Traffic Monsoon preliminary injunction hearing rescheduled for 23 Sep
Earlier today a joint stipulation was filed by the SEC and Charles Scoville, requesting the upcoming August 5th preliminary injunction hearing be rescheduled.
The parties also requested the current TRO in place be extended until the rescheduled hearing.
An order passed a few hours after the filing granted the request, with the preliminary injunction rescheduled until September 23rd.
The TRO has also been extended till then. The Receiver remains in control of Traffic Monsoon and Charles Scoville’s assets as ordered on the 27th.
No reason for the request for a reschedule is provided in the joint-filing. Of note is Scoville personally signed the joint-filing, suggesting he has yet to acquire legal representation in the matter.
In an Facebook post published less than an hour ago, Scoville has given his version of events:
I’ve had a very positive and constructive conversation with the SEC today, and they explained to me they have every intention to work out resolution with me without having to go through litigation.
They said this is their experience almost all the time. They’ve moved the hearing until 23 Sept 2016 to give us plenty of time to work out settlement resolution.
I stressed with them my priority at this point is to make sure that the people who have purchased the adpacks get the money that’s owed to them.
They told me that we’ll sort out the plan for accomplishing that, and I’ll work with the receiver to make sure everyone gets paid what is due through the resolution as quickly as possible.
I outlined a plan for determining amounts to be paid. I told them that speed in getting this done is important, and to place urgency in carrying out this step.
I know people want to get paid as soon as possible, so I even suggested a plan I believe this could be carried out nearly immediately.
The next step is making sure the business can move forward from here without a revenue sharing position, still providing quality services, and still create a way for people to earn money by surfing ads.
There are naturally a few problems with Scoville’s post.
First and foremost is that if a settlement agreement is reached between now and September, Traffic Monsoon will not restart in any way shape or form.
MLM underbelly scammers are facing criminal trials for much less over the past year (see Troy Barnes and his $3.6 million Ponzi and Daniel Filho and his $22.8 million Ponzi).
Given Traffic Monsoon is a $207 million dollar Ponzi scheme, that Scoville will face criminal charges at some point is almost certain.
That said, the SEC have filed a civil lawsuit, they can’t bring about criminal charges. Criminal charges against Scoville will likely only be made public following an arrest abroad or when he returns to the US.
Regarding money owed to Traffic Monsoon investors, what has been recovered and is still to be recovered will eventually be distributed out to Traffic Monsoon’s victims.
Currently Traffic Monsoon and Charles Scoville have about $60 million in frozen funds, with $207 or so invested into the scheme. The $147 million dollar deficit makes it impossible to pay everyone what they initially invested.
As for Ponzi ROI liability, Traffic Monsoon racked up $812.35 million. Even if Traffic Monsoon hadn’t paid anything out and had access to the full $207 million invested, that’s still only about 25% of the Ad Pack ROI liability.
The Receiver and Scoville meanwhile will be working together but this will have nothing to do with restarting Traffic Monsoon. The Receiver has been given control of Scoville’s assets, including Traffic Monsoon.
Communications between the two parties will be limited to the Receiver securing Scoville’s assets (including offshore bank accounts).
The bottom-line is busted $207 million dollar Ponzi schemes don’t get “restructured”.
Traffic Monsoon affiliates were already purportedly getting paid to view other affiliate’s ads. This is more of the same and ignores the fact that Traffic Monsoon was a Ponzi scheme because newly invested funds were used to pay off existing investors.
The SEC, who have shut down Traffic Monsoon to protect its victims, are not about to let Scoville re-open and continue to steal more funds.
In addition to that there’s also the TRO in place, which explicitly prohibits Scoville from soliciting any funds from Traffic Monsoon affiliates.
A few hours ago the SEC published a press-release, again reaffirming their position that Traffic Monsoon is a Ponzi scheme:
The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that it has obtained an asset freeze against the operator of a Utah-based international Ponzi scheme that raised more than $207 million from investors worldwide, primarily in the U.S., India and Russia.
In a complaint filed in federal court in Salt Lake City on July 26, the SEC alleges that Traffic Monsoon LLC and Charles Scoville, the company’s only member operated an Internet-based Ponzi scheme that they falsely represented to investors was an advertising company.
