Robert Craddock Refuses To Answer To Zeek Rewards Affiliates Causing A Roller Coaster Of Emotions An Points To Troy Dooly As The Reason

Robert Craddock decided that instead of responding to what his right hand man David Kettner wrote on Saturday, or what Jordan Maglich founder of wrote, he would try and use an old political tactic of pointing to the messenger… In this case MLM Help Desk and Troy Dooly! Why?

Since I believe the Zeek Rewards affiliates deserve the truth on every issue, when someone like Craddock wants to avoid the questions raised and cause in his words “an emotional roller coaster” then I figure it is best to provide to the best of my ability some answers.


[quote]Troy site did not get the traffic it now enjoys before Zeek Rewards, but in the last 4 weeks the traffic has shot up as shown by this graph from Alexa[/quote]

Now sure why he feels this is something new. Many folks have brought this up every time we cover any critical information. But let’s take a deeper look at things.


Now it is easy to see above that Craddock and his crew have not gotten any real traffic until we started covering their story. (of course they did not exist until the closure of Zeek Rewards either) And in the beginning because he was introduced to me by a friend, I gave him the benefit of the doubt. I did take the time to ask some specific questions and he was quick to answer.

But as time went on and things were not happening as he said they would and he refused to respond to emails, I started to wonder like many others what his true motive was, or is!

Now let’s take a look at the same graph since MLM Help Desk started becoming the main source of information for Zeek Rewards info by the affiliates who were looking for a place to speak their mind.


Interesting… Now we see somewhat of a different story than what Craddock shows on his three month trailing graph. But something that he did get right… “The zeek rewards affiliates have and are on an emotional roller coaster.” And it shows in the above graph. Each time a major event took place at Rex Venture Group, the affiliates went looking for answers.

[quote]Troy Dooly was capitalizing on your pain and confusion.[/quote]

Seriously? By forcing Robert Craddock and crew to remove false information about SNR Denten representing them to hurting Zeek Rewards Affiliates, Craddock feels that I have in some way capitalized on the emotions of Zeek Rewards Affiliates, and betrayed him?

Or maybe Craddock is talking about the fact I contacted him prior to publishing an email presented by his right hand man David Kettner, which stated some very questionable and possibly false information about the SEC to already hurting Zeek Rewards Affiliates who are looking for the truth, not pipe dreams.

Or maybe it was my publishing of Jordan Maglich’s article from rebutting the information Robert Croddock’s purported attorney told him came directly from the mouth of an SEC official.

If that is what Craddock calls “Capitalizing on your pain and confusion”, then guilty as charged!

Now take a second and ask yourself this question… Why isn’t Robert Craddock or his attorney answering the hard questions?

Even in the most damaging of capital murder cases, the attorney’s are willing to address the media and talk about heir case. In the current issue surrounding Craddock, first of all there is NO case, since nothing has been filed in court. So why not answer the most simple of questions… Did you, Robert Craddock say what your friend David Kettner publicly states you said?

Why is he attacking the largest outlet of Zeek Reward info in the world? This is the oldest political trick in the book. When you can’t answer the questions, because the answers are to embarrassing, then you do all you can to deflect the issues, and question the agenda of others.

[quote]Troy wanted to capitalize on this, again as you can see by the spike in traffic.[/quote]

ROFLOL… sure we offer advertising. Heck anyone who has watched one of our videos knows we monetize as many as YouTube will allow. And many of you have been rewarded over the last few months at advertising your Zeek Reward’s business and many other businesses right here.

Craddock, seems to feel that if you are charged $25 per month or $50 per month for an ad, that is taking advantage of you… Why? Ask yourself which is a safer risk… advertising for your home-base business or sending money to someone who lies about who their attorney really is until pushed into a corner?

By the way, yes we do use Google Ad Sense on all of our Blogs, including our newest blog in order to help keep our monthly membership plan at $10 per month and to keep the banner ads at a reasonable price for the average network marketing distributor.

I almost forgot we also make money from ads on our radio show BeachsideCEO also. But that sure doesn’t keep 40,000 people a month from listening or getting any less value from the show.

[quote]I would say to you that Troy wanted to get updates starting on the 5th of September and, have responded to Troy that we needed to let the information he received will need to come from court filings. Now this is not going to drive traffic to his site so he needs to create a sense of panic, and he has done that.[/quote]

Well it was really September 1st when I sent the following email to Robert Craddock.

“From: Troy Dooly []
Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2012 8:48 PM
To: ‘Robert Craddock’
Subject: question on case


Wanted to check in and get an update on the situation and ask a few questions for my next post.

1. Has the engagement letter now been signed and the $100K sent to the law firm?
2. When will a press release be going out from the law firm?
3. Will the law firm establish an escrow account for folks to deposit money into?
4. Will you establish a trust account administered by a 3rd party, such as a federally insured bank?
5. Do you have an outside board of directors for Fun Group USA?
6. Have you taken out a E&O policy to protect you and others from lawsuits?

Ok, as you can tell the questions have been flying in. Right now the biggest issue you face is the critics are trying to prove you are not credible based on you fighting them in the past, and because of some of the questionable affiliates who are boldly making it clear they have joined the fight.

