There is a fairly new organization that I’ve been advised you need to be aware of and avoid.
The organization is called PTVPartner and PTVPartner itself encourages you to do your due diligence when they state:
“This Is The Perfect “Free Money” Strategy
That Will Not Keep You Up At Night
From Worry!
Perhaps this sounds too good to be true. You wouldn’t be the first to think that. Nor will you be the last. But from the start, we are telling you honestly, with conviction that, after reading this release and doing your own due diligence, you will never be “ordinary” again!”
So think of this information as a way of helping you with the due diligence that PTVPartner.com themselves recommends.
I’ve invited my friend Lynndel Edgington of Eagle Research Associates who alerted me to problems with PTVPartner to offer his insights here for all of you.
His comments, insights, and cautions about PTVPartner follow…
Note: His original comment got buried, so I’m reprinting it here:
Lynndel ‘Lynn’ Edgington says:
Thanks Paul for inviting me here, and to be able to point out some major red flags we see with this program. Most of what I am going to share comes from an interview that was done with the admin of this program, Garrett Rainier.
The first red flag is this statement of his, and I quote: “The reason we selected these two processors (Liberty Reserve and Perfect Money) to begin with was to allow members the most anonymous venue of participation. Like it or not, most of the world is of an oppressive nature. Governments like control. The majority of HYIP participants don’t pay taxes on the money they earn in this arena. Governments don’t approve of this and attempt to cause problems for Members and perhaps at some point ourselves. So an anonymous entity was expected to be preferred. We personally do not want to participate with any vehicle that will cause undue scrutiny on our endeavors or those of our members.”
Any time you have an admin telling you that governments are oppressive and could cause their members and them problems, and undue scrutiny on themselves is a major red flag. If you are legal, you don’t worry about regulatory scrutiny.
They have announced that their main thrust of advertising will be on work-from-home sites, click-to-pay sites, and MLM sites. Now ask yourself, they claim to be this investment program, so why would they want to advertise on these specific sites instead of the normal investment sites? This is to keep from drawing the attention of the authorities to their program, but would if they were advertising on the financial sites.
Here is another major red flag, and I quote: “We have made some decisions regarding AP and STP. Since they are not offshore and potentially can cause challenges for us with respect to their government’s decision to allow or disallow participation in programs like ours. According to our terms of service, you are responsible to determine if your government will allow you to participate here or not. We are not required to uphold a KYC policy. However, if your government does not allow you to participate, then don’t. We would prefer you to remain out of our program than participate here and cause problems. We are not going to police this. What we are going to do is protect ourselves, this program and those that are in compliance.”
I’m sure you recognized some of the issues I said were red flags, but the major one is this: As an investment company you cannot absolve your responsibility of complying with the KYC rule and force that on the customer by fiat. Well not if you are real and legitimate. Of course any investor should look into this being legal in their country, but that also means this investment must be registered in that country as approved by the agency that oversees investments. Here in the U.S. that means the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission).
To sell any securities allowing U.S. citizens to invest, the offerings must be registered with the SEC, and also with each State’s security agency charged with this responsibility. So all you have to do is check with EDGAR, which is the SEC’s database of all registered securities approved for sale by the SEC. Another red flag is the myth of being offshore elmiinates the need to be registered in the country from which they solicit customers. It makes no difference where the organization is registered. If they sell to one U.S. citizen, they must be registered and they are not exempt from U.S. laws or law enforcement.
When the reporter who did this interview gave his intro, he said this, and I quote: “I am a bit more enthusiastic about this program than many of the recently opened short term programs I could compare it too and would not be at all surprised if we see bigger things from this one and see it run for that bit longer than such programs usually go for.” Now what is striking about this statement is the admin in the interview says they will be around for the long haul. I guess the intervewer is not as optimistic about them as the admin is on this point.
Like everything, you must do your due diligence before investing in any program. There are enough red flags flying here to tell me this program has major issues, no matter what they say in their hyping this program. They also say this program is drawing a lot of people, but their website is barely registering with Alexa. It does not mean this cannot get traction quickly because it could. We just see a lot of hype with very little to back it up, and they have all the trappings of a classic HYIP Ponzi scheme.
They also claim this is a private placement offering, but this is limited to just 100 people if this is true. You also have to be a ‘qualified’ investor before you can participate in a true private placement. So what does “qualified’ mean? It usually means that you have a gross income of at least $250,000 and assets excluding cars of $1 million dollars. I’m sure that everyone reading this is a ‘qualified’ investor. LOL. Another major red flag.
It is your money and you can invest in anything you feel is right for you. All we can do is warn you of things we see with this program that warrant a thorough due diligence review before reaching your decision. I hope this information has been of help to all of you, and you know how to spot some red flags you didn’t know about before.
Related:
- Absence of Proof is Proof of Absence
- The Myth of Offshore Companies
- Extradition Treaty Between The United States of America and The Goverment of Belize
- U.S. Treaty With Belize On Mutual Legal Assistance In Criminial Matters
- Guide to Mining Investments
- A review of recent mining stock scams
- Gold From Water (And Other Mining Scams)
- The Road from Foolishness to Fraud – Pascal’s Wager
- Absence of Proof is Proof of Absence
- The Black Box Method of Due Diligence
- asdf
Paul: Are you suggesting that Garrett was lying?
@Lynndel ‘Lynn’ Edgington: Lynndel, maybe I’m being overly diplomatic here, but what I would say is that as an investor I’d be a somewhat alarmed at Garrett’s apparent lack of knowledge about the industry in which he’s encouraging others to invest.
Lynn wrote:
“I will type this real slow so even you can get it. PTVPartner is selling investments to U.S. Citizens. To do so they must be registered with the SEC to sell them to U.S. Citizens, and in fact with every state securities commissioner; T H E Y A R E N O T R E G I S T E R E D. This makes them illegal, for it is illegal to sell securities without being registered. That is not my rules, but the SEC. This claim that being offshore exempts them from being subject to U.S. Laws is a M Y T H. Again, I am not just saying this, and it is not just on my word that I am saying this. This is what the SEC has said. You can read about it here:
http://www.sec.gov/rules/interp/33-7516.htm. So please try to claim that I have not provided any “P R O O F” of what I have said from the first post I made on this blog.”
PTVPartner are legal were they are based and elsewhere and illegal in the U.S. So what’s your point? Legality is all about jurisdiction. What if the territory where the U.S. claims to have jurisdiction says, “No, you don’t have jurisdiction.” what happens then? The U.S. invades?
Would it not be easier for the U.S. to turn their attention to their own Citizens rather than interfere with another nation? Particularly given the complexities of the borderless nature of the Internet.
Maybe PTV will eventually decide not to deal with any U.S. Citizen. You’ll be popular then…
Lynn wrote:
“Here’s another fact for you: THERE ARE HIGH YIELD INVESTMENTS, BUT THERE ARE NO HIGH YIELD INVESTMENT PROGRAMS THAT ARE LEGAL. Every one is a scam or Ponzi. It just depends on how it is set up that determines if it is a scam or Ponzi.”
Wrong. This is opinion not proof. And legality is all about jurisdiction.
Lynn wrote:
“Real investments don’t use payment processors so they can stay below the radar of government agencies. That statement alone is proof this is a scam. No legal investment has to stay below the radar of any goernment agency, anywhere in the world. The moment you hear those words, alarm bells should be going off warning you this is a scam or Ponzi.”
Wrong. This is opinion not proof.
Lynn wrote:
“You can try to twist anything I say all you want, but the fact they are not registered with the SEC is proof this is a Classic Ponzi, and really is the only proof I need.”
No twisting, you’re just wrong. It is not proof, none of it, it’s just your opinion. Though you may argue it is fact within the confines of the U.S., but that’s not the same as proof.
Lynn wrote:
“You just refuse to accept that truth.”
You want truth take a class in philosophy. Facts and proof here only please. Got any yet?
Lynn wrote:
“But for you to say it is not proof, shows your hypocrisy, ignorance, or both. But since you are a shill for this joke of a program, you can’t admit it is proof. As I have said before, every shill says the same thing, and then the program goes “poof,” of the feds raid and shut it down.”
I’ll mark that down as ridicule.
Lynn wrote:
“As for your other assinine statements about customs, jurisdiction, I will address when I have more time.”
lol, sure you will.
