Category: Uncategorized

  • Has AdViewGlobal Maneuvered Itself Into A Box?

    Some members of the AdViewGlobal (AVG) autosurf say they received no paper profits for surfing yesterday. For weeks, members have complained about “low” payouts, not “no” payouts.

    Concern now is spreading about the complete absence of payouts yesterday. Some members, however, are saying that complainers have to understand that payouts never were “guaranteed.”

    AVG is awash in a sea of incongruities. On one hand, the surf has released a forward-looking promotion that suggests members can earn back the money they spend on “advertising” — plus a profit of 10 percent — in the first six months of membership.

    On the other hand, however, current members are grumbling about minuscule payouts — and, now, no payouts at all.

    The no-payout development came on the heels of a PowerPoint presentation AVG released that advertised a conversion rate “in the neighbourhood of 37 percent,” a claim that implied the rate could be achieved across-the-board, regardless of the nature of the product, the quality of the audience, the state of the economy, pricing and other variables.

    Under the conversion claim, an “advertiser” who pitched free doughnuts could expect 192 conversions out of each 519 AVG visitors. An “advertiser” who sold doughnuts for $10,000 each also could expect 192 conversions out of each 519 visitors.

    “Advertisers” could expect to “garner” the rate as long as their sales copy didn’t “suck,” AVG said in the presentation.

    The presentation included a “case study” that incorporated events that had not happened and concluded with an AVG surfer “on the beach” two years from now enjoying his success.

    One AVG promoter complained that this Blog’s reporting on the PowerPoint presentation was unfair, saying the promotion was “not complete and is still being polished.” The member explained that the presentation was released because promoters were eager to have a new sales tool, but did not explain why AVG ever would release a tool prematurely, especially when the tool paints a rosy picture despite the fact current members are complaining about major problems within AVG.

    AVG provided no context and no proof of its 37 percent conversion claim — a claim that was at odds with a separate claim of a “10%” conversion rate elsewhere in the presentation. The 10 percent claim was punctuated with an exclamation point, even though it was 27 points lower than the incredible, 37 percent claim.

    Any person who achieved the lower conversion rate reasonably could ask why he hadn’t achieved the higher one — and why the 10 percent rate was something to celebrate with an exclamation point when the advertiser’s ad had underperformed the standard claim by a misery factor of nearly four to one.

    Conversion rates vary wildly, as does the definition of a successful conversion rate. Depending on the nature of the product, pricing, market conditions and other variables, some advertisers would celebrate a conversion rate of 1 percent or even lower. A 37 percent conversion rate — especially if the implication is that it can be achieved across-the-board — is absurd on its face.

    AVG Members Want Thieves Identified

    Meanwhile, amid reports that some members had stolen from the company by abusing a member-to-member button AVG had provided, some members have called for AVG management to identify the thieves.

    Earlier this month, an AVG promoter described a strategy by which prospects could pay upline sponsors directly for the purchase of ad-packs, which AVG calls “page impressions” or “viewer impressions.”

    Under the strategy, the prospect would pay the sponsor directly, instead of paying AVG. The sponsor, in turn, would deposit the money into his private bank account. In the next step, the sponsor would send a check by overnight mail to payment processors either in Canada or Panama.

    Alternatively, the sponsor could use his bank’s wire facility to route his prospect’s money to the offshore processors.

    Once the processors received the money, the sponsor would instruct them to wire it to AVG. Once the money reached AVG, the sponsor would use it to fund his own account, and then use AVG’s internal system to distribute it back to the prospect.

    The approach raised serious questions about mail fraud, wire fraud, tax evasion, money-laundering, selling unregistered securites and acting as a securities broker-dealer without a license.

    AVG now has removed the member-to-member button.

    At the same time, members have complained that promoters were misusing the button to siphon windfall profits through a process known as “stacking” — thus the call for AVG to identify the cheaters.

    There were calls yesterday for AVG to reclaim the money promoters who cheated were paid. How the surf intends to proceed is unclear.

    Some members pointed out that AVG itself provided the member-to-member button, saying that members who used it to their advantage had done nothing wrong and simply were taking advantage of a tool the surf had provided.

    AdSurfDaily, a Florida company with close ties to AVG, which purports to be based in Uruguay, had problems with massive internal theft, federal prosecutors said in December.

    In one case outlined by prosecutors, more than $1 million purportedly was stolen from ASD by Russian “hackers.”

    ASD President Andy Bowdoin never filed a police report, despite the huge theft, prosecutors said. In fact, they added, Bowdoin ignored other thefts, too, because he knew that calling the police could expose ASD to the scrutiny of law enforcement.

    Prosecutors said Bowdoin had set up ASD so family members and insiders actually could benefit from theft. In one instance, prosecutors said, ASD paid an employee to surf for Bowdoin’s son, who received rebates for having performed no work.

    Bowdoin and family members later set up a separate company, using ASD proceeds to do so, prosecutors said. The separate company was used to retire the $157,000 mortgage on the home of Bowdoin’s stepson, who is a trustee for AVG.

    Whether AVG will call the police to report the purported thefts by insiders is unclear.

    And the company may face another problem: If AVG tries to reclaim money from promoters who took advantage of a member-to-member button the company itself provided, it is possible that the promoters themselves would consider the action a matter for law enforcement to investigate.

    Jurisdiction also is fuzzy. AVG purports to be based in Uruguay, but recently issued a news release with a dateline of Tallahassee, Fla.

