@GetUupnow2008,

Hey thanks for stopping by and adding your opinion to this conversation. Let's look at a few of the statements where you are totally inaccurate and those where you raise great questions.

1. The argument of "endorsing" Zeek has run it course, but let's look at the current, since I have already addressed the past. I currently defend the US Constitution and the RIGHTS of every citizen and entity in the USA to due process. Based on the US Justice System we are innocent until proven guilty. ANd we have the RIGHT to a trial of our peers. So until a trial, which we will now see. you are 100% correct I will continue to defend the right of the legal team, executives, comp plan expert and others to defend their opinion that what they created was within the current laws which governed Zeek Rewards and any other penny auction or multi-level compensation structure.

If or better when a Judge and Jury rules on the facts as presented and argued in court, I will then accept the decision (once it has worked its way through the appeal process), and if any of the facts given to me were proven false, then I will report on that also.

2. I did not tell anyone not to join any company. I did caution folks who might be looking to join any penny auction and I was clear that I do not think Penny Auctions fit the definition of Direct Sales, and are not good for the network marketing community. This is not anything new, I have been saying most of this for months. The one new part is "not good for the network marketing community" In reviewing the aftermath of how companies and distributors have been effected, and the fact some of these folks had NEVER bought a bid, but their eWallet accounts with their own money is now frozen and may be for years, it is clear this situation has caused some devastation, to folks who were not directly part of the whole situation.

Part of living in America is being able to review the facts, see what happened, and warn others to be very careful. Now I could keep not report and let grown adults just go down whatever trail they decide. But that would be very irresponsible of me when I know specific things, and can provide opinion and commentary on others based on historical track record.

And there will be times when the trends change, historical track record, doesn't prove out the future and I will report and update things we report on. But I would rather error on trying to caution folks, than to let them go down a road, that may be devastating to them.

3. Why do you feel I did not due diligence? Is this because I wrote about BidiFy and Ultimate Power Profits after they had made changes (which we reported on in the case of BidiFy)? For a seemingly educated individual, you should have realized, that if I put these two into this editorial, then there was a good reason.

The emails and calls we have been getting have to do with these four companies, and all of them have had, or still have penny auctions, and that is why folks have joined them. UPP launched leading with their penny auction. Since they have added several additional income streams and we have talked about this right here in this community and across the social scene. I also wrote an editorial on BidiFy's changes which were a great move.

My reporting is not focused on what a founder ot executive team might want. It is driven by what we see at the grass roots level. When the grass roots think a company is a penny auction, and the questions they ask have to do with that, then I will do an editorial based on the perception of the masses. Then once I have their attention, we can then shed deeper insight into specific companies which are making huge changes.

4. Now let's look at consulting fees. Any company who contracts with me for consulting, know that part of the risk they take with me as written into my agreement, is they could still receive critical editorials based on the facts and perception of what is happening daily in the space. You like so many others seem to feel that ethics and principles are bought and sold for a few thousand dollars. Maybe with you it is, but folks who truly live and breath their mission are not for sale at any price.

BidiFy is a client, and that sure did not keep me from mentioning them in this video. So sadly your argument doesn't hold water, which shows you might want to get your facts straight before casting suspicion towards others. See when you look at the amount of companies we have done reviews on, you or anyone can quickly see there is no way all of them are clients.

Do I need to pay the bills and put food on the table… you bet! But the driving force is to provide as much information as we can to help folks in the home base world. It might be through our blog network, radio shows, consulting or speaking engagements but one way or another we will help folks get enough info to make informed decisions.

Now let's look at the banner packages… This may me laugh. I guess you must not have looked at the prices we charge? We purposely charge a low cost so the average distributor can afford to advertise. We do not have one company who advertises with us on our blog. I give Kevin Thompson a free ad, because he is my friend, ss I also do Richard Brooke who is my person mentor. Outside of that sport, we do not have any corporations advertising with us, they are all independent affiliates.

Now to the video editorials. Let's take a loom at those real quick. It seems you are very new to our community, or you would know I do my best these days to ALWAYS provide a positive outlook to any critical situation. A few years ago, we covered "MLM Scams" then we went to "High Risk MLMs" and I realized that was not fair to the company or the affiliates who were joining them. I also realized I was not living my creed of Walking Humbly, Acting Justly and Loving Mercy. So I moved to a new style of delivery, which I am sure I will continue to do as I grow as a person. Now I do my best, and fail often at delivering all information positive and critical, in a straightforward, heartfelt manner without judging those who are launching the companies or joining them.