Give me all the documentation you can, and all the facts so I can report in a clear a precise manner.

Living An Epic Adventure,

So it was not on the 5th, it was four days before that. But instead of responding to these questions, Robert Craddock called on the phone to state SNR Denten had pulled out. Yet, it was not until September 7th, 2012 that the ZTeamBoz website was updated. Sometime after I published the fact they pulled out. Personally I feel the Zeek Reward Affiliates, who are donating money for Robert Craddock to be represented, should get the truth at every step of the way, and it should come first from Robert Craddock, not MLMHelPDesk.

Now let’s look at what happened after the 5th of September 2012. This cam from a quote from David Kettner’s email of September 8th, 2012…

[quote]Ok, well that is a wealth of information…Please be sure to share this news with everyone.[/quote]

This email went viral as they expected and instead of Robert answering a simple question “Did you say these things or not?” he wants to say my answers would come from a court filing? A court filing is NOT (unless someone sues Craddock for fraud for this email) is going to tell me anything.

From what it looks like to me this email may have been a ploy to keep folks from wondering why SNR Denten had not been removed from the ZTeamBiz website days before my original post.

[quote]I’m posting this now to help you understand that Troy needs to keep the prior Zeek Affiliates in a panic and let you think that the latest news will come from Troy but I’m here to tell you that you will only get updates from me in your secure backend area[/quote]

Well, let me get this straight. In a previous website update Craddock posts…

[quote]Due to lack of foresight SNR Denton was hounded with thousands of calls, emails and yes, harassment and threats when people could not get answers quick enough.[/quote]

So now he feels that by not responding to simple requests and putting it behind a “secured backend area” that he is going to keep Zeek Rewards Affiliates from calling the attorney or from them sharing important information with the public.

If I was in Robert’s shoes I might want to focus on what these “prior Zeek Rewards Affiliates” might think of him not disclosing all the important information. If they were willing to threaten and harass a legal team who is suppose to be protecting their interests (well Robert’s interests with their money), then they may really get ticked off now! Especially if they find out, they are not being told the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

This is not about me at all, and never has been. Sadly, Robert Craddock, would like you to believe that I am the issue that is causing everyone to have some emotional roller coaster ride. Well take a second and read the questions below.

But first think about the sentence below from Craddock’s ZTeam Biz website.

[quote]As some of you are aware of, we have made changes in law firms that are assisting us in providing protection against possible crawl back action by the SEC.[/quote]

How is stopping “Claw back action going to help you get your refunds? And while you are at it, here are a few more questions to think about.

1. Why did Craddock collect legal defense funds from former Zeek Rewards Affiliates under false pretenses of collecting for SNR Denten, instead of just telling the truth, that a change had to be made?

2. Why is Robert Craddock now blaming the very Zeek Rewards Affiliates who paid money into the legal defense fund, as the reason SNR Denten withdrew from the case? Sure doesn’t seem very appreciative of the folks who are paying the legal bills.

3. In the last two posts I have published, which I did NOT write, why has not Craddock or his purported attorney not address the fact that, one David Kettner purports that Robert Craddock personally told him the SEC has admitted to making a mistake in the Rex Venture Group case, instead of trying to bypass the issue and make me the issue?

Or that Jorden Maglich’s rebuttle was a bold face lie, and have his attorney prove his purported statements?

There is no doubt Robert Craddock believes he is doing something good for someone. But what he seems to not get, is that of all the internet voices, I am a friend to the affiliates, and still stand firm, based on hours of conversations with the legal, compliance and compensation teams, Zeek Rewards was not created to be run as a ponzi.

With that said, I do need to be very clear, I do NOT believe Zeek Rewards will ever reopen or was even close to being a perfectly run company. And I also admit that I do not know what might have gone on behind the scenes that I nor others I spoke with (or some I did speak with) was going on in the background.

I do believe that had, Greg Caldwell been given enough time to replace all the former executives with outside professionals, and made the planned changes to the compensation plan, that Zeek Rewards might still be doing business today.

At the end of the day, all that matters is the Truth and Justice prevails for the former Zeek Rewards Affiliates and they get the refunds they deserve.

Well… And I would really love to see the SEC complaint tried in an open court and the evidence examined and defended.

At the end of the day I report and give my opinions based on the facts and my beliefs as I see them. Then I open up the floor for all to comment so you the former Zeek Reward Affiliates, can decide on what your future should be.

Spread The News!

41 thoughts on “Robert Craddock Refuses To Answer To Zeek Rewards Affiliates Causing A Roller Coaster Of Emotions An Points To Troy Dooly As The Reason”

  1. @Troy

    The correct way to handlee it is to check the facts = was the “NMBJ review” misleading from your side at the time of publishing? And did you knew it?

    Most other people asked questions about some of the details, and did their own analysing. The review clearly failed logical test, and was more like “marketing junk” than “unbiased and factual information”.

    To be able to explain it in a rational way, I had to use “professional viewpoint” rather than my personal. For Keith Laggos / NMBJ I had to use “I don’t know anything about his audience, and he can have a special type of audience that really prefer material like that, marketing junk rather than factual information”. I had to use similar methods for you, pointing out a difference in audience to explain it.

    People can check the video themselves if there’s any doubts about whether it was misleading or not?

