World Consumer Alliance reboot due to scam reports
Just days after the Zeek Rewards collapse Blaine Williams and Paul Skulitz launched Wealth Creation Alliance.
Accepting investments of $2 and guaranteeing a ROI of $3.25 per investment made with the company (an effective 162% ROI), Wealth Creation Alliance managed to rack up an alleged 20,000 investors in just three short weeks.
Somewhat abruptly, a few days ago it was announced that Wealth Creation Alliance would be changing their name to ‘World Consumer Advocates’ due to “scam reports”.
Considering Wealth Creation Alliance’s blatantly obvious Ponzi-like business model, turns out there’s somewhat of an irony to the scam reports WCA are running away from.
The Wealth Creation Alliance call referenced in this article was recorded on Monday night (10th September) and features company CEO Blaine Williams. You can listen to the call in full at the conclusion of this article.
On the call, Blaine (photo right) explains the alleged reason behind the name change to World Consumer Alliance:
We started using Wealth Creation Alliance and we started getting text and email that there was a gentlemen on the internet named “Chuck Hughes”.
Now I don’t know Chuck, I’ve never had any relations, don’t know who he is. But he has been running financial planning seminars of some sort and has had a lot of scam reports on that.
And it kept coming back to us, kept coming back to us and we talked to our legal counsel and the decision was made with that guidance that, it’s in our best order right now to make the change before we move forward into the next three or four months, especially to our launch [24:07].
Having to change the name of your blatant Ponzi scheme because some guy used the same company name a few years ago to run some other scan? Priceless.
Williams then went on to introduce the new company name, “World Consumer Advocates”, which is notably different to the new name that appears on the WCA website, that being World Consumer Alliance.
I’m not particularly sure which new name WCA are going to settle on so for now I’ll go with the name on the website, ‘World Consumer Alliance’.
Getting back to William’s reasoning behind the name change, I too have no idea who Chuck Hughes is but note that the cited abundance of scam reports behind the name change to be somewhat ironic.
When WCA first launched, they did so guaranteeing a 162% on all $2 investments made with the company:
Shortly after I reviewed the opportunity and wrote it off as a blatant micro Ponzi scheme, the verbiage on the WCA website was changed, with all references to the 162% ROI, maximum allowed investment amount per member and 65% forced re-investment having been removed.
The business model however remained the same and was left untouched.
Today the World Consumer Alliance pay plan information reads as follows:
Our goal is to make the average business owner successful by giving them the tools and the knowledge to become successful.
Our company profits go into a Affiliate Global Profit Pool which will be shared with all the active affiliates who purchases advertising banners and text impressions!
They will automatically earn a percentage of these company profits depending on their participation level.
“Company profits” is still just money invested by members and “participation level” is naturally just “how much money affiliates invest”. Mechanically not much has changed other than the removal of specific figures revealing the nature of the 162% ROI World Consumer Alliance pay out.
Again despite this, Williams claimed upon launching WCA, that he ‘didn’t even know what a money game was‘ [10:08] and conveyed his confusion over why World Consumer Alliance was being ‘painted in the same brush with what is called a HYIP program’, claiming ‘that is the last thing on the planet that we (World Consumer Alliance) are‘.
He even goes so far as to claim that, despite World Consumer Alliance offering a guaranteed 162% ROI that
we (WCA) are not taking investments (and) we are not offering high rates of returns on money [10:26].
Sound familiar? It should, it’s the same linguistic pseudo-compliance acting COO Greg Caldwell was pushing over at Zeek Rewards, prior to the SEC shutting them down for being a Ponzi scheme.
Just like Zeek Rewards’ “Zeek Squad”, which appears now to have been nothing more than Robert Craddock, acting on behalf of Caldwell, running around the internet trying to erase critical information and analysis on Zeek Reards, World Consumer Alliance has something called “WCA Marshalls”.
We are going to be absolutely to the line when it comes to compliance, number one, and to also policing the internet.[19:30]
There is a lot of people who have migrated to WCA that come out of the money game mindset, and are posting lots of stuff up on websites that are claiming incomes, that are claiming money games, they’re using terms like “investment” and “return on investment” and are making absolutely incredulous statements about the gains.[20:08]
Every single one of those must be taken down within the next 24 hours.
We have deputized a group of, at this point, around 25, and that number will expand to one hundred, WCA Marshalls. And they are going to be going out, these are technically competent people, and they will be going out to the internet and they will be finding these postings and these videos that are being put up.
