IFFL: Take the IFFL Challenge

[i_ofthe_beholder]

I took the IFFL challenge last year, and I am still waiting for these two simple questions to be answered.

1) How come a rock solid business needs to pay 40% consistently for the money it borrows?

2) Why paying inducements to recruit people to dilute a business advantage is a good business practice.

Anyone?

[Targa2]

1) That is the price they pay to retain ownership and CONTROL. Banks and venture capital interests want control and ownership of you. If you, as a business person, believes they can control the success of a business better than an installed board of directors you want to retain that status.

Maybe you think control is over-rated. I know a lot of guys with nagging wives who would beg to differ.

2) Diluting or growing? You are acting on a presumption and it is incorrect.

Satisfied?.......of course not!...you never will be.

[Duck98]

Originally Posted by Targa2

1) That is the price they pay to retain ownership and CONTROL. Banks and venture capital interests want control and ownership of you. If you, as a business person, believes they can control the success of a business better than an installed board of directors you want to retain that status.

what a complete crock of rubbish. No company needs to pay 40% for capital - unless they are in a complete freefall financially and have to pay off Big Vinnie or get their legs broken.

You are out of your mind - and out of your league - if you think any company that is actually a real company would pay out interested at roughly 8X prime when they could merely pop down to their local checks r us and get a much better interest rate.

It has nothing to do with control - banks are not after 'control' they are after returns and any bank that could get double digit returns on a "rock solid" company would be beating the doors down.

Maybe you think control is over-rated. I know a lot of guys with nagging wives who would beg to differ.

Oh really? I doubt that you know one person with a nagging wife - I think even this little assertion is just something you made up

2) Diluting or growing? You are acting on a presumption and it is incorrect.

Satisfied?.......of course not!...you never will be.

Well as you did not even come close to answering the question - I suspect because you know so little about finance and business you actually cannot answer the question - I doubt that he or she would be satisfied.

It would appear that your preferred method of "answering" is to invent complete rubbish and post it.

[i_ofthe_beholder]

Targa:I know the subterfuge works on those who are successfully recruited, that much is apparent.

1) But you did not answer the question because "control" doesn't cut it. Any business lucrative enough to pay 40% will not need to borrow money for long if at all, and if it does there are plenty of cash flow lenders who do not ask for control simply because there is cash flow, are you trying to say that merendon et al are not flowing cash?

2) "Growing" in this context would only be a good thing if merendon et al had infinite growth potential. Is that what you are saying?

So far you have failed the iffl challenge, non-sequitors do not qualify as answers and your attempt at bluster, 'wives' yada yada is pathetic.

Care to try again?

[i_ofthe_beholder]

bump for truth

c'mon targa,,,,, surely you have more to add

[Scamssuck]

Unfortunately, these guys are still operating. I have a really tough time feeling sorry for people that lose money is a con like this, as there are enough warning signs out there to tell people to stay away.
Bad news seems to follow Milo everywhere he goes, hmmmm......I wonder why. It must be that the securities commissions in EVERY jurisdiction they operate have it out for him. It must be because he is smarter than they are, and can find loopholes in the law in order to make profit for his followers (Or is the profit for Milo,hmmmm....).

I personally know several people with money there and they are in such denial it's hard to believe. They've invested in companies that were presented to them, and these companies now have no capital, as it has all been stripped out using the shell game between the companies that Milo and his buddies control.

As for the comments from Targa above, anyone dumb enough to believe that is probably dumb enough to pay $2,700 for a membership into this exclusive organization.

I run a financing company, and I've never had a client willing to pay 40% for financing. In fact, if I had someone that was willing to pay 40%, I wouldn't deal with them, as that would tell me enough about the state of their business to stay away from it. That would tell me that they were desperate for money, and that's not a good business to be in.


These magic investments that pay ridiculous rates of return are not legit, get your heads out of the sand and put them to work. I don't care if they are "Off-shore" companies that don't pay any tax, or whatever story the "Structurists" are spewing these days, it ain't going to happen.
Sure it may happen in the short term, but eventually these pyramids all crumble. good luck trying to find your money in all of the rubble.

[i_ofthe_beholder]

Scammsuck:

I have a hard time feeling sorry for people who fall for this as well,,,, but,,, i know one personally and i have seen them employ their finely crafted hooks,,, in the end it boils down to,,, karma,,, for all

[Kgirl]

I recently (last 5 months) have been attending/re-attending IFFL meetings. I decided to join, but have not yet put my own money in. They will let you manage a small funded portfolio (without putting any of your money in) for up to a year to see how it goes and if you want out, they will keep the pricipal and split the interest with you. That would more than make up for the fee to join the "information club".
I'm still trying to do my own due-diligence and this is part of it. I haven't come across anyone who has been unhappy and no one sems to be hiding behind any curtains as you can meet all involved and they'll put you into contact with others who have joined either as new members or have been using the pricipals for a few years now. It seems to me that a scam such as this would want as little co-mingling of 'victims' as possible and wouldn't have sooo many people involved in the business to split the "spoils" with.
I wish someone would post with a bad experience or mor edefinitive info. Even the documents of "cease and desist" orders are mostly about selling securities and the tricky verbiage around that. Doesn't look like any complaints of ripping investors off in the documents.
However, I still keep thinking, "if it's too good to be true....."

[showgirlindisguise]

Kgirl, my experience is just like yours. I have 5 friends who have been investing with IFFL for years now, and they have all done very well. Not just on paper, as some of them have chosen cash flow investments and been receiving money. And, like you, I have been encouraged to come and meet other investors, visit the head office, go to the mines and/or businesses if I want, etc. I am hard pressed to understand how this can be a shell game when I can see the businesses in operation. I am also hard pressed to believe it is all lies when there is no attempt whatsoever to keep secrets, as far as I can tell.

For the super-informed cynics here, who think that you and I are in 'denial' and too stupid to see what is going on, let me just say that through my somewhat unorthodox investments I have managed to retire at 55, own several pieces of property and am, in general, doing really well. Guess it is a good thing I'm in denial.

[dead]

My advice: DON'T take the challenge. Take your money and run. Take your loved ones and run. I know from the INSIDE. This is serious stuff. It is all a massive scam. If your LUCKY you'll only ONLY wind up broke.

Arsenic in Humble.

[i_ofthe_beholder]

showgirl,,,, interesting,,,i'm very curious to hear about "can see the businesses in operation" what have you seen?

[Winnipeg Worrier]

My 85 year old parents invested $50k in the IFFL recently. I (their son) was horrified to learn this, and undertook to learn everything I could about it. I had a conference call with my father and his “structurist”, which went the full 15 rounds, after which he called and offered my father his money back. Haven’t received it yet but we are hopeful.

Here is what I gathered from our discussion. If my suspicions are correct, this may go down as one of the biggest investment scams in Canadian history. Maybe this is a Ponzi and maybe it isn’t. But the red flags are certainly there in spades. Investors would do well to consider carefully.

The Institute for Financial Learning has raised approximately $300 MILLION, much of it from pensioners like my father, and from generally hopeful but financially illiterate people. They recommend their members borrow whatever they can and invest it all in their strategies.

