A sports talk show radio host claims he has access to an almost unlimited amount of discounted major sports tickets, and he needed a lot of money to buy them in order to share the profits. Do you believe him?
A "hedge fund of the year" with 18 billion assets did, and it appears they have lost $4.3 million they put into two companies controlled by this talk show radio host.
You may think who'd believe this sort of stuff, or how can they be this stupid, but really, think about it...
Hedge funds, esp. fund of the year are NOT stupid.
However, there's no doubt that this is a ponzi scheme... When the Feds arrested the radio talk show host and uncovered a trove of communications between him and his co-conspirators, as well as evidence of his millions in gambling debt. Robbing Peter to pay Paul is the very definition of Ponzi scheme. This radio talk show host, who co-hosts with a VERY famous former NFL celebrity, had been accused with running this scheme.
Yet you can see this sort of argument proliferate in the "make money fast" market, and promoters use the language of "this can't possibly be a scam because it associated with _____", and this guy has it in spades. A famous hedge fund gave him millions of dollars. He co-hosts a show with a celebrity. He can't possibly be a scammer, right?
WRONG!
Lesson to take away: when someone tries to sell you something on reputation only, think VERY VERY HARD on it. The risk is probably much higher than you think.
Thursday, September 7, 2017
Saturday, September 2, 2017
How to spot truth in sea of lies, rumors and myths
Spotted this in the Lifehacker archives (originally published 2012) but it's still relevant
http://lifehacker.com/5950871/how-to-spot-truth-in-the-sea-of-lies-rumors-and-myths-on-the-internet
The internet is full of crap. For every piece of reputable information you'll find countless rumors, misinformation, and downright falsehoods. Separating truth from fiction is equal parts a mental battle and diligent research. Here's how to make sure you never get duped.As long as words are hitting the page, news and facts are filtered through someone. Sometimes this is a ludicrous rumor that somehow morphs into a fact, or even just a small tip that doesn't work at all. Filtering out the junk from the facts is hard, but it's not impossible.
http://lifehacker.com/5950871/how-to-spot-truth-in-the-sea-of-lies-rumors-and-myths-on-the-internet
Friday, August 25, 2017
IPro Network One Month Update: still no proof of any original claims
More than a month ago, I highlighted some spurious claims by (over-)enthusiastic IPro Network members claiming that some famous personalities have "endorsed" IPro Network.
Two anon comments were left claiming I know nothing, blah blah blah, but left NO evidence to rebut any of the observations. I invited them to leave publicly verifiable evidence, not "I know the secret call me" or "my friend told me" evidence.
It has been about a month, and I haven't gotten a single reply.
So I decided to go search for some myself. Is there any news that Kevin Harrington endorses IPN?
Google says... nope. Indeed, there is ZERO mention of Kevin Harrington with ANY sort of cryptocurrency or blockchain opportunity in the entire 2017 when searched via Google News.
Instead, it appears that in 2017, Kevin Harrington is jumping into soap, cannabis, marine phytoplankton (sea scum), and horse racing, not to mention lending his name to entrepreneur bootcamps and invention services. But nothing about cryptocurrency, and definitely not IPN.
Indeed, the ONLY webpages that mention Kevin Harrington and IProNetwork together are IPro Network members webpages (or social media) and event listings that mention his one-time appearance.
Yet this tweet is still there:
And here's a claim that Kevin Harrington has "JOINED" with Pro Currency Team (i.e. IPro Network)
https://plus.google.com/115931890863103213165/posts/VXckhxCjDJk
I am still waiting for the evidence, guys.
Two anon comments were left claiming I know nothing, blah blah blah, but left NO evidence to rebut any of the observations. I invited them to leave publicly verifiable evidence, not "I know the secret call me" or "my friend told me" evidence.
It has been about a month, and I haven't gotten a single reply.
So I decided to go search for some myself. Is there any news that Kevin Harrington endorses IPN?
Google says... nope. Indeed, there is ZERO mention of Kevin Harrington with ANY sort of cryptocurrency or blockchain opportunity in the entire 2017 when searched via Google News.
Instead, it appears that in 2017, Kevin Harrington is jumping into soap, cannabis, marine phytoplankton (sea scum), and horse racing, not to mention lending his name to entrepreneur bootcamps and invention services. But nothing about cryptocurrency, and definitely not IPN.
Indeed, the ONLY webpages that mention Kevin Harrington and IProNetwork together are IPro Network members webpages (or social media) and event listings that mention his one-time appearance.
Yet this tweet is still there:
Kevin Harrington of shark tank endorses https://t.co/pnBqODzynX— IPRO NETWORK (@IPNCrypto) June 24, 2017
The revolution is here!
Vid-https://t.co/sag7Ur2vh1 #bitcoin #proc #ipn
And here's a claim that Kevin Harrington has "JOINED" with Pro Currency Team (i.e. IPro Network)
![]() |
"Kevin Harrington from the Original hit TV show (Shark Tank) Joins With Pro Currency Team (IProNetwork)..." claims G+ post |
https://plus.google.com/115931890863103213165/posts/VXckhxCjDJk
I am still waiting for the evidence, guys.
