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

From Tara's blog...

Click Intensity - The Traffic Monsoon Effect

Posted: 29 Sep 2016 01:13 PM PDT
The SEC 's closure of Traffic Monsoon is having repercussions for the whole 'Rev Share'/ Ponzi Industry.
First 'My Advertising Pays' closes withdrawals and stops 'profit share', and now Click Intensity are having withdrawal problems too. Currently two weeks according to it's owner, Nick Johnson, but could be up to 30 days:

'Super Excited for upcoming 3 Big Announcements

1. Paypal should be back in next 24-48 hours

2.Sales of hourly login ads will be going live next which everyone has been asking for

3.FB share product is 99.9 % ready and final stage of testing has already started - That product alone has the power to double up existing revenue share and dominate the industry !

A lot of people have been recently asking us that what happened with 2 Big Revenue Share Companies - Will the same thing happen to us or does it affect us in any way and my reply always remains the same

Even though our business model has similarities but there is no similarity between the way we operate things here at the management level and the way they operated themselves...

Whether it's the way we handle payouts , whether it's the way we shift our corporate registrations from UK to USA to Hongkong for a longer vision and growth , whether it's the way we build our marketing systems right from day 1 which resulted in 120k members in 5 months alone etc etc

I always say this and will say again - we are just getting started with 125k+ members strong , the next phase of growth will be super strong

Our tech team is almost finalied with development of tons of codes for making the system super tight and secure and in about 30 days you will see very fast payout processing times of less than 72 hours ...

For now we still need to manually verify each transaction and with so many transactions , I know it does increases the backlogand hence the delay of about 2 weeks processing time....

But things are improving on the code and security level and not even $10 loss has been reported by finance team in last 45 days.....which is great to know.....

So have patience for about 30 more days and you will see less than 72 hour processing times for withdrawl requests and also increased withdrawl requests of about $200/day or more....

Kindly restrain from posting anything which sounds negative , which is of complain based nature as you will be banned instantly from the group.
I hate to do this but it is important to protect the interest of everyone here on a bigger level.
You sending 100 mails to finance department will not speed up the withdrawl process neither will you get any preferential treatment.
All it will do is waste time of finance team to reply you back which will slow down the response time..

There is a reason for everything we do and at corporate level we have to think differently from affiliates in order for us to run CI for many years to come....

The best is yet to come
Stay focussed on what you need to do i.e clicking your ads , buying more packs and sharing the message of CI with the world and we will do whatever it takes to make sure Ci lasts for another 5 years , 10 years and 20 years and beyond..
Long Live CI
Tag your teams to this post and share it so we all are at same page...
Nick Johnson.'

So what's happening? Why are these Ponzi's suddenly dropping like flies?
It's very simple really. 'Traffic Monsoon' has been the catalyst for the sudden withdrawal
of vast amounts of affiliates money from many similiar scams.

The problem with so many withdrawals, in such a short space of time, is that the money has long gone.

So the owners have to stall payments and make endless speeches to encourage MORE people to join and bring in fresh money - so that payments may commence again and the rising panic of its members can be quelled.

Fortunately for us, people are getting wise to these schemes now. They see the SEC taking down Traffic Monsoon and realise that the business models of 'My Advertising Pays' AND 'Click Intensity ( and many, many more) are identical and they want their money out -quickly. They know full well that once the payment excuses start, it's GAME OVER.

More Ponzi's will undoubtably crash as soon as the 'Traffic Monsoon' case goes to court.
'My Advertising Pays' and 'Click Intensity' are just the tip of a massive Ponzi iceberg.

Originally Posted by HARRISON

AdHitProfits doesn't look to healthy -looks like the SEC has struck again!:

Looks like we won't be hearing the old "AdHit Profits uses the same business model and it has been running for years" nonsense argument from Traffic Monsoon pimps anytime soon.

Originally Posted by laidback

Something that none of these "Oh I just bought advertising" clowns has addressed is: Would they have purchased that "advertising" without the promise or expectation of getting back $55 for the $50 they put in? Everybody that believes that one stand on your head!!

They still have to answer the questions:

Why did they buy more than one ad pack at a time? 1000 clicks isn't delivered any differently with one pack or a thousand. In fact with only 162,000 members five packs total probably would have covered those that need to see an offer multiple times. Which leads to the next riddle.

Why did they continue to buy advertising when 90% of traffic wasn't being delivered?

