Thread: Traffic monsoon. Better than MAPS with trusted admin Charles Scoville

Relax, everyone.

WILLIAM IS BACK!!! Yay!!


TM 337 Oct 16.jpg

Really, why does Our Chazza need a lawyer, when he's got people like William and Sunil?

I don't understand what's taking him so long to get to the SEC and show him his facebook timeline. people's money is dependng on it.

Originally Posted by Della Cate

Relax, everyone.

WILLIAM IS BACK!!! Yay!!


TM 337 Oct 16.jpg

Really, why does Our Chazza need a lawyer, when he's got people like William and Sunil?

So, what legitimate business did the feds shut down, and why would people in TM care?

Originally Posted by Della Cate

Relax, everyone.

WILLIAM IS BACK!!! Yay!!


TM 337 Oct 16.jpg

Really, why does Our Chazza need a lawyer, when he's got people like William and Sunil?

Offline work? but I thought this high roller was making $1k per day in TM?
Would anyone be shocked if this rustic worked at a car wash or as a custodian?
So many of these ponzi pimps make just above minimum wage in real world.

16190d1475688531-traffic-monsoon-better-than-maps-trusted-admin-charles-scoville-tm-337-oct-16.jpg
How are these nimrods going to save TM? What part of they have no standing are they missing? Went through the same scenario with Zeek, did they miss it? It is extremely entertaining watching their twitch & shout fest, but D@MN!

Originally Posted by laidback

16190d1475688531-traffic-monsoon-better-than-maps-trusted-admin-charles-scoville-tm-337-oct-16.jpg
How are these nimrods going to save TM? What part of they have no standing are they missing? Went through the same scenario with Zeek, did they miss it? It is extremely entertaining watching their twitch & shout fest, but D@MN!

they know they have no standing. just have to make it look good for the marks.

Originally Posted by ribshaw

You are much closer than my $25M, effective clawbacks will also put more money in the pot. There is however a * to be addressed below.

As far as I'm concerned any money Scoville pulled into his personal accounts is fair game for other legal challenges. Let's say a crafty attorney takes a position that since Charles rolled members from one scam to the next that he was simply running one multiyear scam. Maybe it comes to light Scoves was involved in some swindles on the side and gets sued over those. While I consider these things to be a low risk in the total picture, they are a risk nevertheless.

The money held at the processors is a more conservative number, mostly though I would like Monsooners to start asking better questions like you just did.


52. Traffic Monsoon account at PayPal had $46,515,787 in the account as of July 11, 2016.
55. As of July 21, 2016, the TM account at PayPal had a balance of $23,316,843.
56. Scoville has wired the funds withdrawn from PayPal to the Traffic Monsoon account at JPMorgan Chase in Park City, Utah. From there, he has
transferred at least $21 million to his personal JPMorgan Chase account.

Since the freeze was lifted he has been withdrawing funds, apparently for his own benefit, as quickly as possible.

https://www.sec.gov/litigation/compl.../comp23604.pdf

This has some payment processor balances as well if I recall.

Attachment 16183




To keep it simple 61M was paid out per below, this would satisfy 1,109,090 ad packs. 15,000,000 ad packs were sold/created out of thin air, 13,890,910 are still in back offices somewhere. If we use 7M, that means people collectively are expecting $385,000,000 (7M X $55) or more is due. It is a very specious assumption IMO that people would be walking away from 6M in ad packs without expecting their $55 per.


45. Since inception, $134 million in investor cash went into PayPal, and approximately $61 million was paid out to Traffic Monsoon investors prior to the PayPal freeze of TM’s accounts.




"Legally" people are going to get much less than they put in. I believe too many still have the expectation that what they saw in their back office is what the SEC is actually holding.




So some of this is to educate, some just for giggles. You could drive yourself nuts looking for numbers that you don't have, other than to say much more is owed than remains in the kitty.

It's not our job to prove the maths, it should have already been done by the "leaders" who earned commi$$ion$ off their downlines. In fact it should have been done prior to them taking dime one telling people what a no brainer TM was.
Since that data was never public no remotely competent person would have been advising anyone to plow money in. That ship has sailed, the very least affiliates that don't want to be suckered again could do is stop clucking about "buying ads" and put pen to paper thus seeing how little money is floating around.

Yep fair point about the money that was moved to his personal account!

