Will hiding in Ecuador protect AddWallet from US?
Undoubtedly if one was to credit a single source for the current rash of Ponzi scheme “daily revenue share” companies infecting the MLM industry, it would have to be Zeek Rewards.
Under the guise of a penny auction, Zeek Rewards let its members invest in the company and paid out a daily ROI over 90 days. The business model hinged on affiliates receiving >100% than the money they invested over the 90 day maturity period.
Zeek Rewards ran from January 2011 till it was shut down by the SEC in August 2012 for being a $600M Ponzi scheme. Following the SEC’s investigation it was revealed that at best, Zeek Rewards only had enough invested funds in reserve to continue paying out affiliates for 5 days ($45 million USD a day).
Since Zeek Rewards was shut down, those of us observing the industry has seen an explosion of Ponzi schemes popping up. Most, if not all of these companies seek to recapture the inherent addictiveness of affiliates investing money and then watching virtual earnings grow via a daily paid ROI.
The problem is that fundamentally, every single one of these opportunities still boils down to affiliates investing their own money into the company which is then used to pay out existing affiliates who invested earlier.
One of the closest imitators of the Zeek Rewards “daily revenue share” Ponzi scheme I’ve seen thus far has been AddWallet. The company has gone to great lengths to replicate the design, look and feel of the Zeek Rewards backend and is heavily marketed towards ex-Zeek Rewards affiliates.
With a business model and compensation plan that simply exchanged penny auction bids with advertising credits, naturally questions have arisen from prospective investors curious as to why, once the scheme grows big enough, the SEC won’t just simply shut down AddWallet too.
Seeking to address those concerns, AddWallet held a conference call a few days ago. The gist of the explanation being not that AddWallet is any different to business model and compensation wise to Zeek Rewards, but rather that being based offshore, AddWallet are confident the they are safe from the SEC.
The AddWallet call, hosted by ex-Zeek Rewards and current AddWallet affiliate Cesar Ramirez, was mostly a Q&A session from existing and prospective investors, largely focused on concerns they had over obvious similarities between AddWallet and Zeek Rewards.
On the call the management structure of AddWallet was revealed, naming Louis Cordero as CEO (Ecuador), Brandon Bradshaw as Vice-President (Florida in the US) and Logan Chamberlain as CFO (Ecuador).
Bradshaw took most of the questions on the call and started by lamenting on the loss of Zeek Rewards and the intentional similarities that exist between the it and AddWallet:
[4:52] After the fall of the major player Zeek (Rewards), we… saw a lot of things there.
[13:34] It’s unfortunate what happened, alot of good people got hurt. I thought Zeek was doing a fantastic job.
[5:26] We put a base operating system down. Yes, it’s very much like Zeek when you go into the retail profit pool earnings, you see something that you’ve seen before.
So in essence, for a lot of people we didn’t have to really train them. You already know what’s going on as soon as you reach that screen.
[7:31] This business model, this compensation plan is proven to be dynamic. Everyone will make lots of money here at AddWallet.
Addressing concerns over what happened with Zeek Rewards, Bradshaw then attempted to reassure those on the call that AddWallet would not be in danger of facing the same fate:
[13:44] One of the first things that was wrong was that they (Zeek Rewards) were incorporated in the southern United States, they were incorporated in North Carolina and they were sitting ducks.
Y’know, once you have so much advertising people know you, you become global and they became a target.
So we saw all the way what happened here. So we incorporated in Ecuador, spoke to the lawyers in Ecuador. They said “this business model is fine”. So by doing that, we are offshore.
[5:10]The CFO, Dr. Logan Chamberlain, moved down in Ecuador and we saw an opportunity. We had a lot of meetings, we put a lot of things in place.
[5:50] We launched on January 7th. We’re an Ecuadorian corporation, owned and run by Ecuadorians. [6:09] We have our server here in Tampa.
[15:11] The Ecuadorian government loves us, welcomes us. We feel that, besides having our server in Tampa (Florida) right now, getting it, the servers are already in Ecuador, flipping the switch to speak, that’s the only thing left to do.
