James Clark Howard: Source: Boca Raton Police Department
UPDATED 2:25 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.) In a complex case unfolding in Florida, the SEC has filed fraud charges against two companies that allegedly sold unregistered securities and conducted a $27.5 million “investment scheme” involving “purported commodities contracts.” A receiver has been appointed to marshal the assets of the murky businesses, which are known as Commodities Online LLC and Commodities Online Management LLC.
Millions of dollars generated in the scheme were moved to Mexico and the Netherlands even as the SEC was issuing subpoenas in the case last month, according to court filings. The agency described the transactions as “extremely suspicious.”
Although the SEC successfully halted the alleged Commodities Online scheme on April 1, the only defendants named to date are the companies themselves. The agency described the individuals presiding over the scheme — a former managing member and a vice president — as convicted criminals.
One of the individuals, according to the SEC, was a “convicted felon who was, in March 2010, charged with grand theft and organized scheme to defraud in conjunction with an unrelated Ponzi investment scheme.”
The other, according to the SEC, was an individual who “pled guilty to bank fraud and narcotics charges in 2005 and to transmitting a threat to injure charge in 2007.”
The PP Blog confirmed that, on March 5, 2010, the Boca Raton Police Department arrested James Clark Howard, who is listed as a “managing member” of Commodities Online LLC in documents filed with the Florida Department of State on Jan. 26, 2010.
Howard was charged with grand theft and organized scheme to defraud in a Ponzi case that may involve as many as five companies and their associates acting in concert to scam investors. Boca Raton authorities said the Florida Office of Financial Regulation also was conducting an investigation.
On Feb. 11, 2011, Louis Gallo was identified as a manager of Commodities Online Management LLC in records filed with the Florida Department of State. The Sun Sentinel newspaper reported that Gallo is “on probation for bank fraud and a cocaine charge out of New Jersey federal court.”
AdSurfDaily Member And Surf’s Up Mod Emerges As Figure In New Florida Flap
Other records show that, on Sept. 15, 2010, a Nevada-based company that listed former AdSurfDaily member and Surf’s Up moderator Terralynn Hoy as a “director” sued Howard and others in federal court in Fort Lauderdale. The Nevada company — SSH2 Acquisitions Inc. — alleged that Howard and the others were running a Ponzi scheme into which SSH2 had plowed $39 million.
Hoy, who has not been accused of wrongdoing, was a member of Florida-based AdSurfDaily, which the U.S. Secret Service said in August 2008 was conducting an international Ponzi scheme involving tens of millions of dollars. After the ASD seizure, Hoy became a moderator at the pro-ASD “Surf’s Up” forum, which mysteriously vanished in January 2010 after cheerleading nonstop for ASD President Andy Bowdoin for more than a year.
Bowdoin was the target of a federal criminal probe the entire time Surf’s Up operated, according to court filings. In November 2008, just days after a key court ruling went against ASD, the firm endorsed Surf’s Up as its mouthpiece.
By February 2009, Hoy became a conference-call host and moderator of a now-defunct forum that promoted the now-defunct AdViewGlobal (AVG) autosurf. AVG, which had close ties to ASD, launched in the aftermath of the federal seizure of more than $80 million in ASD-related assets, the filing of two forfeiture complaints against ASD-related assets and the filing of a civil racketeering lawsuit against Bowdoin.
On June 30, 2009 — one day after Bernard Madoff was sentenced to 150 years in federal prison for his colossal Ponzi scheme — lawyers suing Bowdoin for racketeering alleged that AVG was an extension of ASD. In September 2009, federal prosecutors made a veiled reference to AVG in court filings in the ASD case.
AVG disappeared in June 2009, about a month after the grand jury that ultimately indicted Bowdoin for wire fraud, securities fraud and selling unregistered securities as investment contracts began to meet. The indictment against Bowdoin was unsealed in November 2010, and Bowdoin was arrested in Florida on Dec. 1, 2010.
Surf’s Up was known for unapologetic, unabashed cheerleading for Bowdoin, whom prosecutors said had swindled investors in Alabama in a previous securities caper during the 1990s. Clarence Busby, an alleged business partner of Bowdoin and the operator of the Golden Panda Ad Builder autosurf, swindled investors in three prime-bank schemes in the 1990s, according to the SEC.
More than $14 million linked to Golden Panda was seized as part of the ASD case — and yet the cheerleading for Bowdoin continued on Surf’s Up. The forum labeled ASD pro-se litigant Curtis Richmond a “hero” after he accused the judge and prosecutors of crimes in 2009.
Richmond was associated with a Utah “Indian” tribe a federal judge in a separate case ruled a “complete sham” after it filed enormous judgments against public officials in performance of their duties. Regardless, the cheerleading on Surf’s Up continued — even after it was revealed that Richmond had a contempt-of-court conviction for threatening federal judges and had been sued successfully under the federal racketeering statute by the Utah public officials and was ordered to pay nearly $110,000 in penalties and damages.
Federal prosecutors now say they have linked ASD to E-Bullion, a shuttered California payment processor whose operator — James Fayed — is accused of arranging the contract murder of his wife, a potential witness against him in a fraud case. E-Bullion has been linked by investigators in the United States and Canada to multiple Ponzi schemes.
SSH2, the company that listed Hoy as a director, alleged in September 2010 that Howard was part of a Ponzi scheme that also involved Patricia Saa, Sutton Capital LLC and Rapallo Investment Group LLC.
Howard had been arrested by the Boca Raton Police Department in March 2010, about six months before SSH2 accused him in the September 2010 lawsuit of operating a Ponzi scheme. In the lawsuit, SSH2 said it had conducted business with the defendants from “early 2009 through March 2010,” and ultimately turned over $39 million.
Howard and the defendants, according to the lawsuit, told SSH2 it was trading in commodities and “would produce profits of 40% per month or more, while not risking any of the invested funds.”
SSH2 did not say in the complaint how it had come to believe that a return of 40 percent a month with no risk was possible. Nor did the company describe its efforts to conduct due diligence on Howard and the other defendants.
Of the $39 million directed at Howard and the other defendants, SSH2 received back approximately $19 million in “fake and fraudulent ‘profits,’” according to the lawsuit.
If SSH2’s assertions that it conducted business with Howard and the others beginning in “early 2009” and expected a return of 40 percent a month are true, it means that the business was being conducted in a period after which both the Bernard Madoff Ponzi scheme and the alleged AdSurfDaily Ponzi schemes were exposed.
Both Madoff and ASD bragged about returns that were far less than the monthly returns allegedly offered by Howard and the other lawsuit defendants.
Madoff’s fraud was exposed in December 2008, about four months after ASD’s alleged fraud was exposed.
And if SSH2’s assertions against Howard and the others are true, it also means the transactions occurred during a period in which Hoy, later to emerge as an SSH2 director, also was moderating forums for ASD and AVG and also was serving as a conference-call host for AVG, which purported to operate from Uruguay and enjoy protection from U.S. regulators because of its purported “private association” structure.
ASD’s Bowdoin initially ceded the money seized by the Secret Service in January 2009, dropping his claims to the cash “with prejudice.” By the end of February 2009, however, Bowdoin sought to reenter the case as a pro se litigant and renew his claim to the money, which totaled about $65.8 million.
Bowdoin’s sudden reappearance in a case he had abandoned coincided with a meeting AVG reportedly conducted with Karl Dahlstrom, a convicted felon. In March 2009 — in a letter posted on Surf’s Up — Bowdoin claimed he had decided to reenter the case after consulting with a “group” of ASD members. Bowdoin did not name the members, but chided federal prosecutors in his letter, writing that his pro se pleadings should “really get their attention.”
For the balance of 2009, Surf’s Up continued to cheerlead for Bowdoin, despite the fact he never told the membership at large about a second forfeiture complaint that had been filed against ASD-connected assets in December 2008. Bowdoin also did not inform ASD members that he had been sued for racketeering and had signed a proffer letter in late 2008 or early 2009 and acknowledged that prosecutors’ material allegations against ASD were all true.
Surf’s Up continued to operate even after prosecutors revealed the existence of the proffer letter. In Bowdoin’s own court pleadings, he had acknowledged he had given information against his interests to prosecutors. Bowdoin said he hoped to work out a deal by which he could avoid prison time, despite the fact prosecutors had alleged he was at the helm of a massive Ponzi scheme.
In October 2008 — at the conclusion of an evidentiary hearing ASD had requested — Surf’s Up conducted an online party for ASD members, complete with images of champagne and fireworks. Members were fed one-sided accounts of what had happened at the hearing, and a federal prosecutor was described derisively as “Gomer Pyle.” ASD’s lawyers were described as the “Perry Mason” team.
A month later — in November 2008 — U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer ruled at ASD had not demonstrated at the hearing that it was a lawful business and not a Ponzi scheme. The AVG forum led by some of the Surf’s Up mods, including Hoy, launched shortly thereafter, and the Surf’s Up forum soldiered on.
AVG was positioned as a way for members to make up their losses in the alleged ASD Ponzi scheme.
Surf’s Up became infamous for deleting comments and information unflattering to Bowdoin. The forum also was used to hatch a rumor that the prosecution secretly had admitted ASD was not a Ponzi scheme but was clinging to the case in a bid to save face.
As time progressed, dozens of pro se litigants attempted to intervene in the ASD case, claiming the government had no “EVIDENCE.” These filings occurred despite the fact that some of the evidence had been a matter of public record since August 2008.
Critics referred to Surf’s Up, whose formal name was the ASD Member Advocates Forum, as the AS[Delusional] forum. Various tortured explanations for Bowdoin’s conduct appeared on the forum, and there were calls for a “militia” to storm Washington, D.C., and for a prosecutor to be placed in a medieval torture rack. Prosecutors and federal agents were derided as “goons” and “Nazis,” and critics were derided as “maggots.”
The SEC’s Case Against Commodities Online
On April 1, the SEC filed an action against Commodities Online that alleged it was selling unregistered securities and operating a commodities fraud that had absorbed at least $27.5 million. Florida attorney David S. Mandel was appointed receiver.
“In connection with the unregistered securities offerings, the Defendants made numerous material misrepresentations and omissions regarding the nature of Commodities Online’s business model and operations, the risks and earnings associated with investing in its securities, and the background of its co-founder and vice-president,” the SEC charged.
“On December 15, 2010, Commodities Online announced on its website that ‘[t]o date, we have 32 contract offerings that have been completed for which our steadfast subscribers have been paid. The dollar total of these contracts is approximately $7.5 million and the payout was in excess of $8.5 million, producing an average earning of over 14.5%.’
“That statement was untrue,” the SEC charged. “There is no evidence to support this amount of investor return. In fact, Commodities Online’s bank records show a net loss for the companies associated with these promised contracts. Further, the company’s records show a net outflow of cash for each of these associated companies.”
By March 14, 2011, the SEC charged, Commodities Online had upped its number of purported successful contracts to 48. That claim also was untrue, the agency charged.
Referring to Howard but not naming him, the SEC said that the company “failed to disclose that in 1997, he was convicted of federal narcotics and firearms felonies and sentenced to 57 months in prison. The Defendants never disclosed his past criminal background to investors either through the Commodities Online website or any other company communication to investors.”
Referring to Gallo but not naming him, the SEC said that, in 2005, he “pled guilty in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey to bank fraud and narcotics charges.
“In 2007, in the same court, he pled guilty to transmitting a threat to injure,” the SEC continued. “He is currently serving a three-year term of supervised release, which expires in July 2011.”
In a separate filing accompanying the complaint filed on April 1, the SEC said that Commodities Online “recently sent approximately $3.8 million to entities and individuals in Mexico and the Netherlands.”
Investigators deemed the transactions “extremely suspicious,” given that the transactions allegedly occurred between March 15, 2001, and March 25, 2011. The SEC said it issued subpoenas to the defendants on March 15, the same day the international transactions began to occur.
Four egg-themed domain names used to drive business to HYIPs that ended in spectacular flameouts and foreshadowed a warning from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) have gone missing.
The domains — including one that redirected to an HYIP site known bizarrely as Cash Tanker, which used an image of Jesus Christ to promote a purported payout of 2 percent a day — first were promoted on the pro-AdSurfDaily Surf’s Up forum by a poster who used the handle “joe” in December 2009.
The egg-themed promo featured a pitch that HYIP participants were wise to spread risk by not keeping all of their eggs in “ONE BASKET.” It also hawked Gold Nugget Invest (7.5 percent a week); Saza Investments (9 percent a week); and Genius Funds (6.5 percent a week).
Despite an active criminal investigation into the business practices of ASD President Andy Bowdoin and alleged co-conspirators — and despite a RICO lawsuit filed by members against Bowdoin and repeated warnings from various regulators about the dangers of HYIPs and autosurfs — the egg-themed promo claimed in all-caps that “I MAKE 2000.00 A WEEK” and directly solicited ASD members to part with their money.
One Surf’s Up member dissed critics of the promo, calling them “dead wrong.”
“I also make a lot of money from those four and your remarks tell me you don’t know anything about them,” the member claimed. “[T]hey are very reputable [companies] who have been around for years….and the money is NOT made from ‘new’ people’s money….google them and look at various forums and see what others have to say about them….I don’t even know Joe, but I can vouch for the programs!”
