4 comments posted · 1 followers · following 0

464 weeks ago @ MLM Help Desk Home Of ... - Breaking Zeek Rewards ... · 1 reply · +1 points

I'd be glad to talk to you. I am, and have in the past been impressed that you don't shy away from people like me. For what it's worth I myself can be an arrogant SOB and I know that. Part of it is being jaded by fighting scams for about 10 years and honestly I'm kind of burned out that the scammers seem to adapt faster than the cure, like a virus.

At first it was just blatant HYIPs and when they became hard to sell to the marks, the autosurf was invented where the promoters tried to say "See,there's a product,you're buying advertising" and that worked at getting the suckers in until ASD crashed. What has really lit my fire on Zeekler is I see many of the same people from ASD trying to find another way to twist a legitimate concept as a cover story for what is at the core just another 2 bit ponzi.

Troy, if Zeekler had been dividing up the 2% of their revenue that was not affiliate income, it wouldn't have been a ponzi scheme. It still would have been among other things an unregistered security, as that definition is tied to the expectation of a return based upon the amount invested. In other words, the "work" of placing an ad had no effect on the rate of the payments, it was based solely upon the amount "invested" though the whole "bids given away and then an ad placed daily" routine was just the cover story. Zeek owed it's affiliates $3 billion dollars on the day it closed. The only thing that kept it afloat was that most of the participants were rolling over part or all of their balances. And that figure, the $3 billion, was due and payable within 90 days. General Motors is not going to generate $3 billion in profit int he next 90 days, who in their right mind would think that a poorly run penny auction site was going to. (really, they'd need to generate twice that much as they claimed to distribute 50%) In short,a legal way may have been found to share 50% of the profits with affiliates, but the only money available was the profits from the penny auctions. The first dollar of affiliate money used to make a payment to affiliates made this a ponzi scheme. There is no other issue.

As to wanting to see a jury judge the facts of the case, don't worry about that. It'll be a few years but I feel pretty confident that Paul Burks is going to face a jury of his peers in a criminal case, and I'm willing to bet he's convicted of host of charges unless he reaches a plea agreement there, too. The thing I'm not so optimistic about is some of the other people I hold just as guilty, his management team for starters, and the big time top of the downline team affiliates for another.

But that's another discussion for another day. For now, I'm glad you published my opinions and I respect you for trying to answer my concerns. I'm not really satisfied with your answers, but I don't think you're being malicious. As I stated earlier, I'd love to talk to you. I'd love even more to be interviewed on your video channel which I have watched several episodes of. Better yet, I'd love more than anything to be on with someone from Fun Club USA to talk to them about their ultimate goals and why they think they should let their victims pay for their defense.

Because have no doubt, the people represented by SNR Denton are going to be defendants in legal actions related to this case. Are they willing to stipulate that no donated funds will be used in any case in which they are the named defendants? Are they willing to say that the money they themselves offer may be used for "PR and outside CPAs" will not be paid to companies that they themselves control?

They have no standing to try to interfere with the SEC case, which by the way is already final and no one, not even Paul Burks, can appeal or overturn. What do they need, by their own admission, millions of dollars for? Why does their website, which states they alone are the clients, on another page refer to people as "People that are now being represented by counsel, to protect their moneys earned by Zeek Rewards and monies currently held by Zeek Rewards".

This statement on their site is a flat out lie, and they themselves know it because their home page has the statement that SNR insisted on, saying that only Fun CLub USA is represented. This statement is also not an oversite that was not corrected because they have updated it daily,with a new number of people who have donated. Have faith in RVGs business practices all you want, but the12 people soliciting these donations are being lied to and misled to think they're being protected, when in fact they are likely paying to leave the people with their money from giving any of it back them.

You have a trusting audience and I honestly do think you're trying to help them, but by not asking Mr. Craddock and his friends these questions, you're only letting them get taken by another scam.

I think you're a better person than that. Don't disappoint me,or your audience.

464 weeks ago @ MLM Help Desk Home Of ... - Breaking Zeek Rewards ... · 1 reply · +2 points

And you know, I didn't even address the fact that my letter had little to do with clawbacks and was about the legal ethics of getting the victims to pay the legal fees of the winner. You do realize that at a minimum 88% of people in a pyramid scheme are net losers. Don't try to spin that, Troy, math is well, math.

My letter is asking the attorneys to clarify who they represent and what legal theory they're going to pursue. I know you and a lot of MLM people don't know much about the law, but any first year law student who thought he could gain standing to reverse this SEC decision already finalized wouldn't never be a second year law student. That legal case is over, RVG is dead. Learn to adjust. They had their day in court and they used to to cut a deal.

My problem is the magic 12 people, who according to one side of their mouth are the ONLY people who are being protected by this legal effort, and whose interests are directly opposed to anyone who lost money, asking the same people who lost money to pay their legal fees, so that they don't have to return money that was stolen from the contributors. And you're deflecting any criticism of this legal travesty. If I didn't think so highly of you, I'd be tempted to ask if you're getting paid by someone, "As an affiliate?" or otherwise.

464 weeks ago @ MLM Help Desk Home Of ... - Breaking Zeek Rewards ... · 3 replies · +2 points

Troy, I'm not a big MLM exoert like you, I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night and I didn't learn everything I need to know about business on a webinar. That said, I do have a Doctorate in International Business, so I'll try to answer your question without embarrassing you too much.