Why were they clicking on 10 ads per day if they were just buying advertising?

Why were ad packs sold to people with nothing to advertise?

Originally Posted by ribshaw

They still have to answer the questions:

Why did they buy more than one ad pack at a time? 1000 clicks isn't delivered any differently with one pack or a thousand. In fact with only 162,000 members five packs total probably would have covered those that need to see an offer multiple times. Which leads to the next riddle.

Why did they continue to buy advertising when 90% of traffic wasn't being delivered?

Why were they clicking on 10 ads per day if they were just buying advertising?

Why were ad packs sold to people with nothing to advertise?

Awww, c'mon Ribby! You are actually expecting someone that thinks clicking is work to answer intricate queries without contradicting themselves? Good luck with that!

Originally Posted by ribshaw

They still have to answer the questions:

Why did they buy more than one ad pack at a time? 1000 clicks isn't delivered any differently with one pack or a thousand. In fact with only 162,000 members five packs total probably would have covered those that need to see an offer multiple times. Which leads to the next riddle.

Why did they continue to buy advertising when 90% of traffic wasn't being delivered?

Why were they clicking on 10 ads per day if they were just buying advertising?

Why were ad packs sold to people with nothing to advertise?

Thats one thing i suggested to charles long ago ... Why not limit adpacks to one in and one out. Then you can buy 2 .. Then 3 and so on . his response was why place a limit on traffic purchases ? I said this would stop the member wanting to invest .. As it would not be lucrative and only reason to buy it would be to get the service .. It fell on deaf ears .. Hindsight is always 20/20.. It would have slowed growth .. But would also stopped sec scrutiny.. It would have been looked at like ahp. Neo bux and or clix sense ...you have to click ads to earn any money on the monsoon .. And you have to advertise something even if it was your monsoon banner as it was showed offline from the monsoon as well .. I know mine was .. I got 18 referrals to the monsoon from the monsoon ..

Originally Posted by stacy532

I got 18 referrals to the monsoon from the monsoon ..

you could not get refferals from TM to ur TM since it was a closed circuit. only way was to spam ur ref link on other sites.

Originally Posted by Scamville

you could not get refferals from TM to ur TM since it was a closed circuit. only way was to spam ur ref link on other sites.

absolutely false statement pre paypal freeze . after paypal freeze he was not able to buy outside advertising from other sources its in the sec papers read up he showed our referral links outside of tm for us for quite some time more than a year

Originally Posted by stacy532

Thats one thing i suggested to charles long ago ... Why not limit adpacks to one in and one out. Then you can buy 2 .. Then 3 and so on . his response was why place a limit on traffic purchases ? I said this would stop the member wanting to invest .. As it would not be lucrative and only reason to buy it would be to get the service .. It fell on deaf ears ..

Charles should have listened to you.

Originally Posted by stacy532

Hindsight is always 20/20.. It would have slowed growth .. But would also stopped sec scrutiny.. It would have been looked at like ahp. Neo bux and or clix sense ...

Except the people clicking ads on Neobux and Clixense are not by and large the same people that placed the ads. And yes, earning $30 per year which is what ad clicking pays would have both slowed growth and minimized SEC scrutiny.

Originally Posted by stacy532

you have to click ads to earn any money on the monsoon .. And you have to advertise something even if it was your monsoon banner as it was showed offline from the monsoon as well .. I know mine was ..

Which kills the advertising backstory.

Originally Posted by stacy532

I got 18 referrals to the monsoon from the monsoon ..

From cash-links, or existing members that decided TM was such a great form of advertising they joined twice?

Originally Posted by shipdit

At your job when you see the bread leaving your facility on trucks, you know that it is going to sell for a price that exceeds its production cost (profit margin). You also know that the vast majority of the end consumers are not employees of your bakery.

Selling ad packs to affiliates and then trickling that money back to them as they click each other's ads does not produce any profit margins without there being a substantial customer base who are not affiliates..