    At the time of publishing, there were already lots of contradicting information available, even from the affiliates themselves. I believe most affiliates knew the FSC stores and the Shopping Daisy didn’t contribute much to the revenue, and they probably knew about all the fake customers. Some of them also knew the IDS was misleading. The review was plain and simple “marketing junk”, with very little factual information that had been checked properly.

    The most serious critique has always been directed against the Ponzi scheme part of Zeek, not against “compliance” or their team of advisors. The review seems to be a method to “outweight” serious critique, and directing people’s attention away from it and over to mor “safe areas”. It does NOT reflect a “neutral viewpoint” or use of balanced sources, it’s more like “propaganda material”.

    How we got into this discussion was because the video connected to this article mentioned “unfair critique”, and I pointed out that some critique probably is well deserved and correct.

    I have already made my point there = SOME critique is probably correct and well deserved. Other than that, it’s not important for me to list all the details.

    BTW, here’s your points:
    If I’m wrong about checking the content, then it probably was your METHODS that failed rather than your intentions?

    So the conclusion will be something like “You DID check the content, but the methods you used to check it didn’t work very well”. Then you should probably check the methods for why they fail, and replace them with better ones.

    You can’t expect an average audience to read through ALL the materials for ALL the companies reviewed on a website, can you?

    The editorials basically contained the same information as the videos, with less “additional details”. And the comments didn’t really clarify anything in most cases (your part of them).

    WHO people are and their status as “experts” isn’t really important if the logic doesn’t hold water.

    That method where you check with “experts” isn’t about checking the content, it’s about checking the defence system you will have if anything fails. It only creates a false impression of that something has been “verified by experts”, but it doesn’t focus on the important details (WHAT they have verified, HOW they have verified it, the logic they have used).

    Trying to add credibility to something by adding “expert opinions” is in itself a misleading method.

    Of course I haven’t read all the editorials or watched all the videos.

    So if I want to recommend your website to someone, I should probably add a “recipe” for how to use it?

    “It becomes more meaningful if you first become a part of the community, read all the editorials for all the companies and watch all the videos, and frequently listens to radio shows recommended there. It’s designed for an audience like that”.

  2. @Morton,

    1. You are wrong on about checking on the content. 🙂

    2. I respect your right to your opinion. But, if you have followed more than just Zeek, then you should realize I would never knowing mislead anyone.

    3. As for the videos, anyone can take them out of context. Each has a link to the editorial and I make it clear to read the editorials. You may have decided not to read all of them, as others have. But if one is seeking the facts, and are willing to do all that is needed to learn those facts, then each video, editorial and comment thread does shed light from both sides of the debate from day one until now.

    And in each case, I did my due diligence and went to folks who would know the answers. Many of them who are paid millions to create and defend what they create are just as curious as I am on what the SEC has that they missed. It is easy for you or anyone to take some guesses based on past situations, (which we all do most of the time) but since none of us have ALL the facts, evidence and conversations between the SEC, Secret Service, FBI, NC DOJ and Paul Burks, most information is based on past case law and speculation.

    I just happen to be the one who covered this story from every direction I could because it had split the network marketing community right down the middle.

    4. Based on your answer, it is very clear, you have not watched every video, read each editorial or read the comments.

    Morton, you always bring interesting thoughts to the table.

    But if you or anyone else believe I would purposely mislead folks, then this is really not the community for you, and I am the last person, who’s videos and writing you should review. But in the mean time if you are open to changing your mind, you may want to get to know me in a different light and listen to some of the radio shows I do.

  3. @Troy

    Quote from post #11 (answer to “first level post” #7):

    2. [..]
    I am not sure what you mean by “you probably knew it.” What are you referring, that causes you to be so judgmental?

    3. Many people used my videos. Those who did not support Zeek used my videos to show the red flags and weaknesses, and those who supported Zeek used my videos to promote it. there is no win in this situation.

    I started the comment with the critique I recently had made about the Dave Kettner / Robert Craddock story, “You only check the source, but you fail to check the content”. And that flaw has been repeated over and over again throughout the Zeek case.

    In the infamous “NMBJ review” from April 15. you made a point out of WHO it came from (Keith Laggos), instead of verifying WHAT it contained and how trustworthy that information was. The review was probably partially written by Dawn herself, as “marketing junk” rather than as “reliable information”, paid for by buying $100,000 worth of copies of NMBJ (or something). Whether or not Keith Laggos was an affiliate isn’t really important, the report contained several other red flags.

    You probably knew the material was misleading at the time of publishing, and yet you choosed to publish it as “reliable information”.

    In the Zeek case, your website/videos has been one of the most misleading sources for information found on the internet when it comes to certain aspects of the case — they have become the one source completely in denial of the reality, willing to ignore most red flags and instead replacing them with meaningless points.

    As for that point in your answer, critics probably never used your videos as a source for information in the Zeek case. You were clearly biased in one direction, and had too little reliable information that could be used. If they used the material, it was probably used as a comparison to more reliable information, or for pointing out misleading points in it. They showed the weaknesses in your work, not the weaknesses in Zeek’s business model. They showed how willing you were to publish misleading information, and they clearly identified it as misleading.