The IFFL purports to be a neutral institute dispensing generic investment advice. This is absolutely false. They HAVE to claim this because they are not registered as investment advisors, and are under court order in several provinces and states not to sell, promote, or trade in securities of any kind.

When someone becomes a member they are given a book showing 4 investment opportunities. Members assume these investments are ARMS-LENGTH independent companies that have been somehow checked out or pre-approved by the IFFL. THIS IS FALSE. What members are not told is that these companies are in fact owned or controlled by Milo Brost, the head of the IFFL. Miraculously, every one of the “generic” investment strategies he recommends leads directly to an investment in HIS OWN COMPANIES!

What members ARE told is that these companies pay a particularly high rate of return. There’s a bunch of razzle-dazzle international intrigue and sizzle thrown in, but that is all they really ever learn about the company they invest in. The IFFL, in its capacity as investment trainers, fails to provide financial statements for these companies, and never suggests to their members that it might be important to even consider financial statements. The company’s financial profitability (or lack thereof), its debt load, its lack of independence from the IFFL, the company’s ownership, and other relevant factors are never considered. There is no discussion of this information itself, or why it might be important to have an independent third party review, verify or audit this information to prove its reliability.

Now I ask you – if you were going to lend money to a company or a person, would you not want proof they had the CASHFLOW to repay the interest and principal, and the COLLATERAL (a strong balance sheet, plenty of cash and other assets that could be quickly turned into cash, not too much debt)? The IFFL responds thusly – They look surprised and explain that NO ONE has ever asked for that information before, but if you really want to know all that “stuff”, you will need to ask the company directly. Maybe the company will give it to you, and maybe they won’t. The IFFL simply dispenses generic strategy, you see, and so has no responsibility to provide any evidence for their claims. The IFFL hides behind a thin veil that it is the members making the specific investment decisions, and the IFFL does not recommend anything but generic strategy.

So in the absence of reliable, verifiable, independent third party information about the company, what do the members really rely upon? The IFFL’s response is simple: “It works; so don’t question it. Talk to our many happy investors who have been receiving either statements or monthly cash for years now.” In short, put your brains on the shelf, don’t ask for evidence, and wait for your check. I submit to you that this is a recipe for disaster.

Summary of recipe:
Students go to school to learn investment strategies.
Professor teaches strategy, and includes in his textbook four companies that appear to meet students' goals.
Professor does not tell students that the companies are owned by the Professor’s wife, daughter, sister and first cousin.
Professor shows students some previous students who are doing well with this plan.
Student invests in professor’s wife’s company.
Student asks professor for further financial information about the company, including cash flow, debt, profitability, risk.
Professor looks surprised; says why would you want to look behind the curtain - that's where the wizard lives. Tells student to take their request to the company’s owners, he is just a professor teaching general investment strategies and didn’t have anything to do with selecting the company.
Professor washes his hands, goes to teach next investment class.

I haven't covered the character of the individuals at the IFFL. Suffice it to say they are questionable, standing accused (but not yet convicted) by the Alberta Securities Commission of mismanagement, lying under oath, and potential fraud. Don't take my word for this, go straight to the ASC website. Let's not rush to judgement here, but simply ask: Would you buy a used car from these people?

As I said, perhaps this is a Ponzi and perhaps not. But the red flags are certainly there in spades. Are you prepared to ignore them all and risk your financial future?

[linda49]

Originally Posted by Winnipeg Worrier

What members are not told is that these companies are in fact owned or controlled by Milo Brost, the head of the IFFL. Miraculously, every one of the “generic” investment strategies he recommends leads directly to an investment in HIS OWN COMPANIES!

Hey Winnipeg - I think I know this guy! How many Milo Brost's could there be - in fact, his son worked for me, while he was in high school, in Calgary - he went on to work for his dad in some investment and insurance business. Could it be? I think it's more than likely. How much money are your parents out? If I can help - I'm all yours....Last I heard they lived in Monteray (neighborhood in Calgary - very nice). I'll find whatever I can.

[i_ofthe_beholder]

Winnipeg Worrier:

Sorry to hear about your parents,,,, have you had any luck on the return of their funds? I hope so,,, good luck.

[Winnipeg Worrier]

Yes, received the money back, with interest.

Interesting story though. They said it would take 30 days to get the money back. When, as an investor, I began demanding to see their audited financials, the money was wired in 3 days, not 30. With a note that, no, they would not be sending their financials.

In a later conversation with company officials, they finally admitted they DO NOT HAVE their financial information audited. Though they are not technically required to do so as a private company, it is yet another red flag.

Reader beware!

Winnipeg Worrier

[i_ofthe_beholder]

That is excellent news,,,,, and further proof that factual details regarding the"investment opportunities" really do not exist,,,

I suspect the refund was a small price to pay to ensure the absence of negative press,,,, thus protecting the stability of the 'structure',,,,

karma for all

[open_minded_dude72]

Let's recap the facts (as validated by this forum of skeptics):

1) Nobody can find an uphappy IFFL client.

2) Nobody can find any hard proof that anyone has been scammed, or that the structure even allows for someone to be scammed. If you think 40% returns is "too-good-to-be-true" hard proof, see point #7.

3) Anybody who has asked for their money back gets it back, quickly, with interest, despite breaking a locked-in contract.

4) There are actual businesses you are investing in, which you also visit, like the mines. You can meet these businessmen and ask them questions.

5) There are actual cashflows from these actual businesses (which you visited) and people have been spending this cashflow for years.

6) The securities commission has been avoided, which means the banks and brokerage houses (which indirectly own the commissions) aren't getting any fees from this money as it is bypassing them.

7) 40% return is not unrealistic as businesses usually expect double, triple, or quadruple profit margins. Would Google go into business for 5% returns? More proof, you shout? Borrow at 6% and reinvest that money at 12%. You just doubled your money for 100% return. You need to borrow the money to get the return. 40% is small change, and the wealthy expect double digit returns such as these.

8) You can get financial statements, however if you are yanking your money out and saying that they were scamming you they aren't likely to grant you this courtesy. If you spit in my face, I would think twice about turning around and helping you out too. It is not unheard of for private companies not to forward their private financial statement to some Jo Blow off the street.


If you still think this IFFL is a scam, WHERE DO YOU HAVE YOUR MONEY?

Banks? GICs? Bonds? Mutual Funds? Stock Market?

Take a close look at these other vehicles, and ask yourself how much control you have over it, or have you given control over to some stranger. It took me 5 days to get my money out of a bank, and the fellow's parents above only took 3 to get out of their investment. Food for though.

PS. It is called "Due Diligence" because you can loose your money in any venture, not just scams. Remember ENRON? Was that a scam? The Securities Commission thought they were OK, because they charged commissions to trade the stock. Yep.

Dude72

[Winnipeg Worrier]

Dude,

Happy IFFL proponents call Milo Brost a financial genius. I agree he is, because he has a group of money-losing companies that still can somehow afford to pay investors 40%, and still allow everyone to come out happy and successful.