Rather than address the obvious problem with paying your existing affiliates with their reinvested money and new money invested by new affiliates, Bradshaw appears to believe that Ecuador has no problems playing host to Ponzi schemes.
The problem with Zeek Rewards wasn’t a jurisdictional one, it was that it was a $600M unsustainable Ponzi scheme operating with money it didn’t have.
One of the changes AddWallet has made to the Zeek Rewards business model is that they do not permit affiliates to withdraw 100% of their returns:
[17:44] With Zeek you could withdraw 100% of what you earned, what is the highest amount, percentage wise, that you can withdraw here and why?
[17:58] The highest on a daily basis is 75%. We just did not see that it was a very smart business move to let everyone, every single member, withdraw 100% of everything they earn every single day. We’ll just have maybe a “run on the bank”, we just don’t know. It’s an extra precaution.
A “run on the bank” of course being what happens
a large number of customers withdraw their deposits from a financial institution at the same time and demand cash because they believe that the financial institution is, or might become, insolvent.
As a bank run progresses, it generates its own momentum, in a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy (or positive feedback loop) – as more people withdraw their deposits, the likelihood of default increases, thus triggering further withdrawals.
This can destabilize the bank to the point where it runs out of cash and thus faces sudden bankruptcy.
In Ponzi speaking terms, this is simply acknowledgement of what happens when your investors demand their money all at once, revealing the scheme to be unable to pay out its investors (Ponzi schemes pay out ROIs based on the flaw of never-ending new investment).
Forced re-investment will prolong the inevitable, however ultimately ROI liabilities will exceed new money coming in and crash the scheme. That is if the company isn’t shut down by regulators and authorities first.
It’s also worth noting that prior to being shutdown, Zeek Rewards also had lawyers (in the US) professing the legality of the company’s compensation plan and business model.
Paying out affiliates with newly invested affiliate money isn’t the only similarity between the two companies, like Zeek Rewards, AddWallet are also promising to reveal additional sources of revenue, under the guise of a “premium ad service”:
[6:36]We know that the power and our expertise in the past has been through advertising. The true success and longevity of this program is gunna be through advertising. You will see this before too long.
[7:09]We’re gunna start introducing our premium advertising.
Largely seen as a token effort that would have had no impact on the source of revenue (investments by affiliates), shortly before being shutdown Zeek Rewards began promoting a shopping mall.
98% of the revenue generated by Zeek Rewards was from affiliate investment in VIP points. A shopping mall was unlikely to put a dent in that figure.
And even if it did, that doesn’t erase a year and a half of paying out a daily ROI sourced from new investors.
Similarily, whatever AddWallet’s future plans are, like Zeek Rewards it’s tainted by the fact that it was kickstarted by paying out a daily ROI sourced from money invested by affiliates.
Bradshaw does try to downplay this later in the call by claiming “advertising” is the source of AddWallet’s revenue:
[18:56] How does the company make money?
[19:00] Advertising. We drive traffic and we’ve got advertising. Our internet properties that we’ve got out there right now are making money.
Claiming to sell advertising has long been a cover for some of the most prolific Ponzi schemes that have popped up in the MLM industry. The most infamous of which would have to be AdSurfDaily.
Shut down in 2008, AdSurfDaily claimed they were not a Ponzi scheme but rather sold affiliates advertising, redistributing these funds to affiliates who had previously brought advertising from the company.
This argument was later demolished in court with the company’s CEO and founder Andy Bowdoin confessing AdSurf Daily was a Ponzi scheme in 2012.
Under the guise of selling advertising, AdSurfDaily paid out it’s affiliates an average daily ROI of 1% a day. Under the same guise, how much are AddWallet paying their affiliates?
[8:35]The retail profit pool, what has the payout been lately as far as the percentage?
[8:54] The retail profit pool has been floating probably between 1.4% to 1.8% lately.
As with both Zeek Rewards and AdSurfDaily, it’s more than obvious where AddWallet’s daily ROIs are being sourced from.