Thursday, August 24, 2017
MLMSkeptic Investigates: Why is Valentus illegal in the UK? (it's the ingredients)
Recently, it was all over the news (cite 1) (cite 2) (cite 3) that former finalist for Miss England and FHM model Charlotte Thompson was "busted" selling 'slimming coffee' and got a visit from the UK Trading Standards Officers and told to stop her business. She went online to vent. But what you won't find in these news articles is WHY did Trading Standards make a visit to her home?
MLMSkeptic investigates this little conundrum, by exploring what Valentus did in the aftermath passing blame, then check the sources from Valentus itself, and the statements by Ms. Thompson, then checking the relevant UK laws and interpretations, to see if there is ANY hope for Valentus, in UK, and in rest of Europe.
Recently, when forced to address the issue, Valentus corporate "Director of International Registration", Terry Recknor, gave a webinar. Ms. Recknor initially blamed Ms. Thompson for spamming thousands of people, implying that was the reason for the visit from Trading Standards, but she soon dropped this bomb:
So, what is the truth? Let's investigate first, what does UK Trading Standards actually do? In the case of their visit to Ms. Thompson, it is to offer:
So presumably, when you combine the various statements given by Ms. Thompson, Ms. Recknor, and explanations, one should conclude that
But is this true? Searching UK Food Laws (Food Safety Act 1990, Food Standards Act 1999, and Food Hygiene Regulations 2006) brought up nothing about registering coffee or similar drink mixes and such. There had to be a different reason.
Which brings us back to "consumer protection", and what other areas does that cover. This was made clear at a different Trading Standards page:
As it wasn't about registration, let us investigate whether Valentus made any misleading claims. But what constitutes misleading claims under UK law? As SlimRoast is about weight loss, I googled "weight loss claim UK", and that brought me to Advertising Standard Authority, or asa.org.uk and their guidance on slimming guidelines for the press (PDF).
MLMSkeptic investigates this little conundrum, by exploring what Valentus did in the aftermath passing blame, then check the sources from Valentus itself, and the statements by Ms. Thompson, then checking the relevant UK laws and interpretations, to see if there is ANY hope for Valentus, in UK, and in rest of Europe.
Recently, when forced to address the issue, Valentus corporate "Director of International Registration", Terry Recknor, gave a webinar. Ms. Recknor initially blamed Ms. Thompson for spamming thousands of people, implying that was the reason for the visit from Trading Standards, but she soon dropped this bomb:
This seems to imply that as soon as Valentus registered their products in the UK, then there would be no more problems. In the meanwhile, there are suggestions that recruitment in UK and rest of Europe are continuing as if nothing was wrong, despite warning from Ms. Thompson that dealing in Valentus is apparently illegal.What you need to understand is, the products technically are illegal because we’re not registered yet.
So, what is the truth? Let's investigate first, what does UK Trading Standards actually do? In the case of their visit to Ms. Thompson, it is to offer:
- Business advice: Trading standards offer a range of business advice and enforcement policies for all traders and businesses. These range from issues regarding licensing to consumer protection laws.
So presumably, when you combine the various statements given by Ms. Thompson, Ms. Recknor, and explanations, one should conclude that
- Valentus SlimRoast coffee needs to be registered in UK
- Lack of registration is a violation of consumer protection laws
- Ms. Thompson's spam alerted Trading Standards to let her know
But is this true? Searching UK Food Laws (Food Safety Act 1990, Food Standards Act 1999, and Food Hygiene Regulations 2006) brought up nothing about registering coffee or similar drink mixes and such. There had to be a different reason.
Which brings us back to "consumer protection", and what other areas does that cover. This was made clear at a different Trading Standards page:
We make sure that people are not misled by claims, prices, descriptions and other selling techniques used by traders when they are selling goods and services.
As it wasn't about registration, let us investigate whether Valentus made any misleading claims. But what constitutes misleading claims under UK law? As SlimRoast is about weight loss, I googled "weight loss claim UK", and that brought me to Advertising Standard Authority, or asa.org.uk and their guidance on slimming guidelines for the press (PDF).
Tuesday, August 22, 2017
MLM Basics: Why do so many MLM noobs don't understand "referral sales" is illegal?
It seems an MLM noob is very fond of her comp plan, which she described as
This is called "referral sales", and it can be described as
And all four elements are in the quote found earlier. Let's check it again, with the elements highlighted.
... I can find 3 people who also want sustainable <item> my order is then FREEShe doesn't realize that this is ILLEGAL. Yes, I said it. It is ILLEGAL.
This is called "referral sales", and it can be described as
- Seller offer to prospective buyer a consideration (discount / rebate / commission, etc.)
- for a sale (or lease) of item from seller to buyer
- the buyer must provide sellers list of potential customers
- the consideration (see 1) is contingent on seller be able to make additional sales/lease to one or more of the potential customers (see 3)
And all four elements are in the quote found earlier. Let's check it again, with the elements highlighted.