You may ask, What companies, and how do I know they are losing money?
According to the iFFL's own documents, they include:
360 Earth Resources invests in "environmentally friendly companies" such as:
- Arbour ****** (CNQ symbol: ARBR) was briefly listed on the CNQ penny stock index, but was almost immediately de-listed for failure to provide audited financial statements, and other alleged offences. However they did post their most recent internal unaudited financials on http://www.cnq.ca/Page.asp?PageID=2042&AA_RecordID=89. They have lost $4 million since inception. More interesting, they have a balance sheet with $42 million in tangible assets, of which (unbeknownst to almost all their investors) $32 million was loaned straight back to Merendon Mining! When Merendon fails, so will Arbour.
Tri-Clean Enterprises in Ontario Canada. www.tricleanent.com
Financial statements are available at https://www.otcstockinfo.com/reposit...57709_FR22.pdf

The "going concern" statement pretty much says it all - the company has no customers, no revenue, and an accumulated $1 million loss. Still Milo has figured out how they can afford to pay 40% returns, so I guess they are not all bad!

- Synchro ****** in Texas www.synchro******.com . Well you be the judge of this one, you can email doug@synchro****** or call him on 512.374.9700 like the website says, but don't expect to find any physical address because there is none. He may tell you about the 4 jobs they have worked on during their existence, so I am sure they are a smashing success.

- Merendon Mining Colorado - Ward Capstick is a Director of the corporation, and he confirmed that the company is losing money. Please call Ward Capstick yourself on 425-241-5414 to confirm this. He also confirmed the company has no operational gold mine in Colorado, contrary to what some structurists tell you.

So that just leaves the offshore Merendon company. I will give them the benefit of the doubt, and assume they are equally as profitable as the IFFL's illustrious onshore offerings.

Hey everyone, I would like to educate as many structurists as possible about these issues; please send me a private message with the contact info (names, email, telephone number) of any structurists you know. Perhaps we can begin to lift the game on the knowledge base of these people. That way, when people invest, at least they are doing so with full knowledge and disclosure of the risk level of the companies they are investing in.
WW

[open_minded_dude72]

This is scam.com, we're looking for proof for statements such as:


"The company doesn't exist, never existed!"

or

"There are no mines, it's all made up!"


**not**


"This start-up company needs money and doesn't have any revenue yet"

(OR)

"Gosh, 40% returns - it must be a scam!"


We're looking to identify and prove "scam artists" not "entrepreneurs". Based on your definition of scam, capitalism, venture capitalists, heck, our entire economy is a scam - because you simply can't see how they could possibly make you a 40% return given their business plan.


Arbour: "Lost" $4 million is an interesting choice of words. I read about a purchase of C.O.R.E.L. technology for $10 Million ($5 Million in cash) as well as a loan to Merendon Mining. They had a net loss of 1.5 million for Sept 05, with a total deficit of $3.6 million (not quite $4 M). Operating and Finance cash flow statements are positive, and investing cash flows are negative - but I think that's expected when you're loaning out $27 Million. Unbeknownst to all their investors? Are you the only one who can read a balance sheet now? I recall them describing this loan in their structure. Unbeknownst?


TRI-Clean. I see a start-up who needs capital to generate revenue. Is that a scam because it's a start-up? Hardly. Proove there isn't an office in Richmond Hill, or clean-up technology and we're onto something.


Synchro - Ok, their website sucks. So what? Does this mean the company and investment is a scam? No. Let's prove a scam with hard facts, shall we? Also, if you read the outline 4 jobs was their target for the first 12 months (12-Megawatts of *****). No lies or deceit there (hence, no scam yet). Now, prove that there is no job, and now we're onto a scam. Complaining that there were "only" 4 jobs (which was the target) is not sufficient.


"When" Merendon fails? Where is this information coming from? Hunches, smells, and feelings don't count as proof. My mechanic stinks of sweat and oil, yet I still pay him to fix my car. He does a great job. He's no scammer.

You should also get your facts straight. The 360 Resource rate isn't 40%.

I Haven't had the chance to phone Ward yet, but even if MMC is losing money - so what? If you understood the structure you'd understand why.





Feel free to update structurists and would-be members, but by all means come with some solid unbiased unemotional proof of lies or deceit.

I await the pudding (you know, where the scam proof is).

[Winnipeg Worrier]

Dude,

This is entirely the right forum for suspicion, whether or not it can yet be proven beyond doubt in a court of law. Your strongest (and only) argument is that no one has ever lost any money, and investors appear to be (still) receiving their monthly returns.

I have attached two recently unmasked U.S. frauds:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06264/723826-28.stm
http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...E-UPDATE-1.XML
http://www.theeagle.com/stories/0819...0060819009.php

Up until the day before each of these multi-million dollar frauds was shut down, they were victimless crimes. They had paid their investors on time, and everyone was thrilled. The following day everyone was a victim. As the stories illustrate, investors simply didn’t ask enough questions about the “back end”, that is, how the money was actually being earned to support these unusually large returns.

Are you already an IFFL investor, or considering making an investment? Possibly you are a structurist as well? Either way, you are in the perfect position to ask the hard questions and demand to see proof of Merendon’s profitability (aka financial statements). Without operating profit and cashflow, someone (probably you) will get stiffed. You are an open minded dude, but unusual claims demand unusually strong evidence. Ask for it. Then post it here.

The onus is actually not on me to show this is a fraud. It is on you to show it is not. If someone offered you $200k per year to sweep floors, or offered you $5 million for your $500,000 house, you’d probably ask why. Likewise if someone offered you 40% when others offered under 10%, you should ask why. There is a market price for everything, be it labor, goods & services, or capital. Why would Merendon be so benevolent to an anonymous investor like you, and overpay for your capital?

Oh and spare me the company line about how borrowing from banks would mean the bankers would sit on the Board and control the company. That’s just BS. Ask a dozen of your business friends how many of them have their banker on their Board. The answer is very few or none. Bankers don’t want to run mining and high-tech companies; they don’t know how. Bankers just want to be repaid with interest, and have enough security in the process so they can sleep at night.

I’ve shown, and you are not disputing, that the IFFL’s portfolio consist of startup, high risk cash-flow negative companies. But you are still throwing wild profitability figures around without any apparent support for it. Bridge that gap. Ask for the evidence. Or get out.
Just my friendly advice.
WW

[Scamssuck]

I appreciate your efforts Winnipeg Worrier, but I'm quite sure that your words will be falling of deaf ears.
These "Structurists", and in far too deep to listen to any common sense.

When Open Minded dude72 makes comments like:

"I Haven't had the chance to phone Ward yet, but even if MMC is losing money - so what? If you understood the structure you'd understand why."That tells me a lot. As I understand (And Open minded dude72 seems to confirm), it is just a ponzi scheme. What else could that mean?


Are you following the story of Michael Ritter? Attached below is a link from the Vancouver Sun. Read that story, and tell me that the scheme doesn't sound familiar.

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/n...7eaa67&k=44609


Anyone that is involved with IFFL should find many similarities between Michael Ritter & Mylo Brost.

[open_minded_dude72]

What it means is that the company flows through the cash offshore for you, as defined in the structure. Since it flows through, the company's financials are irrelavent. It could be a shell company with zero assets and serve the same purpose.

