| |
| Author |
Message |
|
| Guest |
 Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2005 3:00 am |
 |
|
|
|
scambuster 1 U are full of S**T end of story
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2005 10:33 am |
|
|
|
|
ST a scam or not? Read my homepage for a full review of both negative and positive aspects
NOPE...Not today, Bucko!
Referral links galore on that site.
Hugs and kisses,
Scambuster
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2005 11:25 am |
|
|
|
|
US$90 Total Investment
Payment EBT into bank account from Studio Pay 19th Sept £296.56
Payment EBT into Bank account from Studio Pay 15th Sept £574.56 to my referral.
I guess you could say I am in profit !!
Rgs
Steve
UK
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2005 1:14 am |
|
|
|
|
Quote: Originally Posted by macS
You can support ST if you like, and you can claim that you are being paid huge sums of money. That does not change the fact that if no one signed up, it would collapse.
Then I guess everything in the business world is based on a "ponzi" because no business makes money or can continue to exist unless people continue to buy their products or use their services. Not to mention the government runs one of the biggest ponzi schemes on earth, the social security system. The government has taken so much money out of this system that the money we are FORCED to put in today is what is paying the people collecting S.S. TODAY and if it wasnt a forced investment im pretty sure that most people would opt out of it and it would crumple within months but I wont even get started on that debacle. Back to ST. It is not a ponzi. Ponzis deal with money and money only with no product offered in return other than the promise of MORE money. ST offers a product. That product for the most part is advertising. People purchase advertising and people are payed to search through these advertisements. Now it is IRRELEVANT if you naysayers think there is no value in advertising on ST. Its a product and everyone involved seems to be happy with it. Get over it. Either join or go away.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2005 1:19 am |
|
|
|
|
Hey DAN P send me the information I need to get signed up under you. Im giong to start out very small right now just to get the ball rolling and in about a month or so I should be coming into a large amount of money and If everything is still going smoothly then, I will probably max out that first account. Email me at shocfacter@hotmail.com Thanks
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2005 1:25 am |
|
|
|
|
"For example, the government runs one of the biggest ponzi schemes on earth, the social security system. The government has taken so much money out of this system that the money we are FORCED to put in today is what is paying the people collecting S.S. TODAY and if it wasnt a forced investment im pretty sure that most people would opt out of it and it would crumple within months but I wont even get started on that debacle."
I fully agree with your "example." How could anyone let that forced pyramid scheme collaspe before they got their fair share back out? And so it continues to bubble (The largest in the world.)
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:32 am |
|
|
|
|
Wow, these debates are STILL going. I was hoping they would resolve themselves, but I suppose I placed too much faith in my fellow human beings.
People are still confusing "it pays" with "it's a scam". Combine them for the truth.
Here, I'll do it for you: "It's a paying scam".
You see, a scam can be functional and pay out it's members. It does not mean it is legal or legitimate.
In the case of ST, people refer to it as a scam because of the structure of the program. It has NOTHING to do with if it is paying or not. People have been earning from ST, but it doesn't change the fact that ST's structure is based on a Ponzi, which is a well known scam.
You can support ST if you like, and you can claim that you are being paid huge sums of money. That does not change the fact that if no one signed up, it would collapse.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 8:31 am |
|
|
|
|
Quote: Originally Posted by shocfacter Then I guess everything in the business world is based on a "ponzi" because no business makes money or can continue to exist unless people continue to buy their products or use their services.
While I do agree that businesses can not survive unless they continue to have customers, that does not necessarily make them a ponzi.
Allow me to explain by using an example.
A convenience store is kept in business by people paying for goods. Money is exchanged for a chocolate bar. This is not a ponzi where members or "employees" are paid with new members or employees purchases, membership dues, investments (name it whatever you want), but rather an exchange of products.
ST, on the otherhand, sells advertising space to new members. The money taken in from the purchase of advertising goes to pay older members who are supposedly viewing the ads. While it does appear from the outside to be an exchange of currency for advertising services, it does not mask the fact that new member's funds are essentially being paid out in older member's accounts. The service is less about the advertising and more about the 1% return per day, which is a promise of return and essentially following a ponzi structure.
If the store clerk promised to pay you back money for watching other people eat chocolate, you would feel uneasy and look for the catch.
