Biographies on Andrew Stoltmann, Dave Neuman and Joe Wojciechowski Stoltmann In The News Stoltmann Arbitration Awards Checking Out Brokers & Advisers 151 Answers To Most FAQs Group Arbitration Actions Contact & Disclaimer

Helping individuals recover their investment and retirement plan losses.
Ponzi Scheme - usually offers abnormally high short-term returns in order to entice new investors.


At Stoltmann Law Offices we have represented dozens of investors in one of the most common investment scams-the Ponzi scheme. Ponzi fraud is a very common tool utilized by unscrupulous financial advisors. A Ponzi scheme is nothing more than a fraudulent investment operation where abnormally high returns/profits are paid to investors out of the money paid in by subsequent investors, as opposed to net revenues generated by any real business. It is named after infamous hustler Charles Ponzi. A Ponzi scheme usually offers abnormally high short-term returns in order to entice new investors. The high returns that a Ponzi scheme advertises (and pays) require an ever-increasing flow of money from investors in order to keep the scheme going.

The system is doomed to collapse because there are little or no underlying earnings from the money received by the promoter. However, the scheme is often interrupted by legal authorities before it collapses, because a Ponzi scheme is suspected and/or because the promoter is selling unregistered securities. As more investors become involved, the likelihood of the scheme coming to the attention of authorities increases.

The scheme is named after Charles Ponzi, who became notorious for using the technique after emigrating from Italy to the United States in 1903. Ponzi was not the first to invent such a scheme, but his operation took in so much money that it was the first to become known throughout the United States. Today's schemes are often considerably more sophisticated than Ponzi's, although the underlying formula is quite similar and the principle behind every Ponzi scheme is to exploit lapses in judgment arising from investor naivete.

Stoltmann Law Offices has represented dozens of investors in lawsuits against brokerage firms and brokers where the advisor does something like place an advertisement promising extraordinary returns on an investment - for example 20% for a 30 day contract. The precise mechanism for this incredible return can be attributed to anything that sounds good but is not specific: "global currency arbitrage", "hedge futures trading", "High Yield Investment Programs", Offshore investment", or something similar.

With no proven track record for the investors, only a few investors are tempted, usually for smaller sums. Sure enough, 30 days later, the investor receives the original capital plus the 20% return. At this point, the investor will have more incentive to put in additional money, and, as word begins to spread, other investors grab the "opportunity" to participate. More and more people invest, and see their investments return the promised large returns.

The reality of the scheme is that the "return" to the initial investors is being paid out of the new, incoming investment money, not out of profits. There is no "global currency arbitrage", "hedge futures trading", or "high yield investment program" actually taking place. Instead, when investor D puts in money, that money becomes available to pay out "profits" to investors A, B, and C. When investors X, Y, and Z put in money, that money is available to pay "profits" to investors A through W.

One reason that the scheme initially works so well is that early investors - those who actually got paid the large returns - quite commonly reinvest (keep) their money in the scheme (it does, after all, pay out much better than any alternative investment). Thus those running the scheme do not actually have to pay out very much (net) - they simply have to send statements to investors that show how much the investors have earned by keeping the money in what looks like a great place to get a high return. They also try to minimize withdrawals by offering news plans to investors, often where money is frozen for a longer period of time, for example 50% return per month for one year. They then get new cash flows as investors are told they could not transfer money from the first plan to the second.

The catch is that at some point one of three things will happen:
1. the promoters will vanish, taking all the investment money (less payouts) with them;
2. the scheme will collapse of its own weight, as investment slows and the promoters start having problems paying out the promised returns (and when they start having problems, the word spreads, and more people start asking for their money, similar to a bank run);
3. the scheme is exposed, because when legal authorities begin examining accounting records of the so-called enterprise, they find that much of the "assets" that should exist, do not.