A series of spectacular collapses that consumed each of the HYIPs then followed over a period of just weeks, demonstrating that spreading risk across multiple HYIPs by putting eggs in multiple HYIP baskets was spectacularly poor advice that had produced a recipe for financial disaster.
In July, FINRA said that Genius Funds cost investors about $400 million. The regulator launched a public-awareness campaign, one component of which was an ad campaign on Google designed to educate and inform the public about HYIP fraud.
“Open the cyber door to HYIPs, and you will find hundreds of HYIP websites vying for investor attention,” FINRA said. “It is a bizarre substratum of the Internet.”
Records show that the government of Belize had issued a warning about Gold Nugget Invest nearly a month before the egg-themed promo had appeared on Surf’s Up and at least two members had vouched for the program.
FINRA also pointed to criminal charges filed by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service in May against Nicholas Smirnow, the alleged operator of an HYIP Ponzi scheme known as Pathway To Prosperity that fleeced more than 40,000 people across the globe out of an estimated $70 million.
Using baffling prose, a purported GNI manager claimed the program ended after it had attempted to gain “a crystal clear vision of our financial vortex” during the fourth quarter of 2009.
After the collapse of the programs in the original egg-themed pitch on Surf’s Up, the domains then were set to redirect to other HYIPs.
Some ASD members later turned their attention to promoting MLM programs such as Narc That Car/Crowd Sourcing International (CSI), Data Network Affiliates (DNA) and MPB Today. CSI and DNA purport to be in the business of paying people to write down the license-plate numbers of cars for entry in a database. MPB Today purports to be in the grocery business.
DNA, which once instructed people of faith that it was their “MORAL OBLIGATION” to hawk a purported mortgage-reduction program offered alongside the purported license-plate program, now appears to have morphed into a program known as One World One Website or “O-WOW.”
An email received by members of the O-WOW program this weekend purported that a man suffering from terminal thyroid cancer had derived benefit from an O-WOW product known as “TurboMune” and that members somehow can earn “24% Annual Interest on their money” by giving it to O-WOW.
If members don’t pay O-WOW before Nov. 30, they’ll earn a lower rate of interest (18 percent), according to an email received by members.
Like DNA, O-WOW is associated with Phil Piccolo. During a radio program in August, Piccolo threatened critics with lawsuits and planted the seed that he could cause critics to experience physical pain. DNA has an “F” rating from the Better Business Bureau. So does CSI. So does United Pro Media, a company formerly operated by MPB Today’s Gary Calhoun.
The now-defunct Surf’s Up forum was AdSurfDaily’s officially endorsed news venue. It became so on Nov. 27, 2008, a little more than a week after a key court ruling went against ASD, a Florida company implicated by the U.S. Secret Service in an alleged $100 million Ponzi scheme. Surf’s Up routinely deleted posts that challenged ASD President Andy Bowdoin, and routinely suppressed information unfavorable to ASD.
Surf’s Up was known for conflating fantastic realities to accommodate unpleasant fact sets. Among the unanswered questions as the ASD investigation proceeds is whether the forum and some of its members were/are engaging in efforts to obstruct justice by asking victims to spread misinformation.
Some ASD and Surf’s Up members recently received the email below, which fractures facts and appears to encourage members to spread misinformation and not to participate in the federal restitution program. (Italics and carriage returns added. PP Blog’s Notes in Bold.)
“Please pass this on to your group and ask them to pass it on to others who were in ASD. The lawsuit filed against ASD, Andy and his wife Faye was decided in ASD’s, Andy’s & Faye’s favor a few months ago. (PP Blog Notes: The lawsuit was not decided in favor of ASD, Andy Bowdoin or Faye Bowdoin. Florida dropped the lawsuit “without prejudice,” meaning it can be refiled. The state said it had turned over a victim’s list to the federal government for the purposes of securing restitution from funds seized by the U.S. Secret Service.)
“In October the state of FL dropped all charges against ASD. (PP Blog Notes: See note above.)
“The Federal charges are all that is left to be addressed and progress will be made on that this month. Unfortunately if members respond to this notice and file a claim, they will be contributing to ASD losing its case because the government will use it as evidence that ASD created these “victims.” (PP Blog Notes: Is this a deliberate attempt to suppress the victims’ count and a bid to obstruct justice? Beyond that, Andy Bowdoin’s appeal of the forfeiture of money he advised a federal judge belonged to him is hardly the sole, unsettled legal issue. It is known, for example, that a criminal grand-jury probe has been under way. Bowdoin references the criminal probe in his own court filings. It is possible that criminal indictments against multiple individuals could be returned.)
“I have told this man that but he persists because he will make money from ‘helping.’ If ASD loses its case, THEN it would be appropriate to follow up these options, but not until then.
“My husband was hit by a car while he was bicycling and I have been struggling to care for him at home alone. I am 63, 105 lbs and he is functionally quadriplegic (which means that there is much to be hopeful for but, in the meantime, it is very challenging). For this reason I am unable to keep everyone updated as I had hoped to do and I have been unable to spearhead a member campaign to help the effort as I had also hoped to.
“God’s Blessings,
Sara”
(PP Blog Notes: The section of the note above even could bring things such as practicing law without a license into play because it introduces an “if, THEN” proposition that lays out a legal strategy. For example, “if” ASD loses the forfeiture proceeding in the appeals court, only “THEN” should victims register for the restitution program. One of the core problems is that there may be no way of knowing precisely when the appeals court will issue its ruling (oral arguments scheduled for this month have been canceled, and the appeals court will decide the issues based on briefs from both sides). Meanwhile, the restitution/remission forms victims must file are due by Jan. 19, 2011. Victims who follow the advice in the email could be denied a refund.)
The website of AdViewGlobal (AVG), an autosurf with close ties to the alleged AdSurfDaily Ponzi scheme, has gone offline.
Why AVG’s site was offline was not immediately clear. One person told the PP Blog that the site had been “down for days.” AVG’s domain, which lists a registration address in Uruguay and appears to use a dedicated server that resolves to Panama, would not return a ping this morning.
Aug. 1 was the two-year anniversary of the seizure by the U.S. Secret Service of tens of millions of dollars in the ASD case. AVG, fueled by the participation of ASD members, launched in the aftermath of the ASD seizure and the filing of a racketeering lawsuit against ASD President Andy Bowdoin.
Promotions for AVG began to appear online less than a month after ASD lost a key court battle in November 2008. In January 2009, AVG graphics were seen on an ASD-controlled website, but AVG denied any ties to ASD. By February 2009, AVG was up an running, and some of the moderators of the Pro-ASD Surf’s Up forum started a forum to promote AVG.
AVG, whose site remained online after the company suspended payouts in June 2009 and announced it was conducting an audit of itself, perhaps is one of the oddest autosurfs of all time.
Although AVG denied any ASD ties, the person issuing the denial on behalf of AVG was a former ASD employee. Even while issuing the denial, the former ASD employee confirmed that Gary Talbert, a former ASD executive, was the chief executive officer of AVG.
AVG later went on to form a purported “private association” purportedly based in Uruguay. The surf bizarrely claimed U.S. Constitutional protections despite the competing claim it operated on foreign soil.
By June 25, 2009, AVG had collapsed — after running a virtually never-ending series of promotions that offered 200 percent bonuses to both existing members and the prospects they recruited. One promoter claimed that $5,000 placed with AVG turned into $15,000 “instantly!”
The surf later said it was the victim of a $2.7 million theft.
AVG went offline for a brief period in September 2009 after its domain-name registration expired. Records show that the domain name is valid until Sept. 22, 2010 — more than a month from today’s date.
Read this story for the names of other autosurfs/HYIPs promoted by ASD members.
Read this story on AVG threats directed at members and the media after its collapse.
Read this story on a method an AVG member said would help other members qualify for bonuses. (Make sure you read the comments from readers below the story.)
EDITOR’S NOTE: This is a post in which the introduction is longer than the actual story (below). The story demonstrates the dangers of jumping on bandwagons before giving them careful thought.
Longtime readers of the PP Blog will recall our coverage of Curtis Richmond, “Professor” Patrick Moriarty and ASD Members International (ASDMI). Each was a mainstay in the AdSurfDaily autosurf Ponzi scheme case.
Richmond, a member of a sham Utah “Indian” tribe, was sued successfully in 2008 under federal racketeering statutes for being part of a group that placed enormous financial judgments against Utah public officials in performance of their duties. The judgments were bogus. Richmond and other members of the sham tribe were ordered to pay damages and penalties totaling more than $108,000.
Richmond has described himself in court filings as a “sovereign” being answerable only to Jesus Christ.
Moriarty, now in federal prison in Missouri after pleading guilty in January to filing a false tax return, advocated Richmond’s legal theories in the ASD case. Among other things, Moriarty, who claimed to be skilled in the art of “karma restoration” and once sold fake academic degrees on eBay by explaining they were gag gifts, was part of a group — ASDMI — whose membership roster consisted of members of the now-defunct Surf’s Up forum.
ASDMI came out of the gate by announcing a scorched-earth legal campaign against the government for its seizure of tens of millions of dollars in the ASD case. At least two federal prosecutors and at least one Secret Service agent became targets of a hectoring campaign that involved the use of certified mail. Surf’s Up championed the campaign, which was designed to demand a litigation result from the government by trapping the recipients of the certified mail into a contract to which they never agreed. The approach, which also was used by the sham Utah tribe in litigation separate from the ASD case, sometimes is known as “paper terrorism” or “mailbox arbitration.”
Surf’s Up also championed a secondary campaign to write letters to Sen. Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Surf’s Up described the ASD case as a legal “travesty that was committed against the 100,000-plus members of ASD by US attorneys Jeffrey Taylor and William Cowden.”
Richmond, fresh from his RICO rebuke in “Indian”-related litigation in Utah, then became a mainstay in the ASD case. He filed a series of pro-se pleadings accusing U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer and the prosecutors of crimes and threatening prosecution and lawsuits under federal racketeering statutes.
Some ASD members cheered the filings. Richmond was dubbed a “hero” on Surf’s Up, and also on a forum some of the Surf’s Up Mods established to promote the AdViewGlobal (AVG) autosurf, which had close ASD ties. One of Richmond’s motions claimed that actions by Collyer, a court clerk and two prosecutors prevented an ASD member named Alana Holsted from “Collecting on an Entry of Default Affidavit for $30 million for each Defendant.†In the Utah “Indian” case, Richmond tried to force the federal judge presiding over the litigation to step down by claiming the judge owed him $30 million.
It is believed that bogus payment claims against Collyer, the prosecutors and the court clerk by some pro-se litigants in the ASD case totaled at least $120 million. It is unclear if overt steps were taken to formalize the purported judgments by filing liens against the judge, the clerk and the prosecutors.
Previously Richmond had been linked to a scheme to imprison federal judges and litigation opponents and had been declared in contempt of court in California for threatening and trying to intimidate judges.
Although the story about Ronald James Davenport is not related to the ASD case, it demonstrates the risk of some of the approaches advocated by Richmond, Moriarty and ASDMI — and it shows the utter madness of the advocacy of the Surf’s Up forum. It was the type of advocacy that can land followers in prison for decades.
Here, now, a brief on Ronald James Davenport . . .
A Washington state man faces up to 40 years in prison if convicted on charges of filing fraudulent liens against a U.S. Attorney and other government officials, the U.S. Department of Justice said.
Bogus liens filed by Ronald James Davenport of Deer Park sought the spectacular sum of nearly $5.2 billion from each of the officials, including U.S. Attorney James McDevitt of the Eastern District of Washington, an assistant U.S. attorney, a court clerk and an IRS agent, according to court records.
Prosecutors described Davenport as a “tax defier.” Davenport has described himself in court filings as a “sovereign.”
In a civil case that preceded the criminal indictment against Davenport, Senior U.S. District Judge Justin L. Quackenbush ruled last month that the liens “were filed to retaliate against the officers for their good-faith efforts to enforce the tax laws against Mr. Davenport.”
Quackenbush struck the liens, which were filed in the form of UCC Financing Statements with the Washington State Department of Licensing, according to records. The liens not only were fraudulent, but also contained “sensitive personal information” that violated privacy laws, the judge ruled.
Davenport also filed instruments dubbed “Notice[s] of Claim of Maritime Lien” with the Spokane County Auditor’s Office, according to records. Those, too, were struck.
The government sued Davenport civilly in 2008 “to collect delinquent income taxes,” prosecutors said.
Records show that Davenport responded by filing liens against the officials.
“The indictment alleges that in retaliation for attempting to collect the delinquent taxes, Davenport made a series of fraudulent claims in December 2009,” prosecutors said.
“Davenport filed liens against the property of these government officials, falsely claiming that each of them owed Davenport $5,184,000,000,” the Justice Department said.
We have received a few inquiries about a new surfing program called AdPayDaily (APD). Our initial take is that the program is a dressed-up version of AdSurfDaily, AdViewGlobal, BizAdSplash and AdGateWorld and that the operators are persuaded they’ve found a word combination and legal structure that will neutralize critics and law enforcement should concerns about the sale of unregistered securities and a Ponzi and pyramid scheme be raised.
AVG, BAS and AGW were positioned by former ASD members as offshore “clones” of ASD. APD, like ASD, appears to be operating in the domestic United States.