  • BREAKING NEWS: Busby Dismissed As RICO Defendant; Bank Of America Asks Judge To Stay Lawsuit Until Forfeiture Matter Is Resolved

    Three members of AdSurfDaily Inc. who sued Golden Panda Ad Builder President Clarence Busby amid allegations of racketeering have asked a federal judge to dismiss the allegations against Busby.

    Meanwhile, Bank of America has asked the judge to stay the case until a federal forfeiture proceeding invoving AdSurfDaily and Golden Panda is adjudicated.

    In essence, the bank is arguing that the forfeiture case provides a remedy for ASD members to gain refunds. The plaintiffs are expected to oppose the motion for a stay.

    Bank of America was not named a RICO defendant in the racketeering lawsuit against Busby, AdSurfDaily President Andy Bowdoin and ASD attorney Robert Garner. Rather, the plaintiffs alleged the bank had aided and abetted Busby, Bowdoin and Garner in a fraudulent scheme.

    The plaintiffs asked U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer to dismiss the complaint against Busby “with prejudice,” meaning they do not intend to bring it again.

  • AdViewGlobal Members Continue To Question Surf’s Practices; PowerPoint Pitch Claims 37 Percent Conversion Rate If Sales Copy Doesn’t ‘Suck’

    UPDATED 10:23 A.M. EDT (U.S.A.) AdViewGlobal (AVG) autosurf members again are complaining about “low” payout rates, confusion about debit cards and how best to fund accounts. They also are grousing about an absence of comprehensible guidance from the top.

    Meanwhile, some members are grumbling about a culture of super-secrecy, a preoccupation by some leading advocates with spies and “plants” and passive-aggressive lectures from insiders who blame the company’s problems on members.

    Some members have been clamoring for more “tools” to sell AVG’s surf and the “VIP” payout “opportunity,” viewing the “advertising” rotator as the Main Event and saying nonsurf products and services AVG recently introduced have little appeal to the surf crowd, despite claims AVG has “fortune 500” (sic) clients.

    Other AVG members continue to complain about vague messages from the company.

    A PowerPoint presentation produced by the company claims that 519 page views “should garner you in the neighbourhood of 37% conversion if not higher,” adding a strange disclaimer: “Given your sales copy doesn’t totally suck.”

    The presentation includes charts and graphs, including one that speciously boasts of a “400% increase in Traffic!”

    AVG “advertisers” pay to have their sites shown in what the company now describes as a “testing platform.” Because “advertisers” are paid incentives to view the ads of fellow “advertisers,” the quality of the traffic is dubious. The claim of a 37 percent conversion rate — and a claim elsewhere in the presentation of a 10 percent conversion rate — strains credulity.

    The conversion rate claim of 37 percent implies it can be achieved across-the-board, regardless of the nature of the product, the quality of the traffic, the state of the economy, the demand for the product or the pricing of the offer. As the PowerPoint presentation stands, a doughnut priced free or a doughnut priced at $10,000 both could expect to enjoy a conversion rate of 37 percent, something absurd on its face.

    Surf And Sun

    AVG, which has been operating for about six months, also includes what it calls a two-year “Case Study of a BIG thinker.” Why a company that formally launched in February 2009 would choose to call events that have not happened a “case study” is left to the imagination. The “study” includes vague, speculative updates in six-month intervals, concluding with the subject of the two-year study “on the beach” and enjoying his autosurfing success.

    As the “case study” subject is enjoying life at the shore and still doing his AVG surfing, the company challenges viewers to “do the math now” without providing any solid numbers that actually would permit members to do the math. The “case study,” for example, does not say how much the subject spent, describing his first purchase vaguely as an “initial quota of Advertising.”

    Within six months, the subject — who appears not to do any recruiting — recovers “all of his costs + around 10 percent.”

    Although AVG has released the PowerPoint presentation with the speculative, two-year “case study,” current members are grumbling that significant sums of money they sent the company for “advertising” are generating minuscule returns — chump change as opposed to beach money — and that downline members (and family members recruited into the program) are losing faith and having to square off against embarrassment for having joined.

    Other Complaints

    At the same time, members are complaining about the sudden removal of a member-to-member button that enabled them to move cash or cash-equivalents to other members. They also are complaining about a promotional video with a low-quality voiceover that smacks of amateurism and the company’s inability to solve problems that have dogged it for weeks.

    Meanwhile, some AVG members have called for the company to make participation in a so-called 80/20 program mandatory, suggesting that trapping people’s money is the tonic AVG needs to succeed. If implemented, however, such a mandatory program could heighten concerns that AVG was trying to cover up a Ponzi scheme, selling unregistered securities and acting as a bank or financial-services company without a license.

    Indeed, the mere existence of a nonmandatory 80/20 program is one of the hallmarks of an autosurf Ponzi scheme that is thumbing its nose at securities, wire-fraud and money-laundering laws. Such programs are designed to stem the outflow of cash — and outflow should not be an issue when a company claims it does not rely on funds from new members to pay older members.

    The Accountability Equation

    Perhaps the greatest AVG mystery of all is how the company, which purports to be a professional advertising and communications firm based in Uruguay, can send so many confusing messages.

    Some of the incongruities border on the comic. Although the company purports to be operating from Uruguay, insiders routinely describe “international” members as those who live outside the United States. If AVG truly was operating from Uruguay, all members from any country other than Uruguay would be “international” members, including members who lived in the United States.

    Stop Being So Stupid!

    AVG promoters also have a curious habit of scolding fellow members. This habit is accompanied by awkward appeals for loyalty and aggressive, even paranoid appeals that stymie members who ask too many questions.

