ATM LEASEBACK SCHEMES-- any insight?

[imnewhere]

Worried wrote...

Why are people who have already bought into Gillis' ATM 'business' posting on this forum?

Why are they even here ON this forum?


Dear Worried,
I've never met Joel Gillis and nobody asked me to post anything on his behalf. I thought this forum might be a good place for all interested parties to share and discuss information.

You have succeeded in alienating me with your words above.

It's a shame that people like me probably will be hesitant in sharing our words when there are people like you out there sharing your words in such a rude and condescending manner.

The truth as I see it is that we live in a society where you are innocent until proven guilty. You are practically begging people to not invest and you have every right to share your opinion. To imply that those they have chosen to invest should not be a part of this discussion is beyond my comprehension.

The following facts ARE indisputable...NAS and Joel Gillis has been in business for 18 years. They have never been the subject of any meaningful litigation or we would know about it.
My connections I have have never missed a payment.

I cannot say with any certainty whether this is a fraud or not but I can say that the vast majority of the people posting here feel it is, yet this company appears to me to be thriving and legal until such time that it proves not to be...if that were to ever happen.

I apologize to those reading this who would rather see me continuing the discussion but when people like me are immediately attacked and questioned just for participating...I don't see the point.

Goodbye Worried...thanks for your wonderful welcome.

[Tednewsom]

Actually, having started the thread, I'd love to have you around. The one-sided argument that this seems like a ... oh... questionable enterprise is balanced-- sort of-- by anecdotal positive statements from satisfied customers.

I do hope you stay around long enough to answer my question, which price did you pay? The fact that several customers have stated one price, and other sources (including the rental agreement) state another is... well... a puzzlement.

[SomeYuppie]

What I don't get is that there's too much proof that the business is legitimate and absolutely no proof there's a ponzi scheme here. There are risks that it could be, but other than high returns on investment, there's not much to go on.

I'm curious about that 2.50 because mine were once 3.50 and have since been raised to 4 or 3.95 or whatever.

We've assumed in prior posts that NAS risks no money of their own and the ATM owner gets a pay out 12.5% of gross revenue (50 cents over 4 bucks). That's called rev-share.

I still fail to see how the facts of the investment constitute a security. Still doesn't seem like it meets all prongs of the Howey test.

Again, I own dozens of machines, called up each and every location, asked the business owners and they all confirm a service contract with NAS and matching serial number to what I have. The machines exist, they are charging 4 dollars, and a third party processor who I verified as providing service to my ATMs is the one telling NAS the transaction count which is what my payout is based off of.

[rogfulton]

I still fail to see how the facts of the investment constitute a security. Still doesn't seem like it meets all prongs of the Howey test.

Again, I own dozens of machines, called up each and every location, asked the business owners and they all confirm a service contract with NAS and matching serial number to what I have. The machines exist, they are charging 4 dollars, and a third party processor who I verified as providing service to my ATMs is the one telling NAS the transaction count which is what my payout is based off of.

The investment constitutes a security because the law states it is and several courts have said it is.

Are you certain you are the only 'investor' with that list of serial numbers? Are you certain the person you spoke to at the business was not acting on instructions from NAS? Are you certain that you have not violated your agreement by contacting the businesses? Have you personally verified the existence of 'your' machines at 'your' locations?

[Tednewsom]

Excellent question. I think the fact that similar "ATM leaseback" companies have been successfully prosecuted for securities fraud answers that. If the SEC, the FBI, assorted state regulatory agencies and attorneys-general consider the arrangement a securities matter, then I'd guess they consider it "securities," wouldn't you?

That doesn't mean the government is always right about these things, of course. Irwin Schiff argued for years that Federal income tax was illegal, and that the IRS had no authority to... oh... wait... maybe that's a bad example...

In other news. Se-e-e-ems... as though I've heard that song befor-r-re...