In our view, APD’s presentation raises numerous red flags. At a minimum, it is starting out as an MLM absurdity, if not a potential monstrosity. To get a flavor of the absurdity, imagine that Walmart was clueless enough to start an autosurf and provide a corporate-approved greeter who says, “Welcome to Walmart Pay Daily. We count all the money out of sight in the back room at midnight to determine how much you get, and keep 50 percent of the cash for ourselves. Don’t worry. We have excellent lawyers, and we’ve instructed the money-counter not to rip you off.”
That’s effectively what APD is saying.
Another red flag is the fax number listed on a document APD refers to on its website as “Ad Pay Daily’s Conference Registration Form For July 30th and 31st 2010.” The fax number is listed online as a number used by a Kansas real-estate flipping company billed as National Flips. Like APD, the National Flips domain registration is hidden behind a proxy, although the website says this: “To learn how to become a Hard Money Lender and earn 30+% per annum, call [a telephone number] . . .”
Meanwhile, the invitation for the APD conference that uses the National Flips fax number says this — not once, but twice: “Any person who does not provide photographic proof of identity will not be permitted to attend this event, so don’t forget your photo ID.”
Why a photo ID would be required to attend a sales pitch for an advertising company is left to the imagination. Undercover Secret Service agents have been known to attend such functions, however.
Virtually every autosurf that has come along has used strange approaches or applied language tweaks designed to skirt securities laws, disarm critics and sanitize the “opportunities” for prospects. Serial autosurf promoters are infamous for telling prospects that a particular surf has found the magic pill that makes everything legal. Historically they rely on the surf operators to provide a legal cover. When things go south, they claim no one can blame them for promoting the schemes. After all, they relied on the assertions of the operators that everything was above-board and legal. They have been disingenuous in the same way that Alfred E. Neuman, Mad magazine’s fictional mascot, was disingenuous.
“What, me worry?”
Worry, however, appears to be front-and-center at APD, which is preemptively denying in multiple places that it is a Ponzi scheme. This strikes us as a big red flag. There are others.
ASD, Surf’s Up Members Become APD Players
During its early research into APD, the PP Blog has determined that a number of members of the alleged AdSurfDaily autosurf Ponzi scheme have high positions in the APD venture. Some of the former ASD members hold more than one position in the top 80 positions in APD, including a former Surf’s Up Mod who appears to hold positions 76 and 77. It is possible that another Surf’s Up Mod also is high up in the pecking order of APD affiliates at No. 56.
The Blog determined the names of APD promoters by researching the method by which APD creates affiliate links. At least one ASD member who made himself part of the ASD Ponzi litigation by submitting pro se pleadings holds positions 9 and 10 in APD, according to the affiliate links.
Surf promoters are not fond of pointing out the pain of previous prosecutions of autosurfs and the time-consuming and expensive litigation involving both the government and court-appointed receivers that may occur when a surf collapses. It is not uncommon for millions of dollars to go missing in a surf.
ASD’s Andy Bowdoin has told members that he has spent more than $1 million in his legal defense. Nothing (other than GIGO passed along by promoters) suggests Bowdoin was a man of means prior to the Secret Service raid on ASD’s headquarters in August 2008. His money for his defense appears to have come from ASD members. On a side note, Bowdoin tried to persuade members in September 2009 that the million dollars he dropped to keep himself out of prison was for their benefit. At the same time, he claimed his fight with the government was inspired by a former Miss America.
ASD gathered at least $65.8 million. When the sum seized in the Golden Panda Ad Builder action, which is part of the ASD litigation, is factored in, the number surges to more than $80 million. That’s a big number, of course — one that shows why others want to start surfs and just tweak and tweak and tweak in search of the elusive magic pill.
APD’s website was registered on Nov. 18, 2008. That’s just one day before U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer ruled that ASD had not demonstrated it was a lawful business and not a Ponzi scheme. APD’s domain-registration date also coincides with a string of registration dates by the so-called ASD clones:
Aug. 18, 2008: Domain name for AdGateWorld registered. (About two weeks after the ASD raid by the U.S. Secret Service, which is working in concert with the IRS and federal prosecutors.)
Sept. 22, 2008: Domain name for AdViewGlobal registered. (AVG had very close ties to ASD.)
Nov. 7, 2008: Domain name for BizAdSplash registered. (ASD and Golden Panda figure Clarence Busby purportedly was both the “chief consultant” and owner of BAS.)
APD’s domain was registered just 11 days after the BAS domain was registered and only a couple of weeks before ASD declared that the now-defunct Surf’s Up forum was its official organ for ASD news. Surf’s Up became infamous for shilling for Bowdoin, fracturing the facts of the ASD wire-fraud and money-laundering case and misinforming members.
Each of the surfs in the bullet points above failed spectacularly. Each of them blamed members for their problems. Each of them had promoters and members in common with ASD. Each of them also offered various “bonuses” to join — something APD is doing at the moment.
This promo by a Narc That Car member appeared on a .org website that used AMBER Alert's name in its URL. The U.S. Department of Justice, which administers the AMBER Alert program, denied in February that it had any affiliation with Narc. Days later, Narc removed a reference to AMBER Alert in its own video production to advertise the opportunity. The actions of both Narc and its promoters have led to questions about whether the company had come into possession of money based on misrepresentations that caused prospects to believe they were helping out worthwhile causes by joining Narc. The very first Narc promotions observed by the PP Blog were authored by members of AdSurfDaily and Golden Panda Ad Builder, companies implicated in a Ponzi scheme involving tens of millions of dollars.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Narc That Car says it is a private company and has no duty to reveal the names of its data clients. This essay challenges Narc’s arguments.
UPDATED 4:33 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.) The public has a compelling interest not only in learning the identities of Narc That Car’s clients through appropriate channels, but also in learning the identities of the company’s data-gatherers who may hold jobs in the public sector and are supplementing their income by moonlighting for Narc as consultants.
Narc is a highly questionable business. Moonlighting by public employees in highly questionable ways is one of the elements in the Scott Rothstein Ponzi scheme in Florida. Rothstein is alleged to have employed off-duty members of law enforcement as bodyguards while he orchestrated a $1.2 billion fraud. Moonlighting also is an element in a recent case in which investigators in Georgia probed allegations of sexual assault against Pittsburgh Steelers’ quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, who employed off-duty police officers as bodyguards.
The assault allegedly took place in the women’s restroom of a nightclub. Roethlisberger was not charged in the case, but was suspended for six games by the NFL for conduct detrimental to society and the league. Two Pennsylvania police officers working for him potentially face disciplinary action for sullying the reputations of their departments and not extricating themselves from a situation in which a crime or crimes might have been committed in their presence.
Why Wouldn’t The BBB Have Questions?
Today the PP Blog challenges its readers, including its critics, to read this essay, observe the sampling of graphics and answer a few simple questions: Why would the Better Business Bureau, responsible businesspeople, journalists, law-enforcement agencies and taxpayers not have questions about Narc That Car? (Now suddenly known as Crowd Sourcing International after issuing checks to members under at least two different names earlier in the year.)
And why isn’t the company stepping forward with answers that enlighten, not deflect or hop-scotch, around key issues? The company should supply the information to the Better Business Bureau and any law-enforcement agency that asks for it. Information Narc provides could be kept private while any investigation ensues and released by the government if it is determined that wrongdoing has occurred.
Narc says it is in the business of paying people to record the license-plate numbers of cars for entry in a database that will be used by “lien holders” and companies that repossess automobiles when owners default on loans.
Members of Narc say they record plate numbers randomly — in places such as parking lots — on the off-chance the vehicle is or later will become a target of the repo man. Narc’s data-gatherers are required to provide the address at which the plate number was viewed and recorded. Because the location data likely will be stale and the car likely will be moved before it becomes the subject of a repo bid, there are legitimate concerns about the actual usefulness of the data to lien-holders and concerns about whether Narc is just an excuse for a business, not an actual business capable of making profits from retail sales to database clients.
There also are significant concerns about privacy, and the propriety, safety and legality of the Narc program. Some Narc members have advertised that they collect “extra” plate numbers and use them as incentives for prospects to qualify for commissions without gathering data themselves, a practice that leads to troubling questions about whether Narc members have provided corrupt data to the company. An unknown number of plate numbers recorded in Narc’s database may be third-party sightings passed along to incoming members who entered bogus addresses at which plates purportedly were sighted — all to qualify for payments.
Equally troubling is that Narc, which has to know that some members are providing plate numbers for downline recruits, does not reveal the names of its database clients, saying the information is proprietary. There may be no way for existing Narc clients to know whether the data Narc reportedly is selling has been corrupted by the practices of members so eager to earn money that they’re giving away plate numbers and the recipients of the plate numbers are fabricating addresses at which the plates were spotted.
Corrupt data is worthless data.
There are reports that Narc can verify the validity of a plate number — but it is inconceivable that Narc has the means to verify that the plate actually was spotted at a specific address. Adding to the ripples of a potentially corrupt data stream is that some Narc members have instructed incoming members in purported “training” videos not to bother noting the address at the time the plate number was sighted. Rather, the prospects have been told to go home and look up the address on the Internet or refer to a store receipt if they happened to be shopping at, say, Walmart or Giant Eagle, when they were doing their side business for Narc.
These practices introduce not only the potential for abuse, but also an undeniable element of “wink-nod” into the business proposition. Gather extra numbers. Give them away. It doesn’t really matter if the car was parked there or not. Any address will suffice. Just get an address off the Internet.
Members appear to be able to enter any address they please, whether the car was spotted there or not. Meanwhile, some members have openly said they don’t like their neighbors knowing they’re recording plate numbers for a fee, so they record the numbers in the same fashion a character in a spy novel hides behind a newspaper or makes himself invisible in plain sight. The casualty is transparency at virtually all levels, meaning clients don’t know if they’re buying reliable data, members of the public don’t know if their cars are being watched and if profiles are being created, and Narc members don’t know anything other than the information Narc chooses to share.
Public Esteem For Police At Stake Amid Confusing Claims
Narc members say police officers have joined the Narc program as data-gatherers and upline sponsors. If true (and the PP Blog believes that police officers are involved in Narc), it is incumbent upon Narc to publicly identify the police departments for which the officers work.
Because of claims made by Narc promoters, the public has the right to determine if officers who belong to Narc are collecting data while on “city time” or during their off-duty hours and assisting Narc in ways that nonpolice members of Narc cannot.
Why? Because Narc largely operates in the shadows. Moreover, some of the public claims of its promoters have been beyond reckless — and only Narc knows the truth about how it is paying members and using the data they collect. If Narc has police officers among its ranks amid these circumstances, it means the officers are promoting a business they may know very little about.
Police officers should not be promoting a business they know very little about, especially amid these circumstances. That Narc is paying members is not evidence that no wrongdoing is occurring. All successful pyramid and Ponzi schemes pay members. Moreover, the advertising and “training” claims of Narc promoters alone give officers all the information they need to pull out of Narc today and potentially spare themselves and their departments embarrassment later — just as Rothstein’s bodyguards and Roethlisberger’s bodyguards should have pulled out.
That the officers are repping for Narc and not providing security services is immaterial. Narc emits the same kind of stink. It stinks even if it’s legal.
Few people would begrudge a police officer for supplementing his or her income in legitimate fashion — but that is not the issue here. The issue is whether Narc and many of its data-gatherers are legitimate. The Better Business Bureau has expressed concerns that Narc might be a pyramid scheme. Whether Narc is a pyramid scheme is not the only issue, however. This essay points out some of the other issues.
Only Full Transparency Can Lead To Clarity For Narc Members
Absent full transparency from Narc, no police officer or nonpolice officer gathering data, asking people to send money to Narc and building Narc downlines can determine if they are promoting a scam.
Period.
There have been reports in recent days that Narc — through its own unfiltered channels — has claimed the reason it does not publish data clients’ names is because such clients got “incessant” calls when it did publish the names.
This claim strikes us as the precise kind of dreck that cannot pass the giggle test on Main Street but somehow passes the plausibility test in the most florid hallways of MLM, which much of America and the world already view as a cesspool. Not only is the claim absurd, it also is contrary to promoters’ claims that Narc was employing a revolutionary MLM concept by which members would build the database product first and Narc would sell it to retail customers later. This approach could be illegal if Narc does not have “true” customers (database clients) in sufficient volume to destroy the pyramid concerns. Although some Narc promoters have claimed the company has “investors,” the claim itself only leads to more questions: Who put up the purported investment money if investors actually exist?
Narc promoter “Jah” (see below) has been telling prospects for months that Narc reps engage in “No Selling, Trying, Switching, or Using Anything” — in short, Narc’s data-gatherers do not buy the retail database product. Rather, they pay an up-front fee to earn the right to submit plate numbers, become Narc recruiters and have the prospect of earning more money by sponsoring more fee-paying members who pay for the right to submit plate numbers and become recruiters themselves, and Narc sells the database to another set of customers.
These claims and similar claims have led to concerns that Narc was operating a pyramid scheme. Such an approach also can be viewed as a Ponzi scheme. Absent continuous membership growth and real profits from sales to retail database customers to support the payments to Narc’s data-gatherers, the business could collapse.
A video promotion in February by another Narc member showed a tab labeled “Clients.” The video was recorded inside the member’s Narc back office and appeared on YouTube — after Narc had been operating for months. “Don’t worry about that right now,†he said of the “Clients” tab. He did not explain why members should not concern themselves about the tab, which led to questions about whether Narc had data clients in sufficient volume to quash concerns that members were getting paid exclusively or almost exclusively with money from other members — not retail sales to database clients.