    The information (point 2, etc.) hasn’t been about “helping affiliates”. You don’t “help” people by misleading them, you make the situation become even worse when it finally comes to an end. The ones who received factual information are the ones who managed the situation best, e.g. stopping to recruit, withdrawing money or whatever they did to manage the situation. The ones who came out worse are the ones who tried to ignore reality, e.g. the lack of real customers.

    I should probably avoid making any comments about passions, because I have different sort order for what we can call “core values”, i.e. I will place other values higher up in the system. “Core values” is the system that helps us identify “right/wrong” and similar ethical ideas. We will probably both be in trouble if I start to focus directly on that topic. 🙂

    I have focused on the result of something, “the NMBJ review was misleading already when it was published, and you probably knew it”. Of course there has been some “core values” involved in it, but I don’t believe it will be a good idea if I’m starting to analyse that too deeply (even if I probably COULD analyse it in a meaningful way).

    I haven’t focused very much on whether people feel “betrayed” or not, it was only a minor point in what I had checked. And it popped up a few comments on your website from people claiming to have been misled by your material, in the first 2 weeks after the shutdown. But I didn’t make it become an important point in itself, only an example for what I had checked — to show other parts of the context.

    “Misleading when it was published” is a more objective viewpoint than people’s feelings about something. I don’t blame you for people’s feelings, they’ll have to fix that part themselves. But it IS a part of the picture, so I shouldn’t ignore it either.

    The rank order between the points are:
    1. “Misleading when it was published”, something that was directly under your own control.
    2. “Was used in a misleading way by others”, something that was indirectly under your own control.
    3. “People were misled” wasn’t under your control at all, except for when they visited your website and you actively engaged in misleading them. But here people will need to fix something themselves, e.g. how to identify when information is misleading.

    I believe we’re talking about different thing there. I was talking about the logical process of recruiting, e.g. if you help one affiliate recruit 3 others into a Ponzi scheme then your “help” has failed 3 out of 4 times. It has probably failed for all 4 of them, even if it worked for one of them temporarily.

    The more you’re “helping” people in areas like that, the more your help will fail (eventually). You’re helping Peter to rob Paul (and two others). That idea of “helping” isn’t very functional other than in the short term, and it will eventually backfire against you.


    The point in my critique here is to “draw a line” for what’s acceptable and what’s not, when the Zeek case still is fresh in memory for most people.

    For me, misleading people is not very acceptable (in the ways it normally is being used), and I only have the “ethical standard of a salesman” (I’m not very ethical, I even “defended” some of your work at some stages by pointing out the difference in audience, even when I knew the material was misleading in itself).

  4. Pingback: Zteambiz Ripping Off Former Zeek Affiliates?
  5. Renee,

    My view on Zeek is clear, but I’ll summarize.

    The way Zeek was, it CANNOT be legal.

    The “we share 50% of revenue from auctions daily” business model is NOT how Zeek actually operated. Thus, discussing “how can that be not legal” is like discussing “science of Prometheus (the movie)”. It’s a Sci-fi movie!

    The math just do NOT work out.

    Random snapshots of Zeekler auctions have average daily revenue at no more than 300K daily. That means if they really pay affiliates 150K daily, then there’s NO WAY Zeek could have paid 12 affiliates 1 million each in July, much less the remainder of up to 2 million affiliates. Not even if you DOUBLE the daily revenue. (300K shared * 30 days = 9 million, not enough to pay the 12, much less the remaining affiliates)

    And that doesn’t even get into “selling unregistered securities” and related charges of fraud and such.

  6. Zeek is gone forever and cannot return; the ownership has been turned over. The only way you will ever see a company running under the zeek name is if a new co. was to start up with that name. Which would not be a wise idea with name zeek associated with the largest ponzi scheme in American history. Read thru troy’s comments his replys are similar to this.

  7. @Brian McCoy,

    Please forgive me, I must have just missed it.

    Based on the information I have at hand, I personally believe Paul personally knew he did not have the physical or emotional energy left to fight a battle. Not to make excuses for Paul Burks, and I have not personally talked to him about this case. But I do know he is a two time cancer survivor and his wife has suffered a stroke and recent brain damage after she took a hard fall. Could there be more behinds the scenes, sure. But it is not the norm for a person to go 65 years without a criminal record and all of a sudden turn mastermind criminal.

    Could he have been so good he has never gotten caught before? That might happen. But the criminals I have known, both white collar and violent crime, did not start their life of crime in their sixties.

    Now, I am also realistic enough to know there could be far more than meets the eye also. Paul Burks could have been running a front, been a mastermind criminal, or because of some huge issue in his life decided to jump in bed with criminals and launch the biggest ponzi to hit the network marketing community in history.

    But since I so not have finite answers YET, to my questions I will withhold personal judgement against Paul Burks or anyone else involved.

    And you might be right, he may have simply taken the easy way out.

    Now to Penny Auctions. That is something I had to become an expert on in order to cover Zeekler. There are without a doubt some penny auctions which I would classify gambling and are run as slot machines are run. These are illegal. However, the legit penny auctions are not gambling for one very simple reason. They allow for everyone to WIN!

    Although you may not win the auction, if you lose, you are still allowed to use your bids toward the purchase price of the item you bid on. And in most cases at a reduced price off the retail.