The SEC’s complaint alleges that Traffic Monsoon and Scoville violated Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 17(a)(1) and (3) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5(a) and (c) thereunder.
Among other things, the SEC’s complaint seeks permanent injunctions, prohibiting further violations of the laws charged, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains plus prejudgment interest and civil penalties from Traffic Monsoon and Scoville.
My thoughts going forward are that any settlement between the SEC and Scoville won’t change the shutdown or see Traffic Monsoon return.
Rather, they’ll be geared towards building cooperation towards a plea bargain when criminal charges are eventually filed.
the SEC has a policy of ‘no admit/no deny’ which defendants mostly choose in their civil settlements with the SEC. this policy enables defendants to cooperate with the SEC while not admitting guilt.
in 2015, after pressure from federal judges, the SEC announced that moving forward, the no admit/no deny policy would not be available to defendants in egregious cases of public harm. defendants would have to admit guilt, or go to civil trial against the SEC.
let’s see what settlement is reached at, with scoville.
also, there seems to be something wrong with scoville’s head. the kind of rosy picture he’s painting about his settlement with the SEC, indicate he does not have a grasp on what is happening to him and his traffic monsoon, or that he has just taken his first steps into deep shit.
Something wrong with his head is an understatement lol. He is totally f*cked.
Can you please provide us the method to keep up to date with future communications on the case. Where do you access your information from.
The quoted information is directly from court filings.
You can either sign up for a Pacer account or wait for BehindMLM to publish updates as they happen.
I don’t host PDF filings on BehindMLM due to the high volume of traffic we receive.
Is revenue sharing program is illegal ? Why SEC has stopped Trafficmonsoon only while other revenue sharing websites are running smoothly ??
Using newly invested funds to pay off existing investors constitutes a Ponzi scheme.
Because they can’t be everywhere at once.
Lol you make it sound like collecting people’s money on false promises is legitimate revenue.
How many are you in to know how smoothly they are running in the first place?
You may want to start distancing yourself from these schemes sooner than later.
Or it’s just a PR persona he put forth to lull the sheeple.
Zeekheads did similar things weeks before and after USSS closed the Zeek office. *Cough* Craddock *cough*.
This is just the new ‘internet marketing’. People have a slightly believable revenue source (Internet ads) and then set up a ponzi scheme in front of it, which is 100% illegal.
He seems to be in the hopeful, “the SEC only wants to talk to me, this is all big mistake phase.”
Now what to do we all worldwide members ? we invested huge amount on trafficmonsoon. how can we paid out our money ? hope this site going smoothly as previous.
Same thing with Zeek “it’s just a routine investigation, we’re growing so fast”
Same with USFIA / Gemcoin “it’s just an SEC audit, it’s done all the time. We’re just cooperating with the authorities”.
Scoville ain’t gonna ever set foot on the US soil again (including embassies).
Well to be honest there is hope for this con artist… the SEC let Bernie Madoff get away with his scam for years.
These guys are dreamers too… so dream big!
It is a world of internet!
If he gets indicted and based on the size of the scam now, likely will, then he will get an Interpol red alert on him probably if he does not show up to the US to face the music.
That probably means, when he travels anywhere that has an extradition treaty with the US, he is liable to get picked up.
Am guessing there is already a sealed grand jury indictment in place and for the SEC to issue the statement, a “Ponzi Scheme” means they have already determined that to be the case and criminal proceedings are probably not far behind. I am also guessing that they are waiting for scoville to show up on US soil before they can indict him.
Kind of telling when on the first SEC update video earlier this week, one of his leaders asks him if he is still planning to go to the US and he said, no since he cant move the funds. So maybe he was already planning an exit strategy, being in Dubai that has a non-extradition treaty with the US.
Maybe OZ can have some knowledge on this but have not seen any schemes like this in the past where the SEC has filed a suit as a Ponzi scheme and then the alleged mastermind has won the case and reversed the SEC suit.
Yes its a familiar story line. Just talked to my realtor in SFO and additional anti-money laundering measures have been instituted at escrow/title companies in six regions of the country where off shore money routinely attempts to convert illegally obtained funds into US real estate.
With all the anti financial crime measures being instituted and evidence collecting capabilities being expanded, when a guy is caught, he’s pretty much good and well caught… protests to the contrary being of little avail.