[Winnipeg Worrier]

Hmm, understood. But the "structure" is only given to you verbally by your structurist. So work with me here for a moment. Suppose someday Merendon Honduras fails, or Evergreen decides to just simply fire all their "portfolio managers" (including you). Everyone will then rush back to the bottom drawer and pull out their promissory note, which is the only written evidence of your investment. And it will say your only security is certain gold reserves in Colorado. Doesn't that make it important to know if there really are gold reserves there or whether their claim of vast Colorado reserves is totally bogus? Surely this makes Merendon Colorado a far more important piece of the structure than a mere shell company.

Seems they are setting you up for a fall?
-WW

[open_minded_dude72]

Sure, of course that's possible. I don't know enough about Evergreen yet to rate the probability, but it's a possibility.

However, by the same argument, I could say the banks would fail when all the depositors want their money out at the same time. It is possible.

Or, want happens when all the stock owners want to sell at the same time? The system crashes. It is possible.

So it comes down to probability, not necessisarily possibility.

I think in this case the probability relies on the soundness of the business ventures, their profitability, and closely linked to that, the credibility of the people involved.

[Winnipeg Worrier]

Originally Posted by open_minded_dude72

I think in this case the probability relies on the soundness of the business ventures, their profitability, and closely linked to that, the credibility of the people involved.

Ah, finally we have found common ground.
Profitability:
We agree the onshore business ventures are not profitable, at least at this point and for the forseeable future. What makes you think the overseas business ventures are profitable? They don't have their financial statements audited by independent auditors. I don't think they even provide you with unaudited financials. If you rely on "people have gone to see the gold mine", let me remind you I can take you to Detroit and show you Ford factories pumping out thousands of cars per day, yet the company is bleeding red ink and, for all their size, are becoming a risky venture. If you don't see the financials you can't make a judgment. And if you simply rely on the fact that others are currently receiving monthly checks, the same can be said of every scam out there, until the day it crashes.

Credibility of the people involved:
http://www.albertasecurities.com/dms...-__1962285.pdf
Capital Alternatives is the forerunner to the IFFL. This case was heard in May 2006 and remains active and ongoing. The list of allegations is extensive, but includes basic stuff like lying under oath and making false representations. (Yeah, yeah, I know, the securities commissions are not really there to protect the investing public, they are actually underlings of the oppressive regime of bankers and brokers who are trying to keep us all down. But humour me and read it anyway).

I also refer you to one of the best and most documented scams of the 1980's, the ZZ Best Cleaning Company http://www.blinkbits.com/en_wikifeeds/ZZZZ_Best
where the perpetrator (Barry Minkow) opened plenty of neighborhood carpet cleaning shops which he could show to investors, as well as fake restoration projects. It was all a sham. Interestingly, Minkow now operates the Fraud Discovery Institute http://frauddiscovery.net/news.html , and was highly instrumental in breaking the Pinnacle fraud I previously referred to you. He has investigated prior claims made by Merendon and Milo Brost in previous offering memorandums. I would be pleased to email you or anyone else a copy of this damning report upon request.

Suffice it to say credibility is not the IFFL's strong suit.

[Winnipeg Worrier]

As I suspected, Dude is not so Open Minded as he claims, since he didn't ever request the report. It never ceases to amaze me how IFFL members throw ridiculous claims around about fabulous returns, but quickly become silent when confronted by specific factual information (invariably negative) about their investment.

Since the IFFL claims to be simply an investor education company, they should consider using a free brochure in their seminars. http://www.csa-acvm.ca/pdfs/protect_your_finances.pdf
This brochure is a primer on how to avoid investment scams and frauds, which should be a key topic to be covered by the IFFL in their education program.

It's just that nearly every scam example in the brochure happens to look EXACTLY like how the IFFL operates! The resemblance is uncanny. On second thought, maybe they shouldn't use the brochure; it might be kind of confusing for the members.

WW

[superskeptic]

Originally Posted by open_minded_dude72

This is scam.com, we're looking for proof for statements such as:


"The company doesn't exist, never existed!"

or

"There are no mines, it's all made up!"

Merendon Mining Corporation Ltd. is a Calgary based private company that was conceived as a junior mining exploration organization focusing on several promising concessions in the republic of Honduras. Upon examining the mining and economic environment in Honduras and its Latin American neighbors an opportunity beyond mining exploration was realized by the Corporation. Merendon began construction of Central America's only commercial gold refinery to service the existing and future projects within the geographic area. Upon completion of the permitting and construction, Merendon now services clients from the Arctic Circle to the southern most tip of Argentina.

A direct quote from Merendon's web site.

I don't think there actually is a mine. They are talking about refining gold from other sources.

Does that qualify as a proof (not in the Jean Chretien sense)?

The similarities with the MIchael Ritter scam is interesting. The Californian couple who lost their life savings of $ 300, 000 where being reassured by Ritter right until the bitter end.

Only time will tell who is right and who is wrong here.

[Winnipeg Worrier]

Time will tell indeed Super, whether we have a fraud here.

Merriam Webster defines fraud as: Any act, expression, omission, or concealment calculated to deceive another to his or her disadvantage; specifically : a misrepresentation or concealment with reference to some fact material to a transaction that is made with knowledge of its falsity or in reckless disregard of its truth or falsity and with the intent to deceive another and that is reasonably relied on by the other who is injured thereby. (Italics added)

Material misrepresentations / omissions made by the structurist in question (and I am sure many others):
-Claimed Merendon operates a gold mine in Colorado - there is no operational gold mine in Colorado.
- Stated the companies in the IFFL "portfolio" were solid profitable companies. They are money-losing startups at best, and far from profitable going concerns. Merendon Colorado is likewise unprofitable.
- Stated the portfolio companies are independent, no relationship to the IFFL. Fact: Milo Brost is the CEO & President of Merendon Colorado.
- Failed to disclose Arbour (COREL) was and is under trading suspension for failing to provide financial statements.
- Failed to disclose previous history of the IFFL with the Alberta Securities Commission, and current action pending.
- Failed to provide a prospectus, financial information or risk level of the investments, which are clearly relevant to an investing decision.
- Encourages members not to discuss their investment with accountants, lawyers, advisors, bankers or anyone who might advise a member on potential risks. Portrays securities regulators as enemies of capitalism, and paid lackeys of the banker/broker establishment, rather than policemen serving and protecting the investing public.
-Portrays the 360 Earth Resources group of environmentally friendly companies as being an entirely separate investment from Base Metals, when in fact they (Arbour) simply loan money straight back to Merendon Mining.

Wikipedia's entry for fraud ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraud) includes a list of the world's best-known fraudsters. The list includes Ponzi himself, and Barry Minkow, who I referenced previously. Barry now runs the Fraud Discovery Institute in San Diego http://www.frauddiscovery.net/
and has uncovered more frauds than anyone in US history. The Fraud Discovery Institute claims Merendon's previous offering memorandums contain fraudulent and misleading information.

When Barry Minkow smells a rat, we should all get out the traps.
-WW

[i_ofthe_beholder]

Bump for truth,,,

[Winnipeg Worrier]

Today marks the beginning of the end for the Institute for Financial Learning (IFFL).

Milowe Brost and his cronies have been under investigation for over a year by the Alberta Securities Commission (ASC) for allegedly raising $36.5 million illegally and perhaps fraudulently. They were operating under the name Capital Alternatives at the time, which was a fore-runner to the IFFL but identical in nature.