This Is ‘Training?’
The promo was described as a teaching tool in a YouTube headline titled, “NarcThatCar Training Video.†In the same video, viewers were told that the parking lots of libraries, schools and universities provided a steady stream of license-plate numbers to be harvested and entered into the Narc database.
“So, carry a pen and paper with you,†the narrator instructed. “You can go to parking lots. You can go to libraries. You can go to schools. My wife goes to the university, and just goes through the parking lot and collects license-plate numbers.â€
An address in the video suggests plate data was recorded in or around the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. The address is the same street address as the UNLV campus. Indeed, one Narc promoter after another has pointed one prospect after another to sources of license-plate data, implying that cars parked on both public and private property were fair game for downline commissions.
Not even public schools, universities and libraries were off limits in Narc’s universe of members. Narc itself has said its database will be used to locate people, boats, cars and any item imaginable. Data is being mined on both private and public property, and Narc itself says the plate numbers are checked against “the DMV,” commonly known in many U.S. states as the Department of Motor Vehicles.
If Narc’s data is checked against the DMV, then Narc’s business is the public’s business. The public has an interest in determining the identities of Narc’s data clients in no small measure because the data potentially could be used to monitor private citizens and people who hold sensitive jobs in government, science, research and the military.
Narc’s explanation that its clients’ names are proprietary is unacceptable. Its own members are claiming plate numbers are “public” information and “training” prospects to drive through “university” parking lots and the lots of retail stores and restaurants to get a supply of tags, which are checked against DMV records.
If you’re shopping at Walmart, for example, your plate number could be recorded and entered in Narc’s database by a Narc participant in search of MLM commissions and interested in recruiting prospects who could record your plate number elsewhere, leading to even bigger commissions and an even greater loss of your privacy. Incredibly, some Narc promoters have anticipated the public’s objection to such a pursuit, answering it with a chilling argument that people who’ve done nothing wrong have nothing to fear.
That is just downright creepy. Is it any of Narc’s business where you park your car because it wants to help the repo man repossess your neighbor’s car? And what if the repo man isn’t Narc’s only client?
What if a company poses as a repo company or a “lien holder” company and has an objective totally unrelated to the repossession of collateral? What if a suspicious husband with a violent streak, for example, wants to monitor sightings of his wife’s car? What if a private investigator wants to determine where you spend your time? What if the government wants to determine if you’re seeing a shrink? What if an unfriendly government wants to monitor the whereabouts of an important government official or scientist?
Narc’s purported assurance that members don’t record the plate numbers of government vehicles is hollow because government employees own private cars and do not always travel in government vehicles. The sensitivity of their jobs does not vanish if they are in their private cars whether on-duty or off, and the prospect that a data profile on the movement of these cars can be created and offered for sale is unacceptable.
It is unacceptable whether the target for monitoring is employed by the government or is just an ordinary citizen employed by any private company. Cars are inexorably linked to their owners. To track the car is to track the owner. Left unchecked, Narc could be used as a data source by private and public entities to monitor people. That is inconsistent with liberty and privacy. It is offensive by its very nature because it potentially puts people who don’t know they are being watched under a microscope, and it is offensive to any notion of propriety because it potentially puts private citizens in the business of spying on other private citizens to qualify for downline commissions. That Narc’s own members are cheerleading for the supposed riches to be made by helping the repo man theoretically get the neighbor’s car causes one to wonder if America is taking leave of its senses and willing to package and sell anything.
What’s next? News releases from Narc that announce yet-another successful repo brought about by the company’s army of commission-based spies?
A World-Class Example Of MLM Excess
MLM has served up a doozy this time: Peel away the hype and Narc emerges as a private spy-agency-in-waiting. At last count, 52,000 people have expressed a willingness to help Narc build the database and share in the joy of knowing they’ve helped the repo man separate a struggling, stay-at-home Mom from the car she shares with her laid-off husband who lost his job when the economy went in the tank.
Lien-holders do have the right to seize their collateral if a car owner is in default. Lenders do have a corresponding duty to be responsible to investors and depositors to protect assets. But to create a cheerleading section for the repo man when unemployment is at 10 percent is something only the darkest minds in MLM could serve up. That people seem actually to be comforting themselves with the thought that they’ve performed some sort of civic duty by ratting out their neighbor to the repo man and somehow made America a better place is one of the surest signs yet that a big pocket of U.S. commerce has become morally bankrupt.
And that’s before the Narc privacy and security issues are examined in any detail.
Does anyone really want Narc to come into possession of data that could be used to create movement profiles on private citizens in any context — all under some implausible theory that the repo man needs extra help?
Sensitive research — including research paid for by the government — is performed by some universities. The data could be used to monitor people who hold sensitive jobs. This makes it the public’s business to determine precisely what Narc is doing and how and why it is doing it.
A ‘GOOGLE Opportunity Like Never Before’
Narc, according to an email members received, also is blaming the media for not understanding what it is doing. Its response to the bad press it has received recently was to tell members not to worry, that Narc remains a “GOOGLE Opportunity like Never before” — and then close the email with insipid, flowery motivational drivel, including this gem: “EVERYTHING is funny when you [sic] making MONEY!”
Even dispossessing your cash-strapped neighbor of his car, apparently, is funny as long as it pays a downline commission.
The email reminded us of the now-defunct Surf’s Up forum, which promoted the now-defunct AdSurfDaily Ponzi scheme by instructing members that “there are no prizes for predicting rain, only for building arks.” Perhaps finding the fuel they needed in Surf’s Up’s trite prose, many members of ASD pressed forward, introducing prospects susceptible to the harmful power of trite prose to one Ponzi scheme after another.
As we proceed in this essay, we ask readers to note that check-waving videos and “earnings” reports produced by some members of MLM programs are not evidence of success or honesty. It often is the case in the MLM sphere that promoters who throw caution to the wind and pitch programs they know little or nothing about end up the biggest winners, with the vast majority of participants breaking even or losing both money and time that could be better spent trying to make ends meet by other means.
Moreover, it often is the case that willfull blindness and forced ignorance are the dominant traits displayed by promoters. Incongruously, a lack of knowledge about companies and products is what often drives MLM profits.
Practiced hucksters often prefer ignorance themselves, while also preferring prospects who will not ask hard questions and are willing to pass along hype and unchecked information as though they were the high gospel of truth.
BBB’s Concerns Grow
Although Narc That Car provided the identity of a single, purportedly “major” client to the Better Business Bureau April 27, the BBB now says “the client’s identity only raises more concerns” about the company.
The BBB did not disclose the name of the Narc client or reveal why its doubts were heightened after Narc provided the information. On its website, however, the organization said it is “communicating” its concerns about the client to Narc. The BBB also noted its inquiry into Narc advertising claims remains open. The advertising inquiry began Jan. 18. It has been unresolved for nearly four months.
On March 3, the BBB noted, the organization asked Narc to provide a “comprehensive” list of clients. Narc responded April 27 by providing the name of “one of its major clients,” a development that not only did not dampen the BBB’s concerns that Narc was using a pyramid business model and did not have a product with true value, but also ramped them up.
Narc That Car has identified Rene Couch as its vice president of marketing. He also has been listed by titles such as executive vice president and chief field advisor, leading to questions about whether Narc and its promoters were making things up as they went along.
Narc already has an “F” rating from the BBB, the lowest score on the organization’s 14-point scale. In the past two weeks, at least two television stations in major markets in the United States have aired reports about Narc, questioning Narc’s business practices, the level of knowledge Narc’s promoters have about the Dallas-based company and Narc’s willingness to address the questions in an atmosphere of transparency.
Meanwhile, some Narc promoters have been attacking the BBB and accusing the TV stations of biased reporting — instead of insisting that Narc get out in front of the stories and concerns and put the issues to rest.
BBB Under Attack
One of the promoters attacking the BBB is Ajamu M. “Jah” Kafele. Kafele once was accused in Ohio of practicing law without a license and ordered to pay a civil penalty of $1,000 by the Ohio Supreme Court after the bar proved its case against him.
Attorney or not, Kafele is no stranger to the courts. What follows in the passage below is an exchange between Kafele and the attorney for a law firm he had sued for attempting to collect a debt. The exchange started after the lawyer asked Kafele how old he was. In response, Kafele attempted to assert his 5th Amendment right not to answer the question — in a case in which he was the plaintiff, not the defendant, and a case in which a federal judge admonished him that his “invocation of the Fifth Amendment in response to that question was improper.”
A. [Kafele]. I don’t recall my age. Next question. Q. [Defense counsel]. What was your date of birth? A. I don’t recall my date of birth. Q. Do you have a driver’s license on you? A. No, I don’t. Q. Do you have any form of identification on you? A. No, I don’t. Q. Where were you born? A. I don’t recall. Q. Do you have parents? A. I don’t recall. Q. Do your parents — are your parents living or deceased? A. I don’t recall. Are you going to ask me some relevant questions to the defense and claims or are you going to find out about my livelihood for your personal gain? Q. You’ve indicated you don’t recall whether — A. That’s right. Q. — or not you have parents. Do you have siblings? A. I don’t know. Q. Are you married? A. I don’t recall. Q. Where do you live? A. I don’t recall. Q. What’s your home address? A. I don’t recall. Q. How long have you lived there? A. I don’t recall. Q. What’s your current occupation? A. Who said I had an occupation? Q. Are you gainfully employed? A. Who said I was employed? Q. I’m asking you a question. A. I’m asking you, who said I was employed? Q. Are you employed? A. I don’t recall being employed.
Three-figure, check-waving YouTube video by "Jah," who publicly announced his downline group was "not going to be out here flashing, you know, five-figure checks.†The video, which featured a claim that repping for Narc was like working for the "Census Bureau," later was removed from YouTube's public site. Why it was acceptable to publish a three figure-check but not a five-figure check was never explained.
Strikingly, Kafele, who once believed it was prudent to sue lawyers who were trying to collect on a debt, now has thrown in his lot with Narc That Car, which says it wants to help repossession companies collect their collateral when buyers default on loans. The case cited above did not have a happy ending for Kafele: A federal judge tossed the preposterous lawsuit he had brought, saying Kafele had engaged in “egregious” conduct.
“Plaintiff’s repeated and persistent refusal to participate in the discovery process has clearly been willful and done in defiance of the express and unambiguous orders of this Court,” U.S. District Judge John D. Holschuh said. “As a result, the defendants have been denied virtually all discovery in this case. Moreover, plaintiff has been warned — most recently in the April 4, 2005, Opinion and Order granting defendants’ motion to compel and awarding monetary sanctions against plaintiff, . . . that his continued refusal to participate in the discovery process would result in the dismissal of the action. Nevertheless, plaintiff persists in attempting to transform the litigation process initiated by him into a game. Under these circumstances, no sanction other than dismissal of the action is appropriate.”
Kafele now is telling prospects he is an authority on Narc That Car. He said he has hundreds of members in his downline. He has been conducting meetings in Ohio to recruit even more prospects, according to his website.
Fox TV Reports Exposed Promoters’ Willful Blindness
Not a single Narc promoter approached by Fox 5 in Atlanta in a package aired recently could identify a single Narc data client — and yet the promoters were out in force recruiting people for the firm. Meanwhile, Fox 11 in Los Angeles recently visited YouTube and reported on unsubstantiated claims passed long by Narc promoters to a worldwide audience, noting that California Attorney General Jerry Brown was seeking information on the firm.
It is known that attorneys general from at least three states — Georgia, California and Texas — are aware of growing doubts about Narc’s business practices.
Narc’s approach — and the approaches of its promoters — have caused even longtime proponents of multilevel marketing (MLM) to question whether the often-controversial industry had reached an all-time low and whether participants would buy into any scheme under the sun. It is clear that promoters either do not know if Narc is engaging in legitimate commerce or do not care if it is not
Narc promoter shows prospects that parking lots at the University of Nevada Las Vegas are an excellent source of license-plate data. Narc prospects in this promoter's YouTube video were given no guidance on whether the university or campus police needed to be consulted before recording the plate numbers of students, faculty and employees. The promoter said "libraries" were excellent sources of license-plate data.
— as long as commission checks for recruiting members keep streaming in.
As things stand, there is no way to determine if Narc is operating legally. The reason there is no way is that Narc does not reveal the names of clients, will not step out of the shadows, put an executive and attorney on TV or consent to a probing interview by a print journalist to answer the doubters and publish verifiable financial data audited by a CPA that shows inputs and outputs and the sources of revenue.
Any argument that suggests members are not entitled to this data or that the data is proprietary because Narc is a “private” company is not going to fly. The company’s promoters are saying that license-plate numbers are “public” information available for the harvesting by a membership roster of 52,000 people for the purpose of populating a database that Narc itself has said is going to be used to locate people, cars, boats and any item imaginable. That alone makes it the public’s business. Beyond that, promoters say Narc is using government databases to verify data. The assertion that Narc is using the DMVs of America’s 50 states to verify registration data gives the public a compelling reason to demand answers from the company.
Narc has a duty to tell the public through appropriate channels precisely what database it is using to cross-check data entered by members and how it is accessing the database. It also has a duty to reveal the names of its clients, explain how it screens clients, explain how it screens its data-gatherers, explain whether Narc is able to connect a car to a person when members enter license-plate numbers and explain how the data is secured.