And more ridicule too.
Lynn wrote:
“But again you try to use obfuscation to try and defend your position. But I do have a question for you. So, are you demanding Garrett provide his “PROOF” on the private forum as you keep demanding I do here?”
Yes of course I do. Their approach to response is rather different to yours though.
Lynn wrote:
“I didn’t think so.”
Wrong again. You’re on a roll.
Lynn wrote:
“What a tool.”
Name calling. Excellent Lynn, just like the professional we all know you to be. April IS getting close now, isn’t it. Look very closely to what we got here people.
Paul wrote:
@Lynndel ‘Lynn’ Edgington: “11:23: “Silica itself is one of the most environmentally friendly materials that can be mined. There is no pollutants, it is not a hazard, there is no chemicals used in the mining process to make this a highly prized project……”
Interesting observation. Just looking at what OSHA says here:
http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/silicacrystalline/index.html
“Silicosis is a disabling, nonreversible and sometimes fatal lung disease caused by overexposure to respirable crystalline silica. Silica exposure remains a serious threat to nearly two million US workers. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) reports that each year more than 250 die from silicosis and hundreds more are disabled. There is no cure for the disease, but it is 100 percent preventable if employers, workers, and health professionals work together to reduce exposures.”
Paul, Lynn is getting desperate, but surely not you too. Good buddies indeed.
And here we all were thinking that silica mining is actually a health benefit, no need for PPE. Take a stroll in your local silica mine and breathe that air!
“..that can be mined”. It’s all relative and needs to be taken within the context of mining.
But you continue to cherrypick to suit your debate. People notice.
@Jack Pritchard: Jack, I’m just reflecting on what Garrett actually SAID in his presentation and what OSHA says. I listened to all of GARRETT’s presentation.
At the very deepest level I couldn’t give a rat’s ass what Lynndell or Michael or You or anyone else says.
I make my OWN decisions and conclusions about things. If you’ve ever read any OTHER sections of this blog you’d see that.
But go on trying to discredit the messenger. It seems to be your only game.
Lynn, good post, thanks. Glad you made it. I won’t address in detail any that are already clearly answered by PTV. Kind of a Bill and Warren situation again.
Lynn wrote:
“Question One: Why can’t Garrett tell the members where this mine is located, but can have geologists from all over the world visiting there and taking core samples?”
Already clearly answered. Relates to privacy and exposure to the HYIP world. I am sure even you would accept that the world of a geologist is not the same as the world of a HYIP enthusiast.
Lynn wrote:
“Question Two: Do you really believe this mine is a deep dark secret as he claims now that you know what Garrett has said about all the people visiting the mine?”
Sorry, where does Garrett claim “this mine is a deep dark secret”? It wasn’t in any of your quotes of the recording. I’m sue this is a mere oversight and that you are not making things up again to suit your own argument. I will just ask if you would like to rephrase the question?
Lynn wrote:
“This mine is pristine, and very little mining is taking place, but yet they are paying you 190% return for your 40 day investment.
Question Three: How and on what are you being paid?”
So clearly answered by PTV that I am not going to dignify that question with an answer. This question has been asked more than once at every meeting I have been to, and I haven’t been to that many! As a professional researcher Lynn do you actually do any research?
Lynn wrote:
“Question Four: You still believe that they would pay you 190% return on your 40 day investment when they could get a bank loan for 3-5% interest a year?”
Who are “they”? Do you mean PTVPartner? If so, what makes you think they could get such a bank loan?
Lynn wrote:
“Question Five: Do you still believe that Garrett turned down the offer from the Chinese to do it all, as he said, but instead wanted to pay you 190% return over 40 days?”
I notice you end the relevant quote without addressing or providing the answer that Garrett gives. How convenient. Sorry, I don’t play that game. Quote the answer given then we can discuss what’s left, if anything. I really don’t like all this cherrypicking you do.
Lynn wrote:
“He has said their total cost of this project is $125 Million Dollars over the next three years, yet he is telling you that they need to build a refinery, rail lines, a town replete with gas stations, houses, schools, stores, water, sewage, electricity, hospitals, etc., etc..
Question Six:: Do you really believe they can do all of this for $125 Million Dollars, and still pay you 190% every 90 days?”
See? You’re doing it again! Garrett doesn’t state “total cost of this project is $125 Million Dollars”, rather he states the “total out of pocket (for) the entire project is $125 Million Dollars”. Spot the difference?
STOP misquoting.
Lynn wrote:
“Now he also claims that silica is one of the safest products around…”
Quote please? And if you mean this quote…
“Silica itself is one of the most environmentally friendly materials that can be mined. There is no pollutants, it is not a hazard, there is no chemicals used in the mining process to make this a highly prized project……”
…then shame on you. Relative to a mining environment – it is a mine we’re discussing isn’t it? – it may well be one of the safest products around. Silicon is a relatively inert element, so to it’s various compounds with Oxygen. I wouldn’t want it with my burger however. Mining? Yeah, pretty safe.
Lynn wrote:
“Question Seven: Do you still believe Garrett when he says silica is the safest environmental type of mine and safe to mine?”
What environment would that be Lynn? I see you focus on the specific human health environment. Given it is a mine, given health and safety processes within mines (PPE etc), given the ore and product is relatively inert, given asthma sufferers are not expected to put it in their inhalers, just what kind of environment do you think he is referring to?
Lynn wrote:
“Question Eight: Do you still believe this fairy tale is real?”
Leading the witness! lol it did make me smile though.
Lynn wrote:
“Hmmm, Garrett keeps saying the “geologists.” I guess he doesn’t know what geologists means either. Right Jack?”
Right Lynn. Glad we have you here to keep us all in the right.
I have to say Lynn that as an exercise in manipulation, misinterpretation, and misquoting you have excelled yourself. First class. Absolutely first class.
@Jack Pritchard: Agree what you said about Lynndel’s comment about “Out of Pocket”. I’m still thinking that one through – mainly from the stand point of the viability to be able to raise the rest of the funds required for the alleged project based on that out of pocket expense.
Paul wrote:
“At the very deepest level I couldn’t give a rat’s ass what Lynndell or Michael or You or anyone else says.”
That sounds pretty deep. Ok, I apologize I was rather harsh with you. It just seemed to me that you followed Lynn’s lead without thinking for yourself. I just noticed a lot of Lynn-quoting and agreeing going on. Lynn is simply quite brilliant with the specious. Why he is and why he does it so extensively across the Internet you can, and of course should, make your own mind up on. I wonder if he ever did politics?
Fair enough Paul, I know different now. Apologies again.
@Jack Pritchard: It has to do with what’s more probable for me.
Right now, my GUT tells me that it’s highly probable that it’s a scam, but I wouldn’t say that I’m 100% there yet. I have to document everything for myself and connect all the dots. But I’ve done that so much in the bizop arena that I see a lot of indicators here, which I’ll explain later. But an ‘indicator’ isn’t proof, so keep that in mind when I post. Indicator’s are clues to how to tie proof together.
I do agree with Lynndel about the legality of selling unregistered securities to U.S. citizens. I just see no way around that one and the argument about jurisdiction you keep bringing up doesn’t make any sense to me based on other cases I’ve seen which are readily available at the SEC and FTC sites.
So, essentially I am 100% convinced that PTVPartner is operating illegally when it comes to selling unregistered securities to U.S. citizens.
Paul wrote:
@Jack Pritchard: Agree what you said about Lynndel’s comment about “Out of Pocket”. I’m still thinking that one through – mainly from the stand point of the viability to be able to raise the rest of the funds required for the alleged project based on that out of pocket expense”
Sure, fair comment. I imagine the economics get quite involved. Perhaps other areas of outside funding appear exponentially as the project progresses. Whatever, it doesn’t guarantee anything it is only a consideration and more importantly bring’s into focus Lynn’s mindset and tunnel vision. This is known, but what we can’t be sure about is why he has it? Lazy? hidden agenda?
@Jack Pritchard: Jack, just to be clear. I have known Lynndel and Michael much longer than I’ve known you and consider both of them friends.
I’ve seen the work they’ve done and vica versa, so I should say that I listen CAREFULLY to what they say, but in the END my decision is my own.
And I listen CAREFULLY to what you say, but so far my GUT tells me based on my OWN experience in analyzing business opportunity/home business fraud extensively – that there seems to be something “not quite right” with PTVPartner.