    Now in gambling, there is one winner and a boatload of losers.

    By the way, NOT all online gambling illegal in the USA. For detailed info you can review this Wikipedia Page.

    Here is the important details.

    “On December 3, 2009, the House Financial Services Committee held a hearing on UIGEA and Rep. Frank’s Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act of 2009 (H.R. 2267) where experts in the fields of online security and consumer safety testified that a regulatory framework for Internet gambling would protect consumers and ensure the integrity of Internet gambling financial transactions. On July 28, 2010, the committee passed H.R. 2267 by a vote of 41-22-1. The bill would legalize and regulate online poker and some other forms of online gambling.”

    “On November 22, 2010, the New Jersey state Senate became the first such US body to pass a bill (S490) expressly legalizing certain forms of online gambling. The bill was passed with a 29-5 majority. The bill allows bets to be taken by in-State companies on poker games, casino games and slots but excludes sports betting, although it allows for the latter to be proposed, voted on and potentially regulated separately in due course.”

    “On April 15, 2011, in U. S. v. Scheinberg et al. (10 Cr. 336), three online poker companies were indicted for violating U.S. laws that prohibit the acceptance of any financial instrument in connection with unlawful Internet gambling,[30][31] that is, Internet gambling that involves a “bet or wager” that is illegal under the laws of the state where the bet is made.[32] The indictment alleges that the companies used fraudulent methods to evade this law, for example, by disguising online gambling payments as purchases of merchandise, and by investing money in a local bank in return for the bank’s willingness to process online poker transactions.[30] The companies argue that poker is a game of skill rather than a game of chance, and therefore, online poker is not unlawful Internet gambling. There are other legal problems with the government’s case; and, interestingly, the indictments did not mention the Wire Act.[33] On July 31 2012, it was announced that two of the three companies indicted for money laundering and forfeiture settled with the Manhattan U.S. Attorney for $731 million without legally admitting guilt. The government also asked the judge to approve a settlement with the third defendant, Absolute Poker. [34]”

    Now to the compensation question, that has been asked and answered so many times on this blog I can’t count.

    Yes, my expenses were covered by Rex Venture Group, LLC. From April of 2012 until July of 2012 I was paid around 20K for those expenses.

    Living An Epic Adventure,

  8. Well, no matter how often I may disagree with you, I simply can’t hate anyone that throws out a quote from Road House. 😀

    Another relevant quote to all this discussion would be “Opinions Vary”.

  9. @Jamen McGranahan,

    I think the SEC Receiver Kenneth D. Bell said it best today… What he publishes on the Zeek Rewards Receivership site you can believe! And he said that the rumors were false.

  10. @K. Chang,

    Dallin Larsen and I were communicating the other day and he quoted some great words… “God is Great, Beer is Good, and People are Crazy”

    As I wrote last night, this is about the affiliates. Always has been and always will be. It is not about me being right, it is about getting results for those asking questions. And I know you and I do not always agree, but I do know you are providing solid info from your worldview on this issue, and I thank you for that.

  11. @Chris,

    I heard that… I have been busy with normal network marketing business, but did hear, something along those lines. Well it’s not the first time. 🙂

  12. @Renee,

    🙂 Thank you for the kind words. The goal is never to fight it you don;t have too. From the mouth of the great philosopher Dalton “Be Nice Till It’s Time Not To Be Nice.”

    So I would not lead a fight, but I would lead the discussion on finding the truth. And although I do not know when, I do believe that the SEC and other will want the whole truth in this situation to come out.

    And I think what is holding back some of the truth right now is the fact, each day as I try to connect with former insiders I am finding that they have all lawyered-up and they attorneys have told them NOT to talk to anyone. This is a good indication that something is happening behind the scenes that we do not know about. Maybe more civil charges or possible criminal charges. In either case as different cases are thrown out or brought before a Judge we should start to see exactly what happened, why the corporate legal team was not allowed to defend the business model, and why Paul Burks decided to surrender the company.

    So like you I would just like the truth. It doesn’t make any logical sense to me that all the folks hired by Paul Burks to make sure Zeek Rewards was a legal business model could be wrong.

    But, I know one thing for sure, I will not give up on working to find the truth on everything just for the peace of mind of knowing what exactly did happen.

  13. Hey Troy,
    Sounds like you would be the right guy to lead a fight with the SEC to prove it’s model as legal??!!! I believe you would do it right. Even if Paul has given up, it would be nice to know the truth? There has to be a way this can be done. It is a great model that needs to become a new way to do business whether it be Penny auctions or some other product. We need a real cowboy!

  14. Hey Troy, did you catch today’s update by Craddock.

    He was going to report you to YouTube for violating their terms under harassment, but decided not to because your “short term fame is fading”.


  15. Seems Craddock read your commentary, Troy, and he’s claiming that you’re playing with affiliates emotions.

    What a pi***ng contest! It’s like wrestling with pigs in a pig pen, isn’t it?

  16. I am honestly flabbergasted by what is going on here. I don’t know who or what to believe any more. Makes me not want to trust anyone or anything that is done online. It’s so very discouraging.

