Chartfords Review: Fine art & MLM?
There is no information on the Chartfords website indicating who owns or runs the business.
An address in Canada is provided on the Chartfords website, however a Google search reveals mulitple businesses operating out of this address meaning it’s most likely just virtual office space (mailing address).
The domain registration for the Chartfords website (“chartfords.com”) only adds confusion to the mix, providing another address in Kent, UK under the registrant “Midas Marketing Group”.
Midas Marketing Group have their own website over at “midasgrp.co.uk” which is currently promoting the Chartfords MLM opportunity:
The Midas Marketing Group website domain registration lists a “Barrie Sapsford” as the owner, operating out of Essex in the UK.
On his Facebook profile Barrie Sapsford credits himself as the Director of Midas Marketing Group since early 2000:
I wasn’t able to dig up any further MLM history on Sapsford, possibly indicating that Chartfords is his first MLM venture.
Read on for a full review of the Chartfords MLM business opportunity.
The Chartfords Product Line
Chartfords has no retailable products or services. Instead, members join the company (by referral only) and purchase art via a company hosted storefront.
Members earn commissions when members they’ve recruited purchase art from the the Chartfords storefront.
Chartfords themselves do not create the art available for sale on the website, which is instead sourced from third-party artists. Chartfords provide information on each of the artists with work for sale on their website.
Prices for the artwork featured on Chartfords starts at $200 CAD.
The Chartfords Compensation Plan
The Chartfords compensation plan revolves around points, with every $200 CAD spent with the company generating 1 point.
Points are essentially positions in a company wide 2xinfinity matrix. This matrix starts off with one position at the top with two legs branching out from under it. In turn these two legs branch out into two legs and so on and so forth:
Note that despite being in a company wide binary, each position within the binary itself acts as a mini 2×4 matrix (note the fourth 16 position level is absent from the diagram below):
Once the positions below the starting position in this matrix is full, the position at the top pays out a commission.
If three levels of the mini-matrix are full (2×3 matrix), the position pays out $250 CAD.
If all four levels of the position are full (the entire 2×4 matrix), the position pays out $1000 CAD.
The total payout per position is $1250 CAD and another position in the company wide binary (which also creates a new mini 2×4 matrix).
The company wide binary comes into play when a Chartfords member purchases multiple positions.
Odd numbered positions are placed in the oldest spots remaining to be filled in a member’s upline’s incomplete matrices. Even numbered positions are simply placed in the oldest unfilled positions company wide (the oldest unfilled positiion in the binary.
In effect, new members help their upline’s fill up their matrices with their odd numbered positions, with their even numbered positions acting as spillover for the company.
Referral commissions are also paid on the purchase of new positions, paid out using a unilevel compensation structure.
A unilevel compensation structure places a member at the top of the structure, with every personally recruited new member placed directly under them (level 1).
If any of these level 1 members recruit new members of their own, they are then placed on level 2 of the original member. If any level 2 members recruit new members, they are placed on level 3 and so on and so forth.
Using this unilevel compensation structure, Chartfords pay out referral commissions down ten levels, with commissions being paid out upon the succesful completetion of a 2×4 matrix.
How much of a commission is paid out depends on what level the member who owns the completed position sits on in the unilevel compensation structure:
- Level 1 – $200
- Level 2 – $100
- Level 3 – $50
- Levels 4 to 6 – $20
- Levels 7 and 8 – $10
- Levels 9 and 10 – $5
Joining Chartfords
New Chartfords members can only sign up via a referral link from an existing member, with the company charging a $250 membership fee following a member’s first matrix cycle.
Chartfords do not set a timetable for this to occur so there appears to be some ambiguity as to when members are charged.
Conclusion
A simplified breakdown of the Chartfords compensation would be that members join the company, invest money and earn a 625% ROI once 30 new $200 CAD investments have been made after their own.
The obvious counter to this is that Chartfords members are purchasing art, with any commissions paid out being incidental. As per the breakdown of money members pay to the company however upon “purchase” of artwork, this is not the case.
Chartfords claim that for every $1250 payout, it is only the fourth layer of the 2×4 matrix (16 positions) that counts towards commission payouts. The positions in levels 1 to 3 are used to pay commissions on positions above (counted as being the fourth level of a mini 2×4 matrix higher up in the company wide binary).
At $200 CAD a pop, this equates to the fourth level of every mini 2×4 matrix generating $3200.
Out of this $3200, just $640 is paid to the artist for the artwork (20%), with the remaining $2560 (80%) used to pay other members who have prior bought positions.
Chartfords take their $420 (7.6%) cut out of each remaining $2560 balance.
If we consider that each position bought winds up being the fourth layer of a mini-matrix within the company wide binary, this equates to 80% of the revenue generated by Chartfords being paid out as a ROI to members who deposited money with the company previously.
Where is this revenue sourced? New deposits made by new and existing members.
With art purchases accounting for just 20% of the total revenue members pump into the company, each $200 CAD deposit generating an effective 625% ROI once a theoretical minimum of 32 new deposits have been made and no retailable products or services able to be sold by members, Chartfords effectively operates as a member-funded Ponzi scheme.
Whereas a traditional Ponzi scheme pays out ROIs based on a fixed number of new investments or a variable ROI rate (based on the rate of investment and re-investment by members), Chartfords on the other hand effectively increase the rate at which ROIs are paid out, due to the company-wide binary increasing in width which each new level generated.
Overtime the binary will balloon out and with half of each member’s new investments being designated to the oldest unfilled position, this will result in longer and longer blowout times for members to fill new 2×4 matrices and earn their ROI.