Today the ASC rendered their decision. FRAUD – guilty as charged.

The ASC’s wording, normally very diplomatic, could not be stronger or more damning. Read it yourself:
http://www.albertasecurities.com/?c...y=1&newsID=7142

So what will happen now? My crystal ball reads as follows:

Legal:
Legally the ASC is simply a regulatory body which can only issue sanctions and fines, and their next decision will be to determine these penalties. However since FRAUD has been alleged, and virtually proven, I would expect the RCMP to press criminal FRAUD charges against Brost.
His criminal conviction may be years away, but investors will make their judgment much more quickly and decisively.

Your investment has been lost:
The $36.5 million in question is chicken feed compared with the $300 million or more which the IFFL claims to have raised since then from hundreds, perhaps thousands of naive investors.
It is highly probable that Merendon is a simple Ponzi scheme, meaning that it relies upon bringing in money from new investors to prop up and pay returns to existing investors. This week when the news hits the wire, the flow of new money will dry up instantly, and the truth will become immediately apparent. Since there is no sustainable business model, and no new investors to fund payments to existing investors, their monthly checks will cease. Worse still, a flood of existing investors will demand their money back at once. The IFFL, and Merendon Mines (their flagship investment), will fold like an Alberta highway map.

For many this represents their life savings. It is possible that those investors who are quickest and noisiest to demand their money back will receive something rather than nothing at all. But certainly, most will see little or nothing of their investment. I pity these investors, particularly the elderly.

Nevertheless, if the humble offerings in these scam forums has prompted even one investor to reconsider and avoid losing their shirt, then it has all been worthwhile.

Let me know if I can assist anyone.
WW

[rgpa]

Originally Posted by Winnipeg Worrier

Nevertheless, if the humble offerings in these scam forums has prompted even one investor to reconsider and avoid losing their shirt, then it has all been worthwhile.

I wish to personally thank all the noble individuals on this forum for participating in the discussions concerning IFFL.

An IFFL representative had recently approached me and had attempted to convince me to join IFFL so that I could attain financial freedom in a short number of years. I was rather intrigued by what was described. I found this forum as part of my personal due diligence to see if this organization was legitimate or not. The individual's sales pitches were exactly consistent with everything I've read here in this forum.

With your help (noble people on this forum), I've been able to make an objective, informed, decision on whether or not to associate or invest with IFFL. The weight of evidence, as I see it, suggests not associating and not investing with IFFL, assuming you ever hope to see your investment money again.

Even if it weren't for the Alberta Security Council's February 16, 2007 news release describing IFFL's fraud, I would have avoided IFFL due to the information found on this forum (and if it weren't for this forum, I might not have found ASC's news release in time). So yes, this forum has prompted at least one investor to not to invest. Many thanks!

I've also found cross-referencing related threads to be most helpful.

Related threads:
http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=134
http://extra.scam.com/showthread.php?t=7377
http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?p=297924

ASC February 16, 2007 News Release:
http://www.albertasecurities.com/?cu...=1&newsID=7142

[truecon]

[quote=dead]My advice: DON'T take the challenge. Take your money and run. Take your loved ones and run. I know from the INSIDE. This is serious stuff. It is all a massive scam. If your LUCKY you'll only ONLY wind up broke.
“The greatest shackles we bear in this life are those forged by our own fears.”
Richard Paul Evans this is on IFFL's vision page and this alone seems creepily suspicious

[King David 101]

You couldn't be more right!
Check out the latest link on the ASC Decision.
Looks like things are about to get NASTY here!

http://www.albertasecurities.com/dms...2264860v12.pdf

[Scamssuck]

Originally Posted by rgpa

I wish to personally thank all the noble individuals on this forum for participating in the discussions concerning IFFL.

An IFFL representative had recently approached me and had attempted to convince me to join IFFL so that I could attain financial freedom in a short number of years. I was rather intrigued by what was described. I found this forum as part of my personal due diligence to see if this organization was legitimate or not. The individual's sales pitches were exactly consistent with everything I've read here in this forum.[/url]

I'm very happy to hear that you made an educated, knowledgeable, common sense decision. Much thanks to Winnipeg Worrier for his input.

Unfortunately, I have my doubts as to how quickly this thing will collapse. I haven't seen any media coverage, and that leads me to think that a large number of "investors" will not even know about this report. Also, I think that these followers (structurists, salespeople, whatever you want to call them), won't believe the ASC's report anyway. There has been so many report showing this as a fraud, and they never believed them. Also, since the IFFl tells their members that there is a big conspiracy out there, this will just reinforce that warped point of view.

Anyone who knows anyone that has invested needs to share this information with them. They need to attempt to get their money back NOW, while they still have a chance.

[King David 101]

I also would like to thank the many contributors for their up to date input on the IFFL fiasco. As they say, knowledge is ***** and this site has certainly benefited many!!!!

I have family members who are "Structurists" and upon hearing the latest news ( ASC Decision ) when contacted, they literally just laughed at the findings. Personally,I am sleeping very well knowing that I did NOT invest in their scheme.
I wonder who will be laughing last? ( Not that I want to see anyone financialy bankrupt but man.....wake up and smell the coffee people! )

[Winnipeg Worrier]

Originally Posted by King David 101

I have family members who are "Structurists" and upon hearing the latest news ( ASC Decision ) when contacted, they literally just laughed at the findings.

KD raises a good point. Many of you who monitor scam.com have family and friends who are structurists, and evidence notwithstanding, some of them will continue to hold the party line against all odds. Please send me a private message with their name, email address, and city, as I would like to contact and advise them of the enormous personal liability they face by continuing in their fundraising endeavours. It is for their own good; their future and their good name may otherwise be destroyed.
-WW

[rgpa]

Yes, that does bring up an interesting point. Does anyone know what's in it for the structurists in both the short term and in the long run? I assume that the structurists themselves have invested thieir life savings in IFFL-related investments. Will they end up losing their life savings along with the other investors? The ASC news release stated that it's unlikely that investors will ever see all, or perhaps any of their money back.

The structurist who attempted to recruit me claimed they were financially free and had no need to work due to their IFFL-related investment income exceeding their living expenses. This individual explained that they worked for IFFL part-time for enjoyment. The structurist also indicated that they receive a comission for getting new individuals to purchase IFFL memberships (so maybe their "investment income" didn't actually cover thier living expenses?). Can anyone else add anything to this?

I also wonder if the structurists are themselves victims of the scam, or are they in on it with full knowledge of what's actually going on?

[King David 101]

It will be indeed be VERY interesting to see how this plays out for all the "Structurists". How in good conscience could anyone continue and represent this as a viable investment after all that has now come to light?
My uncle is particularly interested to see how things go for this Mr.Holm chap. Does anyone have any additional information or had any personal dealings with this individual? He is mentioned at least nine times in the ASC Final Decision Report. I get the distinct impression, from reading the comments contained there-in, that this head office manager, has some explaining to do. Apparently, they ( The ASC ) want to know just why no one has asked him to testify up to this point.
I agree with Winnipeg, that Holmes in particular, may be placing himself in an awkward position, should he continue to represent this company. I also expect that as soon as the fund flow ceases, the heat will be turned up on ANYONE still promoting the viability of this venture. Just how many structurists are there in the company???
Again....my heart goes out to the Elderly who have placed their trust in this company.I sincerely do wish them and others all the best in their attempts to retrieve their investments.