    In March, AVG announced its bank account had been suspended. Incredibly, it blamed members in the very first sentence of its announcement for causing the problem.

    Due to people bank wiring too many transactions over $9500.00 each, the bank we were using for Bank Wires and ACHs suspended our account,” AVG said at the time.

    Although AVG announced in May it had struck a deal that enabled members once again to wire money to the surf, one of the companies it identified as a facilitator of the wire transfers issued a public denial it had any business relationship with AVG.

    AVG is engaged in a highly questionable “industry.” The U.S. government has destroyed several autosurf firms. Several government agencies have issued warnings about the autosurf trade in general, and the U.S. Secret Service issued a news release last year, noting that it had seized more than $93.5 million from Florida-based AdSurfDaily Inc.

    AVG, which launched after the government seized ASD’s assets, has close ties to ASD. Unlike ASD promoters, however, AVG promoters used the surf’s purported offshore location to drive business to the company.

  • BizAdSplash Surf Site Offline

    UPDATED 6:41 A.M. EDT (June 12, U.S.A.) BAS appears to have come back online overnight. The site now is resolving to a server. It returned briefly at 9 p.m. yesterday. At 9:05 p.m., the site went down again. Total downtime yesterday was at least 6 hours , perhaps as many as 14, based on reports elsewhere.

    The BizAdSplash (BAS) autosurf website has been offline for hours. The site will not resolve to a server.

    What is causing the problem is unclear.

    Clarence Busby, a central figure in the AdSurfDaily/Golden Panda Ad Builder case, is listed as “Chief Consultant” for BAS.

    Federal prosecutors have sought a final order to give the U.S. government control of more than $14 million seized from bank accounts Busby controlled for Golden Panda.

    UPDATE 4:38 P.M. The  BAS site continues to be offline. A mirrored copy of the BAS News Release page is accessible, although it does not explain the server issue or the downtime and appears not to have been updated for hours.

    It does, however, explain that the surf experienced a problem and that “transactions” are “missing” from accounts. The date and time of the posting are unclear:

    Notice:  We are aware of the account issues and will have them resolved shortly!!

    As some of you may have noticed already this morning, there are transactions missing from your accounts. This includes any rrsp, commission or ad package purchases made since the 15th of May. This is a known issue created while performing a data transfer last evening and will have them corrected shortly.

    UPDATE 6:41 A.M. June 12. The BAS site now is resolving to a server and appears to be back online.

  • Bank Of America Seeks Oral Argument In ASD Aiding-And-Abetting Claim; Files Dismissal Motion

    Andy Bowdoin: Still a no-show in RICO case
    Andy Bowdoin: Still a no-show in RICO case

    Bank of America has asked U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer to hear oral arguments in its bid to be dismissed as a defendant in a lawsuit that alleged it aided and abetted a Ponzi scheme operated by alleged racketeers associated with Florida-based AdSurfDaily Inc.

    Federal prosecutors seized at least $79.8 million from 15 bank accounts controlled by ASD President Andy Bowdoin or Golden Panda Ad Builder President Clarence Busby, saying the funds were the proceeds of a criminal enterprise that engaged in wire fraud, money-laundering and the sale of unregistered securities.

    Three ASD members sued Bowdoin, Busby and ASD attorney Robert Garner under federal RICO statutes, claiming the men had engaged in racketeering  — including indictable offenses — with unnamed others.

    Bank of America was not named a RICO defendant. Rather, the bank was accused of aiding and abetting the RICO defendants in a fraudulent scheme.

    The bank said the plaintiffs had failed to show that it had aided or abetted the RICO defendants in any way, repeating an earlier assertion that “banks are not guarantors” of their customers’ conduct.

    “No law holds that a bank could be held liabile for conducting legitimate business activities with an entity that, as it turns out, also happens to be committing a fraud against others,” the bank argued. “Nor can there be if banks are to conduct business.”

    The lawsuit was filed in January. In April, plaintiffs Mike Collins, Frank Greene and Natures Discount Inc. amended the complaint, alleging that Bank of America employees were moonlighting as ASD employees in Florida while ASD was commiting fraud in plain sight.

    Collins, Greene and Natures Discount said that a “majority” of employees of Bank of America’s branch in Quincy, Fla., also worked for ASD, including the branch manager.

    Bank of America, however, said moonlighting was “lawful” conduct.

    “The alleged moonlighting activities of Bank of America employees did not occur within the scope of duty of the employees’ employment with Bank of America, and Plaintiffs do not allege that they did,” the bank argued.

    “This conduct, as lawful as it is, cannot be imputed to Bank of America,” the bank continued. “Regardless, Plaintiffs alleged no facts demonstrating which Bank of America employees knew that ASD’s conduct was fraudulent, how they learned this, when or how they intentionally aided the scheme in some way.”

    Bowdoin is the sole defendant in the RICO case not to have responded to the complaint. Prosecutors said he signed a proffer letter in the federal case and acknowledged ASD was operating illegally.

    In January, Bowdoin submitted to the forfeiture. He changed his mind in late February and began to file pro se motions, chiding prosecutors by saying his filings “should really get their attention.”

    Bowdoin promised to hold a conference call to update members nearly three months ago, but he has not done so. He also did not inform them of the proffer letter prosecutors said he signed or explain why he has not responded to the RICO complaint filed nearly five months ago.

  • REPORTS: James W. Von Brunn, White Supremacist And Conspiracy Theorist, Opens Fire In Holocaust Museum

    Not long ago, James W. von Brunn challenged Barack Obama’s citizenship, one of the core qualifications to hold the office of President of the United States.