Why else would Bradshaw feel the need to reassure everyone that with a near identical business model to Zeek Rewards, that AddWallet was safe merely because they have incorporated themselves in Ecuador?
As far as I know legitimately selling advertising isn’t a crime in the US. Running a Ponzi scheme whilst pretending to pay out your affiliates from imaginary advertising revenue however is.
Despite this however, Bradshaw states the following at [14:55]:
We don’t feel that our business model is illegal in any way in any country.
Getting back to Ecuador, do they really “love” Ponzi schemes? And are AddWallet really protected from the US by incorporating their company there?
Research into Ponzi schemes in Ecuador indicates somewhat of a mixed answer.
A 71-year-old provincial notary who died in a luxury hotel room earlier this year left behind a teenage girlfriend — who said he’d been on cocaine and Viagra — and a crumbling $800 million pyramid scheme that has blossomed into a nationwide scandal.
José Cabrera’s sudden death sparked panic among thousands of people who gave him a minimum of $10,000 each over two decades in exchange for up to 10 percent monthly interest.
Most were rank-and-file police and military personnel — more than 6,500 of them — and residents of Machala, the port city where Cabrera was based. The scandal has spread to high-ranking current and former military officials, judges, politicians and their families.
The head judge of the Machala Superior Court resigned after acknowledging he had invested $15,000. Ecuador’s former commander of the Joint Chiefs of Staff put in $45,000, and the wife of a former defense minister contributed $125,000, media have reported.
Interior Minister Alfredo Castillo said last week that the scheme was probably linked to money laundering for the drug trade, illegal arms dealing or counterfeiting.
Cabrera died of an apparent heart attack Oct. 26. His 18-year-old girlfriend of two years told police he had been smoking cocaine-laced cigarettes, drinking whiskey and popping Viagra.
Cabrera’s son and daughter denied their father, a former president of the National Association of Notary Publics, was involved in shady dealings. They promised to sort out the financial mess, before they disappeared last month as arrest warrants were issued.
Authorities believe they are in the United States and are preparing extradition requests.
Hundreds of investors laid siege to Cabrera’s office in mid-November. They were joined by police and soldiers assigned to guard the building.
Television broadcast images of police and soldiers leaving the scene with cash stuffed in their pockets, shoes and protective vests.
Criminal charges were lodged against 17 members of the armed forces who allegedly used two air force planes to fly from Quito to Machala to search for their money. Another 28 military personnel have been relieved of duty. Eight police officers face graft charges for their alleged involvement.
President Alfredo Palacio replaced his three top military commanders earlier this month. His administration has refused to explain the shake-up.
Cabrera, who as a notary was prohibited from handling investment funds, “managed around $800 million,” said Congressman Carlos Gonzalez, who is leading a legislative investigation of the case.
That represented more than the $700 million total deposits of the Bank of Guayaquil, Ecuador’s second-largest bank, Gonzalez recently told reporters.
Ecuador is no stranger to financial scandals. Its corruption-riddled banking system collapsed in 1999 after years of financial mismanagement, prompting a switch to the U.S. dollar as the official currency to stem the country’s worst recession in decades.
The Stanford Financial Group was a privately held international group of financial services companies controlled by Allen Stanford, until it was seized by United States (U.S.) authorities in early 2009.
On February 17, 2009, U.S. Federal agents put the company under management of a receiver, because of charges of fraud.
On February 27, 2009, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission amended its complaint to describe the alleged fraud as a “massive Ponzi scheme”.
On February 18 and 19, 2009, Ecuador and Peru suspended the operations of local Stanford units.
The Stanford Financial Group was incorporated in the US, but Ecuador seemingly had no problems swiftly putting a stop to local operations within 48 hours of the SEC shutting them down in the US.
And it’s not just the US that Ecuador are happy to cooperate with either. In 2008,
D.M.G. Grupo Holding S.A better known by its acronym DMG is a controversial Colombian company, intervened and disbanded since November the 18th 2008 by the Colombian government, under the suspicion of money laundering and illegal money catchment by using the Ponzi scheme.