Adding to this is also the problematic creation of “free” positions each time an existing positions cycles. These positions bring no new revenue into the scheme, yet still extract an eventual $1250 CAD payment.
Nevermind the fact that if new and existing members stop buying artwork investing in binary/matrix positions, the entire scheme collapses.
Props to Chartfords for a bit of creativity with the whole “fine artwork” angle, but the reality is their business model and compensation plan is no different to any other Ponzi scheme out there.
When you have members funding existing member’s ROI payouts, paid out upon a fixed number of new investments being made, ultimately what the company pairs this model with becomes irrelevant.
If that is indeed what they claimed, then it’s an outright matrix/pyramid scheme with lower level members funding the upper level members… with a self-confession.
Where’s Office of Fair trading (UK’s FTC or ACCC) when you need them?
(Ozedit: The authenticity of the named author of this comment is under question, see comments below)
@k.Chang This has been looked at and there is nothing wrong with buying art from this site. The company simply offers its members a reward program for buying fine art.
As for the poster of this topic, the system cannot collapse because the free point is included in the $3200 costs, you did not understand and have wasted my time. You are simply scared of competition as a “marketing networker” yourself and we frown upon people like you.
Experience: Senior Marketing Manager at Office of Fair Trading
No, there isn’t.
Ding ding ding! The problem is the rewards program and how Chartfords members are paid.
Costs of what? The “artwork” is $640, the rest is distributed between the company and existing members.
Noooo… nothing suss when your “product” is just 20% of the money members pump into the scheme.
The bigger they are…
@Oz
A correction to the article, to the section “Joining Chartfords”
It’s free to join. After you have received minimum $1000 (1 completed cycle), there’s an annual fee of $250 per member (not per point). I’m not sure whether the membership fee is IN the first year or AFTER the first year, or simply after the first cycle (whenever that happens).
I found that information right near the end of the 34 minutes video.
You can’t seriously mean you’re working at Office of Fair Trade, AND have joined a scheme like Chartfords?
If I have interpreted it correctly, the Office of Fair Trade is a consumer protection agency, and they are expected to fight against recruitment schemes rather than supporting them, i.e. let their employees join them.
It’s not about buying art as a customer, it’s about the income opportunity. You’re participating in an illegal promotional pyramid here, if I have interpreted it correctly.
@Oz
We have a serious problem here. Not WE, but Angharad Davies and the Office of Fair Trading.
The Angharad Davies posting here is either the real one or a fake one. In both cases it will be a serious problem for the real Angharad Davies and the OFT.
INFORMING THE OFT?
I’ll believe the correct practice here will be to inform the Office of Fair Trading about the situation, pointing to her comment in this thread, and let them handle the situation.
It can be delayed for a few days, e.g. to clear up some details first. If it’s the real Angharad Davies, she will probably prefer to inform them herself about the situation.
I have checked the LinkedIn profile (in her comment), and it looks real. I have also checked oft.gov.uk (I googled “angharad davies site:oft.gov.uk“), and I found her name there on one of the pages.
Information should be about:
* a description of the problem (the pyramid scheme issue, her role in this case)
* a link to her comment in this thread
* a link to the 34 minute video presentation (link disabled) youtube.com/watch?v=lWonbRMKenE
FAKE ANGHARAD DAVIES?
The Angharad Davies posting in this thread doesn’t sound like someone working for a consumer protection agency, she sounds like someone working in MLM:
“You are simply scared of competition …”?
“We frown upon people like you”?
That doesn’t sound like someone working for the government. It sounds much more like an average internet marketer trying to impress someone. My guess is that we’re dealing with a fake Angharad Davies here.
Oz can check the IP address. 🙂
Impersonating a public official is some sort of a crime, I’m sure.
I removed the offending comment. The IP traced to Nottingham in the UK, whereas the Office of Fair Trading is based in London.
Google maps shows there’s a rough 150km or so difference between the two, and I’m pretty sure the real Angharad Davies isn’t travelling 300km a day round trip to work.
In anycase if it is her she can leave a comment with an Office of Fair Trading email address (which I’ll verify).
Something tells me though it’s just the admin of Chartford’s or one of his buddies playing dress up…
I forgot something:
* a link to her LinkedIn profile (disabled) uk.linkedin.com/in/daviesangharad
OFT’S EMAIL (disabled):
This situation fits in with both groups, it’s both about OFT’s work and about a “rogue trader”. Most other email addresses there were typically consumer related.
At least this faker put some brain cells into it…
The most correct practice would probably have been to NOT delete the comment. It wasn’t “offending”, it was clearly illegal. It was one of the worst marketing strategies I have ever seen.
Removing the comment will only protect the fake Angharad Davies and Chartfords (assuming she was fake). The real Angharad Davies and her employer will probably need to know about this situation, e.g. for how to deal with it and for how to prevent further damage.
THEY are the ones who should have the right to decide how to handle the situation, not us. “Handle the situation” can be about investigating the situation, the company or whatever, and about making decisions about what to do with it.
WE have no problem with this situation, but Angharad Davies and the Office for Fair Trading have. They probably deserves the right to make their own decisions here. It’s simply about being FAIR to the parties affected by this situation.
Oz, you may want to put the comment back up, but with ADMIN banner above and below that say: WARNING THIS COMMENT’S AUTHENTICITY IS IN DOUBT
No, she didn’t. She believed she did, but that marketing attempt was rather stupid if you analyse it.
* She didn’t read anything else on this website before posting her comment. She actually believed it was an MLM marketing site, marketing other programs and criticising competitors. The first rule she broke was “Analyse your audience, and adjust yourself to that audience”.