    In 1981, von Brunn accused the Federal Reserve Board of “treason,” showing his displeasure by wielding a sawed-off shotgun, pistol and knife at board headquarters, threatening members and claiming to have planted a bomb.

    His goal, he said later, was to place board members under “legal” arrest, but he was thwarted by police, prosecutors and judges who didn’t understand the law. Other judges who didn’t understand the law later denied his appeal.

    He served six and one-half years in prison.

    Today, von Brunn, 88, walked into the Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C., opened fire with a gun described as having a long barrel and shot a security guard. The guard later died.

    Other guards opened fire on von Brunn, a white supremacist, antiSemite and conspiracy theorist.  He is being treated at a hospital and is listed in critical condition.

  • AdViewGlobal Promoter Spams Website With Affiliate Link; Claims Two ‘D.C.’ Attorneys, Best Buy, Staples And Delta Air Lines Are Advertisers

    UPDATED 11:22 A.M. EDT (U.S.A.): An affiliate spammer entered PonziNews.com yesterday, leaving what was described as “my friends” (sic) affiliate link for AdViewGlobal (AVG) and an advertisement for AVG.

    Seven minutes later, the same affiliate spammer left another ad for AVG, claiming that “I just watched as 2, yes 2 Attorney’s (sic) from D.C. decided that they wanted to advertise on the site, and be a member of the VIP program.”

    Affiliate spam is a back-door way of gaining signups for a program or service. One form of affiliate spam is to monitor websites that publish criticism of an “opportunity” favored by the spammer and then post affiliate links as part of the defense of the opportunity.

    It is possible (and easy) to defend an opportunity without leaving an affiliate link, thus taking any issue of spamming totally out of play.  The affiliate spammer who claimed it was a friend’s AVG link yesterday used the username of “Jeffrey,” and the link resolved to the sign-up page of an AVG promoter who used the same name.

    It was not clear if the affiliate spammer also was the AVG promoter “Jeffrey.”

    Software employed by Ponzi News captured the affiliate spam. It was not published. A screen shot of the spam was made and reduced in size to fit within the borders of this Blog.

    AVG enthusiast sends back-to-back spams, claiming Best Buy, Staples and other prominent companies are AVG advertisers.
    AVG enthusiast sends back-to-back spams, claiming Best Buy, Staples and other prominent companies are AVG advertisers.

    The spammer declared that Best Buy, Staples, GoDaddy.com and Delta Air Lines were AVG advertisers. The affiliate link used the identifier 7916, and an email address left by the spammer suggested he was associated with a company known as GuardIt Technologies.

    Although the email address used the GuardIt name, it was not tied to the GuardIt server. Rather, it was tied to a server at a free email-hosting company, so the address could have been used without the authority of GuardIt.

    AVG, also known as AVGA, publishes an antispam policy:

    “If you are found to have spammed, without warning, AVGLOBAL ASSOCIATION reserves the right to disable or terminate your account immediately,” the company said on its website.

    “All funds will be forfeited. AVGLOBAL ASSOCIATION may impose a penalty for each spam policy violation. AVGLOBAL ASSOCIATION also reserves the right to determine what violates this policy, in which case, any violation that occurs will result in account termination without refund of any monies,” AVG said.

    A website associated with Mark Simmons, whom AdSurfDaily intended to call as a witness at a Sept. 30-Oct. 1 evidentiary hearing in Washington, D.C., promotes both AVG and GuardIt. Simmons was sequestered at the hearing, but never took the stand.

    Federal prosecutors say ASD engaged in wire-fraud, money-laundering and the sale of unregistered securities while operating a Ponzi scheme.

    On Nov. 19, a federal judge ruled that ASD had not demonstrated at the evidentiary hearing that it was operating legally and not a Ponzi scheme. Within days of the ruling, ASD stop using its own Breaking News website, instead giving the Pro-ASD Surf’s Up forum its official endorsement as an ASD news outlet.

    In December, prelaunch buzz began to appear online for AVG, and the surf formally launched in February. At least two forums that use ning.com as a host sprouted up to promote AVG.

    Some of the Mods and members of Surf’s Up manage one of the forums, and Simmons started the second forum. One Simmons’ thread pitches members on a technology provided by a website known as ErasableEmail.com, which purportedly permits users to send email and video that “self-destructs” and cannot be forwarded or saved.

    Simmons said the product was endorsed by “the better hobo bureau” — a play-on-words of the name of his ning.com forum: The Unemployable Hobo Lifestyle Forum.

    Erasable email and video technology can be abused. A promoter for an illicit program, for example, could make false claims about a product or service and then erase the claims so they could not be forwarded to law enforcement.

    The legal community has been debating the utility of erasable email for years, wondering aloud if it can be used to thwart the discovery process in litigation and to erase evidence of crimes and misconduct.

  • News And Notes: Surf’s Up Poster Calls For ‘Militia’ To Rise Against Government; BizAdSplash Urges Members Not To Contact MasterCard Vendors

    NEWS: A member of the Pro-AdSurfDaily Surf’s Up forum says he is willing to “Bear Arms in line with the Bill of Rights” and storm Washington, D.C., if a “militia” can be formed.

    In a separate thread, the poster said the government ruined his life last year when it seized assets tied to the Florida autosurf firm and that he is ready to fight to the “DEATH.”

    “If anyone from the US Government reads this,” the poster said, “yes[,] look out because you are now my enemy. May God Bless Andy [Bowdoin] and all ASD members. I’m done with working within the system. I will destroy the entire US Government if that is what it takes to serve justice for ASD members.”

