Ad Packs an Illegal Ponzi Scheme – SEC Calls Online Advertisements
If you are soliciting investors to purchase online advertisements known as “Ad Packs” the SEC might deem them securities and prosecute you for legal violations.
The Securities and Exchange Commission recently warned investors to beware of online “paid-to-click” scams that promise an easy payday by merely purchasing a membership or an advertising product upfront and then clicking on a certain number of online ads each day, especially if high returns are offered for buying advertising products or clicking on online ads. These offerings of unregistered investment contracts constitute an illegal Ponzi scheme.
In September of 2017, the Securities and Exchange Commission brought a lawsuit against Fort Marketing Group LLC and others. According to the Complaint, Defendants raised about $38 million from more than 150,000 investors in the United States and abroad. Roughly 99% of the revenues generated by Defendants’ businesses came exclusively from other investors’ funds. Defendants operated at least three separate online businesses which purported to provide legitimate advertising services.
Through their websites, Defendants offered the sale of certain investments referred to as “guaranteed plans,” “advertising packs,” “shares,” “Ad Packs,” and “Ad Credit Packs” (collectively Ad Packs). Defendants solicited investors to purchase Ad Packs through these websites and promotional videos linked directly from the websites. These materials promoted Defendants’ businesses as successful online advertising and marketing companies.
The businesses had virtually no other revenue from any other source. The monies raised from investors were used to make payments to other investors and for the Defendants’ personal expenses.
The Complaint alleges that in order to purchase an Ad Pack, each prospective investor was required to pay a membership fee. The websites claimed to pay referral fees back to members who recruited new members as well as referral fees for the recruitment efforts of their recruits, with fees promised for such downstream recruitment as far as 14 levels of separation from the initial investor. Each website promised monthly income as high as $10,000 per month for such downstream recruitment. The businesses purportedly offered to host a website for each member to create an online market and sell products of their choosing. The businesses claimed to manage the advertising space on each such website.
The consequences of this kind of offer are usually severe. The Commission is seeking a permanent restraining order against Defendants from further offerings and sales. It also required the Defendants to disgorge all ill-gotten gains, including prejudgment interest and directing them to pay civil monetary penalties. To ensure compliance, the Commission also requested the court to freeze all of the Defendant’s assets.
Because these kinds of offerings constitute securities, there are three major violations involved: (1) a failure to file a registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission; (2) offering these securities through any medium of interstate commerce; (3) making untrue statements about the investment, or omitting material facts which are necessary for an investor to make a fully informed decision about whether to make such an investment.
Call the Bradshaw Law Group to help you restructure your advertising and online marketing program to ensure compliance so that you don’t accidentally become a Ponzi scheme. Contac us today for a free consultation: https://bradshawlawgroup.com/location/contact/
Securities and Exchange Commission Articles
Didi Inc., a Chinese version of Uber, was listed on NYSE (DIDI) on June 30, the day before the Chinese Communist Party’s Founding Day celebration and four days before the United States’ Independence Day. Didi planned to raise approximately $4.4 to $4.9 billion from its IPO, offering 318,000,000 ADSs priced at $14 per share. The…
On June 15th, 2021, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) charged First American Financial Corporation, a real estate financing service company headquartered in California for violating policies regarding procedure control of cybersecurity vulnerability. First American is a publicly traded company registered with the SEC under Section 12 (b) of the Exchange Act, and it agreed…
SEC Enforcement, is the price for SEC violations too high to be worthwhile? The Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, with all of their amendments, give the Securities and Exchange Commission an arsenal of remedies, designed to teach violators the lesson that misuse of funds and deceptive accounting practices do…