... I can find 3 people (3) who also want sustainable <item>(4) my order (2) is then FREE (1)
And yes, this is ILLEGAL. In all 50 states of the US, and in all European countries, and Australia, and so on and so forth.
And you'd be surprised how many companies engage in this ILLEGAL behavior, and its affiliates are completely unaware they are being defrauded.Saturday, August 19, 2017
Can you trust this new company called TresMore? Investigation Part 1
Recently, MLMSkeptic came upon something called TresMore. It sparked my interest because it is heavily marketed toward Asians, with a Chinese name 特利多 (te-li-duo, lit: special profit plenty) and websites in Taiwan, China, and even Malaysia, this thing was basically promising $$$$ for merely shopping, which, as you can imagine, can't possibly work. The premise of paying 20% of retail value just to get your shopping data makes absolutely no sense! Even supermarkets and such don't give you 20%... more like... 2% and coupons.
In fact, this is almost an exact clone of a suspect scheme call Saivian. You can do research on that yourself. Or just read the BehindMLM review.
First, let's look up Tresmore.com Wow, all these "business partners", eh?
TresMore address is 3235 Satellite Blvd, Ste 290, Duluth, GA 30096
That means they rent an office from that building. Suite 290, remember?
Now let's look up their corporate info via Georgia State Website https://ecorp.sos.ga.gov/BusinessSearch
Well, there is a Tresmore LLC... registered March 2017 by a Chae Chang. Hmmm... However, if you go into filing history and access the company formation papers, you'll see another name, Sang Lee.
Let's go down the list. So what is EsolutionTG? (item 1)
In fact, this is almost an exact clone of a suspect scheme call Saivian. You can do research on that yourself. Or just read the BehindMLM review.
Researching Tresmore
First, let's look up Tresmore.com Wow, all these "business partners", eh?
TresMore address is 3235 Satellite Blvd, Ste 290, Duluth, GA 30096
That means they rent an office from that building. Suite 290, remember?
Now let's look up their corporate info via Georgia State Website https://ecorp.sos.ga.gov/BusinessSearch
![]() |
Registered 3/11/2017 by Chae Chang, why 290B vs 290? What about filing history? |
![]() |
Two people responsible, a Chae Chang, and a Sang Lee, for Tresmore. |
Sunday, August 13, 2017
Critical Analysis of a R+F consultants denial that R+F is a pyramid scheme
Recently my news feed came across an R+F consultant (that's Rodan and Fields, an MLM cosmetics brand) denying that R+F is a pyramid scheme. Does her denial make sense?
She started out by casting a wide net, basically stating "I hear that from time to time... (some people) believe RF is a scheme... (but) RF isn't like that"
Then she immediately went into defensive dilemma, which means "if you say it to my face, I will assume that 1) you don't know me and I don't know you, or 2) you don't know what you're talking about"
But does the author know what she's talking about?
She never explained what a pyramid scheme is, or how R+F is not like that. She simply claimed that R+F is a legitimate company. But that's interesting are the two factors she cited in her denial.
Basically, the author is saying that R+F is NOT like a traditional company where the owner is NOT earning the highest salary, isn't it?
Unfortunately, it seems the author is merely half-right. Because R+F is run by Chairman Amnon Rodan (Dr. Katie Rodan's husband) and President/CEO Diane Dietz. Drs. Rodan and Fields own most of R+F. They pocket most of the profit, just not a direct salary.
R+F press release says they achived 626.9 million revenue in 2015, and maybe a billion in 2016. You can be sure all the top execs took home MILLIONS in salaries or other compensations.
It's definitely NOT as different as the author implied.
She started out by casting a wide net, basically stating "I hear that from time to time... (some people) believe RF is a scheme... (but) RF isn't like that"
Then she immediately went into defensive dilemma, which means "if you say it to my face, I will assume that 1) you don't know me and I don't know you, or 2) you don't know what you're talking about"
But does the author know what she's talking about?
She never explained what a pyramid scheme is, or how R+F is not like that. She simply claimed that R+F is a legitimate company. But that's interesting are the two factors she cited in her denial.
We are different: really?
According to the author, "If you’re looking at a company’s payroll by levels of income, it’s probably going to resemble a pyramid. The owner is at the top and earns the highest salary, everyone else trickles down. Right out of the gate, we are different."Basically, the author is saying that R+F is NOT like a traditional company where the owner is NOT earning the highest salary, isn't it?
Unfortunately, it seems the author is merely half-right. Because R+F is run by Chairman Amnon Rodan (Dr. Katie Rodan's husband) and President/CEO Diane Dietz. Drs. Rodan and Fields own most of R+F. They pocket most of the profit, just not a direct salary.
R+F press release says they achived 626.9 million revenue in 2015, and maybe a billion in 2016. You can be sure all the top execs took home MILLIONS in salaries or other compensations.
It's definitely NOT as different as the author implied.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)