    The incendiary remarks were contained in two threads, one of which was titled “Letter from Andy.” A poster within the thread had criticized Bowdoin for not conducting a conference call he had promised nearly three months ago in a letter to members published at Surf’s Up, opining that Bowdoin should get “jail time.”

    In response to the post critical of Bowdoin, yet another poster appealed to the Surf’s Up Mods to cleanse the forum of “rats.” A Mod assured the poster that, if the purported rat again posted “negative garbage” about Bowdoin, the offending post would be deleted.

    The Mod said nothing about the “militia” post.

    NOTE: In court filings in a racketeering lawsuit against Bowdoin, ASD attorney Robert Garner and Golden Panda Ad Builder President Clarence Busby, one of Busby’s pleadings defines him as a minister of 30 years’ standing and uses the abbreviation “Rev.” at least 120 times.

    Golden Panda has ceded to the government more than $14 million it had gathered in only days last summer as the so-called “Chinese” version of ASD. In the months that followed, a new, Busby-connected surf known as BizAdSplash (BAS) opened, touting an offshore location.

    Early promoters identified Busby as the owner, but others defined him as a consultant.

    As a marketing proposition, identifying Busby in any capacity of authority at BAS was odd regardless of any title he held, in no small part because he consented to the forfeiture of Golden Panda’s assets in September, saying he had relied on ASD’s assertions that the program was legal.

    Only in the incongruous world of the autosurf could a man responsible for a stunning, $14 million loss of investor funds be positioned as a marketing plus.

    Work-around?

    One seized Golden Panda account contained precisely $6 million, according to federal prosecutors.

    Choosing his words carefully in a sworn court filing in August, Busby said none of the Golden Panda money came from Bowdoin or ASD, that Busby had provided an unspecified amount of “seed” capital from his real-estate business and that Golden Panda “obtained all other start up money from 34 founders.”

    Amounts Busby provided personally or obtained from the “founders” weren’t disclosed in Busby’s filing.

    Busby’s filing, however, did not rule out the possibility that one or more “founders” provided capital from “profits” paid to them by ASD and deposited in their individual bank accounts and that “profits” then were forwarded to Golden Panda.

    Nor does it rule out the possibility that Golden Panda seed money from one or more “founders” flowed to the company after the “founders” deposited checks from individual ASD downline members in the “founders’” private bank accounts, shifted a corresponding amount of “ad-packs” to ASD downline members by using ASD’s internal system, and then forwarded the desposit amount or portion thereof to Golden Panda, instead of ASD.

    Busby said a prosecution claim that a “majority” of Golden Panda’s funds came from ASD was “false.”

    There have been numerous reports that ASD prospects paid sponsors directly for ad-pack purchases, that the sponsors deposited the money in their individual checking accounts at their local banks and then used ASD’s internal system to transfer ad-packs to the individual prospects.

    The approach was pitched as a work-around, because ASD was having trouble posting payments from individual members and getting them started in the “rebate” program, which was purported in advertisements to pay 1 percent a day or 30 percent a month.

    Given this scenario, it is possible that huge sums paid by ASD “rally” attendees were deposited into the private bank accounts of individual ASD promoters and that the deposits were routed directly to Golden Panda, instead of ASD.

    “Neither Bowdoin nor ASD provided any capital,” Busby said.

    Busby’s claim about Golden Panda’s seed money would be true — at least in a technical sense — if any of Golden Panda’s “founders” also were ASD promoters who deposited money from ASD downline members directly in the promoters’ back accounts, transferred a corresponding amount of ad-packs to the members using ASD’s internal system, and then forwarded the funds to Golden Panda, instead of ASD.

    It is known that at least one of Golden Panda’s “founders” was a highly visible ASD promoter who helped the company organize rallies at which millions of dollars were collected. It also is known that some ASD prospects who attended the rallies paid sponsors directly for “ad-pack” purchases and that the sponsors deposited the money in their individual checking accounts and transferred a corresponding amount of “ad-packs” to the prospects by using ASD’s internal system.

    It is possible that a significant chunk of the money seized from Golden Panda originated with one or more “founders” who initiated private ad-pack transactions with individual ASD downline members, deposited the sums in their personal checking accounts and forwarded the funds to Golden Panda.

    ‘Chief Consultant’

    Busby now has officially been declared the “Chief Consultant” of BAS, in a news released marked a “must read” at the BAS website.

    Unlike Busby’s court filings in the RICO case, the BAS news release does not identify him as a minister or use an abbreviation such as “Rev.” It simply identifies him as “Clarence Busby.”

    Busby was enjoined by a federal judge in the 1990s from breaking securities laws, after he was implicated in three prime-bank schemes by the Securities and Exchange Commission. The government took mercy on Busby, waiving certain financial penalties and not interfering in a bankruptcy petition he filed.

    In the BAS news release, Busby assured members that BAS had “spent a tremendous amount of time and thousands of dollars on economists, attorneys and other professionals and with their advice have built this company in a very responsible manner.”

    Busby did not identify the economists, attorneys or other professionals. Nor did he mention the past encounter with the SEC or the current litigation involving ASD and Golden Panda Ad Builder. Busby did, however, provide an inspirational quotation from auto tycoon Henry Ford.

    Mum’s The Word

    Elsewhere on the news pages of BAS, the company urged members not to contact vendors associated with its use of MasterCard with any questions about the BAS program. The information appeared under a bright red headline titled, “URGENT INFORMATION FOR MASTERCARD USERS.”