Note that “not quite right” doesn’t mean I’ve fully concluded that PTVPartner is a scam.
Again, I DO believe they are operating illegally in the U.S. AND that the burden of proof rests with the company/person controlling the opportunity.
Paul wrote:
@Jack Pritchard: It has to do with what’s more probable for me.
And so it should, for us all. That will anchor your risk comfort and allow you to make a clearer decision. So, for some it will be worth a shot. Others, no way.
Paul wrote:
“Right now, my GUT tells me that it’s highly probable that it’s a scam, but I wouldn’t say that I’m 100% there yet.”
I hear you. You could be right. So could Lynn, but he’s telling people he knows when he doesn’t. Do you think he should?
Paul wrote:
“I do agree with Lynndel about the legality of selling unregistered securities to U.S. citizens. I just see no way around that one and the argument about jurisdiction you keep bringing up doesn’t make any sense to me based on other cases I’ve seen which are readily available at the SEC and FTC sites.”
Paul, can you give a quick couple of lines on a Program that, aside from involving U.S. Citizens, did not have any U.S. presence, and was based entirely in another country, and were “taken out ” by this process? When I say another country I don’t mean any of the usual U.S.’s “drinking buddies”.
It’s important to compare like for like, yes?
@Jack Pritchard: I will pull them. Since it sounds like you may know more about foreign affairs than I do, which countries do you consider “drinking buddies”?
I’ll pull the cases on that basis.
Paul wrote:
“And I listen CAREFULLY to what you say, but so far my GUT tells me based on my OWN experience in analyzing business opportunity/home business fraud extensively – that there seems to be something “not quite right” with PTVPartner.
Note that “not quite right” doesn’t mean I’ve fully concluded that PTVPartner is a scam.
Again, I DO believe they are operating illegally in the U.S. AND that the burden of proof rests with the company/person controlling the opportunity.”
I’m good with that. No problem at all.
Paul wrote:
“Again, I DO believe they are operating illegally in the U.S….”
But they’re operating legally where they reside. So what happens? Who gets right of way? Why choose one over the other?
I am interested to know how a government entity can tell another goverment what to do when that government doesn’t want to do it, and not have human rights infringed. I would appreciate some examples.
Paul wrote:
“@Jack Pritchard: I will pull them. Since it sounds like you may know more about foreign affairs than I do, which countries do you consider “drinking buddies”?
I’ll pull the cases on that basis.”
I can make it simpler.
Regarding an earlier quote of yours:
“…and the argument about jurisdiction you keep bringing up doesn’t make any sense to me based on other cases I’ve seen which are readily available at the SEC and FTC sites.”
Pulling those cases will do fine. Thanks. If you realise you made an error and those cases are not comparing like for like then just pull any one that you think does.
@Jack Pritchard: Jack, I need you to provide the list of countries – otherwise it’s too easy for you to come back and claim a country I pulled was a “drinking buddy”.
It has nothing to do with me “making an error”. It has to do with making sure we agree on what YOUR TERM “drinking buddies” means before I go to the effort of pulling cases.
I see that Jack has been a busy beaver trying to protect Garrett and PTVPartner. In the process Jack has made some outrageous comments. One was his claim that, and I quote: “PTVPartner are legal were they are based and elsewhere and illegal in the U.S. So what’s your point?”
Well, for starters Jack, where’s your proof they are legal where they are based, and elsewhere? Let me save you some time. There isn’s any proof. You have no clue where they are located, only what Garrett has said where they are located. Funny how none of these so-called locations the agencies have no clue who they are, and are not registered.
As to my point, as long as they are selling investment products to U.S. citizens, which they are, they must be reigstered. I realize that this concept goes over your head, and this is now about the upteenth time I have said this and you still don’t get it. This makes them illegal. In fact, they are not legally registered anywhere.
But since you claim they are legal where they are located and elsewhere, please provide your proof. You do have it don’t you?
Now as to your last missive in response to my quoting Garrett, way too funny. But I will respond to you in a moment.
Paul wrote:
“@Jack Pritchard: Jack, I need you to provide the list of countries – otherwise it’s too easy for you to come back and claim a country I pulled was a “drinking buddy”.
It has nothing to do with me “making an error”. It has to do with making sure we agree on what YOUR TERM “drinking buddies” means before I go to the effort of pulling cases.”
Paul, I don’t think any official list exists, and I think any list would be quite extensive. I also don’t know them all, that’s why I used the word “usual” in “usual drinking buddies”.
But ok I see where you are coming from, I could keep shouting “buddy” until I got to one that fits (even though I wouldn’t do that, but you don’t know me so you’re not to know).
I thought the buddy countries would be obvious, generally speaking. Ok, perhaps not. So let’s start with Belize then. Do you have anything like for like with that country?
@Jack Pritchard: Feeling a bit under the weather. Funny you should mention Belize because one case I know well partially involved Belize – but I’m going to throw that one out, because there were also immediately connected players in the Phillipines and the U.S.
Plus, that case was a FTC case, so it would be more appropriate to find an SEC case.
Lynn wrote:
“Well, for starters Jack, where’s your proof they are legal where they are based, and elsewhere? Let me save you some time. There isn’s any proof. You have no clue where they are located, only what Garrett has said where they are located. Funny how none of these so-called locations the agencies have no clue who they are, and are not registered.”
Of course I have no proof where they are located. I never suggested I did. If they’re illegal where they are based there’s no debate is there?
Waken up.
Lynn wrote:
“As to my point, as long as they are selling investment products to U.S. citizens, which they are, they must be reigstered. I realize that this concept goes over your head, and this is now about the upteenth time I have said this and you still don’t get it. This makes them illegal.”
And if they are not registered and are not legal from a U.S. perspective what then? Detail the process, be specific. You’re only giving half the story.
It’s like pulling teeth. For the purposes of debate (because it is a onsideration) they’re legal where they are based and illegal from a U.S. point of view. How does the U.S. take them out if they don’t have the support of the government into whose territory they are entering, without infringing human rights?
Provide an example, like for like. Simple enough?
Lynn wrote:
“In fact, they are not legally registered anywhere.”
And how do you know this?
Well, we have Jack backpeddling and parsing words again. Paul, no matter what case you pull, it won’t satisfy Jack. He will try to find something that he thinks he can hang his hat on that makes it invalid. It makes do difference the Feds extradited the person, and he had to stand trial in the U.S. He will still try to claim that the rights of the country were violated by the U.S. “snatching” this person from there. So I really wouldn’t waste my time. It will only be beneficial for others reading here, but Jack will never accept it. Jack likes to make a lot of unsubstaniated claims, without his having provide any proof of his comments, but demands others do. The typical shill game from the playbook. You would think that after 7 years they would have come up with newer concepts by now, but that is not the case.
Just be prepeared for Jack to claim they don’t apply when you do post them.
Jack: You are too funny. I stated that I could quote Garrett verbatim, and you would claim that I misquoted him, took him out of context, twisted his words, and you proved me right when you said, and I quote: “I have to say Lynn that as an exercise in manipulation, misinterpretation, and misquoting you have excelled yourself. First class. Absolutely first class.” Thanks for proving me right.
Now as to your comments:
Jack: Sorry, where does Garrett claim “this mine is a deep dark secret”? It wasn’t in any of your quotes of the recording. I’m sue this is a mere oversight and that you are not making things up again to suit your own argument. I will just ask if you would like to rephrase the question?
My response: No, I don’t need to rephrase the question. I asked it that way to illustrate the absurdity of Garrett claiming he could not reveal the mines location, when so many other people have been there and know where this mine is located. Of course that is assuming that the mine really exists. But in regard as to where Garrett says this, he says that in the beginning of his recorded conversation.
I guess you were too lazy to actually listen to Garrett’s comments. But let me clarify for you. He said that the location of the mine had to be kept a secret due to his NDA, and they didn’t want others knowing the location of the mine. But listen for yourself. If they have had geologists from all over the world visiting the site, believe me it is not a secret location. It is only secret to the members of PTVPartner, who according to Garrett are funding this operation. By the way, it is the HYIP world you need to get people to join this Ponzi, yet Garrett hides behind a nonexistent NDA claiming this is the group they don’t want knowing where the mine is. Sounds like he is afraid they will steal it away from him. Yet he will go to every other group and tout this mine. Too funny. by the way, claiming he has a NDA is an old scammer’s trick to convince people the program is real. Obviously you bought it.