10/02/09
$80 Million Ponzi Scheme
Even Friends Get Fooled
It sounded like a smart idea: investing in automated teller machines (ATMs) located in high-traffic retail locations around the country. The investors would recoup their money, plus an incredible 20-24 percent return, through the fees charged to the ATM customers. Seemed like a deal too good to pass up.
But investors should have done just that — because...
http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2009/oc ... nzi_100209

[worried]

To imnewhere and someyuppie:

YOU are part of the problem.... don't believe me? Go hire an actual, independent, impartial PROFESSIONAL to look at your 'investment' for you and tell you what you should do.

*I* am not really telling anybody NOT to invest anymore, nobody should believe ME anymore than they should believe YOU... we BOTH could just be shills (you for Gillis and me for Gillis' competition)... NO, people should HIRE their OWN professional advice and follow IT and not their 'instincts' (emotions). To suggest to anybody anything other than that is 'disingenuous' (and I'm being nice by using that word).

Why are you part of the problem? Because you're helping to ruin lives... read the Madoff stories,... that's what's going to happen here.... some people sacrifice personal relationships so they can provide an inheritance for their families, how are those people going to feel when that inheritance evaporates because they were afraid to pay a couple hundred dollars for real legal advice before handing over tens/hundreds of thousands (and more)?? To NOT acknowledge all this and to attack ME in the process is more than 'disingenuous'.

Why do you come back to attack me? I think because this forum is starting to have effect.

[worried]

I cannot say with any certainty whether this is a fraud or not ...

Then why in the hell are you risking large sums of money?!! THINK!!!

[Tednewsom]

Christ...I tried WAXMOR and God Almighty...it works!

Thanks Tednewsom!

Excellent news, redflag! If you like it so much, you should buy more. A lot more. In fact, if you like it that much, tell a few friends who you think would like to get waxed, and waxed real good!

[worried]

from http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2009/oc ... nzi_100209 :

■ Consult an unbiased third party, like an unconnected broker or licensed financial advisor, before investing.

■ Don’t be fooled into believing an investment is safe just because someone you know recommended it. So-called “affinity scams” are one of the favorite methods used to lure people into Ponzi schemes.

That is all people need to read and know if they're looking for information about ATM leaseback schemes... don't listen to any of US on this forum, listen to the FBI...

[SomeYuppie]

Worried, your argument, from what I can tell, is as follows:

"We must stop Jessica Alba. She is a celebrity and we all know celebrities are bad. Do I have to remind you of OJ Simpson? Jessica Alba needs to be jailed before she can continue to hurt anyone else"

There's zero, zilch, nada, nothing that has been provided thus far to make me, who happens to hold an advanced degree from a prestigious institution + advanced financial certification, think this investment is a sham. Like I said, there are inherent risks, but that's the same for any investment, publically traded or not.

[SomeYuppie]

The investment constitutes a security because the law states it is and several courts have said it is.

I hate to say that there's basic legal fundamentals that you are ignoring, but there are.

To recap:
1) Investment here does not pass Howey test as being a security
2) Every case presented thus far in this thread has had a material difference in the facts

Are you certain you are the only 'investor' with that list of serial numbers? Are you certain the person you spoke to at the business was not acting on instructions from NAS? Are you certain that you have not violated your agreement by contacting the businesses? Have you personally verified the existence of 'your' machines at 'your' locations?

Reread the thread dude.

[worried]

Oh.... so you're acting as your OWN financial advisor? ... kind of like a lawyer acting as his OWN defense attorney? How does that saying go? "A person who acts as his own lawyer has a fool for a client"... you're just digging yourself deeper SomeYuppie, your statements and anecdotes are targeted toward those that want to believe, including yourself.... everything you say just proves how irresponsible you've been in making your decisions based on emotion instead of not being afraid to hear the inconvenient truth from an IMPARTIAL source...

Your insistence on telling other readers ANYTHING other than 'go hire a real financial professional for advice' is telling (especially since you claim to be one yourself)...