* “Borrow some credibility” is a well known strategy in internet marketing. It didn’t work very well here, because we have seen it far too often. She didn’t use her brain, she just repeated a strategy that probably have worked before, assuming “all internet users are probably just as stupid as my ordinary audience”.
* If she was the real Angharad Davies, using her official role to promote personal interests isn’t a wise thing to do. Most government agencies have rules to prevent that type of activity.
* If she was a fake Angharad Davies, that strategy will probably backfire on the company and herself. She didn’t have any defense strategy in place before using that strategy. When it first failed, it failed miserably.
* She didn’t manage to play the role very well. She didn’t sound like a real OFT employee, she sounded much more similar to an internet marketer.
I wasn’t very impressed here. The only person she managed to fool was herself.
Fair enough, comment reinstated.
Also thanks for the correction regarding joining M_Norway. I think I must have dozed off and closed the video after I got the comp plan information from it.
(Either that or hearing “chaahtfuds” started to grind on my nerves)
How do we even know it’s a “she”? 🙂
I guess what I mean was it was more brain cells than your typical “I laugh as your pathetic attempt to slander this wonderful opportunity” speech. 😀
Is there any further info on Chartsford, please. It still seems to be growing strong.
If they’re still using the same compensation plan then Chartfords will continue to chug along as long as new affiliates pump money into the scheme and existing affiliates re-invest.
hi how r u I have joined I haven’t made any money yet but I no people who have been paid out
I see someone doesnt have a brain… they object to the convensional ways of earning money being broken.Small minded and unable to think outside the box.
Chartfords works!!! It is legal and helping people to purchase quality Art AND earn bonus points. These point return a very sustainable income…..
Look at the program several times… think .. meditate on it… see it can not fail. Don’t do it and stay broke.
Do it and begin to prosper.
There is nothing “outside of the box” when it comes to Ponzi schemes. They have been mainstream since the 1930s.
All Ponzi schemes work for as long as new sucker investors continue to pump money into it.
Based on what authority are you claiming Ponzi schemes universally legal?
I concur. If you can’t see how a Ponzi scheme can fail then there’s obviously a brain (and soon your money) missing.
Ive purchased art from Chartfords merely for the piece of art than the investment plan. I paid C$10k (£5731) for the said art and have had it valued at £16500 GBP now I’m no art dealer but that seems a decent investment considering Ive also had C$1500 back out in cash back rewards?
Im not saying this thing will go on forever what on our planet does? Im saying its worked for me I have not invited any members and don’t plan to do so either. I joined in March 2013 and I hope it lasts.
A ponzi system or pyramid scheme it is not. All members have the same opportunity to earn the same C$1250 per point, unlike that of a pyramid where the product is increased or over inflated.
Yes the product on some occasions may only be valued at 20% of the $3200 but in my case it has not been so. I believe that Chartfords will be around for many years to come and that should they introduce further products MLM will only develop the Chartfords brand further?!
Just my opinion not factual apart from that I have my piece of art valued at £16.5k in hand and I’ve also had out C$1500.
Where do you think your C$1500 came from?
That doesn’t make Chartfords “not a Ponzi scheme”. Your C$1500 coming from new affiliate investment does. You said it yourself, pump money into the scheme and get back a >100% ROI – whatever they attach that too (art, used condoms, paper cups), it doesn’t matter.
They pay you with new affiliate investor money. It’s a Ponzi.
Hi there I do value your ideas and advice however I have to reply as by definition as you have said a “ponzi scheme” basically shares out the funds of the new investors with old investors, correct? This is not entirely the case.
I see your thoughts on the binary network matrix plan and they are entirely valid. The point is this, I buy a voucher to spend in the gallery? That voucher has no trading value other than that of art on Chartfords site.
If I choose to buy a painting at C$200 10 times or one painting at C$2000 that is my choice I’ve chosen the art myself based upon my personal opinions.
Chartfords may only pay $50 for that piece of art but the resale of $200 means this company is making profitable funds and therefore cannot be judged a Ponzi scheme where by its simply dividing money by its members or new investors?!
I agree this system has a lifespan and I agree it appears somewhat controversial in your opinion but with only approx 2-3k members at present it has years left before you claim its going to fail due to lack of re investment.
You will not stop people buying art all around the world. You will not stop people wanting to manipulate a system to make money and you will not stop peoples personal greed to try and beat a system and take what they can get. In the end its our own greed that fails these systems not the system.
(Ozedit: This is not the place to have a cry about lotteries)
I thank you for your time to reply and your own opinions and thoughts on this matter.
Ponzi scheme is kinda like pregnancy… You either is… or isn’t. You can’t be “sort of”.
There are hybrid Ponzi / pyramid schemes out there that has elements of both. perhaps that’s what you’re referring to?
Either new investor funds are being paid to existing investors or they aren’t. In Chartfords, under the facade of art, they are.
Sorry what? “Profitable funds” is neither here nor there. Chartfords take your $2000 and distribute it out to previous investors who have spent $2000. After spending $2000 you then get a cut of those who buy in after you.
That’s what makes Chartfords a Ponzi scheme. It has nothing to do with being proftable.
Vouchers (discounts) are not valid MLM products (nothing is being bought or sold).
Entirely. But if the company you bought it from promises you a >100% ROI when other people make $1900 deposits – then we have a problem.
Chartfords is a Ponzi scheme. Stop making stupid excuses about lotteries, art, greed and whatever else to make yourself feel better for participating in it, and face up to the facts.
