This is what u call a revolving pyramid scheme.
The formula is very simple.
With a bit of capital, they pay the initial people the profits. The idea is after getting paid the first time, people will get greedy and reinvest month after month or maybe they increase to the biggest package.
*The 1st point of contention is when they said 1 member limit 1 package
-reason being if a few crazy ppl wanna invest like 10000 packages or more they will not be able to handle the sudden spike in repayments. By limiting 1 package per member they can handle the flow of payments easily. Its only a matter of leveraging. Remember the profits that they channel to you come in 2 batch payments of pd cheques in 30 days and 60 days.
- The potential for this group to make off with a lot of money is enormous. This is even better than normal pyramid schemes. Normal pyramid require the entire amount of money to be used to pay all new players of the pyramid scheme. This method only leverages 10% of the money u put in every month. Basically as long as there is a steady flow of new members they will be able to rake in a MUCH LARGER PRINCIPLE SUM IN THE END.
If explained exponentially the money involved is ernormous.
1st month 1 package - (payments none yet) Principle collected 900
2nd month 10 package - (Payments 500) Principle collected 9000
3rd month 100 package-(Payments 5000 + 500) Principle collected 90000
4th month 1000 packages-(Payments 50000+5000) Principle 900000
Off course this is way off the mark as i assume that each member will get 10 members to join. But u get the drift, the amount of money they collect allows them to leverage for 2 months and pay only a paltry sum depends on their market cap per month.
They need at least 50 to 60% market growth in order to sustain the monthly payments. Meaning every month they must continue increasing the intake of members in order to sustain. This is easy off course as the lure is quite huge. Free money if you can wait for 2 months.
And thats not all. Imagine the interest they are generating from such a huge amount of money they gathered. Over 1 year they would have easily millions in their coffers. After they feel that the govt is on to them all they need to do is siphon off the money into various a/cs and dissappear.
Those who stopped after getting a few payments are probably the ones that are lucky. The ones that continue to be baited month after month probably got their hands burnt.
LESSON HERE: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH. THEY SMELL LIKE FREE, SOUND LIKE FREE, EVEN LOOK FREE, BUT AFTER THE PACKAGE IS OPENED, YOU WILL FIND OUT THAT ITS ROTTEN.
Such simple math. Lmao i mean grats to those who got their money and stopped but seriously if you were promoting this "free money scheme" i think BNM should put you behind bars as well. You are just as guilty as the main players itself.
Added on July 25, 2009, 12:50 pm
QUOTE(anQi @ Jul 15 2009, 12:07 PM)
I'm proud to say that i am one of the cbc'ian. We live in risk and in fact every single moment we risk our life. Anything could happen at anytime. Most of forumer here said that small company will fall sooner or later, but we shouldn't forget, even the biggest bank ever collapsed. But, so far, the risk i took from joining cbc haven't disappoint me. What will happen tomorrow, that's god will. I already got the profit from my investment, and for me that's enough. If it collapse tomorrow, i don't care either. I didn't lose anything.
True enough but i hope you didnt get any 1 else involved and i hope those ppl didnt get others to join too. SOMEWHERE DOWN THE LINE, SOMEBODY GOT BURNT AND YOU MIGHT HAVE TO LIVE WITH THE FACT THAT YOU GOT THAT PERSON TO JOIN SUCH A SCHEME.
I dunno bout you but i dun like the idea of having a conman reputation. Hopefully BNM manage to freeze their a/cs in time. At the most the ones that got burnt might stil get back maybe 50% of their money. Provided the scammers didnt siphon the money away into cash.
Yes i agree we live in risk. Thats why i prefer to calculate my risk, make an informed decision and decide NOT TO INVEST in a shady investment that i am unable to certify the time frame when the risk i am taking is too great. Lady luck was smiling on you this time, as you were as i term it at the TOP OF THE FOOD CHAIN. Perhaps future similar endevours might not favour you so well.This post has been edited by twosonsaudio: Jul 25 2009, 12:52 PM