  17. @Sheryl Robinson,

    Well, that is a great question. If these folks are part of other businesses that use Payza, they may be getting funds. If the Receiver has determined, these folks funds should not be frozen, they may be getting money. But without knowing the specific details from Payza there is no way to know for sure.

  18. @Morten,

    I always love your comments because they are thought provoking. You are always welcome to critique anything I write.

    Now let’s take a look at what you have critiqued.

    1. The editorial on the SEC issues from Saturday September 8th, 2012. I did make a mistake which has now been corrected, I forgot to add the quotes, since I was between speaking engagements. And in the video I was very clear on the issues. And since most folks watch the videos and skim the editorials, getting the facts in the video are always my main focus. I understand that folks such as yourself will read the editorial and we will continue the conversation through the comment threads.

    2. The video and editorial from the Network Marketing Business Journal was just that a commentary on what Keith Laggos had published in his newspaper. I do wich I had known he had a position in the compensation plan at the time. Had I known that I would have made that public at the time as a disclaimer. Sadly that did not come out until he shared it publicly on a Lyoness prospecting call.

    I am not sure what you mean by “you probably knew it.” What are you referring, that causes you to be so judgmental?

    3. Many people used my videos. Those who did not support Zeek used my videos to show the red flags and weaknesses, and those who supported Zeek used my videos to promote it. there is no win in this situation. It doesn’t matter what company I cover, the same thing happens, as it does in traditional media. Many times when a public network marketing company CEO or founder is interviewed, networkers will use the footage from Fox Business, CNBC etc to support their point.

    I was very clear in that video, as I read the newspaper that folks could get their own copy at the general bookstores. I have no problem with you calling me out for anything. Just remember I did not publish that newspaper, I read from it. And at the time I had no idea that it was 100% biased based on the fact Keith Laggos had a top position in the compensation plan.

    4. I have not issue with folks blaming me. It’s not about me being right, or you or others thinking I am wrong. It has always been about getting results for the affiliates. Lord knows I am the loudest voice inside the network marketing community when it comes to covering Zeek Rewards. However, pointing fingers does no good for anyone. I have not changed my position on my thoughts on Zeek. And unlike others I have not stopped reporting on the past issues and current situations.

    And if you really sit down and watch my videos, read my editorials and read my comments, from the very beginning until now, it is easy to see where my passions are focused. However, as Tissa Godavitarne stated in one of the comment threads “perception is reality” and in this case people see and hear what they want to hear. And since I do videos more than anyone else it is easy to see my passion.

    I, like so many others really wanted Zeek Rewards to set a new paradigm for folks. Which is why I continued to over the issues, and work with the company to remove all the weaknesses that a regulatory body might look at. This started in April, and continued until the company was closed. I did not focus just on Zeek Rewards either, I looked at several of the MLM Penny Auctions and made it clear to them where issues could arise. Some listened and some did not, or I should say are not listening.

    5. I can fully understand how folks can feel betrayed. Heck, in some ways I feel betrayed, the legal team feels betrayed, the compliance team feels betrayed. I am pretty sure we all would like the same answers, and more than likely we may never get them, or it will be years down the road.

    Right now the most important issue outstanding is getting the funds in eWallets released for those former Zeek Rewards affiliate’s, who had joined Zeek, connected their eWallets, uploaded money to their eWallet, but have NEVER made a transaction between the eWallet and Zeek’s account. Right now those folks are the ones who are left out there wondering what is happening and who they can trust.

    6. You bring up an interesting point on the recruitment. If I were a player in a ponzi scheme and part of a mastermind conspiracy to defraud millions of people, then you have a very valid point. However, since that is not the case and when anyone starts at the very beginning and moves until now, they will see that is not the case.

    Have some taken specific videos and editorials and used them to their advantage to recruit? You bet! And throughout the launch of that has been the case for hundreds of companies. And out of the hundreds of companies and thousands of posts and comments I have done Zeek was the only one to every be taken over by the SEC.

    Again let me point out, I have not changed my stance on the fact that I do not believe the legal, compliance and compensation teams, helped Paul Burks and his crew develop one of the most successful ponzi schemes in history (based on the amount of people involved). And I have stayed firm that if the allegations could be hear in open court and the corporate legal team could defend their opinions, that even now it might be proven Zeek was not a ponzi scheme.

    What I have conceded on is the fact, I could have made a mistake in what Paul Burks or others might have been doing behind the scenes that I, nor the legal, compliance and compensation team (all 3rd party consultants) were aware of.

    Could Paul Burks be a mastermind criminal who for the last 65 years has never gotten caught, which was why his criminal record is clean? Maybe. Was he smart enough to create a ponzi scheme under the noses of folks who have worked with him for decades, and they did not know it? Maybe.

    Hopefully in the future the maybe’s will become finite answers.

    So in closing, again I must say thank you for providing some thoughtful value to he community.

    Living An Epic Adventure,

  19. Hi Troy,

    You never finished answering my questions on the post. Here goes again:

    You make a good point… why would Paul even except a $4 million dollar fine instead of fighting for his company if he really cared and had nothing to hide? I believe the answer is he took the easy way out. That tells me a lot about what was going on and what kind of man he is.