SEC rarely if ever lost cases on Ponzi schemes due to their expertise and ability in tracking money movements and their access to bank backends.
The only significant case I think they lost recently was against an oil exploration company.
SEC alleged they are mingling investor funds earmarked for recent projects and using those as “profit” for earlier projects. Company was able to prove that wasn’t the case even though it does look that way without understanding the multi-year cycle of the way these oil exploration projects work.
And I was NOT referring to LUCA Group. SEC nailed that one.
When it comes to INTERNET autosurf schemes, SEC doesn’t miss.
Pretty much an apple to oranges comparison you’ve made there since the SEC already has this guy backed into a corner and a TRO has been issued by the court.
@kiran
You wait and hope that at some point you’ll receive a percentage of the funds you initially invested.
Moral of the story: Don’t invest in Ponzi schemes.
@jeff
Can confirm, this has never happened.
Here is an update from one of the TM groups and people actually believe this!!
Misinformation is unfortunately rife in the days following a major Ponzi scheme bust.
This, for instance, is a flat out lie:
Traffic Monsoon can’t have more money, because based on a database of every transaction ever processed within Traffic Monsoon, provided to the SEC by Charles Scoville himself, Traffic Monsoon only took in $207 million dollars.
Traffic Monsoon’s Ponzi ROI liability meanwhile was upwards of $800 million. Roughly $60 million has been seized, leaving a massive defecit between what was invested, what has been paid out in fraudulent Ponzi ROIs and what has been recovered and what victims have lost.
That’s just from the opening paragraph of the statement. The rest is lies piled on more lies. As for the pseudo-compliance crap, Scoville is going to find out the hard way why pseudo-compliance when you’re committing Ponzi fraud doesn’t matter.
yesterday, frank colabro jr, a top promoter of traffic monsoon had published a video update on the TM mess. he claimed to have been in touch with scoville who is currently in the UK.
towards the end of the video he claimed that scoville would be returning to the US on 2nd, august, 2016.
but even i am inclined to think that scoville will not enter the US, because a criminal indictment almost surely awaits him.
what i cant figure is this – it seems scoville was cooperating with the SEC and giving them information and signing documents even before the SEC moved the court for an injunction against TM.
so, was he providing this information from the UK, or did he travel to the UK later, and if so how did the SEC allow him to leave the US?
this ^^ is psuedocompliance BS. it’s like saying – hey we were selling knives, but we all agreed to call them spoons.
just saying – it is not an investment – is not enough. scoville will need to show the SEC and courts that he was really selling a ‘service’ by proving the ‘value’ of that service.
if no one outside TM was purchasing this service, then it has no ‘value’ and was not a product but only an investment.
@anjali
Before they filed the suit, the SEC was probably doing an early stage inquiry that is usually very cordial and people get taken in by thinking they can talk their way out of things and probably thats why Scoville was so positive about his case.
Also, at this time, all information requested is usually voluntary and does not require physical appearance as items can be transmitted electronically.
Most times, they have all the generic information and waiting to get the pertinent details which Scoville looks like he provided to them. The SEC complaint is this case is very specific on details and looks like that was provided to them.
If and when the case becomes a criminal case is when normally, the judge rules on travel restrictions and such.
@Oz
How much money have they paid out you think? I dont see that number on the SEC complaint
$207 million minus the $60 million or so left, so about $147 million.
Is this real?
youtube.com/watch?v=p2m24YsWJvE
Quote from my comment on this video:
Also why is the site still live if he has been shut down?
Scoville hasn’t handed it over yet.
Receiver has probably been in touch and Scoville’s holding out or has yet to respond. Probably still thinks he has a shot with the SEC.
If the website isn’t handed over next week I suspect we might see a contempt motion filed.
The Receiver was just appointed on Thursday. I expect her to get it taken down either on Monday or Tuesday.
She has to get in touch with the hosting company, show them the court order and they will immediately comply. I’m sure today she has been busy making sure all the accounts are frozen and they can’t be touched except by her.
I think in the Zeek case it took 72 hours to get the website offline after the raid on Zeek headquarters. My memory may be wrong on that, but I am sure it wasn’t immediate.
if scoville is in the UK, he may just hang on to the website and relaunch his ponzi from outside the US.
ponzi scammers are cunning, and scoville has a lot of experience from participation in various ponzi schemes in his past.