Jack: So clearly answered by PTV that I am not going to dignify that question with an answer. This question has been asked more than once at every meeting I have been to, and I haven’t been to that many! As a professional researcher Lynn do you actually do any research?
My response: Yes I do, but I don’t buy the hype that Garrett and PTVPartner are putting out like you do. As for all this other income they generate, no-one can prove it. Not even you. All you have is their word, and Garrett has been proven a liar, so what makes you think anyone should believe him about where the money is coming from to pay them? All Ponzi’s have 2-5% truth, and the rest is all a lie. It is called over 7 years of dealing with professional liars like Garrett and Ponzi programs like PTVPartner that I have no qualms about calling this a Ponzi. The fact you are dumb enough to buy the hype doesn’t make it real.
Jack: Who are “they”? Do you mean PTVPartner? If so, what makes you think they could get such a bank loan?
My response: Because Garrett said so. You did read where I quoted him saying so didn’t you? But since you obviously missed Garrett saying it, here’s a refresher for you, quote: “If you can go to the bank, understand this, an IPO (International Purchase Order) in itself, if I have an IPO in my hand, if you have an IPO in your hand from China that says I will be buy 300 million tons or a billion tons, that’s something you can take to the bank. It has value and the bank will loan money against that if it is what you choose to do. They won’t loan 100%, so if we have a bankable asset that can be borrowed against for a value of $200 Billion Dollars, what is the actual value? Double roughly.”
Actually if this mine was real, just in its current state any bank would loan enough money to fund the entire operation. All you would have to do is provide the bank your business plan, show the demand for the product, show the agreements from countries that will purchase the product, and viola you have a bank loan. I could write a business plan based on just Garrett’s statements of the total amount of product available, all the other so-called assets that are there, and I could probably get a $750 Million Dollar loan, or more. Only one caveat, I would have to know the location of the mine and provide proof of the core samples to the bank. So want to try again about them not being able to get a bank loan if they wanted too?
I even left out Garrett’s claiming of the 8 million ounces of gold that is magically on this property too, along with platinum (can’t be there if gold is there), palladium, zinc, copper, geothermal, the forests, yada, yada, yada. The only thing missing was diamonds and oil. But I am sure that will be found when they get around to fully exploring the 10 mile and 2.5 mile mine location. Can’t find everything at once. But I have to admit they did find a whole lot of other minerals there in such a short time. So oil and diamonds cannot be far behind. I will save these lies for another day
Jack: I notice you end the relevant quote without addressing or providing the answer that Garrett gives. How convenient. Sorry, I don’t play that game. Quote the answer given then we can discuss what’s left, if anything. I really don’t like all this cherrypicking you do.
My response: Showing again how lazy you really are Jack. Listen for yourself. I wasn’t cherry-picking, but you would know that if you had listened to the recording. You are just too lazy to actually do anything on your own. I am not here to spoon feed you. I thought you were supposed to “Prove” your statements, and here you go again making statements without any supportive “Proof.” So come on Jack, get off your lazy assets and “prove” your point.
Jack: See? You’re doing it again! Garrett doesn’t state “total cost of this project is $125 Million Dollars”, rather he states the “total out of pocket (for) the entire project is $125 Million Dollars”. Spot the difference?
My response: Doing what again? So whose “other” pockets are the “total” costs coming from? PTVPartner claims they own the majority of this mine. Garrett said so. He also said this is “his” project, and that PTVPartner is going to be the one building all this infrastructure that is needed to fully mine this silica mine. Unless he has a mouse in his pocket, PTVPartner is the one who is covering all the costs of the infrastructure. So, please enlighten all of us on the difference Jack between “total cost” and “out of pocket cost”, as I am sure there are others that have no clue what you are claiming. Remember, you always demand proof when statements are made, so provide us your “Proof” of what you said. Back to parsing words again I see.
Now these comments are truly funny, and they were taken verbatim from your hero Garrett. So let me, in Garrett’s own words, debunk everything you just said I took out of context, twisted, distorted or as you said: “STOP misquoting.”
Jack: Quoting me: “Now he also claims that silica is one of the safest products around…”
Quote please? And if you mean this quote…
“Silica itself is one of the most environmentally friendly materials that can be mined. There is no pollutants, it is not a hazard, there is no chemicals used in the mining process to make this a highly prized project……”
My response: That’s the one, and Garrett was the one saying that, not me. I was just quoting him.
Jack: …then shame on you. Relative to a mining environment – it is a mine we’re discussing isn’t it? – it may well be one of the safest products around. Silicon is a relatively inert element, so to it’s various compounds with Oxygen. I wouldn’t want it with my burger however. Mining? Yeah, pretty safe.
My response: Actually when silica is “mined” it is very unsafe. Even excavating the silica it is not safe, contrary to what Garrett said. Actually it is “shame on Garrett.” He is the one who doesn’t’ understand what the difference is between mining, excavating, and safe. Now we know you don’t either. I guess all those health organizations have no clue what they are talking about. Got an issue with silica mining being unsafe? Take it up with Garrett and the health agencies. They are the ones who said it, not me. I was merely quoting your hero Garrett and them.
Jack: Lynn wrote:
“Question Seven: Do you still believe Garrett when he says silica is the safest environmental type of mine and safe to mine?”
What environment would that be Lynn? I see you focus on the specific human health environment. Given it is a mine, given health and safety processes within mines (PPE etc), given the ore and product is relatively inert, given asthma sufferers are not expected to put it in their inhalers, just what kind of environment do you think he is referring to?
My response: Why are you asking me? You need to ask Garrett. He is the one saying it. I was merely quoting him, remember? Too funny.
I gave you far too much credit than I should have. I actually thought you would understand that Garrett was not talking about just taking the silica, putting in a rail car and shipping it off to wherever; which is excavating. I thought you understood that Garrett was going to be “refining” the silica, yes he did say that. When you refine silica, it no longer remains this environmental friendly product and safe to “mine.” As has been stated, silica is not a safe, hazardous free material when it is “refined” as Garrett said it was. He did say “safe to mine,” and since he said they were going to refine it, that is mining. Even in the excavation process, which is also mining, there is silica dust that is dangerous to breathe. It is only when silica is in its natural state is it safe to be around. Garrett is the one who doesn’t know what in the world he is talking about, and was misquoting, not me. No it is not safe to mine, but not according to Garrett or you.
I realize it is hard to accept that when your hero gets caught with his pants down, it is hard to swallow. But thanks for proving my point that even when I quoted Garrett verbatim, you would try to say I misquoted him, took him out of context or twisted his words; or in your words: “STOP misquoting.”
Jack: In regard to this statement of yours, and I quote: “For me a claim’s a claim whether it comes from Lynn or PTV and each have the burden of proof.”
You are so full of it. You have yet to provide any proof from PTV that supports anything you have said, or has challenged what I have said. It has only been you demanding that I have to provide proof.
You can’t even be honest in your own comments, so why would anyone take anything you say as valid? I think it is way past time for you to start proving all your wild accusations for a change. Of course when you don’t have any, it is hard to provide it isn’t it.
So let’s see it.
Jack: in regards to this statement of yours, and I quote: “Of course I have no proof where they are located. I never suggested I did.”
Then what were you saying when you said this? and I quote: “PTVPartner are legal were they are based and elsewhere and illegal in the U.S.”
Now that was not a question, but a statement of fact. In making this statement of fact, you are saying you do know. So yes you did suggest you did with this statement of fact. So my question remains, Where’s your proof they are legal and elsewhere? You made it, now defend it. Or is this just another example of your hypocrisy?
All of the questions that Lynndel has been asking are the reason why a prospectus is needed.
Of course, as Bre-X showed, a prospectus won’t stop someone from salting a mine – but at least there has to be something to salt, as opposed to imaginary fairly tales about some hidden mine worth billions, shown to everyone except the investors!
But then Jack’s purpose is not state claims or offer evidence, but rather play the what-if game. What if they were legal? What if they had a mine? What if the mine was full of diamonds, rubies, etc? Blah, blah, and blah.
Well, if any one of those what -ifs were true, there would be documents to produce for people to do their due diligence prior to investing.