The Receiver is charged by law with recovering everything he can, from whatever source. Yes, going after overseas winners is complicated and surely some of them will be left alone, not because they're entitled to it but because it would cost more than would be recovered.

The US is signatory to many treaties that permit us to file actions in most industrialized countries so unless your big winners are in North Korea or Somalia the legal mechanisms are indeed there to pursue them. I will say that in at least one country, Norway, ponzi schemes are not exactly legal but the government there doesn's prosecute them. I'm hoping they don't have an Albania moment before they change that policy.

Your second point is irreverent, the law doesn't say you get a pass if you were "just good business folks and made money through building their organization," The only solace in the law is that people so positioned are not likely to face criminal charges, but they still have stolen funds, and they still have to give them back. There is in fact a legal mechanism for people who have made some profit to not only return their ill gotten gains, but to put them on the same basis as victims who took no funds out they may have to actually return a portion of their initial investment..

And please make it stop with your ignorant ranting about them having a day in court. Paul Burkes on behalf of himself and RVG did have their day in court., they stood in front of a Judge, agreed with the charges of every fact in the SEC Complaint, entered a plea of "no contest" and were found guilty. I don;t know if you're trying to twist the truth to make some pitiful point or you're really just that uninformed but either way you're only further embarrassing yourself with that.

My goodness, you give experts a bad name. I really hope you abandon this business, and I really mean that. This scam was bad enough but do you not feel any responsibility? Even were I to give you the benefit of the doubt and conclude you're just a very gullible fool who thinks he knows a lot more about business than he really does, there's a point were you have to stop just because it's damned irresponsible of you to keep doing it. You're like a 9 year old left to his own devices in a room full of antiaircraft missiles, it doesn't really matter if you don't know they're not just a nintendo game or if you do know but don't care because blowing stuff up is lot of fun, it's just going to end badly.

And that is assuming that you're just dumb. Although I do think that's part of it, I'm curious as to how much you were paid to be so supportive. And no, I don't mean "As an affiliate?" Do you care to tell us how much money you were paid by Rex Venture Group FOR ANY PURPOSE? Everything, consulting, advising, training, breakfast with Dawn? A final dollar amount of how many checks you cashed for how much. You do realize that information is going to be available to the public when this investigation ends? It might be better for you if you tell us all now when you can explain it away than when the mob is storming the tower later.

Sorry Troy, you don't seem like a bad sort, but you are, through a combination of arrogance, ignorance and avarice a very dangerous person, and if you had any shame at all you'd fold up your little tent revival and get an honest day job. People like you being the "experts" in this field are the reason most people put your industry in such regards normally reserved for politicians, used car salesmen and low level gangsters.

464 weeks ago @ MLM Help Desk Home Of ... - Breaking Zeek Rewards ... · 7 replies · +2 points

I have sent the following letter to SNR Denton, asking just who they represent....

Gene R. Besen
SNR Denton
2000 McKinney Avenue
Suite 1900
Dallas, TX 75201-1858
Dear Mr. Besen:

I am an online journalist researching matters related to Rex Venture Group and Zeek Rewards and their current troubles with among others, the Securities and Exchange Commission.

As you are aware, a group of Zeek Rewards affiliates have apparently retained you as their attorney in regards to this case. My question is, I would like some clarification on exactly who you represent.

A Mr. Robert Craddock has been saying that you have been retained on behalf of all affiliates who contribute to this effort through a website he has set up to accept contributions.

In a letter to potential donors dated today, Mr. Craddock states

“Also, to clarify any rumors that are going around the Internet, yes, if you make a donation to Fun Club USA, you are a plaintiff in the lawsuit and in the group protected by SNR Denton. “

I find this statement hard to believe, as in this case the court appointed receiver has indicated he intends to pursue clawbacks of ill gotten gains and while Mr. Craddock and the members of his group are net winners in this scheme and the people from whom he is soliciting donations are very likely net losers.

If your representation goals are to protect your clients from clawback actions, those interests would be in direct conflict of those who would benefit from the receiver maximizing the amounts he recovers from ill gotten profits.

All the communications I have found in regards to this eventually point to Fun Club USA, a site and company controlled by Mr. Craddock. They have the site set up to collect donations for their legal fund, with a disclaimer I am guessing your firm has insisted upon.

More in line with what I expect is the statement that Fun Club USA has on their website, to wit:

“SNR Denton US LLP represents Fun Club USA and all inquiries about this representation should be directed to Fun Club USA at

SNR Denton’s legal representation is limited to Fun Club USA; SNR Denton does not represent and does not have an attorney-client relationship with affiliates of Zeek, Zeek Rewards, Rex Venture Group LLC or with any individual or party that chooses to provide funds to Fun Club USA.”

As a writer covering a story I’d like some clarification on just exactly who you and your firm represent. As a concerned citizen, I’d like to ask you to clarify to your client the same question and urge them to not confuse the issue.

I realize I’m not exactly The New York Times but I still think it would be in everyone’s interest that you and your clients clarified these issues. I intend to cover it and I’m sure other, more mainstream publications will, too.

Greggory Brian Evans, PhD