The one time when I do not do this is when I know without a doubt, someone is truly trying to rip off the distributors and then I am far more judgmental.

Not sure why you do not feel I have talked to Kevin Thompson about any of this current situation? I can tell you this, Kevin Thompson as the attorney for BidiFy is held to certain confidentiality where he can't always share with me facts about a client. Again you are making some interesting statements. Had you done your due diligence, you might not be so judgmental. Just your statement "you refuse to do so" shows you do not have your facts straight but are making an assumptive argument without the facts. Hmm… The same thing you are accusing me of doing!

5. What exactly is my business model you are referring?

Let me share m business model for you and others since you seem to be very clueless about what I do for a living. There are four separate divisions to our business model. Consulting, Publishing, Media Production, and Speaking Network. Although all four work within the other, not all clients use all of our services.

And, I might add that all of our services are used by different home business niches, not just the direct selling industry. Hope this helps you understand a little about our business model.

Now you mention a red flag business model. In reality, if you had done your due diligence, you would see that covering "red flags" in companies is not part of the business model. It is part of the news, and a very small part at that. If you review the amount of companies we have covered, mentioned, and reviewed, you will quickly find that controversial companies with red flags is a very small part of this community. I will admit, three has been three companies we covered that caused the highest amount of the comment threads, Global Verge, My SHopping Genie, TVI Express and Zeek.

6. Now let's move to your statement of "shake down" Of all the companies we have ever covered which are classified as controversial, only two have ever become clients, BidiFy and Zeek. And in both cases, my reporting has not changed. Let's look at Zeek first.

My first reviews came out between @Dec 2011 through March of 2012. My agreement to speak at their events did not start until April of 2012, after I met with executives and 3rd party consultants to make sure the company was listening to their legal, compliance and compensation team.

I started reporting on BidiFy back in Feb or Mar of this year, and did not enter into an Agreement until June 2012. And since I just included them in my caution report above, I am not sure exactly how you come to your conclusion of me "shaking down" companies. Outside of these two, the only other company close to being controversial is Green Organics. And although they are clients, they do not engage with our consulting very much, due to the great leadership team they have on board these days. So your due diligence and conclusion is flawed and you may need to review your facts.

By the way, I do not think we have ever had a company call us for a paid review. When they learn what it would take and the amount of financial documentation they would need to provide, decide against it. I will gladly admit I would love to be the PwC of direct selling, but companies don't want that at this time

7. Now let's get to Zeek. You are 100% correct I accept no responsibility for what folks may or may not have done in Zeek. I reported many times on the reg flags, sought out answers for the affiliates, and agreed with critics in many areas, although never on the Ponzi side of things.

And, if you had taken time to review each video, editorial and comment thread, then you would know I have also publicly made it very clear what I thought of the RPP and how to fix it. And when you review the SEC complaint, you see the issue is the RPP.

I have defended the business model, based on all the information I have and in talking with the men and women who created it. From Kevin Grimes and going through his compliance course, to Keith Laggos and that he did to the compensation plan, to Gerry Nehra and how he had them change the ad copy and tweak the P&Ps and RPP to stay within regulations. I spent countless hours with Greg Caldwell to learn how many affiliates they had terminated and what they were doing to continue to clear up the marketing.

Then in April when the Burn Lounge judicial opinion came down, I went to the powers to be, and made a huge suggestion which would change the comp plan to tighten the RPP to be well within compliance. This included adding he qualifiers of 2,4,6,8,10 customers per affiliates in order to qualify for the RPP. Each customer must be outside the comp structure, and must have a minimum transaction amount that would be a minimum of $5 but more than lightly would have come in around $7 to $10 per transaction.

All of these plus many more changes were publicly announced to go into effect August 22nd 2012. And for reasons only known to the SEC, they decided to act one week to the day (publicly) prior to the changes going into effect. Had these changes taken place, momentum would have come to a grinding halt as everyone moved to become re-qualified. And as they re-qualified the amount of customers and sales volume outside of the comp structure would have been 2 to 10 times that of the affiliates.

