that operate in the shadows? A successful detonation? (And what will you think of next to defend your downline commissions in these frauds if people are blown to bits?)
This Blog is well aware that many autosurf/HYIP participants want to feel “good” about what they are doing. We are equally well aware that some autosurf/HYIP participants believe that shutting down such schemes is an abuse of government power and some perceived affront to the Constitution.
Our view is that participants should not feel “good” at any time and that the purported abuse of government power in the autosurf/HYIP context is a red herring and, in some cases, code to recruit people who’d prefer the government not regulate any form of commerce.
This Blog has not arrived at its view in a vacuum. It has assessed all the contrarian points of view and views them as arguments that should be accorded no weight at all. In many cases, the arguments have been revealed to be the ravings of people so out of touch with the realities of the various cases — and often so out of touch with reality itself — that they’d advance any argument if they deemed it as helpful to their “cause.”
Mantria CEO Troy Wragg in a music video by ICEBLOC.
A federal judge has issued an order that effectively puts a court-appointed receiver in control of dozens of entities related to Mantria Corp. and Speed of Wealth LLC in a search for “recoverable assets.”
One of the receiver’s duties is to determine if fraudulent transfers occurred between or among companies, according to the order.
The order, which is designed to prevent the dissipation of assets and maneuvering to hide or transfer money, is breathtaking because it covers not only Mantria and Speed of Wealth, but also “all of their subsidiaries, parent companies, and. . . interests in any affiliated entities of any kind.”
All in all, the order applies to a staggering total of at least 55 entities, a figure that demonstrates the enormous task of unraveling a modern-day fraud amid a maze of corporations.
The SEC sued Mantria and Speed of Wealth in November, amid allegations that Mantria was running a “green” Ponzi scheme that focused on biochar and a “carbon negative” housing community in rural Tennessee that purported to be environmentally friendly. Speed of Wealth allegedly helped Mantria get investment clients.
Appointed receiver in the case was John Paul Anderson of Alvarez & Marsal Dispute Analysis & Forensic Services LLC.
U.S. District Judge Christine M. Arguello listed dozens of names, perhaps signaling that the order could become even broader by noting that it was “not limited to” the names on the initial list. She also ordered Anderson to come up with a liquidation plan and warned the entities and their agents not to meddle in receivership affairs.
Anderson was granted the authority to seek the court’s permission to place the entities in bankruptcy if the circumstances warrant such an approach. Arguello minced no words when ordering parties not to meddle. She specifically warned them not to “harass” Anderson or interfere in his duties as receiver (italics/bold added).
“The Receivership Defendants and all persons receiving notice of this Order by personal service, facsimile or otherwise, are hereby restrained and enjoined from directly or indirectly taking any action or causing any action to be taken, without the express written agreement of the Receiver, which would:
A. Interfere with the Receiver’s efforts to take control, possession, or management of any Receivership Property; such prohibited actions include but are not limited to, using self-help or executing or issuing or causing the execution or issuance of any court attachment, subpoena, replevin, execution, or other process for the purpose of impounding or taking possession of or interfering with or creating or enforcing a lien upon any Receivership Property;
B. Hinder, obstruct or otherwise interfere with the Receiver in the performance of his duties; such prohibited actions include but are not limited to, concealing, destroying or altering records or information;
C. Dissipate or otherwise diminish the value of any Receivership Property; such prohibited actions include but are not limited to, releasing claims or disposing, transferring, exchanging, assigning or in any way conveying any Receivership Property, enforcing judgments, assessments or claims against any Receivership Property or any Receivership Defendant, attempting to modify, cancel, terminate, call, extinguish, revoke or accelerate (the due date), of any lease, loan, mortgage, indebtedness, security agreement or other agreement executed by any Receivership Defendant or which otherwise affects any Receivership Property; or
D. Interfere with or harass the Receiver, or interfere in any manner with the exclusive jurisdiction of this Court over the Receivership Estates.
Here is the initial list of entities covered under Arguello’s order:
Mantria Realty LLC
Mantria Communities Inc.
Mantria Real Estate Opportunities Group LLC
Mantria Investments LLC
Mantria Financial LLC
Mantria Capital Advisors LLC
Mantria Industries LLC
Carbon Diversion Inc.
Mantria Records LLC
The Mantria Foundation Inc.