A contempt motion could see an arrest warrant issued (Sann Rodrigues). They’d be able to execute that in the UK wouldn’t they?
In every Ponzi shut down, all the major promoters all of a sudden become lawyers and post some of the most ridiculous reasons why their Ponzi de Jour was not a Ponzi. This is normal when this action is taken. Of course they are all proven wrong, but for now they bask in claiming knowledge they don’t have. The conspiracy theories are alive and well in TM. Actually so far they have been rather mild compared to ASD and Zeek members antics. But they still have a long time to catch up since the hearing is not until 9/23. And catch up I am sure they will.
So moral of the story, if you recycle money from new members you are a ponzi, if you don’t you are like hubpages or something, is that correct?
I’m a bit confused as it seems TM has a wrong business model but I don’t understand why it can’t be restructured…
@Jay
Pretty much.
Because
1. There’s a whole boatload of victims that got ripped off.
2. There’s a handful of investors who stole a ton of money
3. The only reason anyone participated in Traffic Monsoon was to receive a Ponzi ROI. Take that out and the company is as good as dead.
You say $207 million I don’t know where that number came from.. and this $800 million figure B|
Knowing the business model from inside.. A $207 million dollar purchases would only create a deficit of $20.7 million..
Because a $50 adpack would give $5 for the referral and $5 profit under revenue share.. So only a $10 deficit.
The numbers don’t add up to me.. and I think you lot are manifesting. and lot of these commentors have no clue about TM.
Just Naive statement that generalize things..
For example: PayPal froze their account back in Feb 2016 with 60 million in the account.. meaning there were 1.2 million ad packs in circulation. provided 100% balance was from ad pack purchase ( which is not). Are you telling me that TM sold $140 million after Feb 2016.. with Payza and STP.. lol..
Charles reciprocated the freeze immediately in the ad packs so 100% sure that nothing was recurrent from that point..
The only possibility would be that this $200mil would be the sales revenue out of which only a small percentage is actual debt and that is covered by cash..
Because at any given time the sale revenue consist of partly paid sharing positions plus pure profit sales like banner clicks and credit purchases, as it was the best converting easy traffic you could buy in the market for cheap prices.. unless you wanted to pay $1,000 for 100 clicks from solo ads. lol..
I doubt these figures are accurate at all.. but cant expect much from a website like this, all business on the internet is scam and a sham. lmoa..
@Freddy
Because you’re not factoring in re-investment.
The majority of Traffic Monsoon investors were reinvesting to reach the point top investors had reached. That being they can reinvest while skimming a handsome profit from the top.
These reinvested funds meanwhile were paid out to top investors and Scoville (through withdrawal requests). That means funds are being reinvested that don’t actually exist, and so the ROI liability skyrocketed.
As per the transaction database showing every investment and withdrawal into Traffic Monsoon, investors invested $738.5 million dollars (approx $531.5 million which doesn’t exist, due to reinvestment).
At a 110% ROI ($50 in, $55 out), this creates a dollar for dollar Ponzi liability of $812.35 millon. And that’s not even taking into consideration referral commissions, which pushes the the total amount owed even higher.
$60 million in the bank, $207 million actually invested but over $738.5 million taken in on paper. It looks ridiculous because it is, Ponzi business models are fraud.
I just took a look at the site and even attempted to log in but it seems the only thing the members are seeing is an endlessly repeating rotator 😛
and for the record I also work at helping people avoid scams so the account was purely for investigative purposes 🙂
Seriously you lot have no idea! You talk about ‘skimming’ by top investors etc etc but A -There was no investors and B) There is no ROI!
Anyone in the system could withdraw money any time they wanted new member or old member!
The rev share was not payed out all in one go it was shared ( hence the name) profits from previous days sales so just like any other business on earth no sales no profit no profit to share!
Wtf is wrong with you people? Even if someone had 20billion ad packs in the system and tomo there is no sales then that person DOES NOT GET A PENNY!! What is so difficult to understand?
New members get exactly the same rev share per ad pack as existing members, it is completely transparent! The suggestion there are ‘top investors’ is complete BS, members of TM (not investors in TM) can decide to purchase as little or a much advertising as they choose at any time.
