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

Stacy: In regard to TM being an investment/security, here is what the Howey Case that the Supreme Court determined was an investment/security regardless of what the investment was called: loan, revenue share, units, etc..:

An investment contract under the Howey Test was defined as follows:
1. an investment of money due to
2. an expectation of profits arising from
3. a common enterprise
4. which depends solely on the efforts of a promoter or third party

TM meets this criteria to a "T" and according to the US Supreme Court, TM is offering an investment/securities. Makes no difference how much Charles claims otherwise, if it meets this 4 part test, it is an investment/security. This also means that TM must be registered with the SEC to offer securities and Charles has to be licensed with FINRA to sell these securities. What do you think got ASD and Zeek in trouble? They also claimed they were doing "revenue-sharing, they were not an investment and they were not a Ponzi." TM is no different.

As for there has to be a set percentage stated by a program it will pay for it to be a Ponzi is ridiculous. While many do, it is not a requirement to be a Ponzi. The mere fact that Charles is paying the almost identical percentage per day for the duration of TM to date in itself makes it a Ponzi according to what Charles himself has said the definition of what makes a Ponzi a Ponzi. Every program that has claimed it is not a Ponzi, and has claimed that you are not investing that has been shut down by the Feds has been ruled an investment and a Ponzi.

I have said repeatedly that TM is first and foremost an illegal pyramid scheme. I said this because there isn't any outside revenue coming into TM other than from the membership buying ad packs and the other inside services of TM. These other inside revenue sources does not generate enough money to pay the 10% ROI and the 10% referral fee the member receives for every member they sign up into TM. The only ones who make any real money in TM are those who have gigantic list of referrals, not from the return on their ad packs. This clearly demonstrates that the real money is in referrals and not from advertising and so-called revenue-sharing; and it is also what makes TM an illegal pyramid scheme.

But what you and everyone will be crowing about is how Charles is going to let everyone who is a member of TM to see just how much money he has in all the payment processor accounts. It is for show. It means absolutely nothing. The reason why it means absolutely nothing is that it is only 1/2 of the picture. The most important part of the picture that he will not show is how much money he owes to the membership, which is far, far greater than the amount of money he is going to show in the accounts. It is why I said until he posts his audited financial statements, all his claims as to how much money TM has and is able to pay everyone 100% of everything they are owed and there will be money left over is nothing more than numbers on a screen. Again, Charles knows it and he knows that I know it. Charles is no different than Fred Mann, Paul Burks, Andy Bowdoin, or the admins of every other Ponzi/illegal pyramid scheme going. They all lie. All of them. You of all people should know this.

I have said it before and will say it again. I could care less about those who know how this game is played put money into TM. My posts aren't about any of you, but I do are about those who don't know how the game is played and how they are duped, lied to, and tricked into thinking TM is a real legitimate business and they can become rich by becoming a member and clicking on 10 ads per day. If this were true then everyone would be doing it, which ironically would cause it to fold immediately.

If AHP was such a great program, then TM would have never launched. There would have been no need for it. Charles knew he could not keep up the charade of AHP much longer, so he does what he always does, starts a new program while the other one dies a slow death. It's his M.O., and TM will be no different. As the song goes, "Riding high in April and shot down in May" is AHP to a "T" and TM will be no different.

Originally Posted by stacy532

what i would like to ask is any suggestions on how he could make the sharing 100% legal in your eyes. ?

He can share his trust fund or even his revenues 100% legally - if he shares it without asking for money to have the opportunity to participate in sharing.

The $50 ad pack that turns into $55 is an investment no matter what you call it.

Originally Posted by stacy532

i know that it will likely not last forever

Do you think people who set up the Xmas fund for Charles think along the same lines you do?

Do you feel good about making money off of them? 'cuz if it weren't for people like them, no one would make a dime in any of these shenanigans, including TM.

Originally Posted by stacy532

What i read in this post was we only wish to post and respond to folks that agree with us . we have no wish in proving our points .

There is no possibility of "proving" anything to the satisfaction of somebody whose job it is to recruit new victims into his / her scam-du-jour,

certainly not without getting inside the accounts of the fraud under discussion.

Traffic Monsoon is a hybrid pyramid / ponzi scheme.

Portions of it fulfill the requirements of the Howey test, as used by US courts (and contained within this thread) and parts of TM fulfill the definition of it being a pyramid or endless chain recruiting scheme, also to be found in the thread.

The fact you are unwilling or unable to comprehend the relevant laws and continue to throw in strawman arguments only reinforces peoples' impression that you are a serial ponzi pimp doing what serial ponzi pimps do

It is highly unlikely Traffic Monsoon or Charles Scoville will be prosecuted, which is not to say he and it are operating legally.

TM is a mere pimple on the a** of the ponzi / pyramid "industry" it's too small and won't last long enough to be either investigated or prosecuted.

Scoville will be back, you'll keep pimping for him. and profiting from naive and unwary newbies who fall for your lies and deceit and the HYIP ponzi players who hang out on the usual suspect HYIP ponzi forums will keep supporting Scoville as long as it suits their purpose and they can make a few bucks.

If we have saved one potential victim from losing their hard earned, our mission has been accomplished



All we ask is "You decide" and you've obviously done that

Originally Posted by stacy532

im not a fan of his coop crap

Well, if you are not, you should be. Without promotional tactics that emphasize returns on investment (you can call it ad purchase, it doesn't change the nature of the transaction) none of you will be making money.

I'll give one thing to Charles - he is pretty good at phrasing things in a way that cover his arse. If you really read the site, in principle he can make it so that it takes 10 years to turn $50 into $55 and still be within his TOS.

You know what , I think I'll open a free account with Traffic Monsoon just to test the PTC side of the thing.Out of curiosity sake, that is.