Mantria Realty FL LLC
Mantria Communities LP
Mantria Real Estate Opportunities Group I LP
KITN Investments LLC
The Mantria Renewable Energy Fund LP
The Mantria Place Renewable Energy Site Development LP
The Mantria Industries Hohenwald Tennessee Eco-Industrial Center Site Development L.P.
Earth Mate Technologies LLC
Clean Energy Components LLC
EternaGreen Capital LLC
The EternaGreen International Carbon Economy Network LLC
EternaGreen University
EternaGreen Global Corporation
C&M Industrial Center LLC
Mantria Industries II LLC
Carbon Diversion Carlsbad New Mexico Manufacturing Plant LLC
Indian Trail Estates LLC
Mantria Village LLC
Mantria Bluffs LLC
IronBridge Properties LLC
Legacy Ridge LLC
Iris Village LLC
Mantria Place LLC
The Mantria Group LLC
Mantria Indian Trail Development LLC
Indian Trail Estates Phase I LLC
Indian Trail Estates Phase II LLC
Indian Trail Estates Phase III LLC
Indian Trail Estates Homeowners Association Inc.
Legacy Ridge Homeowners Association Inc.
The Mantria Place Homeowners Association Inc.
SOW Trust Deed LLC
SOW Hard Money Loans Investment Club LLC
SOW Hard Money Loans II LLC
SOW Trust Deed Group II LLC
Trust Deed Group I LLC
SOW Hard Money 50 Economic Stimulus Investment Club LLC
SOW Mantria Income LLC
SOW Mantria Diversification LLC
SOW Mantria 5% LLC
SOW Mantria Place 25% LLC
SOW Mantria 25% LLC
Speed of Wealth Investments Gold Club LLC
Trust Deed 3.0 LLC
SOW MI 25% Sale of Systems LLC
Arguello said she recognized “that not all of Speed of Wealth, LLC’s assets and/or business may be related, directly or indirectly, to the conduct alleged in the Commission’s Complaint.”
Named individual defendants in the alleged $30 million fraud by the SEC in November were Mantria CEO Troy Wragg and Mantria COO Amanda Knorr, along with the company itself. Also named defendants were Speed of Wealth and its principals, Wayde and Donna McKelvy, formerly husband and wife.
One of the companies under the Mantria umbrella was Mantria Records LLC, which purportedly promoted a hip-hop duo known as ICEBLOC.
Two months after Troy Wragg accepted a kudo from former President Bill Clinton for environmentally friendly business practices, Wragg was implicated by the SEC in an alleged "green" Ponzi scheme. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) later issued an Investment Alert warning the public about a relatively new form of fraud: “green energy investments†that trade on investors’ affinity for keeping the planet clean.
The case became notable for reasons beyond its size and scope. Wragg, for instance, appeared alongside former President Bill Clinton at the 5th Annual Meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) in New York Sept. 25.
CGI had lauded Mantria in part for helping to “mitigate global warming” through its business practices. Just two months later Mantria and Speed of Wealth were accused of a colossal fraud.
After the CGI event in New York, Mantria and Speed of Wealth seized on Clinton’s name and the names of prominent individuals who attended the event to produce marketing materials used to entice investors.
Even after the SEC brought the charges, reporters who tried to contact Speed of Wealth received email pitches to join money-making opportunities.
Video promotions by Mantria and Speed of Wealth were notable for dropping the names of President Obama, former U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, President Laurent Gbagbo of the Ivory Coast, Mike Duke, CEO of Wal-Mart, Muhtar Kent, CEO of the Coca-Cola Co. and actor Matt Damon.
Leeching off the names of celebrities, famous businesspeople and politicians to sell fraudulent financial schemes is a common tactic among multilevel marketing (MLM) and Ponzi scammers. By implying that prominent people endorse a product or service, the fraudsters hope to turn skeptics into clients.
Claims were made in the AdSurfDaily Ponzi scheme case, for example, that ASD President Andy Bowdoin had received an award from President George W. Bush for a lifetime of business achievement. The award proved to be the so-called Congressional “Medal of Distinction,” which is given for campaign contributions to the National Republican Congressional Committee and signifies only the ability to write a check for the purchase of banquet tickets.
In an SEC case last month, the agency alleged that a Staten Island investment-advisory business known as Gryphon Holdings Inc. told clients that famed businessman George Soros backed the company. A purported “testimonial” from Soros was fraudulent, the SEC said.