Traffic Monsoon @ BehindMLM

Nothing yet official from the Traffic Monsoon preliminary injunction hearing. We’re monitoring the hearing and will publish an article as soon as we hear something (the hearing is ongoing as I type this). In the meantime, yesterday the Traffic Monsoon Receiver filed two revealing declarations in court. They pertain to Traffic Monsoon’s inner business operations and [Continue reading…]

Sunil Patel has appointed himself somewhat of an ambassador for Traffic Monsoon investors. Specifically, Traffic Monsoon investors who believe Ponzi schemes should be legal. In response to the SEC shutting down Traffic Monsoon in July, Patel threatened to sue the SEC. He also offered to fly to the US and personally testify in court. After [Continue reading…]

One of the key points of contention at the upcoming preliminary injunction hearing, is whether Charles Scoville’s pseudo-compliance will hold up in court. Scoville represents Traffic Monsoon’s Ad Packs were not securities because he never used the word “investment” on the Traffic Monsoon website. Traffic Monsoon affiliates referenced the opportunity as an investment scheme, however [Continue reading…]

In what shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone, the SEC have revealed, contrary to Charles Scoville’s representations, that Traffic Monsoon cannot repay its investors.

In addition to the periodic pro-Ponzi rants Scoville has been publishing on Facebook, a few weeks ago Scoville filed an opposition to the SEC’s requested preliminary injunction. The SEC have filed their reply, claiming Scoville’s arguments are “without merit” and “legally meaningless”.

The Traffic Monsoon Receiver’s investigation into Traffic Monsoon continues, with the latest seeing subpoenas served on Google, Yahoo and William Bryant.

As expected, a response in opposition to a preliminary injunction against Traffic Monsoon and Charles Scoville is pretty much more of the same. The Court should deny the SEC’s motion in its entirety for more fundamental reasons: AdPacks are not “securities;” AdPack buyers are not and were not “investors;” and Traffic Monsoon is not a “Ponzi Scheme.” [Continue reading…]

If Charles Scoville’s lengthy rants on Facebook are to be believed, Traffic Monsoon was not an investment opportunity. Affiliates deposited $50 to receive website traffic, with absolutely no expectation they would eventually be paid more than they deposited. This despite Traffic Monsoon advertising a $55 ROI on every $50 deposit. The picture Scoville paints is [Continue reading…]

In a Facebook post dated August 23rd, Charles Scoville told Traffic Monsoon affiliates that the SEC has taken away everything I own; making me basically homeless, penniless, and near powerless to defend myself. Perhaps not so surprisingly, a new filing from the Traffic Monsoon Receiver reveals Scoville wasn’t entirely truthful.

Bad news for those looking forward to the Traffic Monsoon preliminary injunction next week. For reasons not yet entirely clear, the hearing has been delayed by over a month.