[open_minded_dude72]

You guys are funny. Funny, scared, and ignorant. Is it fun living in fear?


Here's a challenge: Phone up the Securities Commission (Alberta, BC, wherever, they are all the same) and ask them a few questions.

1) Are you really a government agency? Honest?

2) So, do you get ******* from taxpayers then? No? Then who does pay your salary?

3) You are likely to do, say, and write things to keep the paychecks coming, right?

4) If it comes down to protecting the taxpayer, or ensuring the salary keeps coming, which do you choose?

5) If tax payers aren't paying your salary, then what would make me think you're looking out for my best interest instead of your real employer?

6) (For the BC Securities Commission) If you are really intereted in protecting me, the little old investor, then who are you investigating in your report? How many complaints have you had? How much money has been lost? Why isn't the RCMP involved if this is a crime / fraud / scam? Surely you have a duty to report such a thing?

7) Why don't you provide me with the same warnings about market risks, or banking collapses? Does the bank hold in reserve enough cash or gold to cover my deposit?

8) Why is it everything you are warning me about the Canadian Banks are doing everyday with my bank account money?



Get real folks. Going to the Securities Commission about investing advice is like going to Revenue Canada for tax advice.

[King David 101]

I for one am very thankful for the ASC. It took MULTIPLE hearings and a considerable amount of waiting time but the conclusive proof and final decision was well worth the wait.Hopefuly now that the truth has been uncovered, many will demand the immediate return of their investment. I understand a Trust Account has been initiated for these unfortunate investors to withdraw their funds. Unfortunately, in order to withdraw any funds,there is a $1,000.00 administration fee, but this is for many a small price to pay for a bad "Investment" decision. Personaly, I'd be jumping at the chance to retrieve anything at all!

As for the RCMP, the path is now primed and in place to proceed with criminal charges I expect. Time will tell of course but I have heard from a reliable source that the RCMP are already involved ( Apparently,formal RCMP notices have been sent out to a select group of investors). It would appear you are indeed prophetic "open minded dude".

Knowledge is *****. It's time perhaps that you conceed the obvious and expedite the request for your funds also.
Best of Luck

[King David 101]

Just one more thing:
The ASC does not exist to hand out "Investment Advice". Their job is quite simply to be the watchdog for us all. Naturally I suspect that all of us would like to pay as little taxes as possible, but we all must play on the same level playing field. Hopefully, the majority of us will play by the House Rules and conduct ourselves in an honest manner.
It's NOT complicated so let's not try and deflect away from the real issues at hand here Open Minded Dude. There are far too many people that stand to kiss their life savings goodbye over this mess.
Again...my congratulations to a job well done ASC!
Thank You.

[Winnipeg Worrier]

For those with friends and family who are IFFL structurists or promoters, I urge you to copy and send (email, hand deliver, take to the next IFFL meeting, snail mail) the attached open letter. Structurists are mostly good but misguided people who are pawns in the IFFL system. They have so much to lose, and so little to gain.
--------------------------------------------------------------------


AN OPEN LETTER TO IFFL STRUCTURISTS

Structurists:

“The mills of the gods grind slowly, yet they grind exceeding fine.”
- Empiricus

As you may know, for over a year the Alberta Securities Commission (ASC) has been conducting an investigation into the activities of Milowe Brost (among others) and the IFFL’s fore-runner, Capital Alternatives, and its raising of $36 million for Strategic Metals. On February 17, 2007 the ASC reached its decision. The decision is posted on their website:
http://www.albertasecurities.com/?cu...=1&newsID=7142 . The ASC found that Milowe Brost, Edna Forrest, Carol Weeks and Bradley Regier engaged in conduct amounting to an outright fraud on investors in Strategic Metals Corp.

Following this ASC decision, you now find yourself in a highly uncomfortable situation: you have been promoting investments for an organization whose head figure has just been charged with the most serious of securities violations. As a reasonable person you should be asking yourself if you have unwittingly been a party to an ongoing financial fraud, and if there is a risk of legal consequences for your involvement.

IF so, your concerns are well founded. Clearly the IFFL is on the radar of the authorities. It would be illogical for them to pursue a $36 million (Capital Alternatives) case and ignore the $300 million which the IFFL claims to have raised, since they share the same cast of characters and essentially the same investment claims. Already the front page of the ASC’s website features a prominent investor warning which is an apparent reference to the IFFL.

I assure you, there will be an investigation into the IFFL’s activities, and it is my personal belief that the verdict will be similar. Since your primary duty is to yourself and your family, I recommend you immediately retain your own independent legal counsel. Your goal is to protect yourself from being found an accessory to any wrongdoing, and to minimize or mitigate any possible damage to investors.

I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. From a layperson's perspective however, your personal liability appears high, and you should take the following immediate steps to limit your risk.
1) Research the claims against the IFFL.
2) Document the quality of the investments promoted through the IFFL.
3) Advise future investors in writing of the risks involved.
4) Advise existing investors of the risks involved. Assist any who wish to have their funds returned.
5) Cooperate fully with any current or future investigation.


1) Research the claims against the IFFL. There is a strong element of conspiracy-theory within IFFL circles which holds that the securities commissions are paid lackeys of the establishment. Whatever your beliefs, I encourage you to read the specifics of the case. Read beyond the fraud headline, and understand the evidence. The ASC has made a commendable effort to make the investigation into Capital Alternatives open and transparent to the investing public. Their website contains a summary of the findings, and a complete 78-page detail report showing the evidence, the legal analysis, and the reason for the ASC decision. The evidence appears to be substantial and largely unchallenged.

2) Research the IFFL investments: Your IFFL involvement to this point may be partially excusable based on ignorance of the facts. Nevertheless, you are responsible for what you now know, and what you SHOULD NOW KNOW. Given the recent ASC decision, I strongly recommend you cease any IFFL involvement until you have conducted (and documented) exhaustive research into the investments in the IFFL’s portfolio umbrella, particularly Merendon Mining (Canada) and Merendon Mining (Colorado). Demand and obtain written proof of the profitability of the underlying businesses that purport to earn extraordinary returns. Obtain copies of independently audited financial statements from these companies. It is a huge red flag if the company cannot provide audited financials showing a highly profitable business. If audited financials are unavailable, request copies of internally prepared financial statements for your files. Be aware this evidence will be considered extremely weak in any legal proceeding, particularly since some of the preparers have now been implicated in investor fraud. Verbal reassurances from management are likewise worthless.

- To jump-start your research, see post #24 on
http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=12189&page=1&pp=40
which has links to publicly available financial statements on a number of these highly suspect investments. Unfortunately this information does not paint a rosy picture. Far from being highly profitable businesses, these investments appear to be completely unprofitable. Demand additional information directly from the IFFL. There is no one in a better position to obtain all available financial information from the IFFL than their own structurists. Seek out qualified guidance to help you understand and interpret these financial statements.