If a member has taken 2 years to build up 3000 ad packs and then someone today decided to buy 3000 ad packs and they are both part of the rev share part of TM , as long as TM continues to sell advertising they will both get EXACTLY THE SAME SHARE OF REVENUE.
If there are no sales and no profit then they will both get $ZERO ……. how is this a scam a ponzi??? You are all simply talking shit!!
As for your ROI argument that fails miserably because for it to be a ROI A it would have to be an investment and B a specific date of return would have to be stated i.e. Give me $50 today and in 1 year I will give you back $55.
You are all haters jumping on the bandwagon to appear like internet heros, in fact I would go as far as to say you are the frauds in this scenario!
I invest $50 in Traffic Monsoon and receive a $55 ROI. That makes me an investor.
Which has nothing to do with Traffic Monsoon being a Ponzi scheme.
Nothing. No new investment = Ponzi collapse, we already know that.
Which has nothing to do with Traffic Monsoon being a Ponzi scheme.
Top investors = those who withdrew the most money. Same as in any other Ponzi scheme.
Which has nothing to do with Traffic Monsoon being a Ponzi scheme.
Because Traffic Monsoon uses newly invested funds to pay off existing investors.
False. A Ponzi can pay a ROI over any timeframe.
Using newly invested funds to pay off existing investors defines a Ponzi scheme. Not how long the ROI takes to pay out or whether a time-frame is given.
And if you told lots of other people to give you $50 on the promise of a $55 ROI, and gave me back $55 with their funds (which is what Traffic Monsoon did), you too would be running a Ponzi scheme.
So you’d be a net-winner then.
OMG you really are laughable!!
NO, YOU BUY ADVERTISING WITH THE OPTION TO BECOME PART OF THE REV SHARE. THERE IS NO INVESTMENT AND NO ROI
AS IT IS NOT A PONZI THIS MAKES SENSE
NO, ANY BUSINESS THAT DOES NOT MAKE SALES DOES NOT MAKE A PROFIT OR PAY SHARE HOLDERS …. BUSINESS COLLAPSE
CORRECT! AS IT IS NOT A PONZI
COMPLETE RUBBISH! ALL OF THESE PEOPLE YOU TERM AS ‘TOP INVESTORS’ HAVE HAD EXACTLY THE SAME OPPORTUNITY TO BUY MORE ADVERTISING AND THEREFOR TAKE A LARGER REV SHARE. SAME AS ANY NEW MEMBER WISHING TO BUY ADVERTISING
CORRECT. AS TRAFFIC MONSOON IS NOT A PONZI, BUT IT SHOWS THAT ANYONE WHO HAS ADVERTISING HAS EXACTLY THE SAME OPPORTUNITY. NEW OR OLD.
ANY BUSINESS ON EARTH TAKES MONEY FROM THE BUSINESS TO BUILD THE BUSINESS. IF NIKE (Ozedit: Nike don’t solicit $50 deposits on the promise of a $55 ROI. Offtopic derail attmept removed.)
SO A PONZI HAS DIFFERENT RULES TO EVERY OTHER BUSINESS ON ERTH JUST BECAUSE YOU DECIDE TO LABLE IT A PONZI YES???
2 POINTS HERE, NO ONE INVESTS IN TM THEY BUY ADVERTISING. JUST LIKE IN MY EXAMPLE ABOVE WITH NIKE (Ozedit: Nike don’t solicit $50 deposits on the promise of a $55 ROI. Offtopic derail attempt removed.)
UNLIKE TM WHERE THERE ARE NO SHARE HOLDERS JUST ADVERTISERS WHO SHARE THE REVENUE.
TM MONSOON SAID THAT THE MAXIMUM YOU COULD MAKE WAS $55 FROM EACH AD PACK IN THE REV SHARE SYSTEM. THIS WAS NEVER LISTED AS A CONTRACTUAL AMOUNT AS THERE WAS NO INVESTMENT. NO CONTRACT = NO INVESTMENT = NO PONZI = NO SCAM
NO IDEA WHAT THIS STATEMENT MEANS APART FROM THE FACT THAT WHERE YOU KNOW YOU ARE CATEGORICALLY WRONG A SNIDE REMARK TO CLOSE IS YOUR ONLY ATTACK! 😉
Buying advertising doesn’t pay a ROI, an investment does.