Originally Posted by Nourjan

You know what , I think I'll open a free account with Traffic Monsoon just to test the PTC side of the thing.Out of curiosity sake, that is.

Charlie's new T-shirt:

Ill leave the trust fund out.... How would someone be able to qualify for a share in the revenue? Buying an ad service perhaps? And the more of them you buy the more you share ? Hmm sounds familiar.

Originally Posted by stacy532

How would someone be able to qualify for a share in the revenue? Buying an ad service perhaps? And the more of them you buy the more you share ? Hmm sounds familiar.

Not making much sense here.

Originally Posted by E2014T

Well, if you are not, you should be. Without promotional tactics that emphasize returns on investment (you can call it ad purchase, it doesn't change the nature of the transaction) none of you will be making money.

I'll give one thing to Charles - he is pretty good at phrasing things in a way that cover his arse. If you really read the site, in principle he can make it so that it takes 10 years to turn $50 into $55 and still be within his TOS.

Yes there is no time frame given
How can there be
No one can predict what people will buy ..and if he didnt put a cap limit. On the sharing one would only have to buy one. Pack and it would earn to infinity. I highly doubt the sec would let someone receive 10,000% on a one time 50$ purchase .

Originally Posted by Fendaril

Not making much sense here.

sorry let me slow down . above someone said it would be legal for him to share revenues if he didnt charge money first for the opportunity. Im asking how would one qualify for the sharing . ?
Im sure someone will say to qualify for a share they have to participate in the website and either be a paid member by buying a service or have qualified through the means of clicking ads.

Originally Posted by stacy532

Im asking how would one qualify for the sharing?

Why should I care? I'm not interested in any sharing Charles has to offer, even if he starts giving out free money for nothing.

Originally Posted by E2014T

Why should I care? I'm not interested in any sharing Charles has to offer, even if he starts giving out free money for nothing.

If he hands out free money for nothing than it's totally legal, and one would be a proud fool not to take it.

Originally Posted by Fendaril

If he hands out free money for nothing than it's totally legal, and one would be a proud fool not to take it.

No, thank you. Sleep with dogs, wake up with flees. There is plenty of free money available from more respectable sources: grants, scholarships, government programs, charitable donations from established charities, etc.

Originally Posted by E2014T

The $50 ad pack that turns into $55 is an investment no matter what you call it.

Players call it rev-share today.......We called it manual-surf back in the day......

The law has always called it an illegal ponzi/pyramid scheme.....

Originally Posted by Fendaril

If he hands out free money for nothing than it's totally legal, and one would be a proud fool not to take it.

Depends where that free money came from.....(if it's clean or dirty).....

Originally Posted by okosh

Depends where that free money came from.....(if it's clean or dirty).....

He doesn't have any clean money. He is a full-time program admin.

Originally Posted by E2014T

Why should I care? I'm not interested in any sharing Charles has to offer, even if he starts giving out free money for nothing.

Would it be more legal if he only sold the rev share packages only after a 10 $ sale of another product was sold ? That would cover the profit thats given ..

Originally Posted by stacy532

Would it be more legal if he only sold the rev share packages only after a 10 $ sale of another product was sold ? That would cover the profit thats given ..

He can't legally sell investments to U.S. members, period. It doesn't matter what the numbers work out to be. If he wants to sell investments legally, he needs to take and pass FINRA qualification exams: Qualification Exams | FINRA.org

As you can see, they are inexpensive, so cost should not be an issue. If he is qualified, what's his excuse for not having certification?

Originally Posted by stacy532

Would it be more legal

"More legal"??.....Is that like "only a lil bit pregnant"??.....

Let me make this real simple for you Stacy.....It's either legal or it's not.....there is no such thing as "more legal"....
Today as it stands....Traffic Monsoon is ILLEGAL.....No if's no but's and no maybe's....

Originally Posted by okosh

"More legal"??.....Is that like "only a lil bit pregnant"??.....

Let me make this real simple for you Stacy.....It's either legal or it's not.....there is no such thing as "more legal"....
Today as it stands....Traffic Monsoon is ILLEGAL.....No if's no but's and no maybe's....

Thats not what i asked would it be legal to only sell revenue share packs only after one of the other 8 services is purchased first?
Some seem to only have issues with the pay plan because. Charles does not show that he has enough money to cover the potential debt . however on this site i find out charles cant even breathe without being illegal ...
You cant be kinda nice you are either an asshole or your not ...?

Originally Posted by stacy532

however on this site i find out charles cant even breathe without being illegal

He can breathe all he wants. He can't legally handle investments without being accountable to regulatory agencies. Not in the U.S. He is operating outside the law - which is fine for y'all on MMG, but not so fine for anyone who has something to lose by being associated with shady financial activities.

Is Stacy Steve Lawson?

Originally Posted by stacy532

Im asking how would one qualify for the sharing . ?

How about they click 10 ads?



Stacy, can you explain why someone has to put in $50, only to be given back $55? Is the math not exactly the same if they put in $0 and got paid $5?

Originally Posted by stacy532

Thats not what i asked would it be legal to only sell revenue share packs only after one of the other 8 services is purchased first?

NO

Originally Posted by stacy532

Charles does not show that he has enough money to cover the potential debt .

Why do you suppose that may be? The better question might be, if someone is getting a commission to put you in a "rev shave" shouldn't they be competent enough to due proper due diligence?

Originally Posted by stacy532

however on this site i find out charles cant even breathe without being illegal ...

Stacy Eagle took a good amount of time in an attempt to explain the law to you. Instead of making the same four circular arguments do you think you could spend some time reading and post a few well founded questions.

http://www.realscam.com/f8/traffic-m...html#post94001