Why do you need capital if its sure win? With Calculations! » Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
QUOTE(Jun 18 2014 @ 11:18 PM)
Why the need to take capital from the public by recruiting if your formula is-a-surewin ?
Why don't you just propose your plan to the bank and ask for a huge sum of loan ?
Something's really not right it seems. And please make yourself clean why you're under BNM's radar ?
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
QUOTE(,Oct 15 2013, 03:07 PM)
Hmmm according to what I understand from here and it really makes me really really find something fishy about this .
1.) 99.8% of win chance is very high , even a coin toss the probably is also 50-50 , so what makes the fella have the formula for up to 99.8% ? A card deck consist of 52 cards and hence the probably is even lower to get up to this 99.8% . Even If they say win chance is 55% , is already high enough for most gamblers because we all know this is less likely happen .
2.) Lets assume it existed 99.8% of what it is currently , but try calm down and think . RM25,000 for a lesson and exchange for it is worth a fortune . Because you certainly can go and bet and have your modal return in no time . But why is he taking the RM 25k as a capital to gamble themselves ? And since the chance is 99.8% win chance is so high, why return 8% a month ? They should be able to payout more than that . You need 12.5 months just to get your "investment" capital back . And why in the world they drag so long ?
3.) Lets assume they really bet for you and you don't mind to get 8% every month . How long have this thing existed and how many members already inside it ? Assume that 10 members in it for starting , and 10 of them decided not to gamble and just enjoy the 8% till they get back more than their capital at the 14th month . But in between , surely they will share with their friends and family about this and more people will join in . In the long run , it will get more and more members and at the end of it who will benefit more ? If it really works , then the members is lucky so does the company since they only want your money to gamble . But if it doesn't work out and the company does not even use your money to gamble at the first place .
Note this : If 1 person is RM 25,000 and assume they already payout 50% averagely to the members , but if they got 100 members by that time . It will be a RM 1.25 Million . That is only just 100 members . Can you imagine if by 3 years , it really expands to 1000 members ? And suddenly it decided to stop . How much money have this company have ? I dare not to calculate .
4.) And if it really works , don't they worry that the people who join in will eventually teach the method to other people as well ? Try to think , if you learn and found that the method really works , wont you go and teach your wife or best friend ? And if this stuff spread like wild fire , don't you think the company have no more member eventually ? And many of us will everyday go to Genting Highlands or Resort World Sentosa to "withdraw" our money from casino and we don't have to work .
And there is a few more which I makes me really suspicious . I personally thinks that it is most likely is a scam . If really got such thing , I would really curious and see that player win so many rounds in front of me ( provided it is not cheating ) .
Zero Sum Game» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
QUOTE(,Jun 18 2014, 03:34 PM)
Zero-sum means for every win, there will be an equal loss from somewhere. All casino games are created that way. I'm not sure how you can counter that with some fancy system. It is intrinsically built that way. The casino makes money through the law of large numbers. All games are designed to have a house edge. In the easiest laymen terms, it means that the risk you are putting up is not worth the rewards. It's like always betting on heads on a 60% tails, 40% heads coin, but getting paid at 1-1 odds. In baccarat, betting player has a house edge of roughly 1.2% while banker has a player's edge, but you pay commission on winning bets to the casino (in Genting, winning banker bets on total of 6 pays 50%). Unless you can somehow get away with paying the commission, there is no way to beat the game.
Unless you are saying that the entertainment and excitement you derive from casino games are considered as a win, then yeah, it is not zero-sum per se.
Same thing goes to forex. There is no value creation. One trades pairs of currency, and for every buy, there must be a sell. The only party winning is the broker who gets a cut from the trade either through the spread or fees.
If you still believe in this scheme and want to keep on investing, I can only wish you good luck and hope the numbers don't come back and bite you. At least you made a few friends along the way (hope they don't turn into your enemies later).
Ponzi is zero-sum too as there is no value creation. It seems surewin4u is going into retail, but usually in these kinda schemes, the product is overpriced and will only be bought by their own members. So it's just the same money churning in the system.
Classic Signs of Ponzi Scheme» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
QUOTE(,Jun 18 2014, 05:09 PM)
Anyway, with the proof most of the level-minded forum members have put forward, the scheme members will never accept it.
There is firstly a leader, the members will worship that leader and will deem that he/she has amazing powers to share riches and prosperity, as long as the members keep getting new members and new funds in.
Level-minded individuals will then find out that it's not creating any value and any kind of system just does not stand up to logic. They will then start to advise others against the scheme.