Otherwise, you are simply investing in pixie dust.
(I am still trying to figure out where “Jack” is from. His arch english continues to fascinate me!)
Jack:
Remember how Garrett was touting the quality of the silica mine at 97-99% pure? Well, here’s a mine right here in Nevada that is 99.5% pure; and it is for sale. I think Garrett should look into buying this mine don’t you? Why mess around with a mere 97%-99% pure when you can have a mine that is 99.5% pure?
BNDII is currently offering a 2,000 Acre High Purity Silica Deposit located in Nevada; and it too has GOLD!
2,000 Acre Deposit of Silica, Flour Silica, & Gold
Over 100 Million Tons of High Grade Silica
Averaging 99.5% Pure
Located in Nevada
Minimal Grinding to Produce Silica Flours from 99%
Un-Patented Claims
Wow, just think….no rail lines or infrastructure to build, no need for a refinery, hospitals, schools, stores, gas stations, you get the drift. But the most important aspect of this mine is it is ready right now. Won’t take 3 years to build. Such a deal. Why don’t you give Garrett all the information? I am sure he would appreciate it.
By the way, just out of curiosity, what would you say if you found out that Garrett wasn’t really Garrett at all but someone else? Now before you go apoplectic on me, it is just a hypothetical question for now.
Lynn wrote:
“Paul, no matter what case you pull, it won’t satisfy Jack. He will try to find something that he thinks he can hang his hat on that makes it invalid.”
You give me too much credit, I really don’t think about it that much. Your flaws and mistakes are that obvious they simply jump off the screen.
If the case is sound there won’t be a problem.
Lynn wrote:
“He will still try to claim that the rights of the country were violated by the U.S. “snatching” this person from there.”
Not at all, the U.S. would never do something like that. They number one for in the world for human rights.
Lynn wrote:
“Paul, no matter what case you pull, it won’t satisfy Jack…So I really wouldn’t waste my time.”
You’ve realised there’s no like for like case too huh? Good feint, I like it.
Lynn wrote:
“Jack: You are too funny. I stated that I could quote Garrett verbatim, and you would claim that I misquoted him, took him out of context, twisted his words, and you proved me right when you said, and I quote: “I have to say Lynn that as an exercise in manipulation, misinterpretation, and misquoting you have excelled yourself. First class. Absolutely first class.” Thanks for proving me right.”
‘Welcome. How’d it feel?
Lynn wrote:
“Jack: In regard to this statement of yours, and I quote: “For me a claim’s a claim whether it comes from Lynn or PTV and each have the burden of proof.”
You are so full of it. You have yet to provide any proof from PTV that supports anything you have said, or has challenged what I have said. It has only been you demanding that I have to provide proof.
You can’t even be honest in your own comments, so why would anyone take anything you say as valid? I think it is way past time for you to start proving all your wild accusations for a change. Of course when you don’t have any, it is hard to provide it isn’t it.
So let’s see it.”
Nope. You got the first post here, you got the first claims. So you first with the proving. Don’t you think that’s fair?
Lynn wrote:
“Then what were you saying when you said this? and I quote: “PTVPartner are legal were they are based and elsewhere and illegal in the U.S.”
Now that was not a question, but a statement of fact. In making this statement of fact, you are saying you do know. So yes you did suggest you did with this statement of fact. So my question remains, Where’s your proof they are legal and elsewhere? You made it, now defend it. Or is this just another example of your hypocrisy?”
No problem. That statement was part of the ongoing converstaion I was having with Paul regarding the jurisdiction and extradition process. I was presenting the scenario required. If you’d read the whole debate you would have realised that and saved yourself (and me) a post.
If I had said “”PTVPartner are illegal were they are based and elsewhere and illegal in the U.S.” Paul may well have looked at me in a strange way whilst thinking why the heck are we discussing this then.
See what happens when you take things out of context? You only confuse yourself. I am quite happy to accommodate these oversights on account of your age but I really would appreciate it if you could spend a little more time thinking before you post.
Paul wrote:
“@Jack Pritchard: Feeling a bit under the weather. Funny you should mention Belize because one case I know well partially involved Belize – but I’m going to throw that one out, because there were also immediately connected players in the Phillipines and the U.S.
Plus, that case was a FTC case, so it would be more appropriate to find an SEC case.”
Ok Paul, no rush. Get better first. Thanks.
Michael wrote:
“But then Jack’s purpose is not state claims or offer evidence…”
Lynn first please.
Michael wrote:
“…but rather play the what-if game. What if they were legal? What if they had a mine? What if the mine was full of diamonds, rubies, etc? Blah, blah, and blah.”
What’s wrong with asking “what if”? It’s not a bad question is it?
Michael wrote:
“Well, if any one of those what -ifs were true, there would be documents to produce for people to do their due diligence prior to investing.”
How do you know there aren’t documents? Because they haven’t been produced? The reasons have been given for why this is the case and I think they’re acceptable reasons but as always you’re entitled to think otherwise. Yes, it denies you DD but the choice is upfront, take it or leave it. So do, some don’t. You make too much out of this point.
Michael wrote:
“(I am still trying to figure out where “Jack” is from. His arch english continues to fascinate me!)”
Tell me you’re not American. Please tell me you’re not American. Otherwise it’s official, I have hit the lowest point in my life, being taught English by an American.
(Just kidding. I like Americans really. No, really.)
@Jack Pritchard: “Like for like case” is a perfect example of your inability with English! But keep it up,it is fascinating.
Glad that you have admitted that you aren’t providing proofs or statements – not that anyone believed otherwise.
Your job is to keep alive that barest of logical possibilities that this might not be a sham. The rhetorical move of asking Lynn to “go first” is thin now, you should try something else.
Oh, but I forgot – you already admitted that this was a Tulip scheme!
It isn’t of course, it is a money laundering scam. And yes, the FBI/CIA have longer arms than the SEC.
Proof of money laundering:
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/ptvpartner.com#trafficstats
Take a look at the top sources of traffic, and compare the overall traffic to the sec.gov. Eeck!
So, Jack are you from Paraguay? That would make sense.
Hmmm, seems to be trouble in PTVPartner land, and it is all you nasty members fault. I thought Garrett said this couldn’t and wouldn’t happen to PTVPartner. Here’s the latest from Garrett:
Important Updates
Duplicates
Recently a conflict developed in our auto-reinvest feature that created a number of duplicate returns and referral commissions. Most of this has already been corrected. However, several members elected to take advantage of the situation and withdraw the excess amount that was incorrectly posted to their accounts.
While we understand human nature, we are unwilling to allow those members to continue as a part of this community. Any member, who has blatantly attempted to withdraw the excess funds, will find their account suspended, investments canceled and balances tallied. Those members, who have attempted to take advantage of the situation, that are in profit will no longer be welcome here. Those members, that have attempted to take advantage, that are not in profit, will have their principle returned to their originating account.
While we understand the error was not created by the members we also realize that we need to be able to rely on each other as a community. Without the mutual benefit of reliance and trust we feel the continued association with those that have attempted to take advantage is to our disadvantage as a group.
We have disabled the auto-reinvest feature until we can completely solve the error. All returns will post to your withdraw account. If you elect to reinvest, you will need to do so manually.
Affiliate Program
We have been conducting a new poll regarding the affiliate program.
The questions posed were to determine our continuation with paying referral commissions.
Based on the results of the poll, the amount of spam being sent by members, the overall dissatisfaction due to the abuse of the program and the reputation we are receiving because of that abuse, we are removing the referral or affiliate program.
The fees generated will now be directed to the Reserve Pool and used to pay the moderators.
The Reserve Pool will be used to provide the Guarantee as well as, by popular vote, participate in or take advantage of future endeavors.
Ecurrency Account # Updates
We have eliminated the ability for members to edit, change or update their ecurrency account numbers.
In order to provide additional security and assist members who have been subjected to personal infiltrations, this step is necessary.
From this point forward, in order to add, edit, or update and ecurrency account number, you must submit a support ticket.
In addition, accounts must be validated. Withdraw requests to accounts that have not been validated, either by deposit or via email verification, will not be allowed.
Don’t worry, 90% of all accounts are already currently validated.
Bank Wire Option
Due to the increased workload on the IT staff, Bank Wire may not be available until next week.