Now to your statement "you personally profited from appearing at events" I did not profit, but did receive around $20K from April until Aug of 2012 to cover my expenses. Now with a family of 8 living at home that is $500 per mouth to feed. And now if you take out the hotel, airfare, food and car rental, then we can forget feeding anyone. Again, if you just did a little due diligence then you would know your facts and would not be making subjective arguments. Again what you suggest I do in my reporting.

Now to your statement on the " the SEC, the court appointed receiver and even Paul Burks himself admitting Zeek was a ponzi" Again your facts are not correct. The SEC has filed a complaint stating Rex Venture Group aka Zeek Rewards knowing ran a Ponzi Scheme. They then entered into a private deal behind closed doors with Paul Burks and allowed him to "neither admit or deny their allegations, gave them is company and agreed to a $4 million dollars. The SEC then requested a Receiver to determine where all the assets are located and who should get any money back and/or to collect any profits paid to folks who may not deserve them.

However at no time did this case ever go through the Judicial process of having a Judge and Jury review the complaint to prove it was accurate. And since the original complaint was filed, and as I reported, the numbers are not proving to not be accurate. Just last week the Receiver held a press conference to announce the amount of affiliates was closer to 2 million instead of 1 million. Something I have already reported on based on information I had. Since this is a foundational number, to the complaint we can come to a logical conclusion that the financial numbers will also be low in the complaint.

This by know means, proves the SEC Complaint of Zeek Rewards being a Poni is inaccurate. But it does have flaws, and for the rights of all involved a trial needs to be held to prove the SEC did not jump the gun. Citi Group just got fined $590 million dollars and did not admit wrong doing to a fraud case, and they are still doing business today. They got their day in court, as should the affiliates who have been effected by this situation.

Maybe you believe we are just suppose to blindly follow our Government, but I for one realize we live in a Republic, and the US Constitution should always be followed. Once Justice proves out he facts and comes to a final conclusion, then and only then will I report that Zeek Rewards was anything but a mismanaged company with a weak compensation plan, which if the new well respected executives had been given a chance, could have fixed the issues.

But once the trial is over, I will report just as loudly the facts no matter which direction they flow.

By the way I will never personally admit I hurt anyone. And if you or anyone else pulls their head out of the sand, and read everything I have ever written, spoke or answers, then you will see I have provided the facts all along the way. And I even shot a video stating if "Zeek Rewards, DubLi Network and Co2 Rewards" were tha last two companies in the world with a comp plan and I was going back in the field I would join DubLi Network! I am sure you just missed that one it can happen to all of us.

By the way, I also have another reason for demanding their day in Court… I believe the legal, compliance and comp plan teams should have their day in court to defend their opinion that based on the changes that Zeek made at their guidance made it a ligit business model. It would seem to me, as someone who seems to care about the people hurt you would want the same thing also. Do you not feel the experts who created this business model should be held responsible also, by defending and proving why they created it? Lord, man these same folks are helping other companies right now as I write this. If they are wrong, then how many other lives could be harmed? However, if they are right, 2 million may get some of their money back.

Now as for sleeping at night. Well I do very little of that these days because I am willing to answer each email that comes in former Zeek Rewards Affiliates from around the world providing them answers and direction on where to get more detailed answers.

So where as I respect your RIGHT to express your opinion, I think facts help to bring stability to those opinions. I do hope some of what I have shared will give you some deeper understanding to what I stand for and how our business model works. Personally the energy it takes covering risky business models, is very draining, and it is far more fun to cover traditional network marketing companies. However since independent business owners guide the conversations through their emails we report where the flow of affiliates are moving at the time.

As for the "disguised Patriotic" statement… Well, it is easy to see who's side you would have been on in the Revolutionary War and the War of North Aggression.

Now to the most important statement you made… "please don't approve this post this to be viewed publicly and then scream and yell about how I personally libeled/slandered you causing you irreparable harm and damages."

Troy

@jcb1014,

Caution is what we all need to do. To many folks are running and jumping based on the money story, instead of slowing own to determine if the company is a good fit. UPP and BidiFy have already made huge changes, bu the story on the net has not caught up yet, based on the emails I am getting.

This next week I will cover a few of these companies separately to show changes they have made which hopefully will keep the Ethically Challenged away.

To your question. The long arm of the law, can reach to most countries and many of them work together. In reviewing the SEC Complaint we see they are already working with the CSA in Canada, and I am sure as the Receiver goes through the records, as well as the Secret Service or the FBI, as they run across known criminals, they will be notifying those countries as well as building a local case in the USA.