Quote: Originally Posted by shocfacter
Not to mention the government runs one of the biggest ponzi schemes on earth, the social security system. The government has taken so much money out of this system that the money we are FORCED to put in today is what is paying the people collecting S.S. TODAY and if it wasnt a forced investment im pretty sure that most people would opt out of it and it would crumple within months but I wont even get started on that debacle. Social Security is a perfect example of why Ponzis can not work in the long run. In it's inception, SS pay-outs for each retiree were funded by about 45 workers. Currently the number of workers paying into SS per retiree is closer to 3.3, with the figure expected to continue to drop each year. Without some improvements being made, SS will collapse.
Now think of every user with a $15000 account who withdraws $5000 a month. How many people need to "purchase advertising" to support that withdrawal?
Quote: Originally Posted by shocfacter
Back to ST. It is not a ponzi. Ponzis deal with money and money only with no product offered in return other than the promise of MORE money. ST offers a product. That product for the most part is advertising. People purchase advertising and people are payed to search through these advertisements. Now it is IRRELEVANT if you naysayers think there is no value in advertising on ST. Its a product and everyone involved seems to be happy with it. Get over it. Either join or go away.
Drug operations can't put out a sign on the street stating what they are doing. It is necessary for them to do business discretely and use cover businesses to mask their real purpose.
Certainly ST can not advertise that they are a ponzi - it would be the end of them. Instead they sell advertising to other advertisers. Or they sell a membership to their advertising club where they pay you more than you paid for the "membership" to view other ads. I won't argue that advertising on ST is useless, but rather I will argue that the advertising isn't the product.
If I soley ran a service where people bought advertising space to advertise to other advertisers who had also bought space, then no one would join. The real product that draws the vast majority of their members in, is the return of 1% a day. I think this is aptly demonstrated by their own forum's focus on withdrawing money. Why bother withdrawing when you just enjoy advertising so much!?!
Since the 1% return on "membership fees" is the actual product, ST really is only dealing in money...
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2005 2:39 am |
|
|
|
|
Quote: Originally Posted by macS While I do agree that businesses can not survive unless they continue to have customers, that does not necessarily make them a ponzi.
Allow me to explain by using an example.
A convenience store is kept in business by people paying for goods. Money is exchanged for a chocolate bar. This is not a ponzi where members or "employees" are paid with new members or employees purchases, membership dues, investments (name it whatever you want), but rather an exchange of products.
ST, on the otherhand, sells advertising space to new members. The money taken in from the purchase of advertising goes to pay older members who are supposedly viewing the ads. While it does appear from the outside to be an exchange of currency for advertising services, it does not mask the fact that new member's funds are essentially being paid out in older member's accounts. The service is less about the advertising and more about the 1% return per day, which is a promise of return and essentially following a ponzi structure.
If the store clerk promised to pay you back money for watching other people eat chocolate, you would feel uneasy and look for the catch.
Social Security is a perfect example of why Ponzis can not work in the long run. In it's inception, SS pay-outs for each retiree were funded by about 45 workers. Currently the number of workers paying into SS per retiree is closer to 3.3, with the figure expected to continue to drop each year. Without some improvements being made, SS will collapse.
Now think of every user with a $15000 account who withdraws $5000 a month. How many people need to "purchase advertising" to support that withdrawal?
Drug operations can't put out a sign on the street stating what they are doing. It is necessary for them to do business discretely and use cover businesses to mask their real purpose.
Certainly ST can not advertise that they are a ponzi - it would be the end of them. Instead they sell advertising to other advertisers. Or they sell a membership to their advertising club where they pay you more than you paid for the "membership" to view other ads. I won't argue that advertising on ST is useless, but rather I will argue that the advertising isn't the product.
If I soley ran a service where people bought advertising space to advertise to other advertisers who had also bought space, then no one would join. The real product that draws the vast majority of their members in, is the return of 1% a day. I think this is aptly demonstrated by their own forum's focus on withdrawing money. Why bother withdrawing when you just enjoy advertising so much!?!
Since the 1% return on "membership fees" is the actual product, ST really is only dealing in money...
