Thread: Zeek Rewards !! How to get to $3K a month, starting as a free member !

Originally Posted by Mitch McDeere

Troy still doesn't believe Zeek is a Ponzi.

Perhaps some of you with more history than I can answer this...

What is the SEC's record when they have alleged a business is a Ponzi, have they ever been wrong? If this was a sports analogy, what is their record? 20-0? 40-1? 50-2? etc.

Does Troy understand that the more he resists belief that Zeek is a Ponzi, the deeper hole he is digging as far as perception & credibility?

Ask yourself this question:

If you had $4 Million Dollars and you knew your company was legal and had done nothing wrong, would you have caved in and not challenged the SEC's charges, or would you have used your $4 Million Dollars to fight them in court and win?

But when the party to which the SEC has charged agrees to a plea deal to pay a fine when not agreeing to or admitting wrong-doing, their record is 100% Paul does not get a do-over like Andy tried.

Originally Posted by EagleOne

But when the party to which the SEC has charged agrees to a plea deal AND FREEZE ORDER to pay a fine when not agreeing to or admitting wrong-doing, their record is 100% Paul does not get a do-over like Andy tried.

An often overlooked, but, vitally important fact.

Seems Kevin Thompson hadn't stay idle. His ZeekRecovery.info is up and running, and he got a team of "experts" giving free advice.

The only catch is he got Lenny on there too.

Originally Posted by kschang

Seems Kevin Thompson hadn't stay idle. His ZeekRecovery.info is up and running, and he got a team of "experts" giving free advice.

The only catch is he got Lenny on there too.

Jordan Maglich is on there as well. I like how they post all of this great expert information, but in the end, their advice is just sit tight and wait which is what you guys have been saying here:

During the last few days, we’ve consulted numerous professionals, including a renowned class action attorney, a ponzi scheme specialist, and a bankruptcy and receivership attorney, regarding development of a strategy to seek recovery of your investment in Zeek Rewards. At this point, the consensus is that there is no clear legal course of action that will yield a more favorable result for you than cooperating with the receiver. We will continue to monitor the receiver’s actions closely and will notify you immediately if we think a different course of action is needed.

Jordan Maglich, the Forbes writer and attorney specializing in Ponzi cases is on there. Jordan's articles appear in other Ponzi tracking related sites.

And this little blurb here, which sounds identical to what realscam and patrickpretty have been saying since the beginning, except you guys were proactive and trying to warn everybody. The few that listened are probably really glad they didn't fall for this scam:

over the last 5 days, you and over 15,000 other individuals submitted personal information to us regarding the details of your investment. The stories are heartbreaking. While some of you were aware of the risk, it appears that the vast majority of you were simply trusting friends and peers who introduced you to Zeek as an investment opportunity. Some of you cashed in your 401(k)s, some of you invested college tuition money, and others invested their life savings in search of investment returns.
Many of you are personally devastated. “Ok, now what?”

Originally Posted by Mitch McDeere

What is the SEC's record when they have alleged a business is a Ponzi, have they ever been wrong? If this was a sports analogy, what is their record? 20-0? 40-1? 50-2? etc.

After they've been inside the business, as was the case with Zeek Rewards, it was no longer an "allegation"

It requires reading of the entire complaint and supporting documents, but, the S.E.C. had complete knowledge of EVERYTHING necessary to ensure the action succeeded.

The point here is, until there are criminal proceedings, we won't know the minutia.

The S.E.C never comments and Zeek Rewards and Burks are sure as h**l not going to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Doubters should ask themselves this question:

How did the S.E.C. get sufficient information about Zeeks' inner workings to satisfy a Federal Court judge, WITHOUT being "inside" ??

By the time it got into court, the "deals" were already done.

Does anyone REALLY think the S.E.C. had only dropped in on Burks that morning for a friendly chat before they presented their case in court ??

At the risk of being even more boring than I usually am, I'll say again:

There is NO WAY in the world that the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and therefore the U.S. Government and all the relevant agencies did not receive "Suspicious Activity Reports" (SARs) AUTOMATICALLY from all the U.S. banks involved. w-a-a-a-a-y back.

Reproduced here with the kind permission of REALSCAM.com member, kschang from his blog A MLM SCEPTIC

I think it's just starting to dawn on some of the HYIP ponzi players this is bloody serious and we were right all along WRT what was going to happen:



Zeek Rewards thread, Talkgold HYIP ponzi forum

1. If you initiate a chargeback with your bank, you are in violation of a DIRECT FEDERAL COURT ORDER and exposing yourself to the risk of being criminally prosecuted for fraud.