The good news is as they weed out these known criminals, those funds will be added to the victim fund for refunds.

As for abusing the system, I believe there were affiliates in both the USA and Internationally who were abusing the system. Was tis abuse wide spread is hard to tell. But when you have a database of close to 2 million people, even a small percentage is a huge number.

I think red flags are pretty clear. When a business model is built around and leads with a money story, instead of the underlying products or services, we have issues. When you look at the legacy companies inside of network marketing they lead with products, and even when they hit attrition in the network their sales continue to rise in most cases.

I hope this helps.

Living AN Epic Adventure,

Troy

@dboudreaux,

My statement was that on their website they list "they are Not a money laundering company". This is a red flag.

@Jah Kafele,

I am going to do an update on BidiFy. I think Frode's move to correct the weaknesses in the comp plan are fantastic. Although only time can tell, I feel it was the right move.

@Chris Bailey,

Great question. I do not think I have ever mentioned JSS Tripler. But if I remember right that was part of Just Been Paid. If we are talking about the same program, then here is my thoughts. First of all they have no legal entity in which I or any of the other Critics have found located in the USA, or North America for that matter. Now that they have been purchased by Profit Clicking that may change, however at this time they are still only showing operations in South Africa.

And since the emails coming in are about JBP, I focused only on just been paid, not any anything that might be happening in the future.

If things change and folks continue to ask then I will go take a look.

Since the site has now changed, it now looks a lot like Banner Brokers which I also based on the program feel has issues. Kind of looks like a modern day ad surf program.

Now I can say that ProfitClickng as with Zeek and other programs feel it is important to add the disclaimer about Investments etc. That in and of itself is also a concern, knowing that with all the compliance Zeek had did not stop the SEC from filing a complaint for purported Ponzi activity due to the illegal promotion of the program from the field. (and the company in the beginning).

I did click on the "Legal Team: button, but it did not provide any info.

Some of the pages are still under construction on the new site, so only time will tell.

@Danial, I will be doing an update soon.

@John,

Always love it when folks reach out to comment. I do find your comment somewhat interesting for several reasons. So let me ask you some question.

1. Show me where JBP is legal to transact business in North America?

Outside of this question is several others that are just as relevant, but if you are so clueless as to not know the answer to this, or be able to produce the documents to prove that JBP is legal, then the rest just don’t matter.

So sport, before you go choking yourself on sticking your feet clear down your throat, you may want to do your due diligence. because you sure look kind of foolish right now.

By the way, now that Profit Clicking has taken control of JBP, feel free to use them as your source. If you can show where they are legit to transact business in North America as a legit network marketing company, then do that instead of the original company.

And I did not categorize anything wrong. So many times folks like you state how I am wrong, yet before long the proof shows in the failure of the program.

Now as for Zeek… You seem to be spitting out phrases you are clueless about. You might want to read everything I wrote. They were going through regular State investigation, and I called that in advance of it happening. What I did not call, nor had any clue of, was the private meetings between the SEC and the owner of Zeek Rewards. Those meetings were private even to those closest to Paul Burks.

Makes you wonder what private meetings you don;t know about between the owners of JBP and the SEC?

By the way… I have never called Zeek Rewards a ponzi. I still hold to the belief that I want all the facts. I have been clear to state if the evidence points to them being a ponzi, and if the facts show, many on the inside were running it from day one as a ponzi, then folks need to go to prison.

ROFLOL… If I were wrong, don’t you think some company would sue me? Sport, JBP and Zeek are not and were not direct sales companies aka network marketing companies. They fall under direct marketing or internet marketing companies. I do not claim to advocate for either of those two industries.

So, you really need to get a clue as to what you are talking about.

But… I do respect your RIGHT to share your opinion.

@Gene,

Thank you!

I hit Lyoness pretty hard when they first came into the USA because they were not legal at all. Since then they have hired Kevin Grimes to work on their P&Ps. However, I am still concerned with the compensation structure and overall business model, because it seems they are paying commissions based on a future event.

But, I am giving the experts time to try and get it cleaned up. I do feel Lyoness wants to do what is right since they just invested in a huge office in Southern Florida.

If they make the changes Kevin Grimes tells them to make, and they clean up the compensation plan so it is easier to fully understand, I will feel a lot better.