SD

yes we hope all the bread sells . im not comparing the products as being the same or the actual generation of the money im only making similarity statements about the debt that each company is responsible to pay . lynndel said im not allowed to compare them directly so im not ....lol

when the monsoon sells an adpack the money is collected and a service is given .
the money from the selling of the service is used to pay expenses and a small portion is used for paying the ad clickers for that day that are owed and then 70% is placed into the reserve. this is actual profit as nothing more is owed from this money . you can scream all you like that money or future click wages are owed in the future . and yes they are but when we sell a loaf of bread the money split is nearly identical . roughly 16-30% is all the profit margin that is generated from a loaf of bread . the other money is spent on expenses , produce , and wages not only todays wages but tomorrows and next week etc .

answer me this why is it ok for an offline business to owe money in future wages to its employees counting in the millions and have no way to pay them without selling of more product . and i know the employees have not earned the wages yet ..
but when the monsoon owes its ad clickers in the millions on wages not earned yet then it has to be stopped immediately and its a clear ponzi.. ?


i guess money is not money and debt is not debt ? and im not comparing the way the monsoon makes its money or how the bakery sells its product .
my only comparison is what is owed and not earned yet and why one can owe and the other one better not ever owe... if my job is allowed to sell more products and services to cover its debt then the monsoon should be allowed to sell more of its services to pay the same debt..

and i know the argument is that every sell creates more debt on the monsoon but then again your saying this money is somehow owed before its earned it is not ..

if we compare neobux which is in the same industry as the monsoon when they sell an upgrade for 840$ for 365 days would you say all that plus more is owed to that purchasing member or do you expect they will be paid back in ads to click that are worth more than a non purchasing member ? one would assume that this purchase allows this member to have some sort of advantage over a free clicker.. when does the ponzi police step into neobux operations and say wait a minute you cant give someone special treatment just cause they spent money you cant give them more money per click thats what the monsoon is doing and thats illegal.. lol

Originally Posted by ribshaw

Charles should have listened to you.



. And yes, earning $30 per year which is what ad clicking pays would have both slowed growth and minimized SEC scrutiny.




Which kills the advertising backstory.



From cash-links, or existing members that decided TM was such a great form of advertising they joined twice?

no charles had showed our referraL LINKS outside of the member back offices he was buying advertising and traffic from other exchanges and sending some of our promotions there .. he had to stop doing this when paypal froze the majority of the money .. i have referrals to the monsoon that showed they signed up from the monsoon.. i have posted pictures of this long ago . the day i did the accusations went a totally different direction and nothing of this has really been spoken about until now..


Except the people clicking ads on Neobux and Clixense are not by and large the same people that placed the ads

if you plan on making your money back if you purchase an upgrade not clicking ads yourself would kill the reason to buy the upgrades .. and yes i agree the cash links at tm were very similar..
but let me run this by you if a member spent 1$ on neobux to place ads and he decides that purchase was useless he then can click ads until he reaches 2 $ and makes 200% on his purchase then he can walk away . what im asking is it fair for the people that spend money have to share the same amount or make the same amount as all the folks just milking the ads dry and never plan on spending a dime ever? should the folks that spend money be allowed to earn more ? receive more ads or have access to the higher paying ads?

Originally Posted by stacy532

if we compare neobux which is in the same industry as the monsoon

That would be a valid argument, except it isn't in the "same industry"

Originally Posted by stacy532

but when the monsoon owes its ad clickers in the millions on wages not earned yet then it has to be stopped immediately and its a clear ponzi.. ?

That would be a valid argument, except for the fact it's not the only reason Traffic Monsoon was stopped and Scoville charged

after paypal freeze he was not able to buy outside advertising from other sources its in the sec papers read up he showed our referral links outside of tm for us for quite some time more than a year

It's only "in the SEC papers" because it's what Scoville told the interviewers, not because it happened that way

Originally Posted by stacy532

And you have to advertise something even if it was your monsoon banner as it was showed offline from the monsoon as well .

So, you're expecting the court to believe members were advertising Traffic Monsoon for free out of the goodness of their hearts, and not simply to qualify to earn 110% return on the purchase price.

How excellent, that should go down a treat with an experienced judge.

Originally Posted by littleroundman

So, you're expecting the court to believe members were advertising Traffic Monsoon for free out of the goodness of their hearts, and not simply to qualify to earn 110% return on the purchase price.

How excellent, that should go down a treat with an experienced judge.

yes there are bad apples that have no use for traffic being no store front you cant actually meet and talk to the customer or force someone to advertise something else if they dont want to

Originally Posted by littleroundman

That would be a valid argument, except it isn't in the "same industry"

by same industry i mean traffic exchange and paid to click industry , and remember everything advertised on the monsoon is also advertised there so its as close to the same industry as you can get..