Originally Posted by Mitch McDeere

Troy still doesn't believe Zeek is a Ponzi.

Perhaps some of you with more history than I can answer this...

What is the SEC's record when they have alleged a business is a Ponzi, have they ever been wrong? If this was a sports analogy, what is their record? 20-0? 40-1? 50-2? etc.

Does Troy understand that the more he resists belief that Zeek is a Ponzi, the deeper hole he is digging as far as perception & credibility?

Again, he has no credibility as he was caught shilling for his friend that owned buzzirk/global verge or whatever that faux telecom mlm that lasted about 6 months was and had to come clean and admit it.

Breaking news from Troy Dooly.

Mlm Company Review | MLM Help Desk

Ah, spin doctoring, it's such a fascinating subject.

Here's what Troy Dooly has to say on MLMHelpdesk (emphasis mine)



Here's what SNR Denton has to say on it's website (emphasis mine)



A minor difference, perhaps, but, given the context, yet another example of how frauds such as Zeek survive.

Should be interesting. Looks like Gene Besen does have some real experience with this stuff:

SNR Denton - People - Gene R. Besen (Partner)

Successfully represented seven Major League Baseball players in recovering in excess of $139 million from the receivership estate of the Stanford Financial and successfully defeated the Stanford Receiver’s fraudulent transfer claims seeking to clawback in excess of $9 million from the players. Janvey v. Adams, et al., 588 F.3d 831 (5th Cir. 2009).

Ballplayers to keep Stanford scheme funds - Washington Times

Seven current and former major league baseball players, along with hundreds of other investors, can keep the millions of dollars they put into R. Allen Stanford’s purported $7 billion Ponzi scheme, a federal appeals court has ruled.

The decision by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals undercuts a central strategy of the lawyer appointed to take control of Mr. Stanford’s assets, and one lawyer says it may set a precedent for how money can be recovered in future scams.

Doesn't really seem fair, but I didn't read how the Court Of Appeals reached their decision.

Originally Posted by JustTooMuchTime

Doesn't really seem fair, but I didn't read how the Court Of Appeals reached their decision.

Just because it has the words "receiver" and "ponzi" in it, doesn't make it "the same"

It's entirely a different kettle of fish.

The case was against the receiver AFTER he attempted clawbacks from the players and was based on the fact the PLAYERS were victims of a ponzi scam and had NOT received "unfair advantage" ahead of other ponzi victims.

I.O.W the receiver was attempting to retrieve funds from those he considered to have received preferential treatment from Stanford (i.e. were "insiders" and "big winners") the players denied they should be treated differently than anyone else , and the court agreed

Completely different ball game (pun fully intended)

I originally thought that the Gov would take this case hands down, but now its questionable. These attorneys are serious big guns. Someone is providing serious funding to this firm cause they are extremely expensive. The firms motive is clear - unlawful action by the SEC. WOW!

Originally Posted by littleroundman

yet another example of how frauds such as Zeek survive.

Originally Posted by Former Player

I originally thought that the Gov would take this case hands down, but now its questionable.

Not to me it ain't, not for one second.

The S.E.C. didn't take action against the "Zeeklers"

They have no standing.

It wasn't "their" company

Perhaps, later down the track, they can perhaps argue about some of the receivers' actions, but, they sure as h**l have no standing in the civil action.

IANAL, nor do I play one on TV, BUT, if these (I presume) adults want to spend their money this way and the lawyers are willing to take it, good luck to them.

That's how the system works.

It's exactly how it worked in the near identical AdSurf Daily case, and, I'm in no doubt that's how it will work here.

Originally Posted by Former Player

I originally thought that the Gov would take this case hands down, but now its questionable. These attorneys are serious big guns. Someone is providing serious funding to this firm cause they are extremely expensive. The firms motive is clear - unlawful action by the SEC. WOW!

Don't confuse the probability that Zeek is a Ponzi with the probability that Zeek affiliates who were "big winners" will have to give back earnings due to clawback lawsuits.

The Zeek affiliates seem to think SNR Denton will represent them... what's the point? If you were a victim (lost money), your best bet is to let the receiver clawback as much as possible. If you were a winner (made money), then you want SNR Denton to make it as difficult as possible for the receiver to claw back money.