Ponzi schemes should be differentiated from some similar, but different types of fraudulent schemes.
-A pyramid scheme is a form of fraud similar in some ways to a Ponzi scheme, relying as it does on a disbelief in financial reality, including the hope of an extremely high rate of return. However, several characteristics distinguish pyramid schemes from Ponzi schemes:
-In a Ponzi scheme, the schemer acts as a "hub" for the victims, interacting with all of them directly. In a pyramid scheme, those who recruit additional participants benefit directly (in fact, failure to recruit typically means no investment return).
-A Ponzi scheme claims to rely on some esoteric investment approach, insider connections, etc., and often attracts well-to-do investors; pyramid schemes explicitly claim that new money will be the source of payout for the initial investments.
-A pyramid scheme is bound to collapse a lot faster, simply because of the demand for exponential increases in participants to sustain it. By contrast, Ponzi schemes can survive simply by getting most participants to "reinvest" their money, with a relatively small number of new participants.
-A bubble. A bubble relies on suspension of disbelief and an expectation of large profits, but it is not the same as a Ponzi scheme. A bubble involves ever-rising (and unsustainable) prices in an open market (be that shares of a stock, housing prices, the price of tulip bulbs, or anything else). As long as buyers are willing to pay ever-increasing prices, sellers can get out with a profit. And there doesn't need to be a schemer behind a bubble. (In fact, a bubble can arise without any fraud at all - for example, housing prices in a local market that rise sharply but eventually drop sharply because of overbuilding.) Bubbles are often said to be based on "greater fool" theory.

-Robbing Peter to pay Paul. When debts are due and the money to pay them is lacking, whether because of bad luck or deliberate theft, debtors often make their payments by borrowing or stealing from other monies they have. It does not follow that this is a Ponzi scheme, because from the basic facts set out there is no indication that the lenders were promised unrealistically high rates of return via claims of unusual financial investments. Nor (from these basic facts) is there any indication that the borrower (banker) is progressively increasing the amount of borrowing ("investing") to cover payments to initial investors (as, again, Ponzi was not the first to do).
Other notable schemes

Other notable (but lesser dollar) Ponzi schemes include: -Sarah Howe, who in 1880 opened up a "Ladies Deposit" in Boston promising eight percent interest, although she had no method of making profits. This unique scheme was billed as "for women only". Howe disappeared with the money from her scam.[2]

-The novel Chance by Joseph Conrad depicted a Ponzi scheme in 1914 before Ponzi himself had hit the scene. Conrad's scammer "de Barral" offered ten percent interest on deposits in his operation "without system, plan, foresight, or judgement".

-On March 22, 2000, four people were indicted in the Northern District of Ohio, on charges including conspiracy to commit and committing mail and wire fraud. A company with which the defendants were affiliated allegedly collected more than $26 million from "investors" without selling any product or service, and paid older investors with the proceeds of the money collected from the newer investors. [6]

-In late 2003, a scheme by Bill Hickman, Sr., and his son, Bill Jr., was shut down. He had been selling unregistered securities that promised yields of up to 20 percent; more than $8 million was defrauded from dozens of residents of Pottawatomie County, Oklahoma, along with investors from as far away as California. [7] Hickman was sentenced to 160 years in state prison.

-In December 2004, Mark Drucker pleaded guilty to a Ponzi scheme in which he told investors that he would use their funds to buy and sell securities through a brokerage account. He claimed that he was making significant profits on his day trades and that he had opportunities to invest in select IPOs that were likely to turn a substantial profit in a short period of time. He promised guaranteed returns of up to fifty (50%) percent in 90 days or less. In less than two years of trading, Drucker actually lost more than $850,000 in day trading and had no special access to IPOs. He paid out more than $3.6 million to investors while taking in $6.3 million. [8] [9]