    It also amazes me that you don’t see penny auctions as gambling as this is purely a game of chance. Online gambling is illegal in the US… this in itself makes me question your integrity when your okay with this and have supported this company so strongly.

    So this leads me to my next question Troy… are you or have you ever gotten compensated from anyone affiliated with Zeek in any way?

    Thanks for your thoughts.


  20. @Elaine,

    I have publicly stated Kevin Thompson is my attorney for years, not just April 11th. This is common knowledge inside the Network Marketing Community.

    🙂 If you had watched the video on Aug 30th, instead of reading the title, then you would not what that video was about and really said. Because you did not watch the video or read the editorial, you have made a huge assumption which is wrong.

    So, Miss Elaine, go watch the video you mention above, then come back and let me know if I have left anything out… 🙂

    By the way, I have nothign against Zeek Rewards, I have stood firm on my belief and I am somewhat confused that you do not know that.

    But seriously, go watch the video and read the editorial which should clear up your confusion and misinformation.

  21. @Ron,

    I did a whole post on on the high earner at BidiFy.

    Unlike someone opinion, in this case here one man who will be represented is soliciting his legal defense fund from others without providing full disclosure.

    So you might want to go check out the BidiFy post I already did on that.

    So, before you decide to cast stones, make sure you have the facts straight and realize the difference between someone ones opinion and facts.

    By the way Kevin Thompson being BidiFy’s attorney or me having a six month consulting agreement sure did’t keep me from warning folks away from ALL penny auctions and naming BidiFy as one of them.

    So, take some time to review what I have said in the videos and written so you can educate yourself on the issues.

  22. The ‘people loving ‘ Burks…if it ever existed… is history.
    He has covered his own ass after syphoning off what he could and ‘limiting’ further risks
    I’m not au fait with law and what his 4 million payout means in the long run to the scheme of things but I sincerely hope he gets his day in court and the remainder where he belongs….along with the scheming cohorts.
    Some 2 million folk need to see justice.

  23. @Troy,

    Wow, like a cowboy who discovered he’d been cheated at the card table. Way to call a spade a spade and to give kudos to the proper people. Love it when u got those guns blazing! Give us more, people are starting to see the light. I think you’re just getting warmed up….

  24. Troy you do protest a lot on this issue with Robert Craddock but say almost nothing in regards to the high earner from Bidify that said you had made unethical statements and that you were being investigated and your next stop would be prison does your affiliation with Kevin Thompson Bidifys lawyer have something to do with that?
    If you are a network marketing journalist ACT like it
    Be fair Troy you are starting to look silly

  25. Argh! That should have said “Court-Appointed receiver / trustee” instead of “SEC” that paid the victims. Darn it.

    Irving Picard, the trustee who liquidated Bernie Madoff, got 9 BILLION from various clawbacks. Add that to 200 mil left in the bank by Madoff, and you got 9.2 billion restituted to the victims.

    ASD’s case is simpler because not all victims registered for the restitution (why not? I have no idea).

    Keep in mind that Todd Disner, who’s also in Zeek and believed to be helping Craddock, once filed paper (along with his partner, disabared lawyer Schweitzer) that he was NOT AWARE OF an restitution program for ASD.

    Which also brings up a very interesting question:

    Disner was among one of the oldest affiliates.

    Kettner is documented to have been in Zeek as far back as July 2011 (back then he was claiming “1.2% daily!”)

    Craddock once posted a LinkedIn profile that he was a ZeekRewards affiliates, but he then deleted it. He also represented himself as a RVG consultant.

    So which side is Craddock really on?

  26. troy,
    on april 11 you mention MLM lawyer kevin thompson is
    your trusted friend and personal lawyer…

    on kevin thompson says:
    June 2, 2012 at 2:34 pm
    I do not represent Zeek, I represent their competitor, Bidify.

    aug. 30th blog you post the four top MLM’s you”d recommend now since zeek is out of the picture…one is “bidify”….

    sept. 12, you state “zeek affiliates deserve the truth on every issue”
    yet you forgot to re-cap the above correlations/coincidence as strongly as you seem to re-cap on roger craddock.

    and interesting how animate you are in YOUR following

    “I do need to be very clear, I do NOT believe Zeek Rewards will ever reopen or was even close to being a perfectly run company.”

    given these facts i’m tending to think…your opinions against zeek & chaddock might have an underlying agenda.

  27. Hey Troy, I love your sons blog already! Now I have to visit both everyday lol. Can’t wait to see him grow into his online video reviews.

  28. Troy,

    Question?? If everything has been frozen…Why are affiliates still receiving checks from Payza?? I know people who have received 2-3 checks since the shut down. They cashed at the bank even with the banks having fraud alerts out. If the account was frozen why would Payza’s US bank cash the checks???

  29. Troy dont listen to this bunch, of Butt holes, we thank you , keep the news coming tell us the truth, zeek could be fix, if their follow the Law.

  30. @Troy

    The critique you have received from me about misleading information is well deserved, from my viewpoint.

    It was posted in the “SEC admits something wrong” thread, where I pointed out that there was a lack of “quality checking” that should have been done before posting the story. As an alternative, you could have added information in the article, something more than “Robert Craddock can neither deny or confirm the content”.

    Other critique from me about misleading information have been about some of the videos, e.g. the “NMBJ review” from April 15th 2012.