Absent complete transparency, the privacy of every person whose tag number is entered by a Narc member is a potential casualty. It is inconceivable that Narc is empowering itself to collect your license-plate number — no matter where you park — because it has secret clients in the business of repossessing cars and there is a small chance that you are behind on your car payments or a person you do not even know parks his or her car in the same parking lot as you and is behind on his or her car payments.
This is the business Narc has chosen to enter — and the public has a compelling interest in knowing precisely how it operates.
Narc Subjecting Own Promoters To Embarrassment; Promoters, Company Blame It On Media
Narc exposed its own Atlanta-area members and prospects to embarrassment after a Fox 5 reporter showed up to a pitchfest with a hidden camera and could not get answers even to basic questions, but the company has not issued a statement that addresses the concerns in any real way and is suggesting the media is to blame.
No part of the Narc story is consistent with transparency or ordinary business practices — and the media attention likely is only now beginning. Viewers in Atlanta and Los Angeles — two of the largest markets in the United States — now have been treated to an appalling lack of professionalism in the MLM sphere, which only will fuel the public’s legitimate doubts about the industry as a whole.
Why wouldn’t the public believe the Internet is just one giant cesspool after viewing the reports on Fox here and here? If you’re a Narc fan and want to argue that Narc was ambushed, you need to know that Narc had plenty of opportunities to answer questions from journalists before they started hiding their cameras. The PP Blog, for instance, has attempted to contact Narc multiple times. The Blog is aware that other news sites have met dead ends in bids to get Narc executives and knowledgeable employees to answer questions, including NBC-5 of Dallas-Fort Worth and others.
The Fox 5 Atlanta report neatly exposed promoters’ willingness to cheer for a program, duck responsibility for their claims and then hide behind the skirt of a company when the heat became too intense.
The trouble with hiding behind Narc’s skirt, however, was that the skirt provided no cover for members. Promoters found themselves in the awkward position of taking heat for a company that did not defend them in any credible way. Narc’s skirt provided no cover at all, and yet some members merrily continue to promote the opportunity and apparently see no incongruity at all.
Let us spell it out: If you’re going to say the media must get answers from the company rather than promoters in the field, you are hiding behind the company’s skirt. And if the company does not provide the answers, you have no cover at all. This creates the appearance that the prospect of making money is the only thing you value. You certainly don’t value transparency if you’re hiding behind the company’s skirt, and the company certainly does not value transparency by ducking questions, avoiding them altogether or spinning things to create the appearance that the media are responsible for Narc’s lack of transparency.
The media are not responsible for Narc’s bad press; Narc and its promoters are. One Narc promoter created a red banner on a .org site to create the appearance that sending money to Narc was like donating to the Red Cross. Other promoters appropriated the name of the AMBER Alert program to do the same thing on a .org website. At one point the message became so impossibly butchered that a promoter urged prospects to “Help AmberAlert and other organizations find repossessed cars.â€
Some Narc members made much ado about a TV anchor referring to Narc as a “job,” but dozens of Narc members posted ads on craigslist that advertised Narc as a job. Promos for Narc have been reprehensible. One member claimed Narc would be used to help the Department of Homeland Security find terrorists. Others claimed that the FBI and the AMBER Alert program endorsed Narc.
These were blatant misrepresentations — plain and simple. If the MLM world wants the rest of the world to take it seriously, it has to quit serving up this slop and stop apologizing for its chefs and the seemingly mindless cheerleaders who cheer for the chefs even when roaches are swimming in the soup.
In the AdSurfDaily case, for instance, the Secret Service said the chef served up a Ponzi scheme. How did the cheerleaders respond? They called the Secret Service, the agency that guards the President and the Treasury, Nazis and “Satan.”
Now, amid a circumstance in which the BBB — one of America’s most recognized business organizations — has questioned whether the Narc chef is serving up a pyramid scheme that potentially affects tens of thousands of people, the cheerleaders are responding by trying to plant the seed that the BBB has a secret agenda and is infested with roaches. It is reprehensible — and it must not stand.
Myriad questions about Narc remain, including these:
Why are Narc promoters so willing to represent a company they know so little about?
Does Narc not understand that vague, ambiguous claims on its own website and its apparent unease in addressing media questions are what’s driving the story?
Why has a Narc PR spokesman not emerged to address media inquiries and become the face of the company? Why aren’t Narc executives stepping out in front of the cameras?
Why have the statements Narc has issued not explained the incongruity of insisting that license-plate data is “public” information while at once insisting the public has no right to know who its clients are, how they are being screened, how data-gatherers are being screened and how the information is being indexed and sold?
Why does Narc insist it has the right to collect your license-plate number and offer it for sale to a third party whose identity and motives are unknown to you?
Why do tens of thousands of Americans suddenly seem so willing to waltz through parking lots of major retailers to record the plate numbers of their neighbors and to recruit others to do the same — when they have knowledge in advance that troubling questions are being asked about the firm?
Why does the repo man suddenly need the help of a commission-hungry MLM army to dispossess people going through lean times?
Any chance that the “buy here, pay here” car business and the title loan business are backing Narc because the industry’s practice of approving anyone for a loan actually is driving repos?
Why are prospects so willing to hand over money when neither sponsors nor Narc itself are willing to provide information that could make the concerns go away?
How many data clients does Narc have and when did the clients become clients? How much revenue do the data clients generate for Narc weekly and monthly?
Is it possible that Narc is selling data to itself through a process in which it formed another company to become a Narc client or is relying on an alter ego of some sort or close association with another firm to create a client out of thin air?
Is Narc closely connected to the “buy here, pay here” automobile business, meaning an entity with a close association with Narc is making high-risk, front-loaded, usurious loans to disadvantaged consumers?
Is Narc closely connected to the title-loan and payday loan business?
Is Narc closely connected to the repossession business?
Does Narc have an investment angel? If so, what is the source of the money and was a private offering involved?
Is Narc making pyramid or Ponzi-style payments to members?
Narc promoter tells prospects the company was started to provide data to the Amber Alert system.
Who are Narc’s executives beyond CEO William Forester?
What are their names, job descriptions and backgrounds?
Do they have high positions in the MLM organization and rely mostly or exclusively on commissions or do they draw a salary?
Who are the members of Narc’s board of directors?
Are police officers involved in Narc? If so, are they collecting information off-duty or on-duty — and are they complying with the policies of their departments and their cities in their efforts to increase their income?
Promoters have claimed that Narc is authorized to verify license-plate data through the DMVs of all 50 states. Is that true? If so, is Narc able to view the names and addresses of vehicle owners and the makes and models of vehicles as police officers could do? If untrue, is Narc verifying the data entered by members through another process — for example, querying databases to determine if a plate number already is “taken” in a state and thus unavailable to any other party, and then concluding the plate is valid simply because it is unavailable to another party?
Is is possible that police officers are querying restricted databases on Narc’s behalf?
The parking lots of these famous companies are sources of license-plate data for Narc affiliates, according to a promoter. Whether any permission is required of store managers or motorists to record plate numbers for entry in a private, for-profit database is left to the imagination.
Are police officers and nonpolice officers alike collecting scores of plate numbers and using their supplies as incentives for people to join Narc? (The PP Blog has observed multiple instances in which Narc sponsors suggested they would supply the first 10 plate numbers to incoming recruits, thus qualifying them for an immediate payment from Narc.)
What part of the approach in the question above is consistent with an attempt to build a valid database, especially if Narc cannot verify that a “gift” plate number actually was viewed in a specific location by the recipient of the gift?
Why has Narc not publicly and loudly renounced the practice of providing the “gift” of plate numbers to incoming prospects? Can Narc tell if entire downline groups are simply trading or recycling existing plate numbers among members and instructing members and prospects to fabricate an address where the plate was sighted?
How can Narc possibly know if the cars members say were parked at a specific location actually were parked there?
What specific event occurred that caused Narc to remove a reference to AMBER Alert in a video promotion and insert the name Code Amber instead?
About Data Network Affiliates . . .
We’ll close this essay by asking a few questions about Data Network Affiliates, Narc’s purported competitor in the business of collecting license-plate numbers:
Is is possible that DNA saw that Narc’s new business of recruiting members to record license-plate numbers was resonating in the MLM universe? And did DNA then engage in a cynical ploy to build a customer base by incorporating Narc’s message — including references to law enforcement and AMBER Alert — simply because it was “working” for Narc?
DNA declares "GAME OVER – WE WIN" repeatedly in a hype-filled email pitch to announce a $10 unlimited cell-phone plan. The company had been in the cell-phone business only days when it claimed to be able to beat virtually every other competitor on earth on cell-phone pricing. Only weeks later DNA claimed it had been hoodwinked into believing it could offer such a price, removing the offer and claiming to be excited about its future.
DNA quickly backed away from emphasizing data collection after it observed Narc becoming the focus of critics who raised concerns about the propriety, safety and legality of Narc — and then DNA morphed into a sort of anti-Narc, saying it existed to help law enforcement only and would never share data with repo companies that wanted to take away cars owned by poor people.
What follows are DNA’s own words (italics added):
“DNA Affiliates STAY ALERT – They are watching out for their neighbors children. If DNA has 1 million affiliates that is 1,000,000 more people watching out for and caring about children world-wide.
“Other companies may collect data to sell to REPO COMPANIES to take cars away from many people who are just down on their luck. A single mom, a dad out of work or 100 other good reasons why good people just can not make a payment. One DNA Affiliate just had his car repossessed because he owed 3 payments and offer to pay two of them and they said no and picked up his car.
“DNA will have no part in such cases. At DNA we collect car data for one purpose and that purpose is that there is a small chance that this data in the right hands could help save a child or help prevent or solve a crime.
“We do not boast of 6 figure contracts with REPO COMPANIES. At the end of the day a DNA Affiliate knows that what they are trying to do will only be a FORCE FOR GOOD in their community…â€
DNA also positioned itself as the “free” Narc, before springing a $127 upgrade on customers to purchase a data-entry tool that worked faster than the clunker provided the “free” members at no cost. Free members were not told they were getting a clunker until the upgrade program was announced. Before long, DNA announced it was in the cell-phone business — and plenty of other businesses willing to sell products to members who thought they were joining a “free” business.
Could DNA’s approach be the most cynical, ribald effort in the entire history of MLM? And does the DNA braintrust not recognize that MLM has so many critics precisely because of the obnoxious and absurd approach of the man behind the green curtain and the men letting him get away with serving up ceaseless, hyperbolic slop?
In our view, DNA is the worst example of wretched excess the MLM trade has ever served up — and Narc is close on its heels for enshrinement in the Hall of Shame. To be sure, Narc is not the next Google, DNA is not the next anything — and the industry has demonstrated once again that many, many of its members think that trite talk about arks is the same thing as building one.
This promo by a Narc That Car member appeared on a .org website that used AMBER Alert's name in its URL. The U.S. Department of Justice, which administers the AMBER Alert program, denied in February that it had any affiliation with Narc. Days later, Narc removed a reference to AMBER Alert in its own video production to advertise the opportunity. The actions of both Narc and its promoters have led to questions about whether the company had come into possession of money based on misrepresentations that caused prospects to believe they were helping out worthwhile causes by joining Narc. The very first Narc promotions observed by the PP Blog were authored by members of AdSurfDaily and Golden Panda Ad Builder, companies implicated in a Ponzi scheme involving tens of millions of dollars.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Narc That Car says it is a private company and has no duty to reveal the names of its data clients. This essay challenges Narc’s arguments.
The public has a compelling interest not only in learning the identities of Narc That Car’s clients through appropriate channels, but also in learning the identities of the company’s data-gatherers who may hold jobs in the public sector and are supplementing their income by moonlighting for Narc as consultants.
Narc is a highly questionable business. Moonlighting by public employees in highly questionable ways is one of the elements in the Scott Rothstein Ponzi scheme in Florida. Rothstein is alleged to have employed off-duty members of law enforcement as bodyguards while he orchestrated a $1.2 billion fraud. Moonlighting also is an element in a recent case in which investigators in Georgia probed allegations of sexual assault against Pittsburgh Steelers’ quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, who employed off-duty police officers as bodyguards.
The assault allegedly took place in the women’s restroom of a nightclub. Roethlisberger was not charged in the case, but was suspended for six games by the NFL for conduct detrimental to society and the league. Two Pennsylvania police officers working for him potentially face disciplinary action for sullying the reputations of their departments and not extricating themselves from a situation in which a crime or crimes might have been committed in their presence.
Why Wouldn’t The BBB Have Questions
Today the PP Blog challenges its readers, including its critics, to read this essay, observe the sampling of graphics and answer a few simple questions: Why wouldn’t the Better Business Bureau, responsible businesspeople, journalists, law-enforcement agencies and taxpayers not have questions about Narc That Car? (Now suddenly known as Crowd Sourcing International after issuing checks to members under at least two different names earlier in the year.)
And why isn’t the company stepping forward with answers that enlighten, not deflect or hop-scotch, around key issues? The company should supply the information to the Better Business Bureau and any law-enforcement agency that asks for it. Information Narc provides could be kept private while any investigation ensues and released by the government if it is determined that wrongdoing has occurred.
Narc says it is in the business of paying people to record the license-plate numbers of cars for entry in a database that will be used by “lien holders” and companies that repossess automobiles when owners default on loans.