If the total ROI for 7 or 31 investors is less than the total investment, and the payouts derives directly from a matrix or downline, it’s technically a pyramid scheme rather than a Ponzi scheme.
Ponzi schemes will have the money from all investors pooled together in a “pool of money”, and should normally allow ANY amount of investment or reinvestment (but ANY can be about any number of “investment units”, for practical reasons).
Pyramid schemes will have the money from participants organized into matrix or downline “positions”, where the payouts can be identified to derive from specific positions.
Chartford clearly has the money organized into matrices. The technical definition should normally be “matrix based promotional pyramid”.
It actually makes it a “promotional pyramid”. Pyramid schemes will typically pay out a fixed ROI based on “positions” (fixed investments).
Chartfords has 1 company wide matrix (2 x infinity), and 1 personal matrix (2 x 4). Both are typical pyramid scheme components.
COMMON IDENTIFIERS
“ROI >100%” is common for both pyramid schemes and for Ponzi schemes, so you can’t use it as a sole identifier if you want to separate between Ponzi and pyramid. In Ponzi schemes, EVERYONE will get a fake or prospected “ROI >100%”.
“Investments” are common for both types, it’s how the investments are made that separates them.
“Using new investors’ money to pay old investors” is common for both pyramid schemes and for Ponzi schemes.
UNIQUE IDENTIFIERS
An unique identifier for pyramid schemes is that the ROI is based on OTHER PEOPLE’s investments (the ROI and the payout). You won’t get paid anything from the scheme if you don’t recruit anyone, or if you don’t get any spillovers in a matrix or from an upline.
An unique identifier for Ponzi schemes is that ROI is based on your PERSONAL investment / reinvestment (the ROI, not the actual payout). Ponzi schemes have fake promises or contracts about future ROI, or misrepresentations of ROI already earned (some types of growing balances).
Pyramid schemes will need PERSONAL RECRUITMENT from some of the participants, and they will reward participants for recruitment. Ponzi schemes can often have CENTRALIZED RECRUITMENT, and they don’t need to reward recruitment.
Pyramid schemes will collapse when they run out of new participants (new money coming IN). Ponzi schemes will collapse when people try to withdraw too much money (money going OUT).
A correction to that one:
Multiple payments from participants will affect HOW they will collapse, e.g. multiple positions, monthly payments, qualifying purchases.
But the general idea is that pyramid schemes will require money coming IN. Ponzi schemes can continue for a long time by preventing people from withdrawing money.
A TYPICAL identifier for pyramid schemes is that REWARDS (e.g. money) will be distributed UPWARDS in a system or plan.
CHARTFORDS
The primary function of something will normally be REFLECTED in the compensation plan.
Commissions >50% = it’s primarily designed to distribute rewards. In business, paying more than half of the revenue in commissions won’t make any sense if the business primarily is designed to distribute goods or services.
People who PRIMARILY are attracted to income opportunities will normally LOVE invaluable products that can be heavily over priced and generate high commissions.
Of a total payment of $3,200 for the art, only 20% is used to pay for the product value. 67% is used to pay out commissions. 13% is used to cover the company’s expenses and profit.
Chartfords simply doesn’t REFLECT what it claims to be.
Multiple payments will also affect other parts of the definitions, e.g. the one about where the ROI derives from.
I should have used “other POSITIONS” rather than “other PEOPLE”. If you CAN buy multiple positions in a matrix, some of the payouts may be generated from your own positions. But POSITIVE ROI will need to involve other people.
For a Ponzi scheme to work (avoid collapse), withdrawals will need to be delayed for as long as possible, e.g. by having incentives to reward reinvestments and by limiting some payouts.
You have got some new information, identifying Chartfords as a promotional pyramid rather than as a Ponzi scheme. Did that resolve your concerns? 🙂
The problem with pyramids and Ponzies is that they have many factors in common, e.g. investments and ROI are common for both of them. You will also find several hybrid models.
Promotional pyramid has a “clear” definition:
1. a chain recruitment system
2. where participants gives consideration
3. for prospected right to earn financial gains
4. that derives primarily from other participants
5. rather than from sale/consumption of goods/services
Most states or countries have relatively similar definitions. Promotional pyramids will normally be defined to be about deceptive trade practice (e.g. misleading actions or omissions).
Ponzi scheme is more like an “idea” or a “concept”, in that you can’t find clear definitions that will cover all different types of Ponzi schemes. The correct definition will be vague:
“A financial or general fraud, involving some type of investment, with falsely prospected or reported ROI/profit, where actual payouts to investors derives from other investors’ investments.”
Ponzi scheme cases will be about many different types of fraud, e.g. security law violations, fraudulent transfer of money, fraudulent use of public communication services, general fraud.
Since it’s about “an idea or a concept”, people will typically use their OWN definitions.
The most generally accepted identifier is the “rob Peter to pay Paul” argument. That argument will fail for some Ponzi schemes, the ones that don’t pay out anything.
Chartfords can be TESTED against pyramid scheme definitions:
1. Chain recruitment system? YES
2. Payments from participants? YES
3. Prospected financial gains? YES
4. Primarily from other participants? YES
5. Sale/consumption of goods/services? PARTLY
Chartfords doesn’t have any retail sale component, so all sales to end users will be to the participants themselves. That will show that it isn’t PRIMARILY set up to distribute goods out into a market, but to distribute goods to members only.
The goods and the income opportunity aren’t clearly separated, i.e. you can’t know for sure whether people are buying into the opportunity or are buying the products.