We are also working on a way for members who have deposited via ecurrency to be able to withdraw via Bank Wire.
NEWS YOU CAN USE:
Today the site has still been having some work done on it. Please be patient with us and the site will become stable shortly. We are working on it. Please check in at the chatroom to find out any changes or updates.
Blog Articles of the Day:
World Economy, What are the Affects of it?
We all know that the economies are affected jointly. The things that affect it are many and varied. What’s happening in the word today? What will the effects of the various levels of production and consumption do to our world globally? Read this article and give some thought to the effects of our way of life, what we do, and how we affect those around us as a community world-wide.
The Government’s Big Secret
Some know. Some don’t. Which one are you? What’s the problem?
Are you asleep at the wheel?
We all know spending is out of control. We know there is something going on. There’s no secret to that. So then. what’s the big secret? I guess you’ll have to read to find out.
Good-Bye: Truth Has Fallen and Taken Liberty With It
There once was a day and age when truth was the way it was. We liked it, hated it, disagreed with it, provoked someone till we made sure we got it. It was the “Prize”. No matter what you thought about the truth it was respected above all else. We demanded truth from our families, our friends, our co-workers and not least our government. Like many other things that change we gradually allowed truth to take a further and further backseat. What became revered was what we were spoon fed. Not unlike an ostrich, we decided we could stick our head in the sand, or nod it up and down like a monkey without knowing anything more then what we were told. Our lives became more and more hectic and it was easier to “let someone else do it”. Having done that we took it even a step further and started convincing ourselves that if the “tv said it” it was the “truth”. After that it went even a step further. We didn’t want the truth. If we heard the truth we didn’t know it and then it turned into disliking the truth because it was hard. At times, “Truth is an unwelcome entity. It is disturbing. It is off limits. Those who speak it run the risk of being branded “anti-American,” “anti-semite” or “conspiracy theorist.” So, we believe what is fed to us now. It is the New Truth.
Think about it. Read the article on the blog and you might be surprised that you may agree with it.
Joke of the Day:
Taxi Driver
A passenger in a taxi tapped the driver on the shoulder to ask him something.
The driver screamed, lost control of the cab, nearly hit a bus, drove up over the curb and stopped just inches from a large plate glass window.
For a few moments, everything was silent in the cab and then the driver said, “Please don’t ever do that again. You scared the living daylights out of me!”
The passenger, who was also frightened, apologized and said he didn’t realize that a tap on the shoulder could frighten him so much.
The driver replied, “I’m sorry. It’s really not your fault at all. Today is my first day driving a cab. For the last 25 years, I’ve been driving a hearse.”
Start the Experience … join PTVPartner and … Free your Life!!!
Chatroom: http://www.ptvpartner.com/chat_room.html
Website: http://www.ptvpartner.com
Forum: http://www.ptvpartner.com/forums
Blog: http://www.ptvpartner.com/blog
Jack: Don’t you just hate it when you get caught with your pants down.
What a pathetic attempt to try and say I misquoted you and took you out of context. I did no such thing, and you know it. It was a direct quote of yours and you were stating it as a fact. But when caught in a lie, here’s your reply, and I quote you verbatim:
“No problem. That statement was part of the ongoing converstaion I was having with Paul regarding the jurisdiction and extradition process. I was presenting the scenario required. If you’d read the whole debate you would have realised that and saved yourself (and me) a post.
If I had said “”PTVPartner are illegal were they are based and elsewhere and illegal in the U.S.” Paul may well have looked at me in a strange way whilst thinking why the heck are we discussing this then.
See what happens when you take things out of context? You only confuse yourself. I am quite happy to accommodate these oversights on account of your age but I really would appreciate it if you could spend a little more time thinking before you post.”
Jack, you are full of it. The only one here taking things out of context and is confused is you. You have just now proven it to everyone reading this blog. You cannot even be intellectually honest.
Lynn wrote:
“Wow, just think….no rail lines or infrastructure to build, no need for a refinery, hospitals, schools, stores, gas stations, you get the drift…”
…and so no ROI either.
Lynn wrote:
“But the most important aspect of this mine is it is ready right now. Won’t take 3 years to build.”
Don’t you mean three years to complete?
Your question seems fair at first, then you realize it’s in the U.S. Enough said.
Lynn wrote:
“By the way, just out of curiosity, what would you say if you found out that Garrett wasn’t really Garrett at all but someone else? Now before you go apoplectic on me, it is just a hypothetical question for now.”
If you think I think Garrett is actually called Garrett you’re more wired to the moon than I thought.
Lynn, you just couldn’t get that post out fast enough could you?
Garrett wrote:
“While we understand the error was not created by the members…”
Lynn wrote:
“Hmmm, seems to be trouble in PTVPartner land, and it is all you nasty members fault.”
Welcome to planet Lynn.
Lynn wrote:
“I thought Garrett said this couldn’t and wouldn’t happen to PTVPartner.”
Thought what couldn’t happen? Why exactly is it trouble?
Lynn wrote:
“What a pathetic attempt to try and say I misquoted you and took you out of context. I did no such thing, and you know it. It was a direct quote of yours and you were stating it as a fact. But when caught in a lie, here’s your reply, and I quote you verbatim:
“No problem. That statement was part of the ongoing converstaion I was having with Paul regarding the jurisdiction and extradition process. I was presenting the scenario required. If you’d read the whole debate you would have realised that and saved yourself (and me) a post…”
Well, that’s what I was thinking when I made the original comment. Within the context of that specific debate with Paul what else could I have said at that point? And I haven’t even mentioned Devil’s Advocate yet.
I gave you a perfectly adequate answer to your question but whatever rocks your world, you’re on your own with that one.
Jack: I see you are back to selective reading again. Garrett did blame the members, but I didn’t say it was the members fault for the glitch in their system. I have capitalized where Garrett specifically blamed the members, and I quote:
“Recently a conflict developed in our auto-reinvest feature that created a number of duplicate returns and referral commissions. Most of this has already been corrected. However, SEVERAL MEMBERS elected to take advantage of the situation and withdraw the excess amount that was incorrectly posted to their accounts.
While we understand human nature, we are UNWILLING TO ALLOW THOSE MEMBERS TO CONTINUE AS A PART OF THIS COMMUNITY. ANY MEMBER, who has blatantly attempted to withdraw the excess funds, will find their account suspended, investments canceled and balances tallied. THOSE MEMBERS, who have attempted to take advantage of the situation, that are in profit will no longer be welcome here. Those members, that have attempted to take advantage, that are not in profit, will have their principle returned to their originating account.”
Hmm, sure sounds like he is blaming the members to me. You really should put your brain in gear before your mouth in motion, or in this case your fingers to the keyboard. You need to take off your blinders and read what was said.
Funny, but GNI had the same problem and 6 weeks later they were histoire!
By the way, I guess you are the only one on the planet that didn’t get my post about the Nevada mine was sarcasm. But then why am I not surprised.
Jack:
All of us are waiting for you to explain the difference between “total cost” and “out of pocket costs.” So why the delay?
I made a statement that Jack took umbrage to, and here is what Jack said, and I quote:
“Lynn wrote:
“Here’s another fact for you: THERE ARE HIGH YIELD INVESTMENTS, BUT THERE ARE NO HIGH YIELD INVESTMENT PROGRAMS THAT ARE LEGAL. Every one is a scam or Ponzi. It just depends on how it is set up that determines if it is a scam or Ponzi.”
Wrong. This is opinion not proof. And legality is all about jurisdiction.”
It is a true statement, and not just my opinion. There has not been One HIYP Investment Program that has not disappeared with the money, or had the authorities shut it down. NOT ONE. That is a fact Jack, but please feel free to try and prove me wrong.
So let’s compare the two investment entities:
HIGH YIELD INVESTMENTS provide you:
A prospectus of the investment;
They are registered and licensed in every country in which they do business, and can be verified;
They have a real physical address that can be verified as real;
They have a real phone number that can be verified as real;
They have a listing of the major principals of the firm, and they can be verified;
They have a customer service hotline that is a real phone number of the company;
You fund your account using a bank wire, or by check;
You receive quarterly statements about your account showing all activity (all trades made on your behalf, both buy and sell with settlement prices) for the quarter, beginning and ending balances of your account;
You receive confirmations of your trade(s) in writing within three days of the trade;
They do not pay referral fees;
They publish in financial trade magazines, and online financial websites;
They don’t have “Promoter’s or Shills” touting the investment;
Your investment is listed and traded on real market exchanges, and you can monitor your position(s) daily; and
In real trading you will win some days, and lose on others. There is no stated rate of return, only projections given to you.