First of all, one can not just milk a 15k maxed out account forever. Memberships only last 12 months from the previous upgrade meaning that one must purchase a new 12 month account for an ADDITIONAL 15k(if he expects to keep getting paid 4500 a month) after it has expired. Not to mention, one can never withdraw the principle. So not only is there always a stable "backbone" of funds available but there is always NEW money coming in from members new AND old. Also, you seem to think that people who work in traditional business' paychecks are guaranteed. Where do you think the money they receive in their paychecks comes from? It comes from shoppers new and old that continue to shop at that particular place of business. I'd like to point out that no one ever asks the president of Walmart questions like "what if everyone decides to stop buying things from Walmart?" What the heck do you THINK would happen?! There would be massive layoffs, store closures and bankruptcies. I dont uderstand how you can compare selling drugs to selling advertising? Selling drugs is illegal. selling advertising is not. Paying people to LOOK at advertising is not illegal either. It doesnt matter if everyone is focusing on the 1%. Laws state that money alone cannot be the sole product. ST has set it up to where the product is ADVERTISING. Again, it doesnt matter if that advertising isnt worth the dirt on the bottom of my shoes, its still the product. Dont get mad because people take advantage of loopholes.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2005 8:29 am |
|
|
|
|
For anyone who wants to be apart of this wonderful opportunity "StudioTraffic", I am offering a $10 bonus for 14 lucky people who sign up in my direct downline for the month of October 2005.
So you will start off with $10 from me + $10 from StudioTraffic = $20 account level.
Dont wait - PM me now!
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 8:19 am |
|
|
|
|
Hello again, shocfactor.
I will try to respond to your points.
Quote: Originally Posted by shocfacter First of all, one can not just milk a 15k maxed out account forever. Memberships only last 12 months from the previous upgrade meaning that one must purchase a new 12 month account for an ADDITIONAL 15k(if he expects to keep getting paid 4500 a month) after it has expired.
Okay. Let us suppose that I upgrade my account immediately with $15000.
Over 12 months time I should earn about $54000 without compounding for a single month. Naturally we need to subtract my $15000 initial member upgrade, which leaves me with $39000 in "profit" that could be withdrawn. Where is that $39000 coming from?
Let us then suppose that I re-establish my $15000 account to continue earning. That still leaves the $39000 that can be withdrawn.
If I decided to open multiple max accounts, and follow a compounding strategy the numbers get even more interesting.
Quote:
Not to mention, one can never withdraw the principle. So not only is there always a stable "backbone" of funds available but there is always NEW money coming in from members new AND old.
Unless they are upgrading out of pocket, it isn't "new money", but money that is just cycling from other members. Using the example above, I earned back my $15000, and withdrew $39000. I put back my $15000 to continue earning and the pool is still down by the $39000 I withdrew.
Pool is 0. I upgrade by $15000, therefore pool is now +15000. I withdraw $54000, and re-upgrade with $15000. Therefore the pool is left with a defecit of $39000 from that one member.
Quote:
Also, you seem to think that people who work in traditional business' paychecks are guaranteed. Where do you think the money they receive in their paychecks comes from? It comes from shoppers new and old that continue to shop at that particular place of business. I'd like to point out that no one ever asks the president of Walmart questions like "what if everyone decides to stop buying things from Walmart?" What the heck do you THINK would happen?! There would be massive layoffs, store closures and bankruptcies.
If I gave that impression I apologize. I certainly do not think that traditional jobs are guaranteed. I am simply arguing that Ponzis all collapse, and that ST is based on a ponzi. Walmart is not based on a Ponzi model, but on a bulk business model.
Quote:
I dont uderstand how you can compare selling drugs to selling advertising? Selling drugs is illegal. selling advertising is not. Paying people to LOOK at advertising is not illegal either. It doesnt matter if everyone is focusing on the 1%. Laws state that money alone cannot be the sole product. ST has set it up to where the product is ADVERTISING. Again, it doesnt matter if that advertising isnt worth the dirt on the bottom of my shoes, its still the product. Dont get mad because people take advantage of loopholes.
I was not comparing drugs to advertising, but rather drugs to a ponzi - where both are illegal. Like I said, a drug operation can not openly advertise that they are selling drugs, but rather may decide to hide their drug business behind a legitmate front.