Now, some points on your "money owing" math:

a) that 61M is just what was paid out through Paypal. There's another significant figure for what has been paid out through the other payment processors. (I think the papers give the total paid out figure somewhere??). But I grant you it seems unlikely that figure would be enough to account fully for the difference between 11M ad packs and 7M ad packs- so there seems to be a discrepancy there between/within the figures provided by Charles

b) when calculating the liability on the 7M remaining ad-packs, it isn't fair to multiply by $55 imo. On average each ad-pack would have half of its time left, so would have already paid out half of its liability (some of which is included in the $4M account balances figure). Thus you multiply 7M x $27.50 which is where I got the $192 MILLION from.

Here's the real problem: Charles did not maintain any financial records. All you have is what he "said" it was. The SEC has had to use their forensic accountants to come up with the real figures, which will be vastly different than from Charles' figures. Charles was just making it up as he went along.

Originally Posted by stephenjgray

Yep fair point about the money that was moved to his personal account!

Now, some points on your "money owing" math:

a) that 61M is just what was paid out through Paypal. There's another significant figure for what has been paid out through the other payment processors. (I think the papers give the total paid out figure somewhere??). But I grant you it seems unlikely that figure would be enough to account fully for the difference between 11M ad packs and 7M ad packs- so there seems to be a discrepancy there between/within the figures provided by Charles

As far as I know $207M was the total taken in. If $61M was paid out and $61M in cash is frozen (for arguments sake) then it's safe to assume another $85M went somewhere. Even if it all went to pay off ad packs that only lops of another 1.5M.

Scoville has a lot of discrepancies to account for.

Originally Posted by stephenjgray

b) when calculating the liability on the 7M remaining ad-packs, it isn't fair to multiply by $55 imo.

I'm not in the business of fair. If Scoves doesn't like my math let him dispense with the poetry for a day and provide an accounting of how $204M bought 15,000,000 ad packs.

Originally Posted by stephenjgray

On average each ad-pack would have half of its time left, so would have already paid out half of its liability (some of which is included in the $4M account balances figure). Thus you multiply 7M x $27.50 which is where I got the $192 MILLION from.

If half the liability was paid out there would be almost no money left. A more probable scenario involves the compounding of packs, which people think will mature for $55.

Only 4,080,000 ad packs could have possibly been sold for $204,000,000, that we're talking about 7M is itself problematic. Back of the envelope I can only account for 2.6M packs being paid in full (from the 61M and the 85M), so what happened to the other packs?

Originally Posted by EagleOne

The SEC has had to use their forensic accountants to come up with the real figures, which will be vastly different than from Charles' figures.

Sounds simple, doesn't it ???

At least it does for anyone who has never encountered a forensic accountant or seen a business undergo forensic analysis.

By the time the receivers' and SECs' teams of forensic accountants have finished their work, Charlies' "figures" won't mean a thing

Originally Posted by ribshaw

... so what happened to the other packs?

Well the "investors" have them in their minds as unrealised assets, owed to them by TM...
but don't worry "there's more than enough money to cover everything"- the Trusted Admin said so.

Originally Posted by littleroundman

Sounds simple, doesn't it ???

At least it does for anyone who has never encountered a forensic accountant or seen a business undergo forensic analysis.

By the time the receivers' and SECs' teams of forensic accountants have finished their work, Charlies' "figures" won't mean a thing

Right... but did he or his programmer doctor the database before he gave it to them!? (doesn't look like it, since they appear to have given them a database that proves that TM is a huge Ponzi, LOL)

Originally Posted by stephenjgray

Right... but did he or his programmer doctor the database before he gave it to them!? (doesn't look like it, since they appear to have given them a database that proves that TM is a huge Ponzi, LOL)

See, that's the thing which will bring Scoville undone.

It's not how forensic accountants work.

They don't rely on anything provided for them

They are not like your friendly neighbourhood tax accountant who balances the receipts you provide to him / her.

EVERYTHING has to be checked, rechecked and traced and the stories attached mean nothing without a paper trail.

Originally Posted by stephenjgray

Right... but did he or his programmer doctor the database before he gave it to them!? (doesn't look like it, since they appear to have given them a database that proves that TM is a huge Ponzi, LOL)

One question that came up last night with respect to "retired" ad packs. Based on clicks alone I am not seeing how Scoville could have retired more than 10% of his packs. Is there some other path where people were either paid without having received their clicks and/or were satisfied with their packs expiring sans clicks and willingly forfeited the money?


17. AdPacks cost $50 each. For this price, the investor receives 20 clicks to his banner ad, 1,000 visitors to his website from the traffic exchange, and the ability to share in Traffic Monsoon’s profit.