Members of Narc say they record plate numbers randomly — in places such as parking lots — on the off-chance the vehicle is or later will become a target of the repo man. Narc’s data-gatherers are required to provide the address at which the plate number was viewed and recorded. Because the location data likely will be stale and the car likely will be moved before it becomes the subject of a repo bid, there are legitimate concerns about the actual usefulness of the data to lien-holders and concerns about whether Narc is just an excuse for a business, not an actual business capable of making profits from retail sales to database clients.
There also are significant concerns about privacy, and the propriety, safety and legality of the Narc program. Some Narc members have advertised that they collect “extra” plate numbers and use them as incentives for prospects to qualify for commissions without gathering data themselves, a practice that leads to troubling questions about whether Narc members have provided corrupt data to the company. An unknown number of plate numbers recorded in Narc’s database may be third-party sightings passed along to incoming members who entered bogus addresses at which plates purportedly were sighted — all to qualify for payments.
Equally troubling is that Narc, which has to know that some members are providing plate numbers for downline recruits, does not reveal the names of its database clients, saying the information is proprietary. There may be no way for existing Narc clients to know whether the data Narc reportedly is selling has been corrupted by the practices of members so eager to earn money that they’re giving away plate numbers and the recipients of the plate numbers are fabricating addresses at which the plates were spotted.
Corrupt data is worthless data.
There are reports that Narc can verify the validity of a plate number — but it is inconceivable that Narc has the means to verify that the plate actually was spotted at a specific address. Adding to the ripples of a potentially corrupt data stream is that some Narc members have instructed incoming members in purported “training” videos not to bother noting the address at the time the plate number was sighted. Rather, the prospects have been told to go home and look up the address on the Internet or refer to a store receipt if they happened to be shopping at, say, Walmart or Giant Eagle, when they were doing their side business for Narc.
Members appear to be able to enter any address they please, whether the car was spotted there or not. Meanwhile, some members have openly said they don’t like their neighbors knowing they’re recording plate numbers for a fee, so they record the numbers in the same fashion a character in a spy novel hides behind a newspaper or makes himself invisible in plain sight. The casualty is transparency at virtually all levels, meaning clients don’t know if they’re buying reliable data, members of the public don’t know their cars are being watched and if profiles are being created, and Narc members don’t know anything other than the information Narc chooses to share.
Public Esteem For Police At Stake Amid Confusing Claims
Narc members say police officers have joined the Narc program as data-gatherers and upline sponsors. If true (and the PP Blog believes that police officers are involved in Narc), it is incumbent upon Narc to publicly identify the police departments for which the officers work.
Because of claims made by Narc promoters, the public has the right to determine if officers who belong to Narc are collecting data while on “city time” or during their off-duty hours and assisting Narc in ways that nonpolice members of Narc cannot.
Why? Because Narc largely operates in the shadows. Moreover, some of the public claims of its promoters have been beyond reckless — and only Narc knows the truth about how it is paying members and using the data they collect. If Narc has police officers among its ranks amid these circumstances, it means the officers are promoting a business they may know very little about.
Police officers should not be promoting a business they know very little about, especially amid these circumstances. That Narc is paying members is not evidence that no wrongdoing is occurring. All successful pyramid and Ponzi schemes pay members. Moreover, the advertising claims of Narc promoters alone give officers all the information they need to pull out of Narc today and potentially spare themselves and their departments embarrassment later — just as Rothstein’s bodyguards and Roethelisberger’s bodyguards should have pulled out.
That the officers are repping for Narc and not providing security services is immaterial. Narc emits the same kind of stink. It stinks even if it’s legal.
Few people would begrudge a police officer from supplementing his or her income in legitimate fashion — but that is not the issue here. The issue is whether Narc and many of its data-gatherers are legitimate. The Better Business Bureau has expressed concerns that Narc might be a pyramid scheme. Whether Narc is a pyramid scheme is not the only issue, however. This essay points out some of the other issues.
Only Full Transparency Can Lead To A Clean Bill Of Health For Narc
Absent full transparency from Narc, no police officer or nonpolice officer gathering data, asking people to send money to Narc and building Narc downlines — can determine if they are promoting a scam.
Period.
There have been reports in recent days that Narc — through its own unfiltered channels — has claimed the reason it does not publish data clients’ names is because such clients got “incessant” calls when it did publish the names.
This claim strikes us as the precise kind of dreck that cannot pass the giggle test on Main Street but somehow passes the plausibility test in the most florid hallways of MLM, which much of America and the world already view as a cesspool. Not only is the claim absurd, it also is contrary to promoters’ claims that Narc was employing a revolutionary MLM concept by which members would build the database product first and Narc would sell it to retail customers later. This approach could be illegal if Narc does not have “true” customers (database clients) in sufficient volume to destroy the pyramid concerns. Although some Narc promoters have claimed the company has “investors,” the claim itself only leads to more questions: Who put up the purported investment money if investors actually exist?
Narc promoter “Jah” (see below) has been telling prospects for months that Narc reps engage in “No Selling, Trying, Switching, or Using Anything” — in short, Narc’s data-gatherers do not buy the retail database product. Rather, they pay an up-front fee to earn the right to submit plate numbers, become Narc recruiters and have the prospect of earning more money by sponsoring more fee-paying members who pay for the right to submit plate numbers and become recruiters themselves, and Narc sells the database to another set of customers.
These claims and similar claims have led to concerns that Narc was operating a pyramid scheme. Such an approach also can be viewed as a Ponzi scheme. Absent continuous membership growth and real profits from sales to retail database customers to support the payments to Narc’s data-gatherers, the business could collapse.
A video promotion in February by another Narc member showed a tab labeled “Clients.” The video was recorded inside the member’s Narc back office and appeared on YouTube — after Narc had been operating for months. “Don’t worry about that right now,†he said of the “Clients” tab. He did not explain why members should not concern themselves about the tab, which led to questions about whether Narc had data clients in sufficient volume to quash concerns that members were getting paid exclusively or almost exclusively with money from other members — not retail sales to database clients.
This Is ‘Training?’
The promo was described as a teaching tool in a YouTube headline titled, “NarcThatCar Training Video.†In the same video, viewers were told that the parking lots of libraries, schools and universities provided a steady stream of license-plate numbers to be harvested and entered into the Narc database.
“So, carry a pen and paper with you,†the narrator instructed. “You can go to parking lots. You can go to libraries. You can go to schools. My wife goes to the university, and just goes through the parking lot and collects license-plate numbers.â€
An address in the video suggests plate data was recorded in or around the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. The address is the same street address as the UNLV campus. Indeed, one Narc promoter after another has pointed one prospect after another to sources of license-plate data, implying that cars parked on both public and private property were fair game for downline commissions.
Not even public schools, universities and libraries were off limits in Narc’s universe of members. Narc itself has said its database will be used to locate people, boats, cars and any item imaginable. Data is being mined on both private and public property, and Narc itself says the plate numbers are checked against “the DMV,” commonly known in many U.S. states as the Department of Motor Vehicles.
If Narc’s data is checked against the DMV, then Narc’s business is the public’s business. The public has an interest in determining the identities of Narc’s data clients in no small measure because the data potentially could be used to monitor private citizens and people who hold sensitive jobs in government, science, research and the military.
Narc’s explanation that its clients’ names are proprietary is unacceptable. Its own members are claiming plate numbers are “public” information and “training” prospects to drive through “university” parking lots and the lots of retail stores and restaurants to get a supply of tags, which are checked against DMV records.
If you’re shopping at Walmart, for example, your plate number could be recorded and entered in Narc’s database by a Narc participant in search of MLM commissions and interested in recruiting prospects who could record your plate number elsewhere, leading to even bigger commissions and an even greater loss of your privacy. Incredibly, some Narc promoters have anticipated the public’s objection to such a pursuit, answering it with a chilling argument that people who’ve done nothing wrong have nothing to fear.
That is just downright creepy. Is it any of Narc’s business where you park your car because it wants to help the repo man repossess your neighbor’s car? And what if the repo man isn’t Narc’s only client?
What if a company poses as a repo company or a “lien holder” company and has an objective totally unrelated to the repossession of collateral? What if a suspicious husband with a violent streak, for example, wants to monitor sightings of his wife’s car? What if a private investigator wants to determine where you spend your time? What if the government wants to determine if you’re seeing a shrink? What if an unfriendly government wants to monitor the whereabouts of an important government official or scientist?
Narc’s purported assurance that members don’t record the plate numbers of government vehicles is hollow because government employees own private cars and do not always travel in government vehicles. The sensitivity of their jobs does not vanish if they are in their private cars whether on-duty or off, and the prospect that a data profile on the movement of these cars can be created and offered for sale is unacceptable.
It is unacceptable whether the target for monitoring is employed by the government or is just an ordinary citizen employed by any private company. Cars are inexorably linked to their owners. To track the car is to track the owner. Left unchecked, Narc could be used as a data source by private and public entities to monitor people. That is inconsistent with liberty and privacy. It is offensive by its very nature because it potentially puts people who don’t know they are being watched under a microscope, and it is offensive to any notion of propriety because it potentially puts private citizens in the business of spying on other private citizens to qualify for downline commissions. That Narc’s own members are cheerleading for the supposed the riches to be made by helping the repo man theoretically get the neighbor’s car causes one to wonder if America is taking leave or its senses and willing to package and sell anything.
What’s next? News releases from Narc that announce yet-another successful repo brought about by the company’s army of commission-based spies?
A World-Class Example Of MLM Excess
MLM has served up a doozy this time: Peel away the hype and Narc emerges as a private spy-agency-in-waiting. At last count, 52,000 people have expressed a willingness to help Narc build the database and share in the joy of knowing they’ve helped the repo man separate a struggling, single, stay-at-home Mom from the car she shares with her laid-off husband who lost his job when the economy went in the tank.
Lien-holders do have the right to seize their collateral if a car owner is in default. Lenders do have a corresponding duty to be responsible to investors and depositors to protect assets. But to create a cheerleading section for the repo man when unemployment is at 10 percent is something only the darkest minds in MLM could serve up. That people seem actually to be comforting themselves with the thought that they’ve performed some sort of civic duty by ratting out their neighbor to the repo man and somehow made America a better place is one of the surest signs yet that a big pocket of U.S. commerce has become morally bankrupt.
And that’s before the Narc privacy and security issues are examined in any detail.
Does anyone really want Narc to come into possession of data that could be used to create movement profiles on private citizens in any context — all under some implausible theory that the repo man needs extra help?
Sensitive research — including research paid for by the government — is performed by some universities. The data could be used to monitor people who hold sensitive jobs. This makes it the public’s business to determine precisely what Narc is doing and how and why it is doing it.
A ‘GOOGLE Opportunity Like Never Before’
Narc, according to an email members received, also is blaming the media for not understanding what it is doing. Its response to the bad press it has received recently was to tell members not to worry, that Narc remains a “GOOGLE Opportunity like Never before” — and then close the email with insipid, flowery motivational drivel, including this gem: “EVERYTHING is funny when you [sic] making MONEY!”
Even dispossessing your cash-strapped neighbor of his car, apparently, is funny as long as it pays a downline commission.
The email remided us of the now-defunct Surf’s Up forum, which promoted the now-defunct AdSurfDaily Ponzi scheme by instructing members that “there are no prizes for predicting rain, only for building arks.” Perhaps finding the fuel they needed in Surf’s Up’s trite prose, many members of ASD pressed forward, introducing prospects susceptible to the harmful power of trite prose to one Ponzi scheme after another.
As we proceed in this essay, we ask readers to note that check-waving videos and “earnings” reports produced by some members of MLM programs are not evidence of success or honesty. It often is the case in the MLM sphere that promoters who throw caution to the wind and pitch programs they know little or nothing about end up the biggest winners, with the vast majority of participants breaking even or losing both money and time that could be better spent trying to make ends meet by other means.
Moreover, it often is the case that willfull blindness and forced ignorance are the dominant traits displayed by promoters. Incongruously, a lack of knowledge about companies and products is what often drives MLM profits.
Practiced hucksters often prefer ignorance themselves, while also preferring prospects who will not ask hard questions and are willing to pass along hype and unchecked information as though they were the high gospel of truth.
BBB’s Concerns Grow
Although Narc That Car provided the identity of a single, purportedly “major” client to the Better Business Bureau April 27, the BBB now says “the client’s identity only raises more concerns” about the company.
The BBB did not disclose the name of the Narc client or reveal why its doubts were heightened after Narc provided the information. On its website, however, the organization said it is “communicating” its concerns about the client to Narc. The BBB also noted its inquiry into Narc advertising claims remains open. The advertising inquiry began Jan. 18. It has been unresolved for nearly four months.
On March 3, the BBB noted, the organization asked Narc to provide a “comprehensive” list of clients. Narc responded April 27 by providing the name of “one of its major clients,” a development that not only did not dampen the BBB’s concerns that Narc was using a pyramid business model and did not have a product with true value, but also ramped them up.
Narc That Car has identified Rene Couch as its vice president of marketing. He also has been listed by titles such as executive vice president and chief field advisor, leading to questions about whether Narc and its promoters were making things up as they went along.
Narc already has an “F” rating from the BBB, the lowest score on the organization’s 14-point scale. In the past two weeks, at least two television stations in major markets in the United States have aired reports about Narc, questioning Narc’s business practices, the level of knowledge Narc’s promoters have about the Dallas-based company and Narc’s willingness to address the questions in an atmosphere of transparency.
