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

Originally Posted by Bestbud

Nunes is spinning his wheels...

Jose_Nunes.jpg

I would assume that the SEC does have jurisdition.

TM is hosted in the US
Bank account/s are held in the US
Scammer scoville is a US citizen
Paypal account was opened in the US ( I assume)
Payza was also more than likely opened in the US
STP as above

The only one that might have been opened from else where was Allied Wallet, although didn't scammer scoville claim somewhere that the account was opened through a back door.

Originally Posted by ianh

scammer scoville claim somewhere that the account was opened through a back door.

Wouldnt surprise me....I'm sure Scoville has had many, many things through that opened his back door. Its at the root of many, many of his issues.

Originally Posted by Fat City, LA

Wouldnt surprise me....I'm sure Scoville has had many, many things through that opened his back door. Its at the root of many, many of his issues.

He may want to think about that open back door scenario if or when he is charged criminally and sentenced to jail time...

This may be an opportune moment to remind readers why it is that the pro Traffic Monsoon strawman arguments advanced by stacy and his fellow ponzi pimps won't even be considered by the court.



IOW, the court doesn't want to hear hypotheticals, false analogies and "what if" arguments, it wants to deal in facts as in: what actually happened

Originally Posted by shipdit

Hi Stacy,

At your company and most other legitimate companies employees are paid weekly or biweekly, meaning that you have to believe that the company you work for is trustworthy and profitable enough to come up with the money they owe you for one or two weeks of your labor.

If a company is in a state of expansion, it is not uncommon for them to borrow money to augment the cash flow necessary to meet their expenses, including their payroll. To do this, they must present convincing proof to the lender that their projected sales and profit margins will be sufficient to meet their obligations, including debt repayment.

The bakery you work for invests in flour, yeast and sugar and using their facilities and labor force, turn it into to bread which they sell for a profit. They compensate you with cash from those profits, financed cash or a combination of both. If everyone stops buying their product (leaving them unable to meet their obligations), your maximum risk is the one or two weeks of your labor that they owe you for.

Your anticipated earnings for the year are therefore not "debt owed by the company". It is a projected (anticipated) expense.

Charles Scoville's entire cash flow was financed by people foolish enough to purchase ad packs, a virtual product with no apparent value or profit margin. No legitimate lender would have offered to finance his obligations. If all 162,000 Traffic Monsoon "affiliates" had purchased a single ad pack, gross revenues would have been $8.1 million, and they would have been collectively expecting $8.9 million approximately 50 days later. Charles' associated expenses and personal take would have been in addition to the $8.9 million, of course.

SD

.

You mean an actual answer without any insults or name calling .. I salute you .. The only similarity between the bakery and the monsoon that im drawing any attention to is the money spent on expenses and wages.. Its perfetly fine for my company to owe millions of dollars in expenses and wages and not have the money yet to pay those expenses. However if the monsoon has any expenses that it cant prove it can pay. Yet we are not allowed to pay them from future selling of services and then called a ponzi .. Same circumstance = a totally different set of accusations .. Paying folks to click the ads is an exchange of money paid to complete a task .. At my job im paid to complete a task ..

Originally Posted by stacy532

You mean an actual answer without any insults or name calling ..

Much of it you bring it on yourself. Shiptdit gave you a very thoughtful explanation, and rather than engage intelligently you went right back to parroting the same nonsense.

Originally Posted by stacy532

.. Same circumstance = a totally different set of accusations ..

no.jpg


The differences were explained to you...

Originally Posted by stacy532

The only similarity between the bakery and the monsoon that im drawing any attention to is the money spent on expenses and wages.. Its perfetly fine for my company to owe millions of dollars in expenses and wages and not have the money yet to pay those expenses.

Originally Posted by shipdit

To do this, they must present convincing proof to the lender that their projected sales and profit margins will be sufficient to meet their obligations, including debt repayment.

Twice...

Originally Posted by stacy532

However if the monsoon has any expenses that it cant prove it can pay. Yet we are not allowed to pay them from future selling of services and then called a ponzi Paying folks to click the ads is an exchange of money paid to complete a task .. At my job im paid to complete a task ..