    “At Biz Ad Splash, we have worked very hard to develop great relationships with some of the finest international banking services available,” BAS said. “We continually strive to maintain a good standing with these institutions in order to provide the best services possible to the Customer/Associates of Biz Ad Splash.”

    Last year, ASD announced that it was finalizing a deal with a company known as Praebius Communications that would result in a cash infusion of $200 million. ASD withdrew the news release after members responded by contacting Praebius in a bid to confirm or deny the deal.

    Some ASD members were infuriated that other members actually questioned the claim, describing even rational doubts as an act of disloyalty.

    In its MasterCard news release, BAS openly discouraged members from contacting any vendors to get answers to questions.

    “[W]e strongly urge our Biz Ad Splash Customer/Associates not to contact these vendors with questions concerning withdrawal requests or Biz Ad Splash card deposits,” BAS said.

  • Judge Gives Plaintiffs More Time To Respond To Robert Garner In AdSurfDaily RICO Case, But Says They Missed Filing Date For Response To Golden Panda’s Clarence Busby

    EDITOR’S NOTE: This story about filings in a racketeering lawsuit against AdSurfDaily President Andy Bowdoin, ASD attorney Robert Garner and Golden Panda Ad Builder President Clarence Busby also includes an update on a lawsuit filed last year against ASD by Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum. The information is under a subhead below.

    Although U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer yesterday granted a motion plaintiffs filed for more time to respond to Robert Garner’s motion to be dismissed as a defendant in a racketeering lawsuit, she advised the plaintiffs that they had missed a May 26 filing deadline to respond to Clarence Busby’s motions to be dismissed as a defendant.

    Collyer ordered the plaintiffs to show cause why Busby’s motion should not be granted, giving them until June 19 to do so.

    Busby was the president of Golden Panda Ad Builder. Garner was an attorney for AdSurfDaily.

    The judge had denied a motion by the plaintiffs earlier this week for more time to respond to Garner’s dismissal motion for “failure to cite good cause.” The plaintiffs filed an amended motion, which Collyer granted yesterday.

    A response to Garner’s dismissal motion now is due July 9. Attorney’s for the plaintiffs said they agreed to examine “whether or not to voluntarily dismiss [Garner] from the proceeding” prior to the new filing deadline.

    Earlier in the week Collyer denied motions by the plaintiffs to formally add two attorneys to the case, for “failure to confer with all opposing counsel.”

    ASD President Andy Bowdoin also is a RICO defendant. He has not responded to the lawsuit.

    In a separate case filed by the government last year against assets tied to ASD and Golden Panda amid allegations of wire fraud, money-laundering, selling unregistered securities and operating a Ponzi scheme, prosecutors seized more than $65 million from Bowdoin-controlled bank accounts  and more than $14 million from Busby-controlled accounts.

    Busby, a minister who also is in the real-estate business and was implicated by the SEC in a prime-bank scheme in the 1990s, submitted to the forfeiture in September.

    Bowdoin submitted to the forfeiture in January, but now says he changed his mind after meeting with a “group” and wants to re-contest it. Golden Panda amassed the $14 million sum in only days, and ASD amassed the $65 million sum in only weeks.

    Busby’s attorney — Jonathan W. Emord of Clifton, Va. — said in court filings that claims against “Rev. Busby are precluded by the United States’ civil forfeiture action under the doctrine of res judicata.

    “Plaintiffs are barred from relitigating issues resolved against Busby on behalf of the United States and all residents, citizens, and taxpayers concerning matters adjudicated which are of public interest,” Emord argued.

    In essence, the argument holds that, since Busby already has submitted to the forfeiture of funds and the government is establishing a mechanism for refunds, the RICO litigants already have a remedy.

    Garner, meanwhile, argued that the court lacks jurisdiction over him in the case. He is representing himself in the RICO action, although court filings suggest he also has paid professional counsel working behind the scenes.

    Florida Case Against Bowdoin At Standstill

    Why Bowdoin hasn’t responded to the RICO lawsuit is unclear. Also unclear is why there has been no public action since Jan. 6 in a lawsuit filed against Bowdoin and his wife, Edna Faye Bowdoin, by Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum.

    Federal prosecutors said in April that Bowdoin had signed a proffer letter in the federal case and acknowledged that ASD was operating illegally. Proffer letters sometimes mean that the one who proffers has agreed to provide the government information that is helpful in the prosecution of others.

    After signing the proffer letter, Bowdoin submitted to the forfeiture in January. Several weeks later, in late February, Bowdoin consulted with what he described as a “group” and began to file pro se court pleadings in the federal case.

    One day after Bowdoin signed his first pro-se pleading on Feb. 25, the AdViewGlobal (AVG) autosurf introduced members to Pro Advocate Group, which says it can help people practice law without a license and help companies form “private membership associations.”

    AVG now is operating as such an association.

    Pro Advocate Group, which also pushes a “legal defense” for taxpayers and “private medical associations,” is associated with Karl Dahlstrom. Dahlstrom was convicted of securities fraud and sentenced to 78 months in federal prison in the 1990s.

    Prosecutors said he bought automobiles with investors’ funds — something Bowdoin is accused of doing.

    AVG has close family, management and promotional ties to ASD. Two of Bowdoin’s family members –  George Harris and his wife, Judy Harris — are trustees of the AVG private “association.”

    George Harris is the son of Bowdoin’s wife, Edna Faye Bowdoin.

    AVG, which earlier had disclaimed any ties to ASD, now describes itself as a full-fledged advertising and communications company with a host of services.