HIGH YIELD INVESTMENT PROGRAMS provides you almost nothing:
The vast majority of these programs do not show a physical address for the entity. When they do provide an address it is discovered to be a fake address:
They do not have a phone number for you to call;
You do not know who the people are that are behind the program. They must always remain a secret;
They are not registered or licensed anywhere, while claiming to be;
They only use offshore money exchangers for you to deposit your funds;
They do not provide you with a prospectus;
They do not provide you quarterly statements of your account;
None of you investment are viewable on any trading exchange;
You only know what they claim they are investing your money in, as there is never any proof provided;
You never receive any confirmation of the trades made on your behalf;
The admin’s rarely use their real names. Only a very select few have;
Secrecy is of the utmost importance, and they claim there is a NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement) to try and give it the air of legitimacy;
They always claim they must stay below the radar of government agencies, or it could cause problems for the program and for the members;
They never reveal how they make the promised rate of return for your investment;
They have to have the ever present “Promoter’s or Shills” for the program to get started and continue for as long as possible before collapsing;
They never advertise in any reputable financial magazine or website;
They provide referral fees so you will help gin the program; and
They never provide any proof of their claims, returns on investment, or supportive documents proving they are real.
As I said, and I repeat: There are only High Yield Investments that are real. There are NO High Yield Investment Programs that are real and legal. They are all Scams/Ponzi’s, including PTVPartner.
@Lynndel ‘Lynn’ Edgington: Lynn is correct, and a review of Charles Ponzi’s scheme shows when the scheme began to unravel.
Ponzi faltered when it was revealed by the Boston Globe (I believe) that Ponzi was keeping the deposits to his scheme in a bank which paid 5% interest yearly. Clearly, if Ponzi could have made 50% in 90 days, he would have had his cash re-invested.
But this points to a larger paradoxical truth – if there was a high yield investment program that was real, they wouldn’t be paying out any dividends as the dividends would be re-invested in the project. And of course that is exactly what all scammers recommend – that you re-invest!
What a shame that the excellent post by “Lynndel ‘Lynn’ Edgington” above cannot be required to be reproduced in BOLD font at the top of every internet “HYIP” forum and so-called “monitor” on the internet. Gullible people could start using their money to better their own family’s lives instead of donating it to the never-ending stream of punk criminals who run these SCAMS.
SD
.
SD:
Thank you for your very kind remarks. I greatly appreciate them, and it means a lot to me.
I’ve followed some of these hyip (scam) programs over the years and been to a number of forums. Off hand I’d say this Jack Pritchard dude is none other than Lennie Middleton ( Chicosan ) by the tone and lack of coherrency on any type of intelligent civil discussion. At the very least some kind of cousin of his.
@Don Holliday: Interesting post Don. Just been reading up on some of the Chicosan posts and they DO sound quite similar. Here’s one from World Law Direct
Don:
A very interesting observation on your part, but I am sure Jack is not Len Middleton. Simple reason he is too nice to me in his disagreement with me. Len and I go back 6 years to PIPS. Since then every time Len sees my name, he sees red. He goes ballistic in his posts against me.
I agree there are some similar writing styles of circle jerk logic, but even Len could not be this nice to me for this long of a period of time. All he knows how to respond to me is by being caustic and vitriolic . So my bet is he is a cousin or lost relative of Len’s.
What has been obvious to Lynndel and Michael all along is finally clear to me – that it is pointless to argue against an operation like PTVPartner based on the merits and law – because the ONLY goal of people promoting such operations is to get people to keep getting people to pumping money into them as long as possible.
That being said, I did go ahead and post two documents at the top of the blog which I’ll repost here:
Also worth noting is an Editors Note made by an attorney specializing in International Criminal Defense here:
Extradition: Third Accused Brother Arrested In Belize in which the attorney makes this comment:
“Editor’s Note: There is no recent indication that Belize will not extradite to the United States. See our previous post here. on the case of Mr. Hertular accused of drug trafficking but extradited from Belize for threats to a DEA agent. An interesting case, in that there does not appear to have been a challenge to the extraterritorial application of US law.”
Keep in mind that this comment is from an attorney who specializes in international criminal defense and hence almost certainly has a much deeper knowledge of extradition laws than ANYONE posting on this blog.
Jack:
Still waiting on you to provide the explanation of the difference between “Total Costs” to “Out Of Pocket Costs.”
To all who celebrate Easter. I wish you and yours a very Happy and Blessed Easter celebrating the resurrection of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Blessings.
For those of you who have been following the discussion here, or are members of PTVPartner, you should be aware that in the last week the website has been down more than it has been up. They are having issues with their website that Garrett said would not happen to them. Payments have been slowing down, and updates are trying their best to downplay these issues. All the while the private forum has Garrett just in a watching mode, not posting mode. A departure from in the past.
The warning bells are sounding and the red lights are flashing. All of these things are pointing to the demise of PTVPartner in a relatively short period of time. If you are a member of PTVPartner, this would be a great time to consider getting out. What you do with this information is solely up to you.
My purpose in posting here was to hopefully keep people from joining and losing their money. For those already in it to step back and take a real hard look at what was said, promised, and if that sounded possible. I was merely providing my knowledge of over 7 years of researching Internet Investment scams/Ponzi’s/frauds.
While I hope that Jack comes back and explains some of his statements I have called him on, I have a funny suspicion that we have seen the last of Jack. Getting too close to this imploding, and he doesn’t want to be around when it does. Only time will tell when this implodes, but it will implode.
It is my sincere desire that the discussions that have taken place here have been educational and informative to all. Wishing all of you the very best.
Hello there, Happy Easter 2010!
All I know is PTV does not disclose who they are…Makes them not transparent and that is all I can perceive for I know nothing about them in spite of many attempts at trying!
Lynndel has pointed out a recent post at Money-News-Online which moved PTVPartner to “paying selectively” and which has this to say recently:
“Garrett said to me that I’m doing it because he removed referral commissions from and now I got too greedy and am telling lies just to distract investors from PTVPartner in hope of them to switching to other programs. Well, if PTVPartner was a stable program and paid everybody on time we would not discuss it any further here. But that’s not the case. Selective and delayed payouts are not things which MNO will tolerate and I proved it many times in the past that I do care about my downline in the programs I monitor by warning them in advance about pending collapses.”
You can read the full Money-News-Online post about PTVPartner here…
…which also has a telling follow-up of the attitude of people participate in these scams:
“The most recent example was the warning posted about GeniusFunds and the same selective payouts which was published on my blog a few weeks ago. After that article I received so many negative responses simply for telling the truth and some of them were quite ugly to say the least. I was even told not to kill a good program and ignore what was in front of my own two eyes. But just a week after my warning which rang bells in some people’s minds GeniusFunds was really dead but I didn’t receive any apologizes from the people who blamed me for everything.”
Of course the irony there is that as far as I can tell the owner of Money-News-Online hasn’t apologized for bringing so many people into these scams.
Paul: Other tell-tale signs of this program having serious problems is the major promoter’s of PTVPartner are now distancing themselves from it as fast as they can. Part of this is due to the discontinuation of the referral program, but also is an indicator of deeper underlying problems.
The reason why the referral program was so important is this fact: Promoter’s of these programs get in early with their investment, and also get out early with their investment so all they have at stake when the program crashes is their referral fees. They only promote and stay for the referral commsisions. So when it goes down, all they lose is any referral commission that had not been paid to them; never any investment money. When this incentive is gone, they are off to the next scam, err, ahem, cough, cough program.
Kind of ties in with Jack suddenly disappearing from this blog when the system issues started. It was not a coincidence. While I did believe this might make it to June, now I doubt if it will make it to the end of this month. And just think…all those billions of dollars of revenue from the silica mine, along with the 8 million ounces of gold, bronze, zinc, geothermal, and all the other stuff Garrett said was there cannot save it. So much for the mine being real.