By analysing the product cost vs the total payment, 67% of the payment is used to pay commissions = it’s PRIMARILY about selling the income opportunity itself.
It also use classical matrix systems for the payouts = the payouts will be generated from how many positions that has been paid for (including the participants’ OWN payments). That’s clearly not about sales commissions, it’s clearly a pyramid scheme type of payout.
Promotional pyramids are about deceptive trade practices, e.g. misleading marketing. A 100% recruitment driven opportunity bundled with a product line will meet the criteria for misleading trade practice in itself, since that type of business model is doomed to fail / cheat consumers.
You will also find examples in this thread clearly showing misleading trade practices.
* Anghara Davies, post #2. Fake identity.
* M82 (you), post #22
You didn’t REFLECT that story. You had too few details and too vague ones. People who are recalling their own experiences from memory will tell their stories differently (because it involves other parts of the brain than logical arguments, and those parts of the brain will handle visual descriptions rather than logical).
I have flagged it as “misleading sales argument”. Please provide more correct information about it? It sounded like you REPEATED a sales argument you have read.
You don’t know much about art, so you’re clearly in for the opportunity. You focused on completely different ideas than what an art lover / art investor would do (I know several of them, and I have even worked for a short time printing arts). Your story simply wasn’t believable, so please provide more details.
WOW, thanks very much for all that information I will try to understand it in the best way I can.
My statement was clear from my point. I’m not a professional art collector. I’m not a mlm investor. I was presented with Chartfords I didn’t understand the payment plan only that your odd numbers go into the 2 x 4 and your evens go into the infinity matrix.
Hybrids led to believe that the even points would pay out after 4 layers have filled above my even points. I didn’t concentrate too much on the rewards plan when I saw some art by an artist I knew something about I was more interested in that and the potential profit to be had out of that.
The infinity matrix doesn’t require inviting people everyone elses even points complete those levels meaning I do get payments whether I invite or don’t.
I was introduced by someone who also invited someone who filled the levels above my point 1 working point. which generated a $1250 payout I did nothing for that nor did I invite anyone else but my number 3 point also generated a payment of $250.
In your opinion how can this be either or ponzi or pyramid when I can invest and not invite but still get payments. I would have got $1500 had I only put in $600 and bought 3 vouchers.
Your expertise is very much appreciated as I’m not convinced it’s one or the other possibly a combination of the 2 after the information this feed has produced.
I also would like to know how you see this company performing as it appears to be growing in strength with now approx 3k members level 14 of the infinity matrix is complete generating payments for level 11. It appears this company doesn’t pay out until the money is in and cleared so unless the directors run away with the funds I can’t see how it can stop.
people will always purchase the products if they’re given a product for there investments and can earn a cash back reward for that same product.
If nectar and Tesco can do this I’m not sure how Chart fords can’t?
Please do feel free to explain the flaws without any insulting words or behavior (whole thread not just Norway) as I’m not sure there are any at present other than fear the directors may just vanish?
They don’t reward you for bringing in additional buyers.
@M82
Somebody has to be out recruiting new investors or Chartfords cannot pay you. When new affiliate funds dries up because recruitment slows down, that’s when these schemes go boom.
You can’t pay out more than you take in. Dollar for dollar whatever funds Chartfords has accepted, they’re still promising a >100% ROI they can’t pay out – unless new funds are injected ad infinitum. That’s hardly realistic so…
New affiliate funds is not an infinite resource.
Those companies don’t take your money on the promise of a >100% ROI. You said it yourself, you handed over your money without caring about art or fully understanding the business model. You were attracted to the “potential profit”.
If you can’t understand the fallacy of promising to pay out >100% of what you take in from affiliates as an MLM business model, there’s not much that can be done.
You have clearly focused on the art when you joined.
The 1 extra point seems to be a bonus point when a matrix is filled. People introduced by your sponsor will get their positions to the left of your #1 position.
I have checked a few galleries for prices, for the same artists and the same art, but only a few examples.
Chartfords seems to be over priced, but not so much that I expected. It has less options than other galleries, they typically have more sizes, more options for TYPES (canvas / quality paper, several printing methods, several methods for how to print the edges). They also generally had more art from the same artists.
“Over priced” doesn’t need to be something negative. I only checked 2 galleries, and prices may be related to a lot of factors I haven’t been able to identify. The two galleries I checked CAN have been “under priced” (e.g. trying to sell to a different part of the market).
Did they focus on the opportunity or on the art when you were introduced to it? For instance, did they mention cashback on art purchases along with potential income claims, or did they PRIMARILY focus on the opportunity?
PONZIES
ZeekRewards had >100% ROI for ALL investors, regardless of whether or not they recruited anyone. 1.5% over 90 days = 28,000 VIP points if all RPP were reinvested.
After that, the VIP point balance would double each 100 day with a 100% reinvestment plan. An 80:20 plan would give a positive ROI that could be withdrawn, and a positive ROI that could be reinvested.
A new investor could also withdraw 100% from day 1, and get his principal investment back in 50 days. Days 51-90 would give a positive ROI.
“Everyone can make money, you don’t need to recruit anyone” is about systems like that.
TelexFree is about the same, “everyone can make money, you don’t need to recruit anyone”. SpeakAsia was about the same. BLGM is about the same.
Lyoness will need 4 directly recruited plus 16 indirects. Lyoness is a “money trap”, money will be trapped in the system rather than paid out. You will need 16-20 investors in downline before you have made any profit.
Lyoness has a POTENTIAL Ponzi-like component, in that credits CAN be reinvested, but the system is too complicated to analyse for that. But you don’t make much money without recruiting, it’s actually more recruitment oriented than most other pyramid schemes.