43. As of May 16, 2016, Traffic Monsoon had sold 15,225,689 AdPacks. For each such AdPack, however, it must deliver 1,000 visitors, amounting to 15 billion visitors total. As of July 24, 2016, however, the Traffic Monsoon website states that the company had “delivered 1,618,996,340 visitors to our member’s [sic] websites to date.” This is only about a tenth of what would be required by Scoville’s own program.

https://www.sec.gov/litigation/compl.../comp23604.pdf

Originally Posted by ribshaw

One question that came up last night with respect to "retired" ad packs. Based on clicks alone I am not seeing how Scoville could have retired more than 10% of his packs. Is there some other path where people were either paid without having received their clicks and/or were satisfied with their packs expiring sans clicks and willingly forfeited the money?


17. AdPacks cost $50 each. For this price, the investor receives 20 clicks to his banner ad, 1,000 visitors to his website from the traffic exchange, and the ability to share in Traffic Monsoon’s profit.

43. As of May 16, 2016, Traffic Monsoon had sold 15,225,689 AdPacks. For each such AdPack, however, it must deliver 1,000 visitors, amounting to 15 billion visitors total. As of July 24, 2016, however, the Traffic Monsoon website states that the company had “delivered 1,618,996,340 visitors to our member’s [sic] websites to date.” This is only about a tenth of what would be required by Scoville’s own program.

https://www.sec.gov/litigation/compl.../comp23604.pdf

Well yes, the vast majority of *investors* don't care a jot about the traffic deficit! However... since it wasn't delivered, it could have relevance in that they could claim they are owed their money back, even for the packs where they've had their full $55 of rev share. Good point! (I guess it just has relevance in exactly how the eventual pot is divided up...)

Originally Posted by Della Cate

Oo-er, Jose is getting quite shirty with his critics....

Attachment 16093

Unfortunately for him, Muhammed Maf Rahman has chosen to answer.... (next post as it's quite long)

Jesus line dancing Christ - how much of a f**king spiv does José No-way look in this pic?!

WHAT about that image in any way, shape or form screams "LEGITIMATE" to anyone?!

Dirty Rat Robber.jpg

William's back on the case and letting people know his precious thoughts.....

Maps 408 Oct 16.jpg

Bet Charles is glad William is in his corner.

Originally Posted by Della Cate

William's back on the case and letting people know his precious thoughts.....

Maps 408 Oct 16.jpg

Bet Charles is glad William is in his corner.

So William, what happened to your famous line that YOUR FB page timeline proves TM is not a Ponzi? And one more thing, there is no case law that supports being able to run a Ponzi, and that's why the attorneys' didn't use any.

Originally Posted by EagleOne

So William, what happened to your famous line that YOUR FB page timeline proves TM is not a Ponzi? And one more thing, there is no case law that supports being able to run a Ponzi, and that's why the attorneys' didn't use any.

Yup, the attorney is doing their best. Case law in just the last decade makes any non security arguement a waste of time.

My thought: civil side ends up in settlement to avoid trial/ get $ back to victims sooner.
Criminal charges follow then trial in 2018. Charles get 20 years ends up doing 10 plus.

Originally Posted by ribshaw

Back of the envelope I can only account for 2.6M packs being paid in full (from the 61M and the 85M), so what happened to the other packs?

Come on Ribshaw. You know he told us that the tooth fairy gave him a huge rebate!

I understand your thinking Fast City, LA, but this is not how Charles thinks. First, he has been telling everyone since TM launched, and us "haters" started exposing TM for being a Ponzi/illegal pyramid scheme, how legal TM is. He has continued that argument to this day. He has boxed himself in and now he has to go to trial. If he caves and admits the SEC is right that TM is a Ponzi, then all the TM members who believed him will turn on him and more lawsuits will follow. They would know he has been lying to them, BUT by going to trial and losing, he wins. This would allow him to be the martyr against the "evil SEC and the government." That he was railroaded by the "evil SEC and the government." And sadly there will be too many TM members who will believe this when it happens. More on this in a moment.

It is also why he had to show for the hearing, and will take this to trial. This is all about Charles and his image. If you think he truly cares about the TM members, you have been fooled. If this was about the members, Charles would have had a TM Company Bank account to move the funds to from PayPal when they released the funds. He didn't and had to have them moved to his personal account. This is a multi-million dollar company, and he didn't have a company bank account. Let that sink in for a few minutes. The truly sad part is that too many members bought Charles' lie about why he did it, and never questioned why there wasn't any TM company bank account ever.