This just in: PTV Partner will compensate members for “their suffering”. According to an easily identified, but non-disclosed source, I was just informed that PTVPartner has stated:
“We have had some serious struggles of late. It is no secret I know. But let me assure you we are going to settle all of this. We will be accelerating ALL your Investment Maturities to accommodate you for the 4 day delays. For those that were already forced to endure them, we will also determine your suffering and compensate you.”
Ouch, ouch, ouch, ouch, ouch, ouch, ouch! I’m suffering just reading that.
I have been reading the “warnings against PTV” for some time now and have decided to unsubscribe to WorkAtHomeTruth?
There are many companies promoting HYIP. What is this vendetta against PTVPARTNER??
This last comment from Paul has decided that I do not wish to be associated with this site anymore.
I am a small investor in PTVPARTNER who to this time have not missed a beat with my returns, even during all the troubles they have incurred.
@Jean: Well, Jean. If you want to scam other people I don’t really want to be associated with you either, so I guess we’re even.
Just because you were “paid” doesn’t mean PTVPartner isn’t a scam. The reason PTVPartner is singled out here is because Lynndel Edgington who SPECIALIZES in these types of cases and has helped Federal Law Enforcement bring MANY of them down alerted me to it.
And what of your logic that “There are many sites promoting HYIPs?” OK, there are a lot of people commiting identity theft, too. I guess that makes Identity Theft OK?
Your logic seems quite dangerous.
One thing to remember…people like Lynndel Edgington and Michael Webster help people AVOID fraud. People who participate and profit from ponzi schemes help people COMMIT fraud.
Here is the latest update provided by PTVPartner to their members, with my commentary at the end:
“The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.
Lets start with the Ugly.
We have had some serious struggles of late. It is no secret I know. But let me assure you we are going to settle all of this. We will be accelerating ALL your Investment Maturities to accommodate you for the 4 day delays. For those that were already forced to endure them, we will also determine your suffering and compensate you. This won’t happen extremely quickly, we simply have too many things that need immediate attention. But we will compensate you. First, we will solve the SCI problem and populate your account with any and all deposits missing. Second, we are reviewing any and all account suspensions and will be reinstating those as well. We will adjust balances as the need is determined by any doubles you were paid. We have 4 additional bookkeepers assisting us starting Thursday in an effort to handle all accounting issues as quickly as possible.
Now for the Bad.
With the last 10 days or so of issues, there has been mass panic. Mass panic has resulted in extremely high withdraws. Honestly, we just were not prepared to handle the level of withdraws we are seeing currently. We have told you from the beginning, In order to keep on track, we average the withdraws and float 3 days. By float, I mean we maintain three days worth of withdraws, average, in ecurrency to make payouts. With the enormity of withdraws over the last several days, we simply do not have the current level needed to complete all withdraw requests today.
We have wired funds to purchase all the eccurency necessary to cover withdraw requests in excess. Unfortunately, bank wires of this amount take anywhere from 48 to 96 hours. So we will pay withdraw requests in order they are received with the ecurrency we have as we acquire it. We expect to be fully caught up in the next 2 to 4 business days. Of course we expect this fact to create even greater withdraw requests. So we have planned for that as well.
Now for the Good.
I have just finished coordinating a new set of investment opportunities for PTVPartners. Our Gold Excavation is beginning. PTVPartner, in an effort to secure its position in this portion of our Mining operation, is returning 100% of the profits to all members who choose to participate. We have a small window of opportunity to participate in this investment. We also have a small position to take advantage of. Members who participate will have first option to continue this investment opp. It is limited to the first million dollars participated. Once this is fulfilled, only those members that have participated will be able to continue to take advantage of this opportunity.
The Ultimate High Yield Asset for your Offshore Financial Portfolio!!!
Start the Experience … join PTVPartner to … Free your Life!!!”
Now here is what is troubling and needs to be addressed. In the Ugly:
They are just now getting around to adding the required number of people to help with this backlog, which they created themselves? This was not done by a hacker, and for this type of problem to be fixed, it can be done in hours, not days that it has taken them to fix.
Besides, in Garrett’s initial interview with Paul from Money-News-Online.com Blog, Garrett brags how these problems cannot happen to PTV as they have checks and balances in place, and all kinds of security features built into their scripts, database, and software preventing this from happening.
For the Bad: What is truly interesting is their claim they don’t have the required cash to make all the payouts, and they blame the members for this problem. This is from the same people who told people to take out their returns as quickly as possible, and to play with PTVPartner’s money. Now they are saying people got greedy, caused a rush due to panic, and they cannot meet the demand. They know their liability of cash if everyone wanted to take all their “returns” at one time when due, yet they did not plan for this contingency.
One of two scenario’s could be at play here. Either they moved all the cash they could to their personal offshore bank accounts, thinking people would just roll over the majority of their returns with just a small payout; or they have no clue what their daily payouts are until the requests for withdrawals are received, which means there are no investments of any kind paying any kind of return. Either way this does not happen to real companies that have real money when payments are due. This is a huge red flag.
For the Good: Magically the gold mine is being developed. Now this is a location that Garrett said they did not have railroad lines to and from the mine, they had no refinery, yet now they are gong to be refining gold now, they have no infrastructure in place to accommodate all the workers needed, this mine is afer all in the middle of nowhere, there has been no filings made to mine the gold, and there’s more but I think you get the picture. But it is this statement that makes this an obvious Classic Ponzi:
Our Gold Excavation is beginning. PTVPartner, in an effort to secure its position in this portion of our Mining operation, is returning “100% of the profits to all members” who choose to participate. We have a small window of opportunity to participate in this investment. We also have a small position to take advantage of. Members who participate will have first option to continue this investment opp.
I don’t know about you, but a company cannot exist when it returns 100% of “ALL” its profits to the members who participate in the project. It is the word “ALL” that makes this impossible. If this does not convince you this is a classic Ponzi, then nothing will. If any of you are members, get your money out now. This is going down, and going down fast.
All the signs are there they are ready to run with the money. They are hoping they can grab enough money into this bogus gold program as quickly as possible so they can run as soon as possible.
By the way, Jack is now over at the MMG Forum, but is going by Sam Morgan over there. Even Jack is not who he says he was, just as Garrett is not really Garrett. But hopefully you all figured that out by now.
I dont know about you folks, but I find the grammar in these PTV company missives appalling. It suggests something other than MBA-level writing skills. That ALONE would put me off, as a result of what it suggests.
Just a quick update about the latest with PTVPartner for those of you who do not know what is happening.
They have now announced they are taking the program private. They are still making selective payments, and claim by the end of today to be current on all the backlog of payments. That remains to be seen as I don’t believe they will pay everyone.
I am not going to go into all the gyrations Garrett has done in the past two weeks, unless someone wants me to do so. Let me just say that he is now blaming all the “naysayers,” the unfaithful members who dare ask for all their money back, the hackers, and the DDOS attacks against the website. What is truly remarkable in all this is what a departure it is from what he said in his initial interview with Money-News-Online.com back in September when this launched. Most of this I mentioned in my initial post here, and then I pointed out all the red flags I saw with his statements. Almost everyone, if not all, of those have now come true.
There are going to be a lot of people who will lose a lot of money by joining this Ponzi. I do not relish or enjoy them doing so, contrary to what some people say. My reason for posting initially was to warn all of you that all was not what it seemed to be, and hopefullly you would head my warning not to join as it was a Ponzi.
I have had people tell me they should have joined in the beginning and then got out in Febraury, and because they listened to me and didn’t join; they lost money they could have made during that time. The truth of the matter is they would not have gotten out, but began rolling over their so-called profits, and ended up losing almost all of it. There are no profits. Everything that has been paid came from the new members joining the program. It is called stealing.
Just like in Flo, Garrett, the most honest admin ever, is now going to turn over the blog to the mods. He has “More important” things to do than be on the blog. Contrast that with what he said in his initial interview, and you will see this too is a lie. And if you do join the private program…don’t be surprised when Garrett goes poof with all your money in it, which he will. You will never see a dime when it is time for it to pay. He will be long gone, just as he did with FLO, and he didn’t even make it to May.
Since I know that Jack is reading this blog, guess I didn’t need till the end of June after all did I. So much for this being the real deal, and will last for a long, long time; but then to Garrett, 8 months was a long, long time. I truly hope none of you lost money in this if you did join, and I hope many of you now are glad you didn’t. Wishing all of you the very best.