3) Should you decide to continue your IFFL fundraising, have investors sign an acknowledgement form stating they have been informed that senior IFFL management has been found guilty of perpetrating investor fraud. Keep this acknowledgement in your files; it may prove to be your “get out of jail free” card! Without it the investor will have strong grounds to sue you personally for fraud. As you may know, the definition of fraud includes omission of information relevant to making an informed decision, as well as providing blatantly false information.

4) Advise every existing IFFL member investor that senior IFFL management has been found guilty of perpetrating investor fraud, and they should obtain legal counsel on how to proceed to get their funds back, should they wish to do so. Cooperate and assist them in any way you can. Advise other structurists in your immediate and extended sphere of influence to take the above remedial steps to limit their own personal liability. Evidence that you have made every attempt to mitigate potential damages to your member-clients will bode well for you in any forthcoming investigation.

5) Cooperate with any investigation: An investigation into the IFFL’s activities is all but certain. I would recommend you take the initiative to contact the relevant authority directly and cooperate fully and completely in any current or future investigation of the IFFL they may launch. I trust you have nothing to hide. If there is an investigation, and if any element of fraud is proven against anyone in the IFFL organization, it will be to your distinct advantage to show you have cooperated, taken every possible step to inform present and future investors, and to mitigate investor losses, should these occur.

You may say the above steps are drastic, and would force you to tear the charts off the wall and go home, since no fully informed investor is likely to invest with the IFFL again. Quite likely so, however it is your moral and legal duty to provide unvarnished facts to enable investors to make a fully informed decision. Your failure to inform investors of relevant information is a fraudulent act in itself.

The good news for you, is that the authorities are primarily interested in investigating and possibly pursuing senior IFFL management. As structurists, you rank somewhere below this in importance, although your role is still quite significant. What you have done till now may escape legal entanglement if, knowing all the facts currently available, you take steps now to protect and distance yourself from any possibility of irregularities, or the people who may be involved, and minimize damages for investors.

For those of you disinclined to cooperate fully with the authorities, I offer this personal story. Several years ago, an acquaintance of mine was charged with accepting a bribe. In discussions with his attorney, he explained that everybody involved in the scheme were his friends and close business associates, and if they all “stuck together” and stuck to their story, they would be ok. His lawyer explained candidly that in the hundreds of similar cases he had handled where more than one person was involved, these prior relationships meant absolutely nothing; everyone involved would do everything possible to point blame on others in order to receive a lighter sentence themselves. Most were fully prepared to turn in their mother if it would save them from prosecution. The key, he explained, was that the first to cooperate tended to receive the lightest sentence, and the sentences would become more severe the longer one waited. “First-in, best-dressed” as it were.

His words proved prophetic. And they are my strong recommendation to you.

[King David 101]

Winnipeg,
Thanks very much for taking the time to outline some detailed and concrete steps for all concerned!
Just one more thing: I checked with the Public Records today and there is information that a Bradley Regier of Strategic Metals Corp.,has been charged with two counts of Criminal Perjury. ( Lieing Under Oath) His court case is set for this September 2007.
Apparently, the ASC does indeed have the authority to send the bad boys to jail. Sentences can range up to 5 years and induce fines up to 5 Million Dollars per charge.[/b] The ASC has sent several "folks" to the Big House in the last several years ,namely Enterprising Individuals" involved in similar ventures. It would appear they ( The ASC ) do have BITE after all.
Anyway, all the more reasons for those involved to come clean ASAP. And yes, hopefuly by acting promptly, they can at least mitigate their possible loss.

[open_minded_dude72]

Ever say "Fine thanks, and how are you?" after someone asked how you are?

My previous comments in #24 applies to both sides of the party, and includes the ASC.

Many people seem to think that the ASC is white as the pure driven snow, however this is a false sense of security, much like the "Federal Reserve" is in the US (also a private corporation). The ASC is a "industry-funded provincial corporation" (according to their own annual reports: http://www.albertasecurities.com/dms...nualReport.pdf), it doesn't say it's a government body. Can anybody find out who the ASC shareholders are, or even a record of corporate registration? Did they skip this step? Well, they must be exempt. After all, who would call them on it? Since when can an administration company charge people, anyway? Don't you think that's a little too much *****? If they are not funded by the taxpayers, and they're not a government body, what makes you so sure they are acting in your best interests and not their real clients (the bank)? Would they be upset if the industry wasn't benefiting (in other words, skimming off the top) from millions of dollars of investments? Next they'll be carrying guns like the IRS - holding them to people's head because their paperwork wasn't in order.

Still convinced the ASC is perfect and anyone who screws up an OM is evil? Well, 4 of their senior executives sued the ASC for trying to scew them out of their pension funds (http://www.businessedge.ca/article.cfm/newsID/3417.cfm). See, the ASC makes mistakes too. One of claimants is a lawyer... wait a minute, now he works for Merendon! From ASC to Merendon, yep, he must have been convinced all the folks at Merendon were evil too. That's why he now works for them. Do you think he see both sides of the story?

Where did this "RCMP are starting an investigation" tip come from? Was it from Terry Sorenson, the ex-RCMP officer, who also works for Merendon? Or was it one the the ex-RCMP officers from Capital Alt/IFL? Or was it from the RCMP themselves who told you? All these RCMP officers involved must mean the integrity is pretty low for sure. It's a good thing we're clamping down on all these "enterprising individuals" who are trying to earn a livihood, as is their right in the charter of rights and freedoms. Or did we forget about that too?

Investors can't get their money back, eh? Did Mr. Winnipeg get his back? Yep. Oh wait, was that before or after they froze trading on the securities? Wait a minute - could the cease trade be why people can't get their money back? Does this supposed $1000 admin fee (citation needed, btw) also go to the ASC? Well, they deserve it. It only cost $14M in fees to save $2.4M in bad investments. Wow, that's government efficiency. Oh wait, they're not quite government...

So the ASC is not in the business of recommending investments? Then why do they go to great lengths to invalidate it? Why not stop at the bad OM and correct the administrative mistake like they are mandated to do? Who has the vendetta to step outside the mandate?

I don't know, I've only been analysing this for a few months, but you've gotta weigh both sides of the story, including considering the ASC's motives. I read that decision and it's obviously biased and full of holes (like why buddy didn't get his all his money back in 11 months when the agreement was 1 year, and then they paid him another $300k, wtf is the problem?). I didn't see anybody from any of the companies running off over the hills and buying Ferraris and mainsons with this money, seems like it went to mining operations just as planned. And nobody is complaining (besides some of you on this post, most likely out of fear instead of bad experiences). I know a few people who have been living off this money for years now, which leads me to believe that more money is coming out than going in, which invalidates the ponzi theory. Add to that the costs of buidling mines, vaults, land, equipment, etc. Lots of money being spent on mining. More money was certainly coming out than going in during the cease trade period of Strategic!

Anyway, long enough rant. Hope this helps someone who is considering options for a decent return.

[PS the reason you ask how the other person is right after they asked you is called reciprocation, the human instinct to give back to those who give to you. It's human nature, and prevails dominantly in business people, who are usually good people who want to contribute to society.]