Now back to the setting up the SEC as the "evil" one in shutting down TM. Even when the SEC wins the civil trial they lose in the eyes and minds of the TM members. The same will hold true in his criminal trial. The winner is Charles and his reputation. I only have to point you to the ASD Cash Generator Case where the members believed every word out of Andy Bowdoin's mouth. In fact they claimed he was "too honest to testify," and even after he pleaded guilty in his criminal trial, about 40% of the members thought he had been railroaded, it was all the "evil government's" fault he had to go to prison, and here we are over 5 years later and they still believe he was innocent and support him. Upon his release from prison if he is too dumb to try it again, these same 40% will rush to join his program, and he knows it. This is the same thing that is happening here with Charles and the TM members. I am not talking about the promoters, shills and pimps of TM because they all know TM was a Ponzi. I'm talking about the regular members who bought the lie that TM was their business and is legal. There is no doubt in my mind that even when Charles is convicted in his criminal trial, serves his time, and if he comes out and starts a new program these same members will rush to join just as the members of ASD would rush to join Andy's program. The two are strikingly similar in both formats and the type of people who were and are members and their loyalty to conmen and criminals.

You see when you join one of these programs, you don't realize that you are joining a cult-like program. The first thing you are taught it not to believe anyone other than the leader and those in leadership positions. Us "outsiders" used to be called negative people, jealous, losers, afraid to rake risks, etc.. but now they just call us "haters" or "vigilantes." You are taught not to worry when things happen but they will all work out. BUT under no circumstances are you to listen to haters/vigilantes EVER. They don't know what they are talking about, they are losers and only want to tear you down and ruin a good thing. All you have to do is read some of the comments from people posting here who tried to talk their friends out of being in TM and how it has ruined their friendship in far too many cases, or at best strained their friendship; and the same can be said about families.

This is why these are insidious because they do destroy friendships, tear families apart, cause divorce, ostracize families members from each other, and sadly the inevitable suicide. Now you know why most of us "haters/vigilantes" do what we do and why we do it. Unlike the promoters and members of these programs who are paid, the "haters/vigilantes" do it for free and take all the verbal abuse to boot. Well, Eagle does have people who make donations for us to continue our work, but the rest posting do not. And yet at the end of the day we are still all here and the programs we were exposing are not. Interesting how the mind works isn't it.

Charles would have had a TM Company Bank account to move the funds to from PayPal when they released the funds

in the interview he said he had one set up in Dubai and that's what really screwed him when he got caught pulling the funds into his own account.

Originally Posted by EagleOne

I understand your thinking Fast City, LA, but this is not how Charles thinks. First, he has been telling everyone since TM launched, and us "haters" started exposing TM for being a Ponzi/illegal pyramid scheme, how legal TM is. He has continued that argument to this day. He has boxed himself in and now he has to go to trial. If he caves and admits the SEC is right that TM is a Ponzi, then all the TM members who believed him will turn on him and more lawsuits will follow. They would know he has been lying to them, BUT by going to trial and losing, he wins. This would allow him to be the martyr against the "evil SEC and the government." That he was railroaded by the "evil SEC and the government." And sadly there will be too many TM members who will believe this when it happens.

Well said. I think this is spot on.

Originally Posted by stephenjgray

Well yes, the vast majority of *investors* don't care a jot about the traffic deficit! However... since it wasn't delivered, it could have relevance in that they could claim they are owed their money back, even for the packs where they've had their full $55 of rev share. Good point! (I guess it just has relevance in exactly how the eventual pot is divided up...)

This is speculation on my part, but I'd wager Scoville matured millions of ad packs without having fulfilled the requisite number of visitors. If so this will kill him both civilly and criminally since his "people were buying a service" definitively becomes "induced into thinking they were making money" which is can't be good for someone not running a Ponzi.

Originally Posted by ribshaw

This is speculation on my part, but I'd wager Scoville matured millions of ad packs without having fulfilled the requisite number of visitors. If so this will kill him both civilly and criminally since his "people were buying a service" definitively becomes "induced into thinking they were making money" which is can't be good for someone not running a Ponzi.

Yes good point - I agree with your speculation, and so his behaviour in doing that completely contradicts his now claim that it was "primarily" a service that was being provided. [Not that the SEC or judge needed any more evidence to win the Ponzi case... but hey, the more the merrier...]. Thinking about it, though, is there going to be any way to determine how many clicks were delivered to the member's given advert(s) by a given date? I would think not, unless it happens to be a data item in his database - that's quite possible - but it won't be possible for the "forensic accountant" to verify it in any other way?