Traffic Monsoon affiliates invested $50 and received a $55 ROI. The ROI was funded from subsequently invested funds, making Traffic Monsoon a Ponzi scheme.
Repeating “Traffic Monsoon wasn’t a Ponzi scheme” over and over again doesn’t change the facts.
Whether they “the same opportunity” or not is irrespective to the fact that they withdrew the most out of Traffic Monsoon, based on how much they invested and reinvested – making them top investors.
Which is not the same as a Ponzi scheme using newly invested funds to pay off existing investors.
A Ponzi scheme uses newly invested funds to pay off existing investors. Nothing more, nothing less.
Nike doesn’t solicit $50 investments on the promise of a $55 ROI.
Ponzi investment != sales.
Whether the ROI was “contractual” or not is irrelevant. By your own admission Traffic Monsoon was offering $55 ROIs on $50 deposits, as advertised on their website.
The ROI was funded out of subsequently invested funds, making Traffic Monsoon a Ponzi scheme.
That much is obvious.
(Ozedit: abuse removed)
I ADVERTISE ON MANY WEBSITES (Ozedit: That’s nice, has nothing to do with Traffic Monsoon using newly invested funds to pay off existing investors, making it a Ponzi scheme.)
THE POINT YOU ARE MISSING HERE IS (Ozedit: Any point outside of Traffic Monsoon soliticting $50 deposits and paying a $55 ROI from subsequently deposited funds is irrelevant)
THIS IS CATEGORICALLY INCORRECT. I HAVE SEEN MEMBERS WHO HAVE RE-ADVERTISED FOR THE WHOLE TIME (Ozedit: And they are not top investors. Top investors, as explained, are affiliates who have withdrawn the most money)
SO A PONZI HAS DIFFERENT RULES (Ozedit: No, as explained above.)
SO AS WE ALL KNOW THIS IS NOT AN INVESTMENT (Ozedit: As previously explained, typing “THIS IS NOT AN INVESTMENT” does not negate the fact that Traffic Monsoon solicited $50 deposits on the promise of an advertised $55 ROI)
NIKE (Ozedit: doesn’t solicit $50 investments on the promise of a $55 ROI.)
NOPE, BY MY OWN ADMISSION HISTORICALLY EACH AD PACK HAS PREVIOUSLY PAID $55 (Ozedit: which is a ROI on each $50 deposit. An investment by any other name.)
hey migel, TYPING IN ALL CAPS DOES NOT MAKE TM ANY LESS OF A PONZI SCHEME.
THIS^^ IS A SNIDE COMMENT.
@Migel
Easier to snip your repetitive waffle then waste my time quoting it.
$50 in, $55 out is an investment paying a ROI. You could have agreed to purchasing unicorn horns for $50 each, so long as there was a $55 ROI attached to your payment it was an investment.
Using subsequently invested funds to pay the ROI makes Traffic Monsoon a Ponzi scheme.
Your only counter to this so far is “IT’S NOT AN INVESTMENT”, which is a waste of everybody’s time.
That’s really all there is to it and unless you’ve got something substantive to offer, I’ll be marking any more repetitive rhetoric as spam.
I guess all the while you joined just to promote your sites and never once thought about the income from each pack purchased?
Did you once think of how many people were buying the packs after you – was your income?
Maybe you need to revisit all your statements and see where you are falling short on understanding.
NO one in Monsoon was really in it for the advertising – not even you!
Interesting note, if everyone is paying $50 per pack where exactly is the profit to pay the $5 coming from?
Don’t hurt yourself coming up with the answer to that.
OZ … My counter is that I have told you you are buying advertising and that’s it. (Ozedit: Given you deposited $50 and received $55, that’s not a counter.)
I guess it is nice to ignore the question and run off.
If everyone is earning $5 on top of their $50 spend
where is the $5 coming from to pay you.
Minus all the hype of other sites and revenue.
you didn’t answer the question at all
The answer will reveal why MONSOON will be and remain a ponzi.
You just ignore the question and the truth in front of you.
Now the SEC will just have to confirm it for you.