    But the company has not explained how having ties to Bowdoin family members, friends and promoters is helpful for business, given twin forfeiture cases by the government against assets tied to ASD, the RICO case filed by ASD members and McCollum’s Florida case.

    In December — in an action separate from an August forfeiture filing by the federal government and McCollum’s August lawsuit — federal prosecutors filed a second forfeiture complaint against assets tied to ASD.

    Among other things, the December complaint alleged that Edna Faye Bowdoin and George Harris opened a checking account with nearly $180,000 in illegal proceeds from ASD. George Harris used more than $157,000 of the deposit to pay off the mortgage on the Tallahassee home he shared with his wife, prosecutors said.

    George and Judy Harris also acquired an automobile with illegal proceeds from ASD, prosecutors said.

    Last year, Bowdoin announced to ASD members that “Ponzi” allegations in the Florida case had been dropped. The announcement caused ASD members to race to online forums to share the good news, but proved to be false.

    McCollum’s office issued a statement denying Bowdoin’s assertions, saying Ponzi allegations hadn’t even been brought against ASD in Florida.

    Rather, McCollum’s office said, the state had accused ASD of operating a Pyramid scheme.

  • FOLLOW-UP: The Headline Flap Over Our AVG Story

    EDITOR’S NOTE: We published a story Wednesday that some members of AdViewGlobal (AVG) assert is unfair. At issue — particularly from a poster who uses the handle “CORRECTION!” — is the headline that accompanied the story.

    Another poster, “Pistol,” isn’t sympathic to the autosurf business and says he doesn’t suffer fools gladly on either side of the issue, but also raised a concern about the fairness of the headline. Meanwhile, other posters say the headline is fair. One of the issues is whether an AVG prospect can bypass AVG and purchase ad-packs directly from sponsors.

    Here is some background, and our response to the concerns. We’ll start by republishing a comment Pistol made. Pistol’s reference to the “200% thingy” below is a reference to an AVG matching-bonus program.

    The 200 percent program was advertised to have a June 29 expiration date, but AVG suddenly changed the expiration date to June 5. AVG members and prospects said they were concerned about not being able to get money to the company in time to qualify for the bonus, and an AVG promoter outlined a strategy by which members and prospects with “big bucks” could get the bonus by paying sponsors directly.

    Pistol: It doesn’t seem to me that the sponsor in question is suggesting that sponsors should give/sell members adpacks/page impressions from them (the sponsors) but rather a quick and easy way that they can help new members get funds available so that they can buy adpacks directly from AVGA thereby qualifying for the 200% thingy.

    OUR TAKE: During the first FOUR steps of what is described as the sponsor’s bid to provide a “quick and easy way” for prospects to buy ad-packs “directly” from AVG, the sponsor:

    1.) Gathers money from the prospect and makes a private agreement with the prospect that the final recipient of the funds will be AVG and that the funds will be used to purchase ad-packs.
    2.) Deposits the funds in the sponsor’s local bank.
    3.) Causes a wire to be sent to an offshore payment processor or sends a check via overnight mail to the offshore payment processor.
    4.) Waits for the payment processor to receive the funds and credit the sponsor’s account.

    That’s FOUR steps — or FIVE, if you count the private agreement as a separate step — so an argument that positions this as a purchase made “directly” from AVG isn’t a very compelling one.

    This deal cannot happen as the promoter describes, absent a private agreement between the sponsor and the prospect and subterfuge aimed at the local bank. Moreover, it can’t happen without use of the bank’s wire facility or use of a banking instrument, and it necessarily must involve the offshore processors because the prospect can’t wire funds to AVG directly.

    There’s that word again — “directly.”  With the exception of the prospect’s direct payment to the sponsor, there is virtually nothing direct about this transaction.

    At this point, the prospect’s bank thinks he is doing business with the sponsor, the sponsor’s bank thinks he is doing business with the prospect, and the payment processor thinks it is doing business with the sponsor.

    ONLY the prospect and the sponsor know that AVG is the intended final recipient — and they haven’t told anybody, FOUR or FIVE steps into the process.

    Additional Steps

    In the next step, the sponsor tells the offshore payment processor that AVG is the intended recipient, but the payment processor doesn’t know the prospect is hidden in the deal or is choosing not to know. The prospect’s role is to give money to the sponsor, so he can use the sponsor’s bank to get the money to the offshore processor in an environment that is conducive for AVG and most advantageous for the prospect.

    The payment processor obliges the sponsor and wires the money to AVG, but the transaction still is at least TWO steps away from completion, because the money or the value thereof somehow has to get back in the hands of the real customer, the prospect.

    So, the sponsor funds his AVG account, so he can use AVG’s internal system to get the money or the value thereof to the real customer, the prospect, for the purchase of ad-packs.

    A sale made “directly” through AVG? Hardly. This process is at least SEVEN steps removed from a direct transaction with AVG and perhaps as many as EIGHT. This sale cannot occur — and the prospect cannot get the 200 percent bonus — unless the prospect pays the sponsor directly. The sponsor is getting paid directly for the purchase of ad packs.

    Here, a person might want to ask why the prospect in search of a matching bonus before a deadline passes just can’t send the money to AVG directly and have it credited immediately. That’s the question some AVG members are asking right now. In fact, they asked it as soon as the sponsor laid out the strategy, and some AVG members are complaining out loud about money procedures that appear to be convoluted and complex.

    A person also might want to ask why AVG isn’t using PayPal, and instead is using the offshore surfing favorites: SolidTrustPay and StrictPay. PayPal does not touch this kind of business because it is fraught with secret agendas.