Originally Posted by shipdit

Charles Scoville's entire cash flow was financed by people foolish enough to purchase ad packs, a virtual product with no apparent value or profit margin. No legitimate lender would have offered to finance his obligations. If all 162,000 Traffic Monsoon "affiliates" had purchased a single ad pack, gross revenues would have been $8.1 million, and they would have been collectively expecting $8.9 million approximately 50 days later. Charles' associated expenses and personal take would have been in addition to the $8.9 million, of course

Originally Posted by stacy532

... <snip> ... Paying folks to click the ads is an exchange of money paid to complete a task .. At my job im paid to complete a task ..

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

.

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 stacy532

You mean an actual answer without any insults or name calling .. I salute you .. The only similarity between the bakery and the monsoon that im drawing any attention to is the money spent on expenses and wages.. Its perfetly fine for my company to owe millions of dollars in expenses and wages and not have the money yet to pay those expenses. However if the monsoon has any expenses that it cant prove it can pay. Yet we are not allowed to pay them from future selling of services and then called a ponzi .. Same circumstance = a totally different set of accusations .. Paying folks to click the ads is an exchange of money paid to complete a task .. At my job im paid to complete a task ..

.
Is it an act or is Stacy really this clueless?

Originally Posted by Fat City, LA

.
Is it an act or is Stacy really this clueless?

It's an act. He knows full well TM is a Ponzi. He just can't admit it, and won't even after Charles loses his SEC case and his criminal case.

For one, I would love to see him in court defending TM with his bakery wages and the bakery being the same as getting paid to click ads and TM. Now that would be entertainment at its finest. My bet is he wouldn't dare try, and that's why it is an act.

Originally Posted by Fat City, LA

.
Is it an act or is Stacy really this clueless?

it's passive aggressive horseshit.

Interesting isn't it that the word "hater" always comes out when someone doesn't agree with the Ponzi being promoted, but never applies to those making the claim others are "haters." Funny how stacy wants to dictate how we are to respond, but then never obliges us with his responses to the points made, but always falls back to his lame comparison to TM and his bakery job and bakery being the same. But when it's all he's got, it's all he's got. He can't have a civil conversation. Interesting isn't it that all of us "haters" have an agenda but he doesn't.

What is sad is he has destroyed his reputation with all this silliness trying to defend TM with his tired and worn out act. He doesn't get it that people are laughing at him, not with him. It is also interesting that every program he has ever been in has been a Ponzi, illegal cash gifting or an illegal pyramid. You would have thought he would have learned from it, but alas that is not the case. Proof is that he joined TrafficHurrican.plus. Some never learn.

Another solid response by Muhammad Maf Rahman. This one on the brain dead yokels comparing TM and Walmart.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/Traf...%3A%22R9%22%7D

Originally Posted by Fat City, LA

Another solid response by Muhammad Maf Rahman. This one on the brain dead yokels comparing TM and Walmart.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/Traf...%3A%22R9%22%7D

Originally Posted by Fat City, LA

This one on the brain dead yokels comparing TM and Walmart.

What do you think would happen if the CEO of Walmart transferred millions of dollars into his personal account without telling anyone and then told people he was going to transfer it back into the business account some time in the future and surprise everyone ???

What makes what Scoville did any different than when Andy Bowdoin of AdSurf Daily infamy transferred $80+ million from the ASD account into his personal accounts ???

Co-mingling of personal and company funds is a giant no-no and I'm sure the court, SEC or IRS won't look on what he did too kindly, no matter what fantasy excuse he gives for doing it.

"Why do people who don't really have an answer to simple questions get so aggressive"?

The TM shitbirds are a cluckin. Turds are starting to finally realize their $ is gone and they got played.


https://www.facebook.com/groups/Traf...1594901207987/

all these dopes want to keep ignoring the fact they are getting their own money back and that's what makes it an investment.
aside from the fact employees don't pay real employers to have a job.

Originally Posted by Whip

all these dopes want to keep ignoring the fact they are getting their own money back and that's what makes it an investment.
aside from the fact employees don't pay real employers to have a job.

As well as the fact, as proven in the AdSurf Daily, CEP and 12 Daily Pro cases, "clicking on ads" is not "work"

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!!

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

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

How people failed to see that leaves me gob smacked.

Why "clicking on ads" is "busywork" and not accepted by the courts as legitimate work.



Member A with one "ad pack" is required to click on 10 ads a day to earn his or her 110% of the cost of that one pack after 60 days

Member B with 10,000 "ad packs" is still only required to click on 10 ads a day, but earns 110% on all 10,000 packs after 60 days

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

ADHITPROFITS DOWN.jpg

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.