    * the video was misleading when it was published, and you probably knew it.

    * the video was used by affiliates in marketing, to mislead people about how safe Zeek was. I found several affiliates’ websites using that and other of your videos when I checked in July

    * people have made comments on your website, where they have blamed you for that role — a partially well deserved blame. Most of them came just after Zeek’s collapse, from affiliates who felt betrayed..

    In case anyone is in doubt about how “fair” this critique is, they should probably check the video themselves..

    The general idea about “helping affiliates” fails when it comes to recruitment. If you help affiliates recruit more affiliates, you will have too many affiliates you have fooled rather than helped when the scheme eventually will collapse.

    So “helping affiliates” will usually mean “fool 3 new affiliates to help 1 old affiliate”, when the help is about recruitment. I’ll guess there is several hundreds of people you have “helped” that are more eager to throw stones at you than to send you Christmas cards.

    BTW, this stuff isn’t off-topic, you had that topic about “unfair critique” as a part of the video. And I also kept the style factual in most of my comment. 🙂

  31. @K, Chang,

    When I brought to his attention his corporation was INACT based on the SunBiz.or website. That would have been aug 25 or 26 when you first brought it to my attention here in the comment section.

    I wrote and email to Robert on August 26th, asking him for “the name of his corporation so I could “combat” a critic on my site,” 🙂

    He then updated the registration.

  32. SEC paid 40% of losses on the Bernard Madoff Ponzi, and 100% of losses on the ASD Ponzi, thanks to actions of the receivers / trustees on those cases.

    So I have no idea why you wrote “SEC… did not play out that way”. What exactly did you mean by that?

  33. I’m reposting a comment I posted in an old thread (5 days old) by a mistake..

    Here’s a quote from document #1 in the court documents, “Motion to Seal”:
    Commission counsel has engaged in discussions with counsel for the Defendant Rex Venture Group, LLC (“Rex”) and Defendant Paul R. Burks (“Burks”). These discussions have resulted in the Defendants’ consenting to filing of this Motion and the documents referenced herein under Seal.

    In support of this Motion, the Commission respectfully states that the parties have reached agreement to settle this matter as reflected in Complaint, Agreed Order, Consents of both Defendants, and [proposed] Judgments. Given the emergency nature of this action and risk of dissipation of assets, the parties have moved the Court for an (Agreed) Order Appointing Temporary Receiver and Freezing Assets of Defendant Rex Venture Group, LLC.
    LINK (court documents):

    So Paul Burks’ counsel had discussions with SEC’s counsel in the day(s) before the shutdown, probably initiated by Paul Burks himself via his counsel.

    Other parts of Zeek was shut down in the last days before the court meeting, e.g. cancelling Red Carpet Event and conference calls. The office was shut down on August 16th, the day before the court meeting.

    This was probably a planned shutdown rather than an involuntarily one. Paul Burks probably knew Zeek was about to collapse, and tried to avoid the escalating trouble that was ahead of him, and of course trying to make a good deal at the same time.

    The deal was good because it limits the civil penalties to a fixed amount, and covers ALL civil penalties including tax penalties. Tax penalties would probably have become HUGE, so he choosed to limit that risk.

    As far as I can see, Paul Burks have very few motives for trying to restart Zeek. He has already made a good deal, and it would be stupid of him trying to reverse it.

  34. So, Troy, when did Craddock re-register his Fun Club USA?

    From the comment you printed on a previous topic, it seem to be 26-AUG-2012 (Saturday).

    When did we see first that he is collecting money for Zeek defense fund?

    Several days BEFORE 26-AUG-2012, I think.

    I believe I noticed that little problem on 24-AUG-2012, and I let you know on 25-AUG-2012.

    It seems he conveniently FORGOT about his own company isn’t even active, didn’t it?

    If you’d check their website, they are NOT using SSL (encryption) to take e-Checks for “donations”. This makes you wonder just how secure is their backend… Now that their “donation” button is yanked because Paypal don’t allow donations unless you’re non-profit (or charity).

    So what is Craddock’s ultimate agenda?

    Was Disner behind this one, like he spearheaded “ASD Justice”?


  35. As a (former) affiliate of Zeek rewards, every post I read makes me more confused about what is really happening.
    I have been choosing to take a wait and see stance and am not holding my breath that Zeek will come back in any form; however, for lack of any other options, since I cannot ask for my money back yet (and may never be able to), it does not hurt (in my opinion) to hope that someone, somewhere can bring back the only program that ever worked for the little guy. I was kind of hoping that this Mr Craddock would have what it takes to challenge the validity of the SEC accusations about Zeek rewards; but the more I read about his actions, the less inclined I am to believe, which is really too bad because the affiliates need someone who can be on their side in this whole mess. As much as the SEC says it is looking after us, it certainly did not play out that way, so as it looks now like the only ones getting screwed in all of this are the affiliates, because it seems that the person we thought could help us is either a bungler or a crook! My oh my what a mess.

  36. Come in DH…as your comment to me in the last section….these were some of the ‘hate filled and venomous’ stirring questions I was asking before the recipient felt he was ‘wasting an afternoon’ …your words…answering.

Leave a Comment