Chartfords will not pay a positive ROI unless you recruit someone, or have your positions placed very high up in the system. It will mostly pay cashbacks on your own purchases if you don’t recruit. You will EVENTUALLY get a few spillovers after a very long time.
I don’t know any of them and I don’t know how they’re organized / what they sell. I’m trying to analyse Chartfords.
COMPANY WIDE MATRICES 2xINFINITY
Syystems like that can have many different functions, but here are some typical ones:
* Distribute money upwards in the system, towards the organizers and people near the top, at the expense of people lower down in the system.
* Create a few high income earners, someone they can use as examples to attract income opportunity seekers.
* Trap money inside the system (prevent money from being paid out, and the money will eventually become profit for the owners). The longer it can continue, the more money will be “trapped” (not paid out).
I also found typical income claim marketing on the internet, and “join now and secure your position”. Some marketing are more “balanced” than that. From a balanced website;
I don’t have time to check many websites, I only wanted to look at a couple of examples for how the income opportunity is being used in marketing. It IS clearly used, it’s actually the only thing people can sell there.
CASHBACK
Half of the units will actually result in cashback payouts = your OWN money being returned to you, when you have filled 7 and 31 positions in your “position 1 matrix”. That is if you have bought all those 13 or 61 positions that is needed to fill the matrix personally.
Max cashback on your positions is 12 or 12.5%. The rest of the money has to come from others.
INCOME OPPORTUNITY
First of all, Chartfords does NOT qualify as an income opportunity. To qualify for that, it MUST have some commissions derived from retail customers. Recruiting people into a 100% recruitment driven opportunity isn’t a type of “work”. Profit from a pyramid scheme is not legally earned income, even if it is taxable as that.
The income opportunity is used to attract income opportunity seekers rather than people who want to buy art. The opportunity is the PRIMARY sales method, and the ONLY thing the members can “sell”.
The ONLY function of the compensation plan is to increase Chartfords profitability at the expense of the consumers, i.e. it will have a “guaranteed market” where it can reduce its own expenses. It has actually LESS to offer than most other galleries, to substantial higher prices.
The infinity matrix is designed exactly for that purpose, “you don’t need to recruit anyone”. It LOOKS impressive when presented, but it won’t show you the realities.
The infinity matrix pays out “recruitment commissions” = you will get paid $200 each time a member you have introduced receives $1000. That sounds impressive, but will require a lot of new positions from that new member you introduced.
If you don’t recruit anyone personally, you will SLOWLY receive some “spillovers” from the matrix itself, from all the “even numbered positions”.
If your “position 2” is on level 15 (32,768 positions),
your first 2 spillovers will come on level 16,
your next 4 will come on level 17 ($250 payout),
your next 8 will come on level 18,
your next 16 will come on level 19 ($1000 payout),
the next 32 positions will come on level 20 (2*$200 bonus)
That example will require more than 1 million positions to be bought after your own “position 2” (your first spillover). It will require 1,048,576 positions.
If the matrix currently are at a lower or higher level, you can either divide or multiply 1,048,576 by 2 4 8 16 or 32.
I have finished analysing it, but it will need to be organized and made more understandable and useable. It can be seen from many different viewpoints, and I will need to separate between them to avoid confusion.
I look forward to the findings and your analysis on the opportunity.
I thought you had disappeared, so it didn’t make any sense finishing the analysis.
I believe you should ask Chartfords about your exact positions in the matrix, row:column positions for your position #1 and #2, e.g. “row 16, column 445” type of info.
4 questions:
1. Your position #1, stated as row, column
2. Your position #2, as row, column
3. Number of positions in that or those rows.
4. How many rows will need to be filled before you can get your first $200 bonus payout, from your position #2.
Odd number is your personal matrix. You don’t need to know more than the first position (#1).
Even number is the spillovers from your personal matrix. You don’t need to know more than the first of those (#2).
I tried to calculate the number of rows before the first bonus payout. You can send them that example as an explanation.
I will like to get THEIR answers rather than my own theories. I’m also interested in HOW they will answer it. The questions are very precise and specific.
Note:
Most people will probably manage marketing and recruitment better if they don’t know details like that, if they can use the ideas they BELIEVE IN rather than the realities. But if you’re a long term thinker, you will need to handle realities too.
The reality in this case is that you’re relatively satisfied as a customer / art collector. That part isn’t any problem in itself, i.e. there’s no need to do anything dramatic.
Your questions will be related to something else, e.g. to whether you should recommend the income opportunity to friends, and potentially HOW you should do it.
I wouldn’t have felt comfortable using those marketing videos I watched. I have friends who are relatively experienced. They KNOW I will analyse details like that, so those marketing videos will only make it difficult for me to recommend it to friends.
That part was related specifically to me. “I wouldn’t feel comfortable” doesn’t mean anyone else should feel the same.
But feeling comfortable and relaxed is rather important if you want to recommend something to others. The more we will need to adjust ourselves in directions we don’t like, the poorer the result will be.
For products like art, a high or low price isn’t much of a problem. People selling $200 pieces of art will feel just as comfortable as people selling $129.99 pieces of art. If you try the same idea on gasoline or electricity, the price suddenly becomes highly important.
$200 pieces of art will need slightly different consumers than $129.99 pieces of art, the less price sensitive and more quality oriented consumer type. For gasoline, almost everyone will be highly price sensitive.
I’m very sensitive to misleading marketing, e.g. when other sales people try to use well known tricks. I wouldn’t have felt relaxed if I had to use those marketing videos.