-dude72

[i_ofthe_beholder]

I started this thread with two simple questions that any due diligence would have answered but still I see posts (admitted rants) with almost two dozen question marks in them. Wow ! Anyone serious about looking into IFFL should really ask themselves if worrying about the similiarities of the ASC and the FED is going to actually make them any money.

Sheesh!!

For your reference, again, here are the two elements of the IFFL challenge:


1) How come a rock solid business needs to pay 40% consistently for the money it borrows?

2) Why paying inducements to recruit people to dilute a business advantage is a good business practice.

Anyone?

[King David 101]

Answer(s): It is possible for the Camel to slip through the eye of the Needle... but it must be slightly greased.

If this makes any sense whatsoever to anyone....rush to your local Structurist and put your all your hard earned $ in this "$cam while there is still time to go bust."

I agree with "i ofthe beholder".....it really does boil down to some basic logic.

(Just my attempt at a little humour...no offence to the many who have actualy been suckered into this venture)
Have a Great Day!
KD

[Winnipeg Worrier]

I’m sure Open Minded Dude's garbled post was deep and meaningful to someone out there. Perhaps spreading conspiracy theories, and spewing venomous accusations at the “establishment” or “the banks” is an enjoyable pastime, and is a suitable and preferred alternative to examining the facts.

“Don’t do it, don’t do it, don’t do it” I kept repeating to myself. It’s just not sporting to beat up on someone like OMD, who (like Milo Brost) is backed into a corner and, despite the bravado, is desperately searching for something, anything, to bolster their remarkably weak position. In a spirit of fairness, I am writing this with one hand tied behind my back, and after downing three or four stiff margaritas. Actually, after the margaritas, OMD’s tortured logic did begin to sound convincing.

In a rare display of candor and common sense, OMD correctly stated in a prior posting (post #6 on this thread) that the validity of the entire IFFL enterprise hinged entirely on the honesty and integrity of the people involved. In the following post I offered to provide him with strong evidence that Milo’s past business practices were highly suspect at best. But as expected, he chose not to ask for it. Since then Milo Brost and other key IFFL players have been found guilty, not of minor infractions, but of outright securities fraud, and another player is awaiting criminal prosecution for perjury. Against this overwhelming evidence, the last-ditch position is a crude attempt to undermine the credibility and motives of the regulatory body (the Alberta Securities Commission). This tactic, although weak, is still common among IFFL conspiracy-mongers, and bears public refuting.

Firstly, thanks for your laser-sharp insights into the ASC’s legal opinion. Clearly you should have been on the defense team. Wait, maybe you were! Is your last name Blakey (IFFL lawyer) by any chance? If so, that certainly explains the verdict, though it is potential grounds for a mistrial due to incompetent counsel.

So the most sinister evidence you could muster against the ASC was a couple of disgruntled ex-employees (including Blakey) who claim their employee pension fund underperformed? Hardly the stuff evil empires are made of. For Blakey to make a bad investment choice, blame his employer for his own mistake, and then attempt to sue them (rather a career-limiting move, don’t you think?) is amusing and telling on so many levels!

An industry association with a public mandate is a common structure in many sectors of society. For example, the Canadian Medical Association sets training and licensing standards to prevent your local grocery store clerk from donning a white smock and removing your appendix. The Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants sets training and review standards to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the corporate financial statements upon which others rely.

Likewise the ASC is charged with ensuring the efficiency and effectiveness of the capital markets in Alberta, and maintaining public trust and confidence in the capital markets. In practice this includes preventing merciless scoundrels from preying on the investing public with fraudulent securities offerings. I believe we can all agree this is not an evil goal, but rather an excellent one worthy of striving for. Therefore the only remaining point of discussion is how well they are meeting the goal; and (people being people), what checks and balances are in place to monitor and control their actions.

*******: All provincial securities commissions share an identical mandate, though ******* methods may vary. Some provinces have opted for direct government *******. Others (yes, including Alberta) fund their operations through industry, which means they charge filing fees for their services. Presumably Alberta opted for this method as part of an effort to privatize certain government activities. Your vague, unsubstantiated allegation that banks somehow profit (or “skim off the top” as you lovingly put it) from this nefarious arrangement is disingenuous, and is a dotted line that I for one have a difficult time following.

Controls:
The ASC functions legally as an AGENT of the provincial government under the Alberta Securities Act. The Chairman of the ASC Board of Directors reports directly to the Alberta Minister of Finance, is responsible to him, and can be removed by him. All ASC investigators are Special Constables under the Police Act of Alberta, and are required to take an oath of office similar or identical to Alberta police officers. The operations of the ASC are subject to the scrutiny of the provincial auditor general, who has found no substantial fault with their activities.

The ASC is a remarkably open and transparent organization. Via their website, the public has almost immediate access to all actions, legal decisions, and the reasons behind these decisions. Their evidence must therefore be sufficiently solid to withstand both government oversight and public and press scrutiny. It would be unkind of me to invite comparison with the IFFL, which operates, sans oversight, behind a murky veil of secrecy, disinformation and outright deception, and so I shall not make the comparison.

But enough about the ASC; let’s get back to basics, which is profitable investing. Obviously this requires profitable businesses, and I believe you said you were going to provide me with those independently audited financial statements showing a glowingly profitable Merendon Mining operation. I am waiting – as is the entire world - please have them on my desk by Monday morning or you’re fired.

[Winnipeg Worrier]

Correction: My previous post incorrectly referenced post #6; the correct reference was post #24.

Unfortunately Open Minded Dud has been unable to provide financial statements proving how incredibly lucrative the Merendon Mining company is, and I have been forced to terminate his services.

To fill the radio silence resulting from his failure, I have attached some famous investment quotations for your enjoyment.
WW

-----------------------
Famous investment quotations:

“Never invest in anything you don’t completely understand.”
- Warren Buffet, greatest investor of all time

“If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, consider the possibility that it’s an aardvark.”
- Milo Brost, IFFL President, IFFL literature (roughly paraphrased)

“Our members statements show their aardvark collections are growing exponentially! Why look further? Be sure not to ask the advice of your accountant/lawyer or friends and relatives. They simply don't understand aardvarks.”
- IFFL Structurists

“Milo Brost found guilty of defrauding aardvark collectors of $36.5 million.”
- Alberta Securities Commission, aardvard division
http://www.canadanewswire.ca/en/rel...7/16/c9511.html

“Quack! Quack!! QUAAAAAACCKKK!!!!”
- Winnipeg Worrier

[Scamssuck]

Quack, Quack, Quack.

Waddle, waddle, waddle.

It's gettin' pretty cold here, I think I'm gonna fly South.

[King David 101]

Well, as usual a wonderful and informative response from WW.This one was so good, that I just have to keep reading it over and over!Thanks for the well written, articulate response Winnipeg Worrier! And thanks for all the great laughs as well! I had to pick myself up off the floor after reading this one.Remind me not to tackle any issue against your sound logic unless I have done all my homework. You have a wonderful and descriptive way of putting people in their place. LOL

It's interesting,though of no real surprise, that OMD wisely chooses not to reply to your recent posting. In order for him to save face, it's probably best for him ( or her ) to just quietly fade into the sunset. By now, surely this individual must be wishing they could remove their previous postings.

I'd comment more but there is no need in exacerbating the obvious.

Great Site!
KD101