People in DMG could buy a prepaid card from 100000 Colombian pesos (and) 5 to 7 months after purchasing the prepaid card, investors had the right to receive 75% to 150% of the money they invested in cash.
According to the owner and president of DMG, David Murcia Guzman, this business is supported by the constant flow of money for selling new prepaid cards, and also by the profitability of the subsidiaries companies.
David Murcia used the revenue to expand his business to Venezuela, Ecuador, and Panama where his businesses were also disbanded by the local authorities.
DMG’s “subsidiary companies” sound awful similar to AddWallet’s so-called “internet properties”.
Either way, whether the SEC do eventually move in on AddWallet (note that Ecuador has an extradition agreement with the US) or the scheme collapses due to not being able to pay out existing investors, fundamentally the Ponzi scheme business model is flawed.
Virtual profits, points and ROIs might look nice on a screen but at the end of the day there’s simply no money to withdraw. Time and time again those who get in first make money at the expense of those they promote the opportunity to who invest later.
Hiding out in Ecuador or anywhere else for that matter doesn’t change that.
A few more bits of info…
David Murcia was later extradited to the US (from Panama to Colombia, then to the US) and stood trial in a Federal Court (Miami?) where he was convicted of money laundering.
He’ll serve time in Arizona, then extradited back to Colombia for charges there. DMG Gropo almost ruined the Colombia government when people actually went to the streets demanding it to be reopened.
I have an article where he’s one part of my report.
Another item… Ecuador has an extradition treaty with the US… had it since WW2.
if you search in Youtube about Murcia you’ll see that unitl nowadays there are people writing comments in videos saying that DMG was legitimate business and was a victim of powerful people.
It’s like a parallel reality.
I know a lot of people who made a lot of money from David. of course they got in the beginning but they did MAKE a lot of money. 🙂
US is no different. People still believe Ad Surf Daily (and Zeek Rewards) are legitimate businesses instead of Ponzi schemes. Two ASD members (and also Zeek members) had their case (they sued the government for “malicious prosecution” of ASD) tossed by the court only a few months back.
people usually think “if someone beyon the owner made money, it’s a definitive proof that it’s not a scam”
Very interesting review and thank’s for sharing it. Reading it, make me think that all programmes on the Net-marketing are Ponzi schemes in some way.
I was a member of Zeek,but there is a big difference with AddWallet on the starting base. Zeek was given free 100 points=100$ as a starter loan for fast earning, so the earning was too high and may be unreal, but with AddWallet you can earn only after investing (paying for advertising) real money.
I’m member now and with this programme and can say – I get real hits to my blog every single day – something I can’t say for some other adv.programmes.
And this is just the beginning,coz a lot of new sevices will be added soon.
In fact, althought with the same rev plan, the profit at AddWallet is not unreal high as it was with Zeek. That make some sense for better SUBSTANTIALITY.
If all your concerned about is receiving traffic from affiliates who are forced to view your website to earn their Ponzi ROI and whether or not the daily percentage is low enough to be sustainable (given the source of such payments, it isn’t), master of the due diligence you are not.
Why don’t you go look up “Ad Surf Daily” (whose head is now in a Federal jail), then see how closely Add Wallet copied it?
The 100 Bonus Points wasn’t any problem. People would either have to invest more money, or recruit more investors, or spend too much time building up a balance before they could withdraw any significant amount.
100 Bonus Points isn’t similar to paying out $100. It’s a VIRTUAL currency used to attract new investors. Your “free 100 points=100$” logic is flawed, Zeek never gave away $100 to any investor.
That idea is THEORETICAL. It can run out of new investors rather quickly, and be less sustainable than Zeek. It can also be shut down by authorities much faster than Zeek was.
In THEORY, having reinvestment rules can make the scheme become more sustainable, but it will still be dependant on money coming IN from investors to pay money OUT to other investors. None of the other Zeek clones have worked very well.
@Oz,the same principal-“view your website to earn “-we see on a lot of Advertising programmes,if not all even-PTC,TE,Safelists,Equal Advertising&Returns.Some of them fault as a Skam-usually these giving a higher and unreal percentage for paying ,but some survive.Is not a secret that we can earn online and offline only after investing in some way. My opinion is that the run of a programme depend on how clever,experienced and trusted is the owner.