Ok apologies for the delay been a busy week at work. I like the business model. I think it’s working well and it’s not a get rich quick scheme for anyone. We have a product we own and can sell at any time to offset our investment. We also have the rewards which would be greater as you clearly state should s feel comfortable inviting people but at this moment it’s not something I know or understand very well but I will on your advice find a way to do this comfortably because I believe many people could benefit from this opportunity. I don’t see it as an illegal system where it may shut down in 6months for example I’ve physically met people who have taken substantial returns from this plan. my even points are on level 13 my odd on level 20 so like you pointed out my odds will pay out slower although point one has paid out due to people below me inviting. My evens all pay out on level 17 and it’s currently half way through 15 so not too long. I also get free points for each completed point my point1 completed I got a free point on to level 14. Which will pay out on level 18. You clearly know how it works. I clearly see it will need more people buying art to build it in the later years but I’ll keep you updated on my progress. There are new ruby and sapphire plans being launched today I believe with bigger rewards. It’s still very new and all businesses need investment for development.
Also feel free to offer your advice on which would be the best way for me to market this product / opportunity.
I personally think you should avoid this, as this is what’s known as a “matrix scheme”, which is a combination of referral sales (illegal) and pyramid scheme (also illegal). And Matrix schemes have already busted by the OFT in the UK.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrix_scheme
Chartford *sounds* like a frequent art buyer’s club, but you don’t get paid until you paid $$$ into the system, and/or induce other people to pay $$$ into the system. In other words, your money went toward “positions” in the matrix. The art is incidental.
The business model is misleading trade practice / promotional pyramid, and is illegal in EU and most other countries.
That’s not about how you personally see it, it’s about the realities.
Sell at any time to whom? Art WITH opportunity attached and art WITHOUT opportunity attached are two different things. If people want to buy art as an investment, Chartfords is clearly not the right choice.
That was explained in post #38:
It didn’t come as a surprise that you have been presented for people who have made a profit from it. That’s one of the reasons for WHY they have that matrix, to have something to show income opportunity seekers.
Even numbered points:
Level 13: 8,192 positions
Level 14: 16,384
Level 15: 32,768 (multiple $250 payouts, 1 per position)
Level 16: 65,536
Level 17: 131,072 positions (multiple $1,000 payouts)
That’s why I asked for the format “row, column” to get the exact positions for your #1 and #2. It will make a huge difference if your positions are near the end of row 13 rather than at the beginning of the same row.
From you bought in at level 13 (with your position #2), something between 24,550 and 49,100 positions will need to be filled before you can get your first $250 payout. The $1,000 payouts will require 4 or 6 times more positions to be filled.
Odd numbered matrix (personal matrix):
The only spillovers you can expect there in the next few decades will be a few spillovers from your direct upline, when they’re trying to fill some holes in their own matrices.
It doesn’t make any sense to recommend Chartfords, e.g. to friends, if you primarily joined it as a consumer. It doesn’t make any sense for you to spend any money there either as a consumer. But that depends on what you’re buying there.
It doesn’t make much sense for an investor either. Most of the arts are over priced prints you can buy at other galleries at lower prices / better quality prints.
The matrix system isn’t very favorable for recruiters either, with $12,600 in investments to be made to get $1,250 payout. The system will become gradually less favorable and pay out slower and slower.
Recruiters will typically make low initial investments themselves, and try to profit from investments in a downline. The matrix system will be heavily disfavorable to that idea.
* The commission for a $200 minimum investment will be less than 10% of the total sale. A recruiter can’t build up a higher commission either from a minimum investment.
Chartfords isn’t very favorable for anyone other than itself and some early in investors.
I have tried to use a spreadsheet to analyse a general 2×24 matrix, “top to bottom, left to right”, with no system for “odd/even positions” to make it easier to calculate.
1 * $1,000 final payout: 16 positions (1 free)
2 * $250 interim payout: 16 positions (1 free)
Matrix payout $1,500 / $3,000 investment = 50% “best case”
Only 6.25% of the positions will receive final payout $1,000.
Only 12.5% of the positions will receive interim payout $250.
Most of those profitable positions are already in place higher up in the system. New investors will mostly be adding losing positions.
1 * $200 bonus payout: 16 positions (1 free)
Average bonus payout in a completely filled 2×24 matrix, bonus payouts 10 levels deep will be:
$258 / $3,000 investment = 8.6% average, 6.25% of positions
$440 / $3,000 investment = 14.67% “best case”, 0.01%
“Best case” is full bonus payout 10 levels deep, counted from the top of the pyramid, with a total of 32,767 or 65,535 positions to be filled to get all bonus payouts = 30720 or 61440 investments to be made (ignoring the odd/even system).
Only 6.25% of the positions will receive any bonus payout at all, 1 out of 16 positions. Most of them are already in place higher up in the system.
It’s difficult to recommend a pyramid scheme to anyone.
* 7 out of 8 positions will not be profitable at all.
* 1 out of 8 positions will earn a minor 25% profit.
* 1 out of 16 positions will receive final payout $1,000.
The main function of the matrix is to move money upwards in the system, to reward people higher up in the system than yourself, giving you the experience and dreams while they will get your money.
In a completely filled “personal matrix”, where all the bonus payouts will be paid out, will require 32767 positions to be filled.