[SomeYuppie]

No one reading this seems interested in doing their own investigation, hence why they are on this board to see if someone else can do it for them. We've even had a few people come on claiming to be advisors doing due diligence by asking those here what their thoughts are. Most thoughts are unfounded though and I'm making that clear.

[Tednewsom]

To recap:
1) Investment here does not pass Howey test as being a security

Yep. Except to those dumb jamokes at the FBI, the SEC, and a dozen state AG offices. What do they know about it, anyway? As long as those checks come in every month...

To recap:
2) Every case presented thus far in this thread has had a material difference in the facts

Well... okay, but... really? Other than the names have been changed to protect the innocent, which details of this operation don't match the details of the busted and/or bankrupted ones?

I've always allowed that this one company could well be the single, solitary, 100%-honest ATM leaseback firm in existence. Stranger things have happened.

[SomeYuppie]

Yep. Except to those dumb jamokes at the FBI, the SEC, and a dozen state AG offices. What do they know about it, anyway? As long as those checks come in every month...

Did anyone there receive all the facts of the agreement and say NAS was a security, or are you assuming that's what they will say? I'm thinking the latter.

Well... okay, but... really? Other than the names have been changed to protect the innocent, which details of this operation don't match the details of the busted and/or bankrupted ones?

I've always allowed that this one company could well be the single, solitary ATM leaseback firm in existence. Stranger things have happened.

Fixed vs variable returns, no control of investments vs control of investments by investor, company already indicted as Ponzi scheme vs nothing determined here yet, etc.

[SomeYuppie]

Anyways, when I originally bought in, I noticed there were dozens of different companies all doing the same thing with these sale-leasebacks. Some I'm sure are scams and some are completely legitimate. Thing is if you're interested in investing in one, you have to determine that for yourself. But to assume 100% of these companies are frauds would be incorrect.

[worried]

...Thing is if you're interested in investing in one, you have to determine that for yourself....

EXACTLY:

from http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2009/oc ... nzi_100209 :

■ Consult an unbiased third party, like an unconnected broker or licensed financial advisor, before investing.

■ Don’t be fooled into believing an investment is safe just because someone you know recommended it. So-called “affinity scams” are one of the favorite methods used to lure people into Ponzi schemes.


DON'T invest large amounts of money (your future, and your family's future) without VERIFYING 100% THAT IT'S NOT A SCAM by hiring (actually paying for) REAL legal/financial advice. To do anything other than that is foolish.... To be told, pushed, or cajoled into doing anything other than that is CRIMINAL..

[Pottapaug1938]

Anyways, when I originally bought in, I noticed there were dozens of different companies all doing the same thing with these sale-leasebacks. Some I'm sure are scams and some are completely legitimate. Thing is if you're interested in investing in one, you have to determine that for yourself. But to assume 100% of these companies are frauds would be incorrect.

We aren't saying that 100% of these companies are frauds. We're saying that any of these companies which claims that it isn't offering securities to its potential investors and does not nered to comply with the securities laws is, at best, ignorant of the laws and, very likely, operating a scam.

[Tednewsom]

Then there's this odd discrepancy which, I'm sure, has a reasonable explanation.

A) The people I personally know who've bought these things pay $19,000 and change. And have paid that same price consistently, for several years. Plus, the lease agreement reprinted above explicitly says "One purchases an ATM machine from NASI for $19,800, then leases it back to the company."

And yet
B) someyuppie wrote
"Anyways the deal is that you pay 12,000 per machine. Years back it was 11,000 but it was raised to 12,000 mainly on inflation." And above, imnewhere stated he paid the same price per machine.

Does this ... not... seem... unusual?

[SomeYuppie]

We aren't saying that 100% of these companies are frauds. We're saying that any of these companies which claims that it isn't offering securities to its potential investors and does not nered to comply with the securities laws is, at best, ignorant of the laws and, very likely, operating a scam.

You might not be saying that, but from what I can see, many here are, and we cannot seem to advance any arguments because of it.