The scammy part of all this is that the affiliates who were big winners could pay for their own counsel, but instead, have Mr. Craddock soliciting "donations" from the flock. The affiliate flock, most of whom are victims, don't realize the money they are "donating" to Craddock for this effort HURTS THEM because any success that SNR Denton has will result in fewer clawbacks and delays in getting money returned.

But, I suppose we call them "flock" for a reason.... they did get involved with Zeek Rewards in the first place.

It wasn't "their" company

Here's an afterthought:

if they are now claiming it WAS their company, they would have been shareholders.

Which, in itself, brings up ANOTHER problem for Zeek and Burks with the S.E.C. i.e. selling unregistered securities.

If it were me, I think I'd make like Elmer Fudd and keep weally, weally qwiet on that front

Originally Posted by littleroundman

Here's an afterthought:

if they are now claiming it WAS their company, they would have been shareholders.

Which, in itself, brings up ANOTHER problem for Zeek and Burks with the S.E.C. i.e. selling unregistered securities.

If it were me, I think I'd make like Elmer Fudd and keep weally, weally qwiet on that front

Oh, I'm sure the lawyer will be glad to go up to court, argue a lost cause, and collect their fee nonetheless.

This ain't a case where they'll go on contingency fee. :D

The case is doomed either way, judging by ASD's case history. Heck, I doubt it'll survive the first hearing (well, maybe second, someone's gonna file motion to delay, while SEC is gonna file motion to dismiss).

Either way, someone's spending $$$, without getting anything in return. The only one getting rich are the lawyers (and the scammers).

Originally Posted by littleroundman

Here's an afterthought:

if they are now claiming it WAS their company, they would have been shareholders.

Which, in itself, brings up ANOTHER problem for Zeek and Burks with the S.E.C. i.e. selling unregistered securities.

If it were me, I think I'd make like Elmer Fudd and keep weally, weally qwiet on that front

LOL, you must be referring to the cartoon Elmer, not the one on MMG...!

Originally Posted by laidback

LOL, you must be referring to the cartoon Elmer, not the one on MMG...!

WHAT ??

You mean to tell me that's not the real Elmer Fudd over on the MMG HYIP ponzi forum ??

Originally Posted by Mitch McDeere

Don't confuse the probability that Zeek is a Ponzi with the probability that Zeek affiliates who were "big winners" will have to give back earnings due to clawback lawsuits.

The Zeek affiliates seem to think SNR Denton will represent them... what's the point? If you were a victim (lost money), your best bet is to let the receiver clawback as much as possible. If you were a winner (made money), then you want SNR Denton to make it as difficult as possible for the receiver to claw back money.

The scammy part of all this is that the affiliates who were big winners could pay for their own counsel, but instead, have Mr. Craddock soliciting "donations" from the flock. The affiliate flock, most of whom are victims, don't realize the money they are "donating" to Craddock for this effort HURTS THEM because any success that SNR Denton has will result in fewer clawbacks and delays in getting money returned.

But, I suppose we call them "flock" for a reason.... they did get involved with Zeek Rewards in the first place.

Not sure if this has been posted before, but in the KSChange article just posted here, he points out Robert Craddock listed as President of (the now inactive) Fun Club USA, Inc.

Whois for funclubusa.com has privacy protect on from the start and no traceable whois from nameservers, but it redirects to something that seems awfully familiar:

OK. Just set up my photobucket account so my images aren't so small here:


Posted by RealScam's Glimdropper at Quatloos:

A few quick points, the person who wrote the "take down" letter isn't an attorney, he claims to be some sort of independent consultant for Zeek Rewards/Rex Ventures Group. His name is Robert Craddock and his recently deleted Linkedin profile mentioned a previous affiliation with Fortune High Tech Marketing. He did threaten K. Chang that Kevin Grimes, one of ZR/RVG's attorneys will be addressing this situation.

Why innocent people were investing their life savings and kids college tuition's, some people were living large! It will be very interesting to see how the people who handled money were living their lives.

Dawn is living in a million dollar home with a 250K motor home, fresh off a European vacation and luxury wedding – is that really fair when that money came from affiliates who have lost millions?

Originally Posted by JustTooMuchTime

OK. Just set up my photobucket account so my images aren't so small here:
Fortune Hi-Tech Marketing

Oh, yeah, that explains it. Craddock used to push FHTM also.



