ATM LEASEBACK SCHEMES-- any insight?

[snookered]

I just got off of the phone with a victim that I met last Monday when I went to Joels office. She is a longtime victim and was able to share a lot of info with me that might be of interest here.

She owns 36 machines, and paid $12,000 for each of them. I personally, paid $19,800 for each of mine. I asked her who brought her into this investment and she said no one in particular, it was the talk of the Yacht Club, where Ed was/is a member. That would be the Marina Del Rey Yacht Club.

She also had knowledge of other investments that Ed was promoting at the Yacht Club. One was for Honey Wagons for the entertainment industry. She didn't have details, but knew there were ATM investors who also invested in the Honey Wagons. She also had knowledge of a petroleum/gas investment that he was peddling as well. Again, she didn't have details.

SO, it may all come out in the wash that all of those millions of dollars that were victimized out of us, simply went to other scams that these 2 were involved with.

This, I believe is going to get very ugly.

[Gregg]

If there is a business to run, it will be shut down and liquidated, and that would be ugly. Consider, if they do have a few ATMs, I haven't found a new model of any of them near $5000. Since "investors" paid anywhere from 3-4 times what they were worth new and being sold used they'll bring less than half the actual new cost, they're gonna get hosed, especially since every real machine may represent several investors.

Say 4 people invested $19,000 in a machine that is sold at auction for $1300 (minus fees of $130), that's not a happy ending. I do wonder what, if anything, the locations are worth and can they be sold?

[JamesVincent]

I agree. We can only hope that the SEC has already locked up all assets for future sale, and will run the biz for a while, to generate as much cash as possible.

I seriously doubt that the receiver will operate an illegal securities business to raise money. Whatever gets divided up and sent to the investors will be whatever they can seize either from accounts, assets (including the ATMs themselves, if any truly exist), clawbacks from net winners or commissions, etc. They may very well empty any ATMs they find to exist but as far as operating the business? Doubt it.

[JamesVincent]

I do wonder what, if anything, the locations are worth and can they be sold?

If any locations were paid for then they were paid for out of an illegal Ponzi and the contracts were therefore illegal, so, no, I doubt they could raise any money that way. Even if they determine the contracts were legal they would have that location only as long as the business was... in business and providing a service. I would imagine any legit contracts they had are now null and void.

[Tednewsom]

She owns 36 machines, and paid $12,000 for each of them. I personally, paid $19,800 for each of mine.

Y'know, snookered, after having re-read this entire thread this morning, and having been called a liar & a misinformed "unreliable witness" repeatedly for stating this very thing... I want to say... how useless and frustrating it is to be vindicated.

[notorial dissent]

As Gregg and Lost Income have said, the prospects aren't what one could call cheery. I've seen too many of these where that by the time they actually get to the carcass there really isn't much left as the principals have either spent, wasted, or judging by some of the other things I've seen, lost whatever money there had been, or in a couple of rare cases gotten it somewhere no one could find and their books were so bad that it was impