UPDATED 11:05 A.M. EDT (U.S.A.) Acting as his own attorney, AdSurfDaily Inc. President Andy Bowdoin has filed a motion to rescind a decision he made in January to submit to the forfeiture of real estate and tens of millions of dollars seized by the government in August.
As first reported in this Blog last month, an earlier motion Bowdoin filed to rescind his decision to the forfeiture appeared not to apply to the proceeds seized last summer. Rather, Bowdoin’s initial motion to rescind appeared to apply to property seized in a second forfeiture complaint prosecutors filed in December.
Neither Bowdoin nor any corporate entity associated with the property listed in the December complaint appears to have filed a verified claim to the property or a motion asking to submit to the forfeiture. Among the proceeds listed in the December complaint were a Florida home owned by Bowdoin’s stepson, George Harris, and his wife, Judy Harris. An automobile owned by George and Judy Harris also was seized, along with two other cars prosecutors said were purchased with illegal ASD proceeds. A boat and marine equipment also were seized.
Bowdoin’s initial motion to rescind appears to be a rescission of a decision he never made — either to claim the property listed in the December complaint or to forfeit it.
Confused? You’re not alone. Sometimes pro se pleadings are extremely difficult to reconcile because the arguments don’t follow a recognized structure or logical form.
Judge Rosemary Collyer included a handwritten note on Bowdoin’s most recent motion to rescind.
“Let this be filed,” she wrote.
It is unclear if Bowdoin filed the second motion to rescind before or after Collyer’s issuance of an order last week that advised Bowdoin and his paid attorneys that corporations could not proceed as pro se litigants. The document makes two corporate claims to the August proceeds.
Corporate claimants include AdSurfDaily Inc. and Bowdoin/Harris Enterprises Inc.
Bowdoin’s paid attorneys yesterday asked the court for permission to withdraw from the case, saying Bowdoin had not consulted them on his pro se filings and that serving as his attorneys had become “unreasonably difficult.”
“Mr. Bowdoin filed these motions without consulting with counsel and without bothering to advise counsel that he would be submitting motions on his own. Under these circumstances, the Akerman Senterfitt Law Firm cannot render effective assistance of counsel,†attorneys Michael Fayad and Jonathan Goodman said.
Bowdoin claimed in his motion that his lawyers were “ineffective at best and only looking out for the best interest of the government.” Fayad and Goodman said yesterday that the client-attorney relationship was affected by a ruling that went against ASD in November.
“After this Court denied Claimant’s Emergency Motion for Return of Seized Funds [on Nov. 19, 2008], the client-lawyer relationship between the Firm and all three Claimants substantially deteriorated and has not improved thus rendering the representation unreasonably difficult,†the lawyers said.
In Bowdoin’s most recent motion, he said his earlier decision to submit to the forfeiture was a “grave mistake and error” and that he was acting under “severe duress.”
Bowdoin’s motion, however, also makes the strange claim that “procedures” government agents used to search for and seize proceeds “were non-existent.”
He also contends what the government did was “improper, illegal and tainted with violations of due process of law.”
Bowdoin’s now makes the claim that his decision to rescind “is now legally accomplished as a matter of law” — a claim that makes a considerable leap because his earlier decision to submit to the forfeiture was made with “prejudice” — meaning Bowdoin agreed to the forfeiture and would not later contest it — and Collyer signed an order granting Bowdoin’s motion to submit.
UPDATED 7:24 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.) Michael Fayad and Jonathan Goodman of Akerman Senterfitt have asked a federal judge to withdraw themselves and the firm as attorneys for AdSurfDaily Inc., Bowdoin/Harris Enterprises Inc. and Andy Bowdoin.
At the same time, the firm cited attorney-client privilege with respect to its communications with Bowdoin.
In asking for leave to withdraw, the attorneys said their representation of Bowdoin had become “unreasonably difficult.”
“After this Court denied Claimant’s Emergency Motion for Return of Seized Funds [on Nov. 19, 2008], the client-lawyer relationship between the Firm and all three Claimants substantially deteriorated and has not improved thus rendering the representation unreasonably difficult,” the lawyers said.
U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer ordered the lawyers to instruct Bowdoin on critical points of law last week, after Bowdoin had filed a series of motions acting as his own attorney. The firm never formally withdrew from the case, but Bowdoin said in court filings that he had fired Fayad and Goodman.
Bowdoin told ASD members March 13 that he had spent $800,000 on the forfeiture case filed last August and dismissed the attorneys for getting “no results.” He added that he had consulted with a “group” that “said that my attorneys had taken the wrong approach. The group was very confident that they could help because the government had broken so many laws and had violated our rights as citizens of the United States.”
Akerman Senterfitt advised Collyer today that it had contacted Bowdoin and his corporate alter egos “recently” and advised them on the critical matters, which dealt with a rule that corporations could not proceed as pro se litigants.
“The Akerman Senterfitt law firm has recently been able to contact its clients and has obtained their consent to withdraw from representing them,” the firm said. It did not say how it contacted Bowdoin or identify his whereabouts.
“In addition, Akerman Senterfitt’s two corporate clients have been specifically advised that they cannot appear as litigants in this Court on a pro se basis and that they must have counsel,” the firm said. “Through their principal, Mr. Bowdoin, the two corporate clients provided written acknowledgment of their understanding of this legal rule.”
Collyer said last week that AdSurfDaily Inc. and Bowdoin/Harris Enterprises Inc. could not represent themselves pro se on claims to seized proceeds because they are corporations. Bowdoin is permitted to represent himself as an individual on claims, but the corporations must have an attorney.
Plaintiffs in a racketeering lawsuit against Bowdoin that is separate from the forfeiture case said they have not been able to serve Bowdoin or co-defendants Robert Garner or Clarence Busby.
Garner was an ASD attorney. Busby was president of Golden Panda Ad Builder, a company whose assets were seized in the ASD probe. The RICO lawsuit has been pending since Jan. 15. A second summons was issued March 18.
Why Bowdoin, Garner and Busby have not been served is unclear. Garner is listed as a director of AdSurfDaily Inc. in Nevada corporation records. But ASD’s incorporation in Nevada appears to be in default for not filing an annual update of officers by Dec. 31, 2008.
ASD is listed as a Nevada-based foreign corporation in Florida, with Bowdoin holding the titles of director, president, secretary and treasurer. Garner’s name is not listed in the Florida documents, which were filed May 23, 2008.
ASD, in longhand, listed its address as 13 S. Calhoun St., Quincy, Fla., in its May 2008 Florida filing. Federal prosecutors said the address was bogus. The same address is listed in Nevada corporation records. Public filings suggest that the U.S. Secret Service was on the ground in Quincy prior to the seizure of ASD’s assets last August. The forfeiture complaint contains a photograph of an ASD sign the prosecution said listed the bogus address.
Florida filings from 1995 and 1996 by Bowdoin’s wife, Edna Faye Bowdoin, list the address of the building ASD went on to use as its headquarters as 11 S. Calhoun Street. The building once was home to Faye’s Florist Inc. The same building was listed by Edna Faye Bowdoin as having the 13 S. Calhoun Street address and serving as headquarters for Bowdoin/Harris Enterprises, according to June 2008 Florida records.
Fayad and Goodman today did not say where Bowdoin could be reached, acknowledging that they were aware of his pro se pleadings because they were a matter of public record.
“Given the attorney-client privilege, the Akerman Senterfitt law firm cannot disclose the
specific issues underlying the problems with the client-lawyer relationship,” the firm said.
“However, without breaching the attorney-client relationship, and based on documents which Mr. Bowdoin publicly filed with the clerk’s office, it is obvious that Claimants have decided to represent themselves without consulting their counsel,” the firm continued.
“By way of example only, Mr. Bowdoin has recently filed, on a pro se basis, a series of motions. Mr. Bowdoin filed these motions without consulting with counsel and without bothering to advise counsel that he would be submitting motions on his own. Under these circumstances, the Akerman Senterfitt Law Firm cannot render effective assistance of counsel.”
In a proposed order for leave to withdraw as Bowdoin’s counsel, the firm said Bowdoin’s last known address was 8 Gilcrease Lane, Quincy, FL 32351.
AdViewGlobal (AVG), a surf firm that has close ties to ASD, introduced members to a firm known as Pro Advocate Group in February. Pro Advocate Group says it can help people practice law without a license. Bowdoin’s pro se pleadings began to appear at the same time AVG introduced the company.
Karl Dahlstrom is associated with Pro Advocate Group. He was sentenced to 78 months in federal prison in the 1990s for securities fraud.
Fayad and Goodman filed notice with the court last fall that Bowdoin would exercise his 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination at the Sept. 30-Oct. 1 evidentiary hearing. Bowdoin did not appear for the hearing or take the stand.
In his pro se pleadings, however, Bowdoin acknowledged ASD was operating illegally last summer when agents seized real estate and tens of millions of dollars amid allegations of wire fraud, money-laundering and running a Ponzi scheme.
Bowdoin said he was denied “fair notice” that his conduct was illegal. Within days of his claim, Gary Talbert, a former ASD executive, resigned as chief executive officer of AVG.
News that a federal court had issued a second summons to ASD President Andy Bowdoin, ASD attorney Robert Garner and Golden Panda Ad Builder President Clarence Busby to notify them they’d been named defendants in a racketeering lawsuit broke on March 19.
On the same date — March 19 — a video for upstart surf company Paperless Access that featured Bowdoin telling viewers that they could recapture money seized by the U.S. Secret Service in the ASD Ponzi scheme investigation appeared online. The video was removed from the Paperless Access site within days — without explanation.
Lawyers in the racketeering lawsuit said yesterday that Bowdoin, Garner and Busby still have not been served with notice of the RICO lawsuit — despite the issuance of the original summons on Jan. 15 and the follow-up summons on March 18.
Now U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer has granted a delay in the RICO case.
Plaintiffs Mike Collins, Frank Greene and Natures Discount Inc. — all former ASD members — asked for the delay yesterday.
Bank of America, named a non-RICO defendant in the lawsuit and accused of aiding and abetting Bowdoin, Busby and Garner in a fraud scheme, joined in the plaintiffs’ motion.
The Plaintiffs now have until April 30 to respond to a BOA motion to be dismissed as a defendant, and BOA has until May 20 to respond to the plaintiffs’ argument against the dismissal.
Why Bowdoin, Garner and Busby have not been served more than two and one-half months after the filing of the lawsuit is unclear.
Also unclear are the date upon which the Bowdoin video for Paperless Access was recorded and the location at which the video was recorded.
Some rank-and-file ASD members were outraged that Bowdoin was pitching another surf. They also were angry that Bowdoin had transferred the ASD database to Paperless Access, which gave the company access to private information.
The first explanation for the video removal appeared yesterday, several days after the video disappeared from the Paperless Access website. A Mod at Surf’s Up, a Pro-ASD forum that received ASD’s official endorsement as an ASD infomation source in November, reported that Bowdoin asked Paperless Access to remove the video because the firm had “not accurately presented†its program to Bowdoin.
Surf’s Up did not explain how the company misrepresented itself to Bowdoin.
Also left up in the air were questions about why Bowdoin sent an email broadcast yesterday for Paperless Access after apparently deciding days ago that the firm had misrepresented itself and asking for the video to be removed.
Bowdoin has not announced to members — through Surf’s Up or in a conference call — why he has not responded to the RICO complaint.
The Paperless Access video starring ASD President Andy Bowdoin went missing because the company misrepresented itself to Bowdoin, according to a Mod at the Pro-ASD Surf's Up forum.
Upstart surfing company Paperless Access “was not accurately presented” to Andy Bowdoin, who made the decision to ask the company to remove a video that starred Bowdoin, a Mod at the Pro-ASD Surf’s Up forum reported tonight.
The Mod said Paperless Access had been banned as a topic for forum discussion, advising members that, if they wanted to talk about it, to “please start a group in the Business Center!”
With those words, Surf’s Up closed the thread to discussion. The forum had deleted at least three previous threads about Paperless Access and the Bowdoin video in recent days.
Many ASD members expressed outrage after Bowdoin appeared in the video. Tonight members were questioning why Bowdoin sent a broadcast email for Paperless Access today, after declaring it did not accurately represent itself to him and deciding to ask the company to remove the video.
Bowdoin, whom lawyers said today had managed for more than two months to avoid being served a lawsuit accusing him of racketeering, enraged some ASD members by appearing in the video.
He pitched Paperless Access as a way ASD members could recapture money seized by the U.S. Secret Service last year amid allegations of wire fraud, money-laundering and operating a $100 million Ponzi scheme.
A Blog reader, “Joe,” reported this evening that Paperless Access is registered as a Wyoming corporation. We confirmed the registration through the state database.
“Joe” also reported that the company appears to be trading on Ponzi pain, saying it had positioned itself as an outlet for people who “had income seized by the government for buying advertising” or people who know people who’ve had income seized by the government.
Paperless Access even has an acronym for seized money: LAL, which stands for “Legal Advertising Losses.”
At the same time, “Joe” said he visited the site and found that seven out of 25 sites he viewed in the advertising rotator were not compliant with the Paperless Access Terms of Service. This computes to a noncompliance rate of 28 percent.
Plenty of surfs have failed in recent weeks and months, including Aggero Investment, Premium Ads Club, MegaLido, Frogress, Daily Profit Pond and others.
Promoters pitched some of the failed surfs as a remedy for ASD’s woes.
Surf’s Up did not explain how Paperless Access had misrepresented itself to Bowdoin. The video was pulled a few days ago.
We’re about to engage in some speculation on the AdSurfDaily case — and we’ll readily concede it’s exactly that: speculation. None of this should be taken as high truth or an assertion we are “right.” It should be taken as an exercise in critical reasoning.
This is a long post. Care to come along for a ride whose purpose is to explore possibilities?
The first thing you’ll need to do is suspend your disbelief and accept the premise that AdSurfDaily Inc. actually is capable of telling the truth — perhaps not the whole truth, but something that may amount to a convenient truth. This will be a leap for many of our readers, but if you want to accompany us on this ride you’ll have to willing to make this leap.
One of the reasons this requires a leap is because ASD President Andy Bowdoin’s words and actions strain credulity virtually across the board. After insisting for months ASD was perfectly legal, he now says it was illegal — but that ASD was denied “fair notice” of its illegal business practices.
At the moment, Bowdoin is leading yet another charge to have ASD members pummel the government with letters of support for a business he concedes is illegal. Bowdoin also encouraged members to contact talk-show host Glenn Beck.
Earlier he filed a petition for emergency relief that asked the government to return seized funds, saying the company couldn’t pay its rent or hosting bills, but didn’t mention ASD had more than $1 million parked offshore in Antigua. Only after prosecutors revealed the existence of the Antigua money did Bowdoin acknowledge it to members.
A few months after Bowdoin’s Antigua tie was exposed, the banking system on the Caribbean island nation was endangered with the exposure of the alleged Allen Stanford Ponzi scheme. The crisis rippled across the Caribbean and into Central and South America.
Back when Bowdoin still was saying ASD was legal, he demanded an evidentiary hearing to make the company’s case — and then took the 5th. Meanwhile, ASD’s fingerprints also are all over the AdViewGlobal autosurf, which recently announced its bank account had been suspended and yet extended a 200 percent, matching-bonus program — all while it was having trouble processing cash-out requests.
Bowdoin’s stepson is an AVG trustee. The company, which purported to be offshore, came to life after the ASD seizure. AVG employed former ASD employees and used the ASD webroom. A graphic showing AVG’s street address as the same street address ASD used appeared in the webroom. It was removed after Web reporters pointed it out. Incredibly, AVG insisted there were no ASD ties. Equally incredibly, the person making the announcement was a former ASD employee.
AVG claimed to be headquartered in Uruguay. Its servers resolved to Panama, one of the countries affected by the alleged Stanford Ponzi scheme.
Bowdoin recently appeared in a video — now taken offline — for Paperless Access, a new surf company. He said the company could help ASD members recapture money seized by the government. He did not identify the owners of Paperless Access. Nor did he explain how the company was legal and able to comply with securities laws — while not operating as a Ponzi scheme.
The Issue
Assertions have been made that the U.S. Secret Service mistakenly left behind “several piles” of undeposited cashier’s checks at ASD headquarters during the August raid last year. Upon recognizing this after the agents left, ASD dutifully notified the Secret Service about the checks. Over a period of days, the Secret Service was said to have accepted some of the checks after being notified by ASD, but not all of them.
Bowdoin’s Take
Our source for this claim is none other than Andy Bowdoin himself. Here is what he said during a conference call last summer (italics and bold emphasis added):
“Now, to show how inefficient they were in doing their search at the office, they overlooked several piles of cashier’s checks,” Bowdoin said of the Secret Service, according to a transcript of his remarks during an Aug. 12 conference call. ASD members circulated the transcript.
“There was one that was made out for several hundred thousand dollars. Federal agents were present at the bank, and one of our people turned them in and said, ‘Here, you overlooked these.’ They went ahead and made a deposit so that they could seize that money,” Bowdoin continued.
“The next day [employees] found a little over a million dollars in checks that [the Secret Service] had missed. And they took them to the Secret Service office in Tallahassee and gave that to them. Monday, back in the office, they found a few more checks at the office totaling about $40 thousand to $50 thousand. They took those to the Secret Service office in Tallahassee, and they said they didn’t want any more money. They said to send it back to the members.
“Now, why didn’t they send all the cashier’s checks back that they took, back to the members? Why didn’t they do that, if they were looking out for the people? If they had been concerned about the people, they would have. The government has done a great injustice to these people by taking those cashier’s checks and cashing those checks into the U.S. Treasury.”
Bowdoin’s assertion that checks the Secret Service missed during the raid kept popping up over a period of days after the raid may be important.
Golden Panda
There also have been assertions that not all checks sent to Golden Panda Ad Builder made their way into government accounts for later use in a restitution fund for victims. Bob Guenther, for example, claims that about $1.5 million was returned to Golden Panda members, in part through his efforts.
Among the people to whom money was returned were Joe Shoop, an ASD promoter; an unnamed “high-profile Dallas Cowboy executive”; and retired and active-duty police officers in Texas and California, Guenther said.
Who recruited the members into Golden Panda is unclear. Guenther said the government should have returned all seized checks to ASD and Golden Panda members.
The Exercise In Critical Reasoning
What could the claim that the Secret Service mistakenly left behind “several piles” of checks mean?
Well, it could mean the Secret Service actually did mistakenly leave behind the checks and decided to accept some of them but not all of them them after being notified by ASD. There could be sensible, logical reasons completely consistent with the aims of law enforcement for not accepting all of the checks.
Not accepting all of the checks also could be a bureaucratic blunder.
We highly doubt the Secret Service mistakenly left behind “several piles” of checks — as Bowdoin claimed — at ASD headquarters, but concede it’s possible. It’s also possible that ASD was telling the truth when it said it notified the agency about the checks and that the Secret Service eventually told ASD it didn’t want any more checks — what Bowdoin and others have painted as investigative/administrative incompetence.
But what if it wasn’t an investigative/administrative error at all? What if the Secret Service made a tactical decision to leave a limited number of checks in the former flower shop that once housed ASD to see what would happen after agents left?
Such an approach could lead to clues that would enable the government to better fund a restitution account for victims.
In our view, no private citizen had any business working as an intermediary or third-party collector to gather money sent to ASD or Golden Panda. We’re not aware of any assertions that a third party collected money from ASD, but we are aware of a report that at least one ASD downline sponsor was pressured by a third party to return money the sponsor accepted directly from a recruit to pay for ASD “advertising.”
At the same time, we are aware of assertions that money was collected by a third party or parties and was returned to Golden Panda members.
The return of the money could have affected the government investigation and hindered its efforts to create the biggest resitution pool possible.
This is a money case. One of the ways to solve a money case is to follow the money. Even if the Secret Service mistakenly left the checks behind at ASD, not accepting some of the checks later might have created an opportunity for it to follow the money and produce new leads.
Now, understand: We have no insider’s knowledge from investigators — and, as noted above, this column is engaging in speculation. But what if the Secret Service, say, wasn’t satisfied at the time of the raid that it had identified all of ASD’s financial conduits?
It might make sense to leave some checks behind and then follow those checks if and when ASD acted on them. If higher crimes were suspected, leaving some money behind might help expose the tentacles of a criminal enterprise and lead to resources that could be used for victim compensation.
The same thing could be said about checks delivered to Golden Panda in Georgia. It is possible that the Secret Service wasn’t certain that it had located all of Golden Panda’s financial conduits and permitted Golden Panda to exercise some control so agents later could follow the money.
Want to add another layer?
What if ASD had what amounts to a banking slush fund set up offshore (or domestically) and kept uncashed checks in a secret domestic location, which is to say not at the headquarters building that was searched?
Are you ready to say for certain that ASD kept all undeposited checks at its headquarters? Are you ready to say for certain that the Secret Service missed “several piles” of checks when the man making the claim is a known fraudster who wouldn’t take the witness stand at his own evidentiary hearing?
What if ASD didn’t have an offshore or domestic slush fund but was in the process of setting one up, perhaps contemplating that it could fund the account with some of the undeposited checks? It would make sense for ASD to stash some checks outside the headquarters building until they could be used to fund the secret account.
Are you ready to rule that out?
And what if, after the raid, ASD considered the dramatic criminal consequences of such deception, and then created a cover story that the agents had left behind “several piles” of checks during their search?
One way to explain the sudden appearance of checks that had been stashed is to say the Secret Service missed them during the headquarters raid.
What if an ASD insider came to the building late at night — hours after the raid, while people were sleeping — and planted stashed checks inside for employees to find in a bid to create the appearance agents had done sloppy work in missing “piles” of checks?
What if ASD feared the Secret Service might suspect ASD had a slush fund offshore or elsewhere and knew any stashed checks effectively had become worthless? In other words, the mere act of depositing them in the slush fund would demonstrate the criminality. Holding onto checks that had been stashed could lead to uncomfortable questions from customers. So could depositing them in a secret bank.
ASD indeed could have notified the Secret Service about checks the company still had in its possession. It could have created a cover story that agents had “missed” the checks, when agents hadn’t missed them at all because they were not at the locations searched at the time of the search.
Mind you, we are not saying ASD created a cover story. What we’re saying is that it is common for criminals to create cover stories and for co-conspirators to agree to the stories. If ASD kept checks at a secret location, those checks would pose a problem that ASD could “solve” with a cover story that agents had missed “several piles” of checks.
An Ongoing Probe
The ASD case was (and is) an investigation by the Secret Service, the IRS and perhaps other law-enforcement agencies. It was (and is) an ongoing conspiracy investigation, and no agency involved is about to share the prongs of their investigative techniques and prosecution strategy.
This is why any efforts from individuals and groups post-seizure to force, say, Golden Panda to return funds to specific individuals very well could be problematic. It’s the prosecution’s case.The prosecution is empowered to investigate and prosecute the case without interference. Its theory of the case is that the assets of ASD and Golden Panda are the proceeds of a criminal enterprise and that a conspiracy existed.
For the purposes of this prosecution, the Feds effectively view ASD and Golden Panda as one in the same because of their native ties. The assets were seized in an “all funds” forfeiture complaint. It is highly possible that prosecutors view the individual entities as components of a larger racketeering and money-laundering enterprise.
Racketeering. Money-laundering. Wire fraud. Mail fraud. Perhaps other types of criminal fraud.
If you’ve been paying attention, you know that private litigants have sued ASD President Andy Bowdoin, ASD attorney Robert Garner and Golden Panda President Clarence Busby in a civil RICO complaint. The theory is that businesses and individuals known and unknown were engaged in a racketeering enterprise.
The pool of money to compensate victims is now smaller because of private interventions by individuals and a group during an active investigation by authorities.
Money has been returned to private individuals by private individuals during a public investigation. We have seen no evidence that any person who intervened to return funds on behalf of another individual did so with the authority, support and encouragement of law enforcement.
We believe it best to let the prosecution handle its case as it sees fit. Freelancing by private individuals to return money never should have been part of this mix. The act alone created potential injustice for ASD and Golden Panda victims. Even before the forfeiture case has been litigated to conclusion, some victims have been made “whole” and have not been subjected to the haircut everyone else stands to get.
The money in the ASD and Golden Panda case was under arrest. Prosecutors have the authority to claw back all refunds that occurred as the result of the actions of an intermediary. At the same time, prosecutors can claw back money the Feds might have been monitoring or strategically permitting to enter the banking system to see where it eventually would land.
UPDATED 10:42 P.M. EDT (March 30, U.S.A.) AdSurfDaily President Andy Bowdoin held matching-bonus “rallies” in U.S. cities, walking away with millions of dollars and setting the stage for the government seizure of the funds last August.
AdViewGlobal (AVG), a surf with close ties to Bowdoin and ASD, hasn’t conducted rallies to date. But the company has been pitching preposterous bonuses virtually nonstop and now is featuring a 200-percent, matching-bonus program — for purchasers and their upline sponsors.
Here’s how one AVG promoter pitched the AVG offer (italics and emphasis added).
Anyone who purchases from $500 (or more) in advertising
will receive a 200% match as will their sponsor.
That means $500 turns into $1500 instantly!
$1000 turns into $3,000 instantly!
$2500 turns into $7,5000 instantly!
$5000 turns into $15,000 instantly!
Let me give you a realistic example of what could be your
reality almost immediately…
Let’s assume you purchase $5000 in Ad Impressions and get
credit for $15,000 with the 200% match.
Let’s also assume the average earnings per day on that
$15,000 balance is only 2/3 of 1%, or .0075%.
That’s an instant cash flow of $112 per day…
That’s over $3,000 per month without having to sponsor a
single person[]!
Never mind that two-thirds of 1 percent is 0.666666667 percent, not .0075 percent as the promoter asserted. And never mind that the promoter used a higher figure (0.75 percent) to arrive at the $112 daily earnings claim, instead of the lower figure (0.666666667, which would have kept earnings slightly under $100 per day, thus dulling the psychology of the pitch).
No, the important thing here — as evidenced in the email — was to sell the money angle, not the advertising angle — and that’s exactly what got ASD in trouble. (That and plenty more, too.)
Even though AVG’s problems were known before the email was sent, the promoter choose to ignore them.
Accompanying AVG’s bonus program was the sudden resignation of Gary Talbert, AVG’s chief executive officer and a former ASD executive, last week. The resignation was announced Friday, March 20.
On Monday, March 23, AVG announced its bank account had been suspended. Instead of ending the matching-bonus program, the company extended it. Instead of communicating with members clearly, AVG has been issuing vague and ambiguous announcements.
AVG now says it is having trouble meeting cash-out requests, blaming the problem on growing pains.
ASD also blamed its problems on growing pains and, like AVG, lost one of its bank accounts in the weeks prior to the seizure.
Here is what AVG members are being told by the company (italics added):
All pending Cash Outs previously requested through eWalletplus will be processed and completed by Wednesday, April 2nd, 2009.
AVGA has made arrangements for Cash Out requests be settled by Solid Trust Pay. Monies are being deposited to cover all Cash Outs; any delay in the process is due to the large number of Cash Out requests and perhaps an overload of the system. We can assure the membership that all Cash Outs requested through Solid Trust Pay will be honored and processed with all expediency.
All start-up companies encounter challenges on the road to becoming successful. This is especially true when that company has an innovative and creative concept. Ad View Global Association is not your ordinary Association. Companies and Association with new ideas to the market usually encounter resistance from the status quo. Do you imagine how many blacksmiths where put out of business when a small innovative and creative company called Ford rolled out its first car?
AVGA Management faces challenges everyday especially in this phase of our growth but we are determined to make this Association the largest Internet advertising entity in the world. This will take some time but it will happen. We will encounter bumps along the way but with the level of commitment that we have personally witnessed by talking to some of you, there is nothing we can not accomplish as a team.
UPDATED 12:29 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.) The controversial video from upstart surf company Paperless Access starring Andy Bowdoin went missing after enraging ASD Members, and now the firm is insulting members in brand-new ways.
In yet another impossibly butchered communication from the surf world, Paperless Access said it wanted ASD’s top downline sponsors to make back money lost in ASD, insisting that they were under no pressure to enroll.
Here is part of a mixed message Paperless Access registrants received (emphasis added):
“With this opportunity and our help, you can personally earn thousands of dollars per month. You owe it to yourself and your downline to register for one of the Webinars below. There are only 18 top leadership spots available on a first come first serve basis. If you don’t want to participate, that is fine and there is no pressure. We are only going to work with those Leaders that want to help their downline be successful. There are hundreds of leaders that are waiting to take your place but we want to work with you.”
Why those “hundreds of leaders” purportedly waiting to register hadn’t actually registered wasn’t made clear. Also unclear was why Paperless Access chose to say there was “no pressure,” and then instantly began applying pressure. Why Paperless Access would suggest people who didn’t want to bother with building a downline or working to build an existing downline were unwelcome to register for the prelaunch also wasn’t clear.
The Paperless Access message appears to have been directed only to top recruiters, not rank-and-file ASD members, some of whom lost tens of thousands of dollars by believing in ASD and representations made by their upline sponsors.
Here is another part of a message recruiters received from Paperless Access (Italics added):
You have been chosen for this invitation to begin the journey with us to reconstitute the member network. You have demonstrated leadership in the creation of a group of at least 15 personally sponsored individuals and a total group size of more than 1,000 members. Your sponsor may not have been invited if your group is 90% of the total in your sponsor’s group. The information shared in this Private Launch is for your eyes only so that we can keep the lines of sponsorship intact for your maximum financial benefit.
Two separate messages appear to have gone out, according to “Joe,” a former ASD member.
“I used my ASD email address to test if they indeed did have the ASD database and sure enough they do,” Joe said. “I think this page is customized based on the # of referrals I had . . . in ASD, as I was able to retrieve another version which talks about leadership positions. The webpage must have backend code which checks the database for # of referrals and then based on a certain level, serves up one of these 2 pages.”
Here is what “Joe” said he received, with the URLs listed (italics added):
Welcome to the Private Launch for Paperless Access, Inc., where you earn for viewing advertising for only 10 minutes per day. You have been chosen for this invitation to begin the journey with us to reconstitute the member network.
The goal of Paperless Access is to recreate the old network line of sponsorships and provide an opportunity for the members that lost money to earn income again.
Our plan is simple and we are not selling advertising, or investments, or offering rebates to members. We are offering five ways to earn compensation and two of them are:
1. Viewing advertising and sharing in the Sales Revenue from Advertising Sales
2. Viewing advertising and sharing in Network Bonus Revenue generated from Business Builder Partners.
We have an Introduction Webinar just for you. Please choose one of the times below to see and learn all about Paperless Access and what Paperless Access has to offer to you.
Let’s RIDE THE WAVE to success
Please click on one of the following webinars to register: (All Times Eastern)
Each of the webinars are the same. Please only register once
to help us make room for everyone.
Welcome to the Private Launch for Paperless Access, Inc.
You have been chosen for this invitation to begin the journey with us to reconstitute the member network. You have demonstrated leadership in the creation of a group of at least 15 personally sponsored individuals and a total group size of more than 1,000 members. Your sponsor may not have been invited if your group is 90% of the total in your sponsor’s group. The information shared in this Private Launch is for your eyes only so that we can keep the lines of sponsorship intact for your maximum financial benefit.
Our goal is to recreate the old network line of sponsorships and provide continuing opportunities for the members, that lost money, to earn that money back. Even though you may not have lost money, there will be many in your group that will join to recoup their money.
This is your opportunity to start with Paperless Access and help your group in this effort. We are looking for the first 18 Leaders that will work with us to actively contact their members and help them earn back their losses. We only sent out 60 invitations.
Our plan is simple – putting more money back into the hands of Viewers. We are not selling “advertisingâ€, or investments, or offering rebates to the Viewers. We are presently offering five+ ways to earn money – three of which are:
1. Viewing advertising and sharing in the Sales Revenue from Outside Advertising Sales
2. Viewing advertising and sharing in the Network Bonus Revenue generated from Business Building programs
3. Viewing advertising to receive the Monthly Reward Bonus for participation in the Viewer Network
Sales Revenue will only go so far in generating the millions of dollars required to recoup legal losses. We need something bigger and more powerful and something we can plug the entire network into within 30 to 60 days. We found the first of many Business Building opportunities which will be introduced this evening.
With this opportunity and our help, you can personally earn thousands of dollars per month. You owe it to yourself and your downline to register for one of the Webinars below. There are only 18 top leadership spots available on a first come first serve basis. If you don’t want to participate, that is fine and there is no pressure. We are only going to work with those Leaders that want to help their downline be successful. There are hundreds of leaders that are waiting to take your place but we want to work with you. The first step is to register for the Webinar below. At the conclusion of the Webinar there will be a website address and phone numbers to get more information and get started. Welcome to a whole new beginning!
Please click on one of the following webinars to register: (All Times Pacific)
Webinar being rescheduled.
New times will be available soon.
UPDATED 12:51 A.M. EDT (March 27, U.S.A.) As first reported on this Blog, ASD President Andy Bowdoin’s paid attorneys never formally withdrew from the federal forfeiture case — not even after Bowdoin said he had fired them and was proceeding as his own attorney.
Now Judge Rosemary Collyer has issued an order to the attorneys to advise Bowdoin on critical legal matters and file notice with the court to make their intentions a matter of record.
“No later than April 9, 2009, current counsel for Claimants, Mr. Fayad and Mr. Goodman, shall file with the Court a notice indicating (a) whether they intend to continue their representation of the Claimants, including Mr. Bowdoin; or (b) whether they will seek to withdraw from the case;
“[I]f counsel seek to withdraw from the case, they shall file a motion to withdraw no later than April 9, 2009, and they shall indicate whether they have explained to Mr. Bowdoin that while he may represent himself in this matter, the corporations may not proceed pro se,” Collyer ordered.
One way to view the order is as a warning to Bowdoin that he may be straying into legal territory that does not serve his interests.
Collyer noted that different rules are in place, depending on whether an individual or a corporation was involved in litigation.
Two of the three parties filing claims to seized proceeds — AdSurfDaily Inc. and Bowdoin/Harris Enterprises Inc. — are corporate entities.
“[A] corporation cannot proceed pro se,” Collyer wrote, providing a case-law citation: Bristol Petroleum Corp. v. Harris, 901 F.2d 165, 166 n.1 (D.C. Cir. 1990).
Making the matter even more complex is that prosecutors alleged in a separate forfeiture complaint filed in December that Bowdoin/Harris was set up to permit Bowdoin and his wife to hide assets.
“Thomas [Andy] and Faye Bowdoin created Bowdoin/Harris Enterprises, Inc., and used it to purchase real properties and other assets, believing that using this structure would help to conceal from the government their expenditures and assets they purchased,” prosecutors said in December.
Collyer hinted at potentially difficult legal challenges ahead for Bowdoin. Indeed, personal and corporate claims were made to some assets — and Bowdoin will not be permitted to proceed pro se on corporate claims.
“Bowdoin/Harris Enterprises, Inc. submitted a verified claim to the real 1 property in Quincy, Florida; ASD submitted a claim to the funds held in the Bank of America accounts; and Mr. Bowdoin also submitted a claim to the funds held in the Bank of America accounts, declaring that the accounts were opened in his name but were owned by ASD and were treated as corporate assets,” Collyer wrote.
These are complex legal issues, ones that challenge even top attorneys and legal scholars. Rarely are such issues associated with pro se litigants. In effect, Collyer has ordered Michael Fayad and Jonathan Goodman to instruct Bowdoin on critical points of law before leaving the case.
Earlier this month, Bowdoin filed a pro se motion in which he acknowledged ASD was operating illegally — something the government has said all along — but insisted the government denied him “fair notice” that ASD was behaving illegally.
Prosecutors very well may view Bowdoin’s pro se public filing as a signed confession — and it’s possible that the filing itself could be used if a criminal prosecution of Bowdoin evolves.
While Fayad and Goodman formally were acting as Bowdoin’s paid attorneys, they filed notice with the court that Bowdoin would not testify at a Sept. 30-Oct. 1 evidentiary hearing under his 5th Amendment right not to incriminate himself.
But Bowdoin appears to have done exactly that — while also potentially incriminating others — in pro se pleadings his paid counsel had nothing to do with.
Some of the legal notions in pro se pleadings are difficult — if not close to impossible — for prosecutors and judges to reconcile. Courts and prosecutors sometimes have to construe meanings because the motions are vague or impossibly off-point.
UPDATE 11:16 A.M. EDT (March 26, U.S.A. See bottom of post and see Comments.) A video starring Andy Bowdoin that enraged some members of AdSurfDaily has been removed from its sponsor’s site.
The video formerly was at this URL. No explanation for the removal appears at the site. Bowdoin pitched a new surf site called Paperless Access in the video.
PaperlessAccess, Bowdoin said, was a way members could recapture funds federal agents seized in August as part of the ASD Ponzi scheme investigation. Bowdoin insisted he was not involved with the Paperless Access business.
But Bowdoin did not name the company owners in his video pitch. Nor did he say where the company was located.
Jaws dropped with Bowdoin’s video appearance. He did not describe how Paperless Access was legal, making only the vague claim that the company employed a business model “based solely on outside revenue.â€
Just days prior to the release of the video, Bowdoin acknowledged in court filings that ASD was operating illegally when federal agents seized tens of millions of dollars last summer. Archived Web files showed that Paperless Access was using a template identical in places to a template ASD had used in 2007.
The Pro-ASD Surf’s Up forum has deleted at least two threads critical of Bowdoin’s appearance in the Paperless Access video. Prior to the deletions, some members expressed shock and horror that Bowdoin would appear in a video to promote a surf site. Some were equally horrified that a surf site would use Bowdoin as a spokesman, given ASD’s troubles and the possibility of a criminal indictment against Bowdoin.