And he had since deleted this LinkedIn profile. Chicken!

Zeek Leaders Commit To a $100,000.00 Retainer with TOP LAW FIRM...

From:ZeekDiamond Updates <zeekdiamondupdates2@gmail.com>
To:xxxxxxxxx@yyyy.zzz
Date:Sun, 26 Aug 2012 8:08 AM (2 hours 24 minutes ago)

Zeek Leaders
Commit To a $100,000.00
Retainer with TOP LAW FIRM...

We do not wish to spam any one any updates
To be removed from these updates - just reply with the words PLEASE REMOVE...

The rest of you need to help us get the word out by sending our ZEEK UPDATES out to every ZEEK PERSON YOU KNOW!!!
To be added to our list just e-mail your request to: zeekdiamondupdates@gmail.com
Please post this communication on facebook, blogs, talking boards and any other online sites available to you.

CURRENT UPDATE...
Zeek Leaders Commit To a $100,000.00 Retainer with TOP LAW FIRM...
Uncle Todd who has done more in leadership of his time and energy even
for people not in his PAY GRID to help them prosper in ZEEK REWARDS.
Is now asking for you to step up to the plate and help make it happen...
LISTEN TO & PASS ON THIS RECORDING
1-530-881-1499 Pin: 228186

HERE IS THE LEGAL TEAM - DO NOT CALL THEM
SNR Denton
TWO OF THE ATTORNEYS LEADING THE CHARGE
SNR Denton - People - Glenn C. Colton (Partner)
SNR Denton - People - Gene R. Besen (Partner)

Good old "Uncle Todd" will milk this for all he can get. He's got to have one of the biggest clawback targets painted on his back and he might be needing some fast cash soon. I'll make some inquiries but I'm wondering if this might be an effort to stall the receiver but I'm hoping it doesn't work like that.

Our good friend wserra over at Quatloos left a comment about this situation which I will plagiarize blatantly:

A couple of points about this "we retained a top lawfirm" stuff:

(1) BFD. Anyone with the money can retain a law firm. If the firm is honest, it may tell you that it may well be unable to do anything for you. It may tell you that your cause is all but hopeless. It may tell you that you should better donate your money to The Guru's Foundation for the Contemplation of His Navel. If this in fact happens, you're the only one that will know of this advice, due to attorney-client privilege. If you want to impress me, Zeeks, prove to me that Denton has taken the case on a contingency. I would give long odds that Denton would laugh at such an idea.

(2) If the above is correct - that Denton received a sizeable retainer against which it will bill - and if the ZeekShills aren't lying about having collected money from the little guys, then the leaders of the place are playing with house money. They personally can piss it away on lost-cause legal fees, because it isn't theirs in the first place. Which leads to probably the most important point:

(3) The interests of all former Zeeksters are decidedly not the same here. The job of a receiver in this situation is twofold: clawback money from those unjustly enriched and fairly distribute it to those unjustly impoverished. The interest of each group diametrically opposes the interest of the other. The little guys will want the receiver to succeed in clawing back as much as possible, so that there is more to distribute; the big guys will want to keep their ill-gotten gains, meaning that there is less to distribute. Since those interests are in direct conflict, Denton cannot represent both groups. Whom do you believe Denton will represent?

(4) Final point: if in fact Denton winds up representing the interests of the big guys - the people who, after all, retained them - that means that Zeek solicited and took money from allegedly thousands of their own affiliates against whose interests it is now using their own money.

I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you.

I'll add one small point here, Bob Guenther ran a similar effort to "retain council" to "represent the interests" of Ad Surf Daily members. Not only did that costly effort fail to achieve any benefits for the members who contributed (Bob and Lawyer Larry did benefit but didn't contribute), but after Bob's previous bank fraud conviction became public and his erratic behavior alienated most of his donors many refunds were requested. The only people who got their money back were the people who sent their money to the law firm instead of directly to Bob. Why? Because the firm could face ethics complaints if they didn't return the cash and Bob had no ethics.

So if Todd Disner, Dave Kettner and Robert Craddock want you to think this is on the up and up, they should arrange to have SNR Denton to handle the funds. This way contributors are much more likely to receive a refund should they ever find themselves asking for one.

Craddock wants all the money going into his FHTM org account. Mua-ha-ha-ha-ha.