Meanwhile, some Narc promoters have been attacking the BBB and accusing the TV stations of biased reporting — instead of insisting that Narc get out in front of the stories and concerns and put the issues to rest.
BBB Under Attack
One of the promoters attacking the BBB is Ajamu M. “Jah” Kafele. Kafele once was accused in Ohio of practicing law without a license and ordered to pay a civil penalty of $1,000 by the Ohio Supreme Court after the bar proved its case against him.
Attorney or not, Kafele is no stranger to the courts. What follows in the passage below is an exchange between Kafele and the attorney for a law firm he had sued for attempting to collect a debt. The exchange started after the lawyer asked Kafele how old he was. In response, Kafele attempted to assert his 5th Amendment right not to answer the question — in a case in which he was the plaintiff, not the defendant, and a case in which a federal judge admonished him that his “invocation of the Fifth Amendment in response to that question was improper.”
A. [Kafele]. I don’t recall my age. Next question. Q. [Defense counsel]. What was your date of birth? A. I don’t recall my date of birth. Q. Do you have a driver’s license on you? A. No, I don’t. Q. Do you have any form of identification on you? A. No, I don’t. Q. Where were you born? A. I don’t recall. Q. Do you have parents? A. I don’t recall. Q. Do your parents — are your parents living or deceased? A. I don’t recall. Are you going to ask me some relevant questions to the defense and claims or are you going to find out about my livelihood for your personal gain? Q. You’ve indicated you don’t recall whether — A. That’s right. Q. — or not you have parents. Do you have siblings? A. I don’t know. Q. Are you married? A. I don’t recall. Q. Where do you live? A. I don’t recall. Q. What’s your home address? A. I don’t recall. Q. How long have you lived there? A. I don’t recall. Q. What’s your current occupation? A. Who said I had an occupation? Q. Are you gainfully employed? A. Who said I was employed? Q. I’m asking you a question. A. I’m asking you, who said I was employed? Q. Are you employed? A. I don’t recall being employed.
Three-figure, check-waving YouTube video by "Jah," who publicly announced his downline group was "not going to be out here flashing, you know, five-figure checks.†The video, which featured a claim that repping for Narc was like working for the "Census Bureau," later was removed from YouTube's public site. Why it was acceptable to publish a three figure-check but not a five-figure check was never explained.
Strikingly, Kafele, who once believed it was prudent to sue lawyers who were trying to collect on a debt, now has thrown in his lot with Narc That Car, which says it wants to help repossession companies collect their collateral when buyers default on loans. The case cited above did not have a happy ending for Kafele: A federal judge tossed the preposterous lawsuit he had brought, saying Kafele had engaged in “egregious” conduct.
“Plaintiff’s repeated and persistent refusal to participate in the discovery process has clearly been willful and done in defiance of the express and unambiguous orders of this Court,” U.S. District Judge John D. Holschuh said. “As a result, the defendants have been denied virtually all discovery in this case. Moreover, plaintiff has been warned — most recently in the April 4, 2005, Opinion and Order granting defendants’ motion to compel and awarding monetary sanctions against plaintiff, . . . that his continued refusal to participate in the discovery process would result in the dismissal of the action. Nevertheless, plaintiff persists in attempting to transform the litigation process initiated by him into a game. Under these circumstances, no sanction other than dismissal of the action is appropriate.”
Kafele now is telling prospects he is an authority on Narc That Car. He said he has hundreds of members in his downline. He has been conducting meetings in Ohio to recruit even more prospects, according to his website.
Fox TV Reports Exposed Promoters’ Willful Blindness
Not a single Narc promoter approached by Fox 5 in Atlanta in a package aired recently could identify a single Narc data client — and yet the promoters were out in force recruiting people for the firm. Meanwhile, Fox 11 in Los Angeles recently visited YouTube and reported on unsubstantiated claims passed long by Narc promoters to a worldwide audience, noting that California Attorney General Jerry Brown was seeking information on the firm.
It is known that attorneys general from at least three states — Georgia, California and Texas — are aware of growing doubts about Narc’s business practices.
Narc’s approach — and the approaches of its promoters — have caused even longtime proponents of multilevel marketing (MLM) to question whether the often-controversial industry had reached an all-time low and whether participants would buy into any scheme under the sun. It is clear that promoters either do not know if Narc is engaging in legitimate commerce or do not care if it is not
Narc promoter shows prospects that parking lots at the University of Nevada Las Vegas are an excellent source of license-plate data. Narc prospects in this promoter's YouTube video were given no guidance on whether the university or campus police needed to be consulted before recording the plate numbers of students, faculty and employees. The promoter said "libraries" were excellent sources of license-plate data.Â
— as long as commission checks for recruiting members keep streaming in.
As things stand, there is no way to determine if Narc is operating legally. The reason there is no way is that Narc does not reveal the names of clients, will not step out of the shadows, put an executive and attorney on TV or consent to a probing interview by a print journalist to answer the doubters and publish verifiable financial data audited by a CPA that shows inputs and outputs and the sources of revenue.
Any argument that suggests members are not entitled to this data or that the data is proprietary because Narc is a “private” company is not going to fly. The company’s promoters are saying that license-plate numbers are “public” information available for the harvesting by a membership roster of 52,000 people for the purpose of populating a database that Narc itself has said is going to be used to locate people, cars, boats and any item imaginable. That alone makes it the public’s business. Beyond that, promoters say Narc is using government databases to verify data. The assertion that Narc is using the DMVs of America’s 50 states to verify registration data gives the public a compelling reason to demand answers from the company.
Narc has a duty to tell the public through appropriate channels precisely what database it is using to cross-check data entered by members and how it is accessing the database. It also has a duty to reveal the names of its clients, explain how it screens clients, explain how it screens its data-gatherers, explain whether Narc is able to connect a car to a person when members enter license-plate numbers and explain how the data is secured.
Absent complete transparency, the privacy of every person whose tag number is entered by a Narc member is a potential casualty. It is inconceivable that Narc is empowering itself to collect your license-plate number — no matter where you park — because it has secret clients in the business of repossessing cars and there is a small chance that you are behind on your car payments or a person you do not even know parks his or her car in the same parking lot as you and is behind on his or her car payments.
This is the business Narc has chosen to enter — and the public has a compelling interest in knowing precisely how it operates.
Narc Subjecting Own Promoters To Embarrassment; Promoters, Company Blame It On Media
Narc exposed its own Atlanta-area members and prospects to embarrassment after a Fox 5 reporter showed up to a pitchfest with a hidden camera and could not get answers even to basic questions, but the company has not issued a statement that addresses the concerns in any real way and is suggesting the media is to blame.
No part of the Narc story is consistent with transparency or ordinary business practices — and the media attention likely is only now beginning. Viewers in Atlanta and Los Angeles — two of the largest markets in the United States — now have been treated to an appalling lack of professionalism in the MLM sphere, which only will fuel the public’s legitimate doubts about the industry as a whole.
Why wouldn’t the public believe the Internet is just one giant cesspool after viewing the reports on Fox here and here? If you’re a Narc fan and want to argue that Narc was ambushed, you need to know that Narc had plenty of opportunities to answer questions from journalists before they started hiding their cameras. The PP Blog, for instance, has attempted to contact Narc multiple times. The Blog is aware that other news sites have met dead ends in bids to get Narc executives and knowledgeable employees to answer questions, including NBC-5 of Dallas-Fort Worth and others.
The Fox 5 Atlanta report neatly exposed promoters’ willingness to cheer for a program, duck responsibility for their claims and then hide behind the skirt of a company when the heat became too intense.
The trouble with hiding behind Narc’s skirt, however, was that the skirt provided no cover for members. Promoters found themselves in the awkward position of taking heat for a company that did not defend them in any credible way. Narc’s skirt provided no cover at all, and yet some members merrily continue to promote the opportunity and apparently see no incongruity at all.
Let us spell it out: If you’re going to say the media must get answers from the company rather than promoters in the field, you are hiding behind the company’s skirt. And if the company does not provide the answers, you have no cover at all. This creates the appearance that the prospect of making money is the only thing you value. You certainly don’t value transparency if you’re hiding behind the company’s skirt, and the company certainly does not value transparency by ducking questions, avoiding them altogether or spinning things to create the appearance that the media are responsible for Narc’s lack of transparency.
The media are not responsible for Narc’s bad press; Narc and its promoters are. One Narc promoter created a red banner on a .org site to create the appearance that sending money to Narc was like donating to the Red Cross. Other promoters appropriated the name of the AMBER Alert program to do the same thing on a .org website. At one point the message became so impossibly butchered that a promoter urged prospects to “Help AmberAlert and other organizations find repossessed cars.â€
Some Narc members made much ado about a TV anchor referring to Narc as a “job,” but dozens of Narc members posted ads on craigslist that advertised Narc as a job. Promos for Narc have been reprehensible. One member claimed Narc would be used to help the Department of Homeland Security find terrorists. Others claimed that the FBI and the AMBER Alert program endorsed Narc.
These were blatant misrepresentations — plain and simple. If the MLM world wants the rest of the world to take it seriously, it has to quit serving up this slop and stop apologizing for its chefs and the seemingly mindless cheerleaders who cheer for the chefs even when roaches are swimming in the soup.
In the AdSurfDaily case, for instance, the Secret Service said the chef served up a Ponzi scheme. How did the cheerleaders respond? They called the Secret Service, the agency that guards the President and the Treasury, Nazis and “Satan.”
Now, amid a circumstance in which the BBB — one of America’s most recognized business organizations — has questioned whether the Narc chef is serving up a pyramid scheme that potentially affects tens of thousands of people, the cheerleaders are responding by trying to plant the seed that the BBB has a secret agenda and is infested with roaches. It is reprehensible — and it must not stand.
Myriad questions about Narc remain, including these:
Why are Narc promoters so willing to represent a company they know so little about?
Does Narc not understand that vague, ambiguous claims on its own website and its apparent unease in addressing media questions are what’s driving the story?
Why has a Narc PR spokesman not emerged to address media inquiries and become the face of the company? Why aren’t Narc executives stepping out in front of the cameras?
Why have the statements Narc has issued not explained the incongruity of insisting that license-plate data is “public” information while at once insisting the public has no right to know who its clients are, how they are being screened, how data-gatherers are being screened and how the information is being indexed and sold?
Why does Narc insist it has the right to collect your license-plate number and offer it for sale to a third party whose identity and motives are unknown to you?
Why do tens of thousands of Americans suddenly seem so willing to waltz through parking lots of major retailers to record the plate numbers of their neighbors and to recruit others to do the same — when they have knowledge in advance that troubling questions are being asked about the firm?
Why does the repo man suddenly need the help of a commission-hungry MLM army to dispossess people going through lean times?
Any chance that the “buy here, pay here” car business and the title loan business are backing Narc because the industry’s practice of approving anyone for a loan actually is driving repos?
Why are prospects so willing to hand over money when neither sponsors nor Narc itself are willing to provide information that could make the concerns go away?
How many data clients does Narc have and when did the clients become clients? How much revenue do the data clients generate for Narc weekly and monthly?
Is it possible that Narc is selling data to itself through a process in which it formed another company to become a Narc client or is relying on an alter ego of some sort or close association with another firm to create a client out of thin air?
Is Narc closely connected to the “buy here, pay here” automobile business, meaning an entity with a close association with Narc is making high-risk, front-loaded, usurious loans to disadvantaged consumers?
Is Narc closely connected to the title-loan and payday loan business?
Is Narc closely connected to the repossession business?
Does Narc have an investment angel? If so, what is the source of the money and was a private offering involved?
Is Narc making pyramid or Ponzi-style payments to members?
Narc promoter tells prospects the company was started to provide data to the Amber Alert system.
Who are Narc’s executives beyond CEO William Forester?
What are their names, job descriptions and backgrounds?
Do they have high positions in the MLM organization and rely mostly or exclusively on commissions or do they draw a salary?
Who are the members of Narc’s board of directors?
Are police officers involved in Narc? If so, are they collecting information off-duty or on-duty — and are they complying with the policies of their departments and their cities in their efforts to increase their income?
Promoters have claimed that Narc is authorized to verify license-plate data through the DMVs of all 50 states. Is that true? If so, is Narc able to view the names and addresses of vehicle owners and the makes and models of vehicles as police officers could do? If untrue, is Narc verifying the data entered by members through another process — for example, querying databases to determine if a plate number already is “taken” in a state and thus unavailable to any other party, and then concluding the plate is valid simply because it is unavailable to another party?
Is is possible that police officers are querying restricted databases on Narc’s behalf?
The parking lots of these famous companies are sources of license-plate data for Narc affiliates, according to a promoter. Whether any permission is required of store managers or motorists to record plate numbers for entry in a private, for-profit database is left to the imagination.
Are police officers and nonpolice officers alike collecting scores of plate numbers and using their supplies as incentives for people to join Narc? (The PP Blog has observed multiple instances in which Narc sponsors suggested they would supply the first 10 plate numbers to incoming recruits, thus qualifying them for an immediate payment from Narc.)
What part of the approach in the question above is consistent with an attempt to build a valid database, especially if Narc cannot verify that a “gift” plate number actually was viewed in a specific location by the recipient of the gift?