Bowdoin appears to be losing credibility rapidly among people who formerly were supporters.
ADViewGlobal (AVG), another surf site with close ties to ASD, announced Monday that its bank account had been “suspended.”
UPDATE: A discussion thread critical of Bowdoin started by a Surf’s Up member late yesterday has been deleted. The member said Bowdoin’s video appearance was telling and that he had come to believe ASD was a scam and that he’d been taken in by a scammer. In a bitterly sarcastic response to the poster, a Bowdoin apologist said she was certain the poster and the government now would get along nicely. But the poster also had supporters in the thread. This is at least the third time Surf’s Up has deleted a thread critical of Bowdoin’s Paperless Access video appearance.
UPDATED 2:26 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.) ASD President Andy Bowdoin voluntarily answered questions during a noncustodial interview with Secret Service agents on Aug. 5, 2008, federal prosecutors said in a court filing today.
In fact, prosecutors said, Bowdoin was “quite voluble, and voluntarily so.” The interview occurred while agents were executing a search warrant of Bowdoin’s home.
“Voluble” means talkative.
Bowdoin, acting as his own attorney, filed a motion to exclude and suppress evidence last month. The prosecution responded to it in today’s filing.
In his pro se motion, prosecutors said, Bowdoin inexplicably argued that “any information or evidence given by [him] constituted an unreasonable search.”
Prosecutors said Bowdoin never was in custody. They acknowledged that he initially raised a concern about talking about ASD and Golden Panda Ad Builder with the agents, but quickly changed his mind.
“Although Mr. Bowdoin initially said that he did not want to discuss the ASD and GP Operations without a lawyer present, he quickly changed his mind, agreeing to speak with the agents while they were there,” prosecutors said. “He certainly never declined to answer any of the federal agents’ questions, and Mr. Bowdoin never said he only would answer questions if he could have an attorney present during the interview.”
Judge Rosemary Collyer should reject Bowdoin’s motion to suppress because his claims are “meritless,” prosecutors said.
“Mr. Bowdoin asserts that he never received what are colloquially known as ‘Miranda warnings,’ and claims, therefore, that his statements should be excluded from evidence in this case,” prosecutors said. “Mr. Bowdoin’s argument has no merit because he was not in custody when he spoke to the federal agents at his home on August 5, 2008.”
Contrary to Bowdoin’s claim that he currently is a “defendant,” prosecutors pointedly said Bowdoin is “not now a defendant.”
Bowdoin also argued bad case law in his motion to suppress, prosecutors said.
AdViewGlobal (AVG), which purports to be a professional advertising company operating as a private association headquartered offshore, appears to have mangled an announcement that its bank account was “suspended.”
The suspension announcement was made Monday, March 23. On Friday, March 20, AVG members said Chief Executive Officer Gary Talbert had resigned but would continue with the company as an accountant.
Ismeal Santiago was identified as AVG’s new chief executive officer and was reported to be moving to Uruguay because “all officers should live offshore.”
Members have not been told if the banking suspension occurred this week or last week. Nor have they been told if Talbert’s sudden resignation last week had anything to do with AVG’s banking problem.
Adding to the confusion were the lack of a definition for the word “suspended” and a clear explanation on what would happen to funds AVG members wired into the suspended account.
AVG did not name the bank in its announcement about the suspension. Nor did it say whether the bank was in the United States or offshore. At the same time, it did not say whether funds remained in the suspended account or if the funds were removed prior to the suspension.
Nor did AVG identify the person notified about the suspension or the party who told the company about it. Given the lack of clarity over the banking issue, questions are being raised about whether the account was seized as part of a law-enforcement investigation.
No AVG executive or employee signed the suspension announcement. It was signed “The AVG Management Team.â€
AdSurfDaily Inc., a Florida company with close AVG ties, had its bank accounts seized by the U.S. Secret Service on Friday, Aug. 1, 2008. Federal prosecutors said ASD was engaging in wire fraud and money-laundering, and also running a $100 million Ponzi scheme.
Gary Talbert was a former ASD executive. George Harris, the stepson of ASD President Andy Bowdoin, was listed as an AVG trustee.
In its announcement about the suspension, AVG blamed members — in the very first sentence — for the suspension.
“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,” the company said.
AVG recently has been promoting a 200-percent, matching-bonus program. Yesterday the promotion was extended through April 3, despite the banking suspension and lack of clarity on the issue.
Today AVG members were told about a “great” conference call AVG will hold tomorrow. Members were encouraged to invite guests, but also told to explain to guests that they would have to leave the call when requested.
Members were given a script on how to address prospective call guests (italics added):
“Important: When inviting guests to Thursday’s call you must use the following wording to keep us in compliance with the rules of our association.
‘AVGA is a Private Membership Association. I would like to invite you to a private conference call Thursday Night so you can listen to some of the exciting benefits our members enjoy. You’ll find out how our members are making themselves recession proof with our dynamic money making program.’”
The script did not identify AVG as an “advertising” service. Rather, it identified the company as a “dynamic money-making program.” Federal prosecutors said ASD also stressed money-making elements over advertising benefits.
AVG then instructed members that guests would have to exit the line when private association business was being discussed (italics added).
“When you have a guest on the line and your name is called you & your guest will qualify to win page impressions. In order to win Page Impressions you must have a guest on the call. Be sure to provide your AVGA enrollment link to each of your invited guests.
“Once the opportunity portion of the call is completed we will have to ask all Guests to exit the call. This is very important and we ask that you inform your Guests that once the Page Impression Give Away is completed that they will be asked to hang up.
“Let your Guest know that this is standard protocol.”