Likewise, ST can not advertise that you are signing up for a ponzi money scheme, and instead sell "advertising" as a pseudo product.
I argued that the advertising is not what people are actually purchasing, as the 1% daily return is the real draw. This point would suggest that the advertising is again used as a front for the actual product: 365% in a year.
As for being mad? I'm not mad at all! In fact I am fascinated by the success of ST, and the arguments of it's supporters. They are not taking advantage of a loophole, but rather an individual's greed. A 365% return per year is unrealistic in almost every sense, but ST has managed to convince people that it is a realistic and sustainable approach.
I'm looking forward to your response.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 11:11 am |
|
|
|
|
For anyone who wants to be apart of this wonderful opportunity "StudioTraffic", I am offering a $10 bonus for 14 lucky people who sign up in my direct downline for the month of October 2005.
So you will start off with $10 from me + $10 from StudioTraffic = $20 account level.
Dont wait - PM me now!
PS: Mac who cares for your opinion.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 12:46 am |
|
|
|
|
Quote: Originally Posted by macS If the store clerk promised to pay you back money for watching other people eat chocolate, you would feel uneasy and look for the catch.
Heheh.. succinctly put. I think it summarizes ST perfectly.
There's a great article at Wikipedia about Ponzis and how they operate. It even looks at the similarity between Social Security and Ponzi schemes.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 1:28 am |
|
|
|
|
Quote: Originally Posted by macS
A 365% return per year is unrealistic in almost every sense, but ST has managed to convince people that it is a realistic and sustainable approach.
Finally! You got to the relevent part. ST has convinced people that it is realistic because they have done what they promised successfully for a very long time now. Everyone in ST is full aware that nothing lasts forever. This like any other money making opportunity out there may very well fall apart tomorrow but you know what.....its highly unlikely that ST will. One must wonder if you've ever even gone to the ST sight and checked things out for yourself. Do you not realize that ST has several other programs which bring in revenue? Obviously not. We could sit here and debate the value of those other programs but the fact is they ARE OTHER programs which are bringing in some kind of revenue. Aslo, we could banter back and forth like this for the next year but you know what.....? I will have made THOUSANDS of dollars during that time period while you, instead of just getting in while things are hot, will have sqaundered the opportunity. Sometimes you have to risk it all to get it all. Take some chances in life sometimes.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 2:37 am |
|
|
|
|
Quote: Originally Posted by shocfacter Finally! You got to the relevent part. ST has convinced people that it is realistic because they have done what they promised successfully for a very long time now. Everyone in ST is full aware that nothing lasts forever. This like any other money making opportunity out there may very well fall apart tomorrow but you know what.....its highly unlikely that ST will. One must wonder if you've ever even gone to the ST sight and checked things out for yourself. Do you not realize that ST has several other programs which bring in revenue? Obviously not. We could sit here and debate the value of those other programs but the fact is they ARE OTHER programs which are bringing in some kind of revenue. Aslo, we could banter back and forth like this for the next year but you know what.....? I will have made THOUSANDS of dollars during that time period while you, instead of just getting in while things are hot, will have sqaundered the opportunity. Sometimes you have to risk it all to get it all. Take some chances in life sometimes.
I can read some furstration in your post, which is unfortunate. Hopefully you do not think ill of the discussion we've had so far.
I for one have always seen the relevant part as being if ST was a scam or not.
I have certainly been to the ST site, and am well aware of the other programs. I am not one to argue about a topic that I know nothing of, and have researched ST fairly extensively for a friend.
While everyone in ST may be "full aware that nothing lasts forever", I would be more interested in knowing if everyone in ST was aware of STs payment structure.
As for the ST family of programs? If those programs brought in enough money to pay out the ST users without using incoming member fees, then ST would not be a scam. Seeing as they don't, their purpose is to prolong the life of the program. Since it does follow a Ponzi structure, the more money you make from ST now, the more money later members will lose out on. I suppose that would make using ST not just a legal question for some, but also a moral question. I guess most ST users that know this just figure it won't be them or anyone they know that loses out. Out of sight, out of mind.
Good luck, and I truly hope that I can safely say that ST is not a scam someday. In the meantime I just hope the people that will lose out can manage those losses and learn from their experiences.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
All times are GMT
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