    Worth Noting

    It’s worth pointing out that some of the government personnel involved in the AdSurfDaily (ASD) case also were involved in the successful prosecution of e-Gold, which basically was accused of looking the other way while it processed payments for people who were laundering money.

    ASD, a Florida company federal prosecutors say once used e-Gold and engaged in wire fraud,  money-laundering and the sale of unregistered securities, has close ties to AVG.

    AVG, for example, lists ASD President Andy Bowdoin’s stepson — George Harris — as a “Trustee” of the AVG “private association.” Judy Harris, the wife of George Harris, also is listed as an AVG “Trustee.”

    A home and a car prosecutors say George and Judy Harris acquired with money from ASD was seized as the proceeds of a criminal enterprise in a December forfeiture complaint filed by the Feds.

    One of the issues in the e-Gold case was secret money transactions, and look what’s happening in the strategy outlined by the AVG promoter: The banks don’t know that the prospect and the sponsor just worked together to get funds to a final beneficiary unknown to the bank — AVG — and the processor doesn’t know the prospect is hidden in the deal or may be choosing not to know.

    Incongruous Messages

    AVG purports to be headquartered in Uruguay, has servers that resolve to Panama, receives money from offshore processors in Canada and Panama, but issued a news release this week with a dateline of Tallahassee.

    Many of our readers probably noticed that AVG didn’t use the words “Uruguay” or “Panama” or  “offshore” in its news release, but then immediately sent members an email purported to have originated in Uruguay — to celebrate a news release with a Tallahassee dateline.

    It’s a message hopelessly at odds with itself. It is particularly incongruous because AVG also now claims it provides professional PR services — but just look at what is happening:

    AVG can’t reconcile its own message. It is creating the appearance that it is in Tallahassee when it wants to look clean and proper — indeed, some people now say it is selling legitimate services priced from $30,000 to $200,000 — but it’s in Uruguay when it wants “advertising” rotator cash from folks who need to believe the Securities and Exchange Commission can’t touch them offshore.

    How do those competing notions come into balance? And why would a company that says it can command legitimate fees of up to $200,000 from clients not be running like a man on fire to exit the autosurf business? Incredibly, one promoter said today that AVG’s plan is to remain in the surf business and use the fees it collects for legitimate services to fund the surf.

    In the strategy outlined by the promoter, where is the money that started out at a local bank now? Uruguay? Panama? Florida? Elsewhere? And what routes will it take in the form of payouts to get back to members so it becomes spendable in their hometowns?

    The Headline Flap

    As many of our readers know, “CORRECTION!” is none too happy about this headline, which appears on this Blog.

    AdViewGlobal Promoter Says Prospects Can Bypass Company And Purchase Ad-Packs Directly From Sponsors To Ensure They Get Credited With 200 Percent Match Before Deadline

    CORRECTION repeatedly has demanded a retraction, although he has not identified himself as an AVG spokesperson or person in position of authority at AVG to bring a concern to our attention and ask for a clarification or a retraction. At the same time, CORRECTION will not answer basic questions about AVG’s business practices or provide evidence of verifiable income streams to refute concerns AVG is selling unregistered securities and operating as a Ponzi scheme.

    Let’s take the headline sections one at a time:

    /AdViewGlobal Promoter Says/

    Yes, it was an AVG promoter who shared the strategy of prospects paying sponsors directly and engaging in a process that involves at least SEVEN steps and ultimately results in the purchase of ad-packs. (AVG calls ad-packs “page impressions” or “viewer impressions.”)

    /Prospects Can Bypass Company/

    Yes, the prospect bypasses the company and pays money directly to the sponsor, under the strategy outlined by the promoter. The only thing AVG does in this transaction is make sure the electrons settle in the proper places when told to do so.

    /And Purchase Ad-Packs Directly From Sponsors/

    Yes, the sponsor is selling ad-packs directly because he directly collects the money for the ad-packs, routes the money offshore, causes it to be delivered to AVG, funds his own AVG account with his prospects’ money, and then causes AVG to redistribute the funds or the value thereof to complete the sale. In this case, the sponsor is more directly involved in the sale of ad-packs than AVG itself.

    /To Ensure They Get Credited With 200 Percent Match Before Deadline/

    Yes, this whole strategy was published because someone wanted to know the quickest way a person with $10,000 could get the money to AVG before the deadline to qualify for the 200 percent match.

    The promoter said it was a way to take care of the folks with “big bucks.”

  • BREAKING NEWS: Judge Denies Plaintiffs’ Motion In AdSurfDaily RICO Case For More Time To Respond To Garner Dismissal Motion; Bowdoin Still A No-Show

    A federal judge has denied a motion by the plaintiffs in a racketeering lawsuit against AdSurfDaily attorney Robert Garner for more time to respond to Garner’s motion to be dismissed as a defendant.

    Judge Rosemary Collyer said the plaintiffs had failed to cite “a good cause” to grant the delay.

    Meanwhile, Collyer also denied motions by the plaintiffs to let two additional attorneys enter the case, saying the plaintiffs’ attorneys failed “to confer with all opposing counsel” as required by a Local Rule.

    How things will proceed is unclear. The plaintiffs’ answer to Garner’s dismissal motion is due tomorrow. They had sought a delay until July 6.

    Garner’s RICO co-defendants include ASD President Andy Bowdoin and Golden Panda Ad Builder President Clarence Busby.

    Bowdoin has not responded to the lawsuit, which was filed in January and amended in April.