1 your first position
2
4
8 1*$250 (interim payout)
16 1*$1,000 (final payout)
32 2*$200 = $400 (1st level bonus payout)
64 4*$100 = $400 (2nd level)
128 8*$50 = $400 (3rd level)
256 16*$20 = $320 (4th level)
512 32*$20 = $640 (5th level)
1024 64*$20 = $1,280 (6th level)
2048 128*$10 = $1,280 (7th level)
4096 256*$10 = $2,560 (8th level)
8192 512*$5 = $2,560 (9th level)
16384 1024*$5 = $5,120 (10th level)
———————-
Max bonus payout per position = $14,960.
32767 positions total, 15 levels to fill in the matrix to earn the full bonus payout.
The biggest problem with investments like that is that the money you pay for a position will be used to reward people higher up in the system. THEY will get the monetary rewards, while you will get the POTENTIAL monetary rewards if you can get other people to believe in the same idea you believed in.
@M Norway —
Level 15 is 16,384 not 32768. 2^(n-1). Total points to date when L15 completes would be 32767 (2^n)-1.
Much of the data in the original post is now out of date according to the current introductory videos.
Chartfords seems to be expanding quite nicely for them.
I didn’t try to calculate total points to date in post #48. It was about how many positions people would need to fill in the personal matrix (not the company wide one) to get the full $14,960 total payout from the first position.
Chartfords is a combination of Jackie Charters and Barry Bashford hence Chart Fords both names
Barry Bashford was an owner of the renowned InfocusPlanLine. Barry Bashford was not very public about this and passed himself off as a normal member of Planline the exact same system that they are pushing now as Chartfords and a system that left Thousands of people losing Thousands and thousands of pounds when it imploded several years ago.
They then started up exactly the same Ponzi style business called Rewarding Art, low and behold that also went down due to sheer incompetence.
Everything starts with Planline (PL) the premise is you buy “art” but you’re buying a “matrix position”. To earn you then need to get people below you to buy “art”.
The art is nothing special, it’s regular prints you can buy for £25 or less, but with PL they cost $200 +.
So the product does NOT have the value that is being charged for it, indeed is completely irrelevant as people are not even wanting the crappy pictures they are being lured into a money game where people that get in early make money at the expense of the people that come in and for the third time thousands of people will lose their money.
PL was nothing new, they copied the idea from a Dutch company called Image Direct
PL had the following layout, each level down had double the amount of “matrix positions” as the previous level.
It turned out Barry Bashford and Jackie Charters had a private stock of positions in key locations which they sold to unsuspecting people very late in the game for many thousands. Essentially they cashed out on these positions, when they saw the blue lights in the distance.
In order for line 1 to be paid out, line 4 would need to be completed, not line 2. So you can imagine when you join in line 14 (8,192)and line 18 (131,072) needs to be completed.
You work out how much money needs to come in to fill line 18 then double to 19 20 etc. Eventually things slowed down, then an investigation happened and all the money was frozen. Everyone lost everything.
It is inevitable that as the pyramid grows more and more people are destined to lose their money. Any one that is recruiting and promoting this Ponzi style company should at the least feel ashamed of stealing other peoples hard earned money and at best be sent to jail with no release as they are out and out SCAMMERS
Mick Smithers was another early joiner who knew the investigation was coming and sold his positions knowingly.
Lee and Darren Smith were also directors of PL and cashed out, they have a history in the UK, eventually a member who lost everything in PL ran down one of them with his car and he is paralyzed from the waist down.
Now we reach Rewarding Art (RA) both Jackie Charters and Barry Bashford are involved. It’s an exact mirror of PL. Just as with PL the whole thing was amateur and the top people profited once again.
Eventually as I said due to sheer lunacy it disappeared without a trace and thousands of people for the second time lost all the money they put in and they got their friends to also lose money .
The matrix Layout
1
2
4
8
16
Now we have Chartfords, despite what Jackie Charters and other people say, it has been around for a few years now. The overpriced “art” prints are still present, the matrix and requirements.
Barry Bashford and Jackie Charters are bold enough to create the company name through a combination of their surnames. You have the same people who profited through immoral means in PL and RA, promoting Chartfords.
What is interest now and extremely silly, is that the Banners Broker (BB) profiteers:
Lyndon Farrington
Duncan Wood – pushing IML to BB affiliates
Martin Wild – pushing IML to BB affiliates
Ann and Barry Hardman
Neale Pocock – Spain IC
Fraser Douther – Cyprus IC
Paul McCarthy – Ireland IC
Mateuz Guzda – Poland IC
Bardur Gunnarsson – Iceland IC
Simon Martin – Talkingbb admin
Nev dunn
Sandy Goel
James King
Andy Cummings
Sharon James – pushing IML to BB affiliates
Keith Lambert – pushing IML to BB affiliates
Simon Stepsys – pushing IML to BB affiliates
Are all supporting BB and still do or they have profited through mass recruitment and panel sales and now jump to Chartfords whilst being silent on the topic of BB.
For some unknown reason there is very little online regarding PL and RA or how things ended up and the profiteers.
Chartfords is an exact copy and these BB front people are knowingly trying to profit through getting the people they mislead into BB, now into Chartfords. Where they have no hope of reaching the required amounts of recruitment to breakeven, never mind profit.
If you opt to be passive you will make nothing, if you get your friends, family and others in, you make money at their expense, so if you risk your money that is your choice to be a muppet if you recruit you are a crook make a choice
Thankyou Andrew Williams for that insight of this rip off company.
I have been in it for 3 years with never a cent returned from it.
I have tried to “sell” my points to no avail, as Support told me that was the only thing I could do…. seems nobody wants them.
There is absolutely no way to get out of this thing, so just put it down as another bust and loss!
Update also… it changed its name to Premier Cashback… and has also branched out into Health Products.