Members will refute the claims, and deny any proof and reasoning. They will state that the naysayers do not understand the system, that they should come and see for yourself the miracles, and that the system is still paying, so it must be legit.
Soon, funds will dry up, the leader will abscond, and the rest of the members will lose their skin.
Rinse, repeat.
This is textbook ponzi/pyramid scheme. Always has been, always will be.
Trustworthy » Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
QUOTE(,Jun 16 2014, 07:45 AM)
I only report what I found out and post what is a fact. I never say his Dato title is fake but coming from a man who declared himself Tengku and was a scammed back in Red Island Cafe, I will have to doubt him for now.
If you are business owner, you will also doubt ppl who have criminal record before also right? Not saying that they won't change but just reasonable doubt
Also this scheme really smells of get rich quick. Only ah longs can promise you 8% returns a month.
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
QUOTE(jonn zee @ Jun 13 2014, 11:22 AM)


this Ong Kean Swan is a certified scammer. remember Red Island Cafe? and many more scams from him
http://www.bnm.gov.my/documents/2014/040414_FCA_en.pdf They are not the only schemes around» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
QUOTE
alamak... this is a rip off . seems that these 2 guys learned from this sg baccarat inst
http://baccaratinstitute.com/Home.phpthen they came back and tried raising money to fund their own things promising 8% return. teh sg company just ask for fees SGD8,888 for 3 day course. they take u for practical lessons in casino.
anyway, there is a warning memo on this site saying the person in Malaysia is former students but dont have any relationship with the sg company.
http://baccaratinstitute.com/Chinese/%E9%80%9A%E5%91%8A.php
Scam Psychology: Naive Realism / Anecdotal Fallacy / Argument from Illusion» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
One of the most often used counter-arguments by a scheme participant against skepticism is the self-testimonial, as in "I have done this, so I know it works, and therefore the whole business works!"
Let us assume that they are not outright scammers for the moment (i.e. liar, liar, pants on fire)
What they don't realize is they are operating from "naive realism", i.e. they assumed that everything they experienced is real, when it is quite possible they've been defrauded (magic trick), and they then extrapolated from their limited (but realistic) experience to conclude that the whole business must be "real". One version of such self-testimonial, and the most often used, is the "It paid me" argument, as in "this opportunity paid me, therefore it's not a scam".
Yet this is the most powerful of all arguments, even if it's false.
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
What's even more interesting is the more you tell or listen to the story, the more you believe in it. You may not believe it at the beginning (it's just a job), but eventually you will. Here's something you may not know; if you read about rich people or talk about rich people, you get pleasure from it as if you are rich, just to a lesser extent, much like "groupies" or "camp followers" to rock bands and rock stars congregate around the celebrities. And after a taste of that pleasure, you will want more. That's why so many scams rely on displaying money or other evidence of affluence, such as exotic cars, beautiful houses, or exotic locales. Yet such images are powerful recruitment tool: you too can be like me (if you join).
A person's view / experience is limited by his or her prior experience and knowledge to interpret the experience. If a person had never seen an automobile before, depending on their cultural context it could be described as horseless carriage, iron turtle, or some other terms. So if a person had never experienced a scam such as Ponzi scheme or pyramid scheme (and often, even if they did) they may not recognize the signs and interpret the fact that they received some of their money back as "proof" that the scheme works, when it can also be proof that it's a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme.
Thus, it's also known as "argument from illusion"... The person is not arguing with all the data, merely what s/he can experience. It's like the 3 blind men and an elephant example. It'd be like the guy touching the legs (Wow! Elephant is like a small tree and rough!) telling the guy who felt the tusks (It's thick, bony, but curved!) "You are absolutely wrong!" Neither of them have the full picture, yet neither would admit so.
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
In formal logic there's this "anecdotal fallacy", which basically states that you cannot prove anything if you only have your own experience as proof, as you could be an exception.
So how do you deal with these cognitive biases? Stop trusting your eyes and your heart 100%. You can be defrauded and lied to all the time. And you can only be cheated if you ALLOW yourself to be cheated.
Consider the business both from your view as an associate / affiliate, and from the business point of view. Does the business model make sense for BOTH VIEWS? Scams often claim to be a very profitable business and they need you to spread the word and they'll pay you a ton of $$$ for that... but first you have to pay them. If it's so profitable, why do they need YOUR money? Where is your money going? It makes sense for you the affiliate, but it makes no sense for THEM as a business.
SourceThis post has been edited by Big Balls Jackson: Jun 20 2014, 08:10 AM