-In June 2005, in Los Angeles, California, John C. Jeffers was sentenced to 168 months (14 years) in federal prison and ordered to pay $26 million in restitution to more than 80 victims. Jeffers and his confederate John Minderhout ran what they said was a high-yield investment program they called the "Short Term Financing Transaction." The funds were collected from investors around the world from 1996 through 2000. Some investors were told that proceeds would be used to finance humanitarian projects around the globe, such as low-cost housing for the poor in developing nations. Jeffers sent letters to some victims that falsely claimed the program had been licensed by the Federal Reserve and the program had a relationship with the International Monetary Fund and the United States Treasury. Jeffers and Minderhout promised investors profits of up to 4,000 percent. Most of the money collected in the scheme went to Jeffers to pay commissions to salespeople, to make payments to investors to keep the scheme going, and to pay his own personal expenses. [10]

-12DailyPro was a version of what is commonly known as a "paid autosurf" program where "investors" deposited money and received an extremely high profit (44%) within a short period (12 days). Charis Johnson created what authorities considered one of the largest modern day versions of the Ponzi scheme. She accumulated a total of over US$1.9 million from the program. More than 300,000 people joined over the course of 8 months, spending over $500 million [13]. When a federal investigation of 12DailyPro took place, its main payment processor, Stormpay, froze all funds related to it. Stormpay has since refused to return any of these funds. On February 24, 2006, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) ordered 12DailyPro and its parent company to cease and desist all operations. On February 28, a Los Angeles judge ordered all company assets and records to be turned over to an appointed receiver for investigation. Charis F. Johnson now faces criminal and civil suits from both local and federal agencies.

-High Yield Investment Programs are related to established economic rules such as supply and demand, material assets that appreciate based on value-added through high-end skills such as high-end electronics, buildings & estates, hotels, technology parks, museums, theater and organic systems such as businesses involved in producing the previously mentioned material assets. HYIPs could involve printing of cards as certificates, with units being transferable to third parties. The monetary value of units rises over time, so most holders of such cards won't want to transfer their units. At the same time, the card can be used as a means of exchange for value making it a form of money. It's like turning the HYIPs into a form of Central Bank and the units it issues become currency.

-In September 2007, another bank in Second Life called "The Bank" owned by the in-game character "Jasper Tizzy", operated as part of an in-game group of companies known as Atlas Venture Capital (AVC) and Countless Galaxies (CGI), stopped processing customer withdrawals. This was closely followed by the disappearance of Jasper Tizzy and his staff; Paydayloan Lindman and Teanna Nomura. They claimed they could give returns on average of 10% to 20% per month and, like in many of these schemes, they were making good on their claims for several months. The beginning of the end was when a separate venture supported by The Bank, the Kristatos Fashion Mall (KFM), was abandoned by the owner, Teanna Nomura and caused AVC and CGI to prematurely cave in on themselves. As with the Ginko episode, some residents have lost amounts of L$2.5M (around US$10,000) in the scheme and more calls for Linden Labs to clamp down have been raised as a result.

About Our Lawyers
Learn more about Andrew Stoltmann, Dave Neuman and Joe Wojciechowski

Stoltmann In The News
Various news articles and TV transcripts quoting Andrew Stoltmann or profiling his clients.

Stoltmann Arbitration Awards
Arbitration Awards by Andrew Stoltmann.

InvestmentFraud.PRO Blog
Read the InvestmentFraud.PRO Blog.

Arbitration Process
Questions and Answers on the Arbitration Process.

Checking Out Your Broker
Tips for Checking Out Brokers and Advisers.

151 Answers To Most Faqs.
Excerpts from the book by co-authored by Andrew Stoltmann on Investor Rights for the 21st Century.

Group Arbitration Actions
Learn more about Group Arbitration Actions.

Insurance Abuses
Life Insurance Twisting

Ponzi Scheme
Scheme usually offers abnormally high short-term returns...

Bond Fraud
At Stoltmann Law Offices, we've represented many clients in arbitrations ...

Get Started, Schedule A Meeting.
Contact our office to schedule a meeting.

Cases Pending/Current Investigations
Specific broker’s/brokerage firm’s name and actions

Free, 24 Hour, Online Evaluation
Contact our office to schedule a meeting.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Chicago-IL/Stoltmann-Law-Offices-PC-InvestmentFraudPRO-Andrew-Stoltmann/258350053152