@K. Chang-I don’t know about AdSurfdaily,but in principal the World go round thank’s to some copy…All I can say is -assimilating the best of something+some new clever additions=new option,a bit different from the original
As I said in my first reply to @Oz-the success depend on how clever,experienced and trusted is the owner.The mistakes are the way for learning and progress.
You’re talking about “success” and “making money”. You seem to be missing the point entirely.
Your hip pocket is not a consideration in this discussion.
1)-my point concerns the 100 points is exactly what you fix…Every free member was starting to earn on a base of 100$ virtual money,which make some sense for unreal profit.
I remembered I earn per 1.50$ daily in comparision with AddWallet, where I earn on a base of 10$ real invested money-0,15 daily at the start and at the moment average 0.27 daily-for the second month after paying new 10$ monthly fee for Silver upgrade.
Generally all Net programmes for “earning online” are on the same principle and depend on the money involved, but also how clever and substanial is calculated the profit-how experienced, clever and trusted is the owner.
In the life there is nothing for ever, but keep trying is our mission. I hope at last somebody to create more substanial formula for our Net-marketing’s success.
Mariyana.. I enjoy reading your posts. Keep them coming. 🙂
I love being in addwallet, hope it last a long time. your words make me think it will be around for a long time.
@Oz,I think the discussion here is about AddWallet and making some paralel with the most Advertising programmes online,is just example to show one and the same principle.Sorry,you can’t get any sense of it.
Sell products to retail customers and stop running from one scam to another. Your idea of MLM is as warped as the best of the scammers out there.
Your efforts would be better served elsewhere rather than trying to find the mythical golden Ponzi goose.
I get sense out of it, it’s a Ponzi scheme. Everything else is irrelevant waffle.
Please don’t waste my time with the “you just don’t get it” line.
@Yssup, thank you 🙂 I’m glad you enjoy reading my posts :). Exchanging of opinions is a fresh way for learning.
Comparing one Buz with another give us better point of view for the advantages and faults for each of them. We never know how long a programme will stay, coz even the life is not for ever, but hope AddWallet to stay few years – they are still in a beta launch…The site is not even with the full capacity.
Doesn’t really matter when at its heart it’s a Ponzi. Again with the mention of time you’re missing the point.
@Oz, I see your Biz is for real products, but here the discussion is about AddWallet and may be about the same type of Net programmes.
If you want to not lose your time,just stop replying-you are not obligated…Do you think that all Net programmes, apart from the real products programmes, are Ponzi Schemes?
I’m as well involved in Affiliate programmes for real products, where we need investing also…Can you share what is your Real-product’s Biz?
No you don’t because I’m not in one.
No because being a “net programme” doesn’t make a business a Ponzi scheme, it’s business model and compensation plan does.
So are you conceding that AddWallet is a slightly modified and updated version of a convicted Ponzi scheme?
@Oz, a lot of programmes have their Biz model and compensation plan (including the invested money of their members) and althought that, some are called Ponzi…Why do you think is that?
And can you share what programmes are you involved with?
Yes – I think so. What do you think about the World’s monetary system? Isn’t it a Ponzi too?
I see you’re one of those who signed the petition to keep Zeek open. Guess that explains your attitude toward Ponzi schemes.
Apparently what happened in Russia (MMM pyramid) and Albania (too many schemes to list) and even some collapsed Ponzi schemes within your border had no effect.
The two are not related.
Indeed, it is an often used tactic by Ponzi-defenders to attempt to sidetrack discussion of a particular Ponzi onto “_____ is a Ponzi too!” In the US, it’s often “Social Security” or “National Banking System”.
The Bulgaria Ponzi had real estate people asking poor people to dump money into apartment building. Then they grabbed the money and ran. They are often called “pharoahs”.
Bulgaria is no stranger to Ponzi schemes. Just because they moved onto the Internet should not make Bulgarians blind to them.
well, this addwallet is the best thing since i have started my business. i have tried google, twitter AND a couple of other sites and get NO results.
just one month into addwallet and my business is BOOMING. i have a little over 40 new customers from around the world that are now customers of mine. I paid 99 to set this up. BEST MONEY spent for me.
Maybe this site will go down one day, but i am a pure believer in this product. 🙂
my “yes” was about
which meant that when is assililate the best part of something and apply into something another = something new and different.
For you is a bit “modified Ponzi”, but form me is something new and different. Here the topic is in principale.
Can I say,that when I born a child will be like me? What about the world’s inventions, which get the best of the old and create something new, far more innovative?
And my nationality has nothing in common with all this, coz people from all over the world and good marketers are involved in such kind of Biz.
Give me some example for non-“ponzi “Net programme.
Google, Amazon, EBay all have “net programs” aka affiliate programs. Not ponzi schemes. Time to face facts.
Zeek had a 60 day free trial, with 100 Bonus Points (not $) to start with, making a similar daily profit as the VIP points.
Bonus Points = no money paid out, but THEORETICALLY some people could of course have selected to withdraw $1.50 per day, rather than compounding. But in REALITY most people would probably follow a normal plan = 90-180 day reinvestment.
After 60 days (or within 60 days), people had to upgrade to a normal membership and pay $10 IN as a minimum investment. Zeek has still not paid any money OUT, the member has paid money IN.
The 100 Bonus Points idea was simply an inexpensive marketing strategy. Zeek gave away virtual currency, and usually it received real money in return from the member. You can’t claim THAT to be a main reason for Zeek’s problems?
If AddWallet has removed that part, it will probably attract fewer new investors and become LESS sustainable than Zeek.
I’m aware of the Zeek’s strategy and their free 100 VP trial, may be you can’t get what is my point or our opinions are completely opposite.
How we will named VP or $-it was announsed that 100 VP=100$ and after the upgrading they were assumed as real money. It’s one thing to start earn with 100 virtual and completely different with 10$ real money.
And I can’t understand why you think that this is will make AW less sustainable? My opinion is completely opposite. Anyway,everybody has his/her own view of point.
The fundamental did not change. Put in money, take little bit out every day forever, no proof of external income.
Thus, nothing new. Same scam, fresh coat of paint.
Of course, but some views are more based on reality than others.
Mariyana…I think what everyone here is trying to tell you is if AddWallet DID NOT offer a revenue-sharing compensation model, and only paid out the retail commissions and 2×15 matrix commissions on the sales of ad units, then it would not be considered a Ponzi.
Basically, any business that offers revenue share (where it gives the purchaser of whatever, i.e. bids, ad points, etc., the opportunity to earn back MORE than they SPENT on the purchase without referring others, i.e. 150% ROI, etc.), must be a Ponzi scheme.
No one here or on any other other blog seems to give an example of a “legitimate” revenue-sharing compensation model that is not considered a Ponzi — because any business model that promises to pay out more than what it takes in is either a Ponzi or poorly made plan designed to benefit its creator; and will eventually collapse.
And yes, in some sense, the same could also be applied to Social Security in America, as experts have already stated there isn’t enough money to continue paying retirees their full amount past the year 2036, as people are living longer. (See article here: http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/01/13/ponzi-scheme-or-not-social-security-cant-keep-up-the-pace/).
I think you get the point. End of story.
Very good! (That was NOT sarcasm, honest)
However, then you have to consider… CAN (and does) the company actually sell that many ads to fund the comp plan?
Many people have tried to analyze how much revenue (and thus profit) can Zeekler actually generate, by checking amount of auctions that closed and closing prices (and thus, number of bids). Every scenario we came up with, even the most optimistic one, fell WAY SHORT.
I really appreciate your explanation. At last somebody to do is intelligently – thank you :).
My target was to show that the most of Net programmes are the same type. I just wonder – if the monthly fee we pay is higher than what they spend – could the difference be enough to cover the rev share….?
There are another Advertasing programmes &rev. share of 60% to stay substanial..There should be some key…People can’t repeat one and the same trick.
Of course they can repeat the same trick… they just need new audience (who haven’t seen the trick before).
Then your target is off. What “most of Net Programmes” are or aren’t is irrelevant to the discussion.
No because the revenue share (Ponzi) liability increases exponentially over time. Membership fees are static.
Not to mention the pyramid scheme red flags that pop up when you start paying commissions out of membership fees.
Perhaps you could provide us with some evidence of businesses offering “revenue sharing” which AREN’T ponzis and which offer “revenue sharing” arrangements of the size being offered by your “internet programmes”
this is my reply to @Sam. I see you are very nervous and biting….and I don’t want to continue this game of words…coz should go above to show which of your statements are irrelevant.
Speaking of AddWallet, pick up the question and for the same type of programmes with which the Net is full around, but nobody claims as ponzi. That is my point.
A point which is entirely irrelevant. As stated three times now.
“What about company X?” is a common derail tactic deployed by Ponzi scheme supporters. It is not tolerated here.
And please don’t tell me who I can and can’t reply to on my own blog.
There is no game of words, AddWallet is a Ponzi scheme because of their business model, irrespective of other “net programmes”.
Accept it and move on. You won’t have any luck trying to justify it here.
If they need to repeat the same trick,why they should claim some comparison with Zeek,which a lot of people have been seen?
Because they’re both Ponzi schemes?
Plenty of POTENTIAL reasons… but is it really relevant?
But let’s chase down that thought… Why would a potential Ponzi scheme compare itself to a KNOWN Ponzi scheme? Usually it is merely to claim some sort of differentiation, like we’re headed by some other people, based elsewhere, and we don’t do *that* (whatever that Ponzi did).
But are those actually relevant differences? or should we just examine the ONE critical issue at stake: the business model itself, and its revenue stream(s)?
Who are going to buy those ads, and thus pay for those crazy profits that the members will enjoy?
What exactly are the members doing to “deserve” these crazy profits? “Watching” the ads? You watch ads on TV and online every day!
And what makes AddWallet different from Ad Surf Daily, which is a convicted Ponzi scheme? The terminology and operating model are virtually identical between the two schemes.
And why aren’t smart people like yourself ASKING these simple questions?
Ok,everybody…It was a pleasure to have this discussion with you.At some point it clarified few of my questions,coz althought I’m member of AW,I want to stay objective and comparision gave me better point of view.
Good luck for you!
Perhaps it’s because HYIPs are KNOWN to be Ponzis? And even American MLM lawyers are speaking out against the the so-called revenue-sharing participation programs?
But I do thank you for a frank and civil discussion. Some other folks in some other topics have a tendency to resort of insults and gross stereotyping of skeptics when they have nothing concrete to bring to the table for discussion.
Your delusional if you think you will make any $$ with Addwallet. Their customer service stinks and if you have made a cash withdrawal to say Payza – Most likely you will NEVER see a dime of what you earned.
If by chance you are thinking of joining this program ~ start here: Send an email to their customer service department. Like your money – You never see it again.
They went gangbusters in the beginning then all of sudden – No company tapes to listen too. Maybe the fact they are supposely based in Equador has something to do with it??
My advise – Take you money to your bathroom – throw it in your toilet then take a crap – Basically thats whats going to happen to any money you send them.
Sadly the addwallet program has evaporated off the internet. I was involved in Zeek Rewards and lost a considerable amount. I made a claim to the receiver and the final determination was in my favor. Now I await the check in the mail.
With addwallet I simply did NOT want to repeat the same problem ~ so I started pulling money out of addwallet from the first day I joined. In the end rather then losing money like the Zeek experience, I actually make a few bucks. The lesson is jump in and move the money fast. It’s that simple.
That feeling you felt when you “lost a considerable amount” in Zeek? You did that to somebody else in AddWallet.
Back to school son, sounds like you didn’t learn anything at all.
After 15 years of silence, David Murcia speaks
David Murcia Guzmán is serving a 22-year sentence in the Valledupar High Security Prison.
Basically he plays the poor victim, denounces death threats and claims “politics played a big role in his conviction”