Originally Posted by littleroundman

It's only "in the SEC papers" because it's what Scoville told the interviewers, not because it happened that way

with that being said i guess you should not believe anything in the sec papers

Originally Posted by stacy532

absolutely false statement pre paypal freeze . after paypal freeze he was not able to buy outside advertising from other sources its in the sec papers read up he showed our referral links outside of tm for us for quite some time more than a year

That's a lie. What about the 15m he had in processors and reserves by the end of March begging of April? Surely that would have paid for some outside advertising?

Or was this about the time he started stashing money offshore?

Originally Posted by stacy532

with that being said i guess you should not believe anything in the sec papers

That's completely up to you.

It makes no difference, anyway.

Traffic Monsoon has been stopped in its' tracks, the assets are in the process of being confiscated and Charlie is looking down the barrel of an extended stay in a Federal prison.

Everything else is dross.

Originally Posted by stacy532

yes there are bad apples that have no use for traffic being no store front you cant actually meet and talk to the customer or force someone to advertise something else if they dont want to

Bad apples? The vast majority of members were sold an investment. Not advertising. In fact Sharon and Sunil barely even mentioned advertising at their meetings except for calling it an advertising revenue sharing company.

Originally Posted by stacy532

yes there are bad apples that have no use for traffic being no store front you cant actually meet and talk to the customer or force someone to advertise something else if they dont want to

Except in the case of ponzis like TM, the "bad apples" are the majority. If you weren't expecting a profit, whether guaranteed or not, you wouldn't have bought $50 adpacks and would have bought the cheaper, non-revshare product that offered the same "service".

In his SEC interview, Scoville admitted to using reserve funds to keep the payout level consistent, so the revenue sharing wasn't based on actual revenue.

Just like the Zeek Rewards scam and all other rev share scams before TM, the admin has to create the illusion of consistent returns or it's game over sooner.

It's too bad you refuse to see how ponzi math works.

Because most members are conned into "repurchasing" in order to get to a higher level of adpacks, their $55 "earnings" really only cost TM $5 in commission to the upline. Maybe Charles took his cut and gave the programmer theirs. Either way, repurchasing drains the system slower than actually paying out from real revenue.

Eventually, there would have been enough TM members trying to live off their adpack income that the amount of withdrawals would have far exceeded actual revenue and the inevitable collapse would have begun.

That's how every rev share ponzi will die if it's not shut down first.

If the service is actually worth the price, there is no need for a revshare. You make your ROI from your advertising results.

Originally Posted by ribshaw

Why were ad packs sold to people with nothing to advertise?

How people failed to see that leaves me gob smacked.

Originally Posted by stacy532

by same industry i mean traffic exchange and paid to click industry , and remember everything advertised on the monsoon is also advertised there so its as close to the same industry as you can get..

There is only one industry in ponzi advertising and that is the biggest growth industry on the planet which is CRIME

Originally Posted by stacy532

i have referrals to the monsoon that showed they signed up from the monsoon..

Which by default means neither you nor they were there to buy advertising.

common sense.JPG

Originally Posted by stacy532

no charles had showed our referraL LINKS outside of the member back offices he was buying advertising and traffic from other exchanges and sending some of our promotions there ..

Which would look something like this...

KINDA LIKE THIS.jpg

Originally Posted by stacy532

if you plan on making your money back if you purchase an upgrade not clicking ads yourself would kill the reason to buy the upgrades .. and yes i agree the cash links at tm were very similar..
but let me run this by you if a member spent 1$ on neobux to place ads and he decides that purchase was useless he then can click ads until he reaches 2 $ and makes 200% on his purchase then he can walk away . what im asking is it fair for the people that spend money have to share the same amount or make the same amount as all the folks just milking the ads dry and never plan on spending a dime ever? should the folks that spend money be allowed to earn more ? receive more ads or have access to the higher paying ads?

The issue is not one of "fairness" or "milking" the issue is where does the money come from to pay these people. With Neobux people are buying advertising, mostly for a bunch of crap. Then other people are being paid a pittance to click on that crap.

If someone has a credit card, or is foolish enough to pay for a bunch of upgrades they may never recover they make a wonderful mark. I can very easily see why an advertiser would pay more for this person view their ads.

Originally Posted by surfer

It's too bad you refuse to see how ponzi math works.

he knows exactly how it works and is why he's here making ridiculous excuses for it.