And if they’re up there and we find them, there will not be a lot of liberty in this. We are telling people now we will communicate by email “take em down, do not use our name, do not use our image and do not make claims.
It is against the law and we will not stand with you when it comes to backing that sort of thing [20:33].
How describing taking in $2 investments and paying out a 162% ROI paid out money invested by members as a HYIP is illegal is beyond my understanding, but I’m sure WCA’s Marshalls will get to the bottom of it.
In any case, they might want to start scrubbing WCA’s own testimonials page, where the following company-approved WCA member testimonials are currently viewable:
For those of us who followed the Zeek Rewards Ponzi scheme the similarities between Zeek and WCA leave little between the two opportunities, other than the MLM niches they operated in (penny auctions and advertising respectively).
This isn’t coincidental mind you, as Williams clearly states WCA was rolled out only after the SEC shut down Zeek Rewards:
We made a decision when the demise of this last company took place in August that we would go to work and bring something out [7:25].
Just like Zeek Rewards, World Consumer Alliance has plans to expand their current passive Ponzi offering to include a business directory where WCA affiliates will be able to give advertising spots away to businesses that they themselves have purchased.
Our product is advertising for the small business community in your local city around the country and around the world [13:05].
You’ll be able to make available, as complimentary advertising for them, to get them engaged in our system.
Much like companies give free products away as samples, we’ll be doing that. Just like the prior company (Zeek Rewards) gave away free bids to give to people out [13:28].
So you’ll buy those ads, in blocks or units, and you’ll be able to give them out. But you will also be able to resell them to those clients in the marketplace [13:46].
Money wise of course all that’s happening is affiliates are putting money into the system and then earning a ROI directly proportionate to how much money they themselves have invested in “advertising units or blocks”.
This didn’t work for Zeek Rewards (0.25% of the penny auction bids given away were actually used) and at the end of the day 98% of the money the company paid out as a daily ROI was simply newly invested affiliate money.
Currently 100% of the money WCA pay out is newly invested affiliate money, and if Zeek Rewards is anything to go by, if they ever do launch a business directory it will have little impact on the actual source of revenue being paid out.
Amazingly, despite the SEC shutting down Zeek Rewards for being a Ponzi scheme, Williams refers to Zeek’s business model as a “radical movement” and declares it to be
the most hyrbid interesting model that (he’s) seen in network marketing [6:10].
Williams simply brushes off the Ponzi business model Zeek Rewards was using as “deficiencies” and “challenges”, stating that
on August 17th that company (Zeek) took a, I don’t think it was a fatal blow but they took a pretty serious blow [6:35].
Not only that, but after declaring that ‘network marketing as a whole has failed people‘ [5:42], Williams even goes on to justify the Ponzi points business model Zeek Rewards used:
According to our compliance attorneys right now, we’ve been told that if you give the advertising to them and you pay for it, they qualify as a bonafide retail customer [13:59].
I have no idea who World Consumer Alliance’s compliance attorneys are, but if they’re suggesting that affiliates buying a product and giving it away is the same as the person to whom the product is being given away to purchasing it themselves as a retail customer, might I suggest that they themselves might be delusional.
Again similar to Zeek Rewards, other future plans for the WCA business are also mentioned, including
- an online shopping mall
- something about a “WCA university” offering training courses and education
- daily coupon deals
Currently only offering a shallow investment scheme hiding behind the facade of members purchasing advertising credits, quite clearly the intent here is to push the notion that much more is just around the corner.
That it very well might be but unfortunately for Blaine Williams and the rest of the World Consumer Alliance team that doesn’t negate the past three weeks and current state of the WCA compensation plan.
If I joined WCA today, all I’d be able to do is invest with the company in $2 lots, kick back and wait for them to pay my 162% ROI.
Where does that ROI come from? New investments made by newly recruited or existing affiliates.
Whatever WCA’s future plans might be, as long as that mechanically remains the core of the their compensation plan (dressing it up with a shopping mall, giving “sample” advertising away and everything else doesn’t actually change it), the company remains a Ponzi scheme as it existed the day Blaine Williams launched it.
As proven in the Zeek Rewards Ponzi scheme, hiring people to “police the internet” and forcing your members to not use certain (accurate) words to describe the opportunity ultimately means nothing, with your business model being all that’s relevant.
Here we have a business model that affiliates alone contribute into and thus receive a payout over time directly proportionate to how much money they themselves put in, and/or convinced other members to put in.
It didn’t work for Zeek Rewards and ultimately it’s not going to work for World Consumer Alliance either.