Why has Narc not publicly and loudly renounced the practice of providing the “gift” of plate numbers to incoming prospects? Can Narc tell if entire downline groups are simply trading or recycling existing plate numbers among members and instructing members and prospects to fabricate an address where the plate was sighted?
How can Narc possibly know if the cars members say were parked at a specific location actually were parked there?
What specific event occurred that caused Narc to remove a reference to AMBER Alert in a video promotion and insert the name Code Amber instead?
About Data Network Affiliates . . .
We’ll close this essay by asking a few questions about Data Network Affiliates, Narc’s purported competitor in the business of collecting license-plate numbers:
Is is possible that DNA saw that Narc’s new business of recruiting members to record license-plate numbers was resonating in the MLM universe? And did DNA then engage in a cynical ploy to build a customer base by incorporating Narc’s message — including references to law enforcement and AMBER Alert — simply because it was “working” for Narc?
DNA declares "GAME OVER – WE WIN" repeatedly in a hype-filled email pitch to announce a $10 unlimited cell-phone plan. The company had been in the cell-phone business only days when it claimed to be able to beat virtually every other competitor on earth on cell-phone pricing. Only weeks later DNA claimed it had been hoodwinked into believing it could offer such a price, removing the offer and claiming to be excited about its future.
DNA quickly backed away from emphasizing data collection after it observed Narc becoming the focus of critics who raised concerns about the propriety, safety and legality of Narc — and then DNA morphed into a sort of anti-Narc, saying it existed to help law enforcement only and would never share data with repo companies that wanted to take away cars owned by poor people.
What follows are DNA’s own words (italics added):
“DNA Affiliates STAY ALERT – They are watching out for their neighbors children. If DNA has 1 million affiliates that is 1,000,000 more people watching out for and caring about children world-wide.
“Other companies may collect data to sell to REPO COMPANIES to take cars away from many people who are just down on their luck. A single mom, a dad out of work or 100 other good reasons why good people just can not make a payment. One DNA Affiliate just had his car repossessed because he owed 3 payments and offer to pay two of them and they said no and picked up his car.
“DNA will have no part in such cases. At DNA we collect car data for one purpose and that purpose is that there is a small chance that this data in the right hands could help save a child or help prevent or solve a crime.
“We do not boast of 6 figure contracts with REPO COMPANIES. At the end of the day a DNA Affiliate knows that what they are trying to do will only be a FORCE FOR GOOD in their community…â€
DNA also positioned itself as the “free” Narc, before springing a $127 upgrade on customers to purchase a data-entry tool that worked faster than the clunker provided the “free” members at no cost. Free members were not told they were getting a clunker until the upgrade program was announced. Before long, DNA announced it was in the cell-phone business — and plenty of other businesses willing to sell products to members who thought they were joining a “free” business.
Could DNA’s approach be the most cynical, ribald effort in the entire history of MLM? And does the DNA braintrust not recognize that MLM has so many critics precisely because of the obnoxious and absurd approach of the man behind the green curtain and the men letting him get away with serving up ceaseless, hyperbolic slop?
In our view, DNA is the worst example of wretched excess the MLM trade has ever served up — and Narc is close on its heels for enshrinement in the Hall of Shame. To be sure, Narc is not the next Google, DNA is not the next anything — and the industry has demonstrated once again that many, many of its members think that trite talk about arks is the same thing as building one.
Regulators in Cyprus have referred Genius Funds for criminal investigation and released a warning that the company “[is] not permitted to provide investment and ancillary services in the Republic.”
Genius Funds, a darling of the HYIP world, was heavily promoted on the Ponzi boards. The program also is known as Genius Investments. The program was referred for criminal investigation by the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission, which also issued the warning. The announcement that the case was referred for criminal investigation was made Friday in Cyprus.
One of the matters referred for criminal investigation pertained to a question about whether Genius Funds used a “falsified document that possibly stated that it possessed an operational license which was not authentic,” the Cypriot regulator said.
Separately, Canadian securities regulators also have acted against Genius Funds, permanently banning the HYIP “for illegally selling securities,” the British Columbia Securities Commission (BCSC) said.
Genius Funds’ website is throwing a server error.
The program was pitched on the pro-AdSurfDaily Surf’s Up forum in December by a poster who dubbed himself “joe.” Genius Funds was one of four HYIP’s pitched by “joe” in an egg-themed promotion. The egg-themed domains redirected to HYIP programs.
All of the programs appear to have failed or gone missing, but the egg-themed domain names now redirect to other HYIPs.
“ALL MY EGGS ARE NOT IN ONE BASKET,” the Surf’s Up pitchman said in all-caps. “I MAKE 2000.00 A WEEK.â€
Some ASD members continued to promote autosurfs and HYIPs after the federal seizure of tens of millions of dollars from the personal bank accounts of ASD President Andy Bowdoin in August 2008. The Surf’s Up forum went missing earlier this year.
In recent weeks, the Golden Panda Ad Zone forum (also known as the Online Success Zone forum), another website from which ASD members pitched autosurf and HYIP programs, also went missing.
BCSC opened its probe into Genius Funds after receiving a tip from “a financial institution,” the agency said.
Has the Golden Panda Ad Zone forum, which was renamed the Online Success Zone after federal agents seized tens of millions of dollars from AdSurfDaily and Golden Panda Ad Builder in 2008, followed the Pro-AdSurfDaily Surf’s Up forum into the dust?
The website URL — http://goldenpandaadzone.ning.com — now is returning the same error message Surf’s Up produced when it went missing early this year. Other failed autosurf forums on ning.com have generated the same error message.
It was not immediately clear how long the Golden Panda Ad Zone forum has been offline. The forum was a meeting place at which promoters shilled for autosurf programs, cash-gifting schemes and other questionable “business opportunities” such as recyclers.
It is believed that every single autosurf program pitched on the Golden Panda Ad Zone Forum collapsed or is in the process of failing, giving the forum an unblemished record for failure. In recent weeks, the forum was used to promote MLM programs such as Narc That Car and Data Network Affiliates.
In one memorable video, the forum pitched multiple surf programs that reportedly collapsed this year or last after the spectacular seizures in the ASD case. These included — but are not limited to — Biz Ad Splash, AdGateWorld and Daily Profit Pond.
Biz Ad Splash purportedly was operated by Clarence Busby, who presided over the collection of more than $14 million before it was seized in the ASD case and an untold sum with Biz Ad Splash. AdGateWorld, meanwhile, collapsed after collecting an untold sum and purportedly being sold to buyers in the “Middle East.”
Daily Profit Pond, which suddenly went missing just prior to Christmas in 2008 after collecting an untold sum, also was said to have collapsed.
In AdGateWorld’s earliest days, the acronym “ASD” appeared in its Terms of Service, which suggested the surf simply copied and pasted terms from one program to another.
The Golden Panda Ad Zone forum also was notable for promoting MegaLido, another program that resulted in a spectacular flameout prior to the 2008 Holiday Season, and a host of cash-gifting schemes promoted as “Pay It Forward.”
“Pay It Forward” is a promotional scheme by which members sign up under each others links as a means of assuring they can build downlines or establish relationships with like-minded participants.
Autosurf programs that pay a lower daily rate “normally have sustainability,” a forum pitchman counseled prospects in a video. He cited no authority for the claim, but noted that 7 percent to 14 percent a week was a “really, really good” return that no bank could match.
“I can assure you [of] that,” the pitchman said, noting that higher return-on-investment surf programs “just tend to go away quicker.”
MegaLido, he explained, might have been a clunker because its advertised payout rate of about 13 percent a day perhaps made it unsustainable. How a program that paid a lower rate of say, 1 percent a day or 365 percent a year, could be any more sustainable without being a Ponzi scheme never was explained.
Like their brick-and mortar cousins, autosurf Ponzi schemes are not sustainable. They sustain themselves temporarily only through the use of smoke-and-mirrors, paying old members with money from new members to create the mirage of sustainability and performing other sleight-of-hand such as “80/20” programs to minimize cash outflow. Ponzi scheme operators typically siphon funds paid by investors, which is a form of theft. Prosecutors view the money as proceeds of a crime.
Like the Surf’s Up forum — but to a lesser degree — the Golden Panda Ad Zone forum became an outlet for members to complain about how the government views the autosurf “industry.” Some members complained openly, if not bitterly, about perceived “slow” refunds as a result of the seizure of assets connected to ASD and Golden Panda.
Those assets were seized amid wire-fraud, money-laundering and Ponzi scheme allegations — but members continued to push surf programs even after the seizure, while still complaining about “slow” refunds.
The complaints continued even after the government explained it had not perfected title to the seized assets because of court challenges by Andy Bowdoin. Although the government now holds title to the assets, an appeal filed by Bowdoin in one of the forfeiture cases — and the prospect of a Bowdoin appeal being filed in a second case — means that restitution could be delayed even longer, prosecutors said.
Some Golden Panda Ad Zone members positioned new surf programs as a means by which ASD and Golden Panda members could recover losses. Like Surf’s Up, entire threads went missing at the Golden Panda Ad Zone forum.
One thread that went missing pertained to a surf program purportedly operated by ASD Chief Executive Officer Juan Fernandez after the ASD seizure. Some Golden Panda Ad Zone members used religion in their sales pitches.
Religion also was an element in ASD pitches. ASD President Andy Bowdoin told a crowd assembled at a company “rally” in Las Vegas that he thanked God for making him a “money magnet.”
Prosecutors said Bowdoin family members and at least one insider embarked on a spending spree less than two weeks after the Las Vegas rally concluded on May 31, 2008, purchasing cars, jet skis, a boat and haul equipment — and retiring the $157,000 mortgage on the Tallahassee home of George and Judy Harris.
George Harris is Bowdoin’s stepson. Members later said he was the co-owner of the AdViewGlobal (AVG)Â autosurf, which crashed and burned in June 2009, after launching in the aftermath of the ASD seizure and in the weeks after a key court ruling went against ASD.
Some members of the Golden Panda Ad Zone also pitched AVG, despite everything that had happened to ASD, Golden Panda and a related surf known as LaFuenteDinero. There were reports later that at least $2.7 million was stolen from AVG, but the reports have not been confirmed.
After AVG announced a suspension of cashouts last summer and exercised its version of a “rebates aren’t guaranteed” clause, the surf said that, if the program restarted, an “80/20” program would become mandatory.
AVG pitchmen started out by saying the surf paid about 1 percent a day — or 365 percent a year — an amount the Golden Panda Ad Zone pitchman described as reasonable and sustainable for autosurfs in general.
The claims were made despite the fact that prosecutors had laid out a case against ASD that its 1 percent daily payout rate was unsustainable and that the surf was insolvent.
“Professor” Patrick Moriarty, a mainstay in the AdSurfDaily Ponzi scheme story, has been sentenced to a year in federal prison for filing a false tax return, according to KMOX.com.
Details about the sentencing were not immediately available.
Moriarty, 62, pleaded guilty in January to filing a false return for the year 2003. Prosecutors said he caused a tax loss of $135,697.
He initially was charged with filing false returns for the years 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005, but pleaded guilty to a single count. Prosecutors alleged that he claimed a false deduction of $30,000 for “legal fees†for the tax year 2003 and claimed a false amount of $23,533 withheld for the tax year 2004 and a false amount of $23,433 withheld for the tax year 2005.
After the August 2008 federal seizure of tens of millions of dollars from the bank accounts of ASD President Andy Bowdoin amid wire-fraud and money-laundering allegations, Moriarty fashioned a theory that the government was interfering with commerce.
Moriarty also espoused the legal theories of Curtis Richmond, another mainstay in the ASD story. Richmond, a pro se litigant in the ASD case, was a member of a sham Utah “Indian” tribe known for filing vexatious litigation, including litigation that resulted in a successful counter-suit brought by Utah public officials under federal racketeering statutes.
The “tribe” derisively became known as the “Arby’s Indians” because it held a meeting in an Arby’s restaurant in Provo, Utah, in 2003. The “tribe” used the address of a Utah doughnut shop as the address of its “Supreme Court,” and once issued “bench warrants” for the arrests of sitting judges and litigation opponents in legitimate courts.
Although not a lawyer, Richmond holds the unusual distinction of having been banned from the practice of law in Colorado. In the ASD case, he accused a federal judge of “TREASON” and of operating a “Kangaroo Court,” accused another federal judge of operating a “Kangaroo Court” — and accused federal prosecutors of theft.
Moriarty, along with other ASD members and members of the Pro-ASD Surf’s Up forum, started a nonprofit entity dubbed ASD Members International (ASDMI). One of ASDMI’s claims was that it would litigate against the government in the ASD case — even if the government was acting lawfully.
ASDMI, which was formed in 2008 and collected contributions from at least 167 ASD members, never brought any litigation and quickly dissolved.
Moriarty and Surf’s Up later spearheaded an effort to get the U.S. Senate to investigate the ASD prosecutors. Moriarty and Surf’s Up members also participated in a certified-mail campaign in which — as Moriarty described it — more than 50 “individual and notarized DEMAND[S] FOR LEGAL EVIDENCE” were sent to two federal prosecutors and a U.S. Secret Service agent.
In 2006, Moriarty formed a nonprofit for a Missouri man accused (now convicted) of breaking into a woman’s home and shooting her to death in cold blood. Moments earlier, the man had shot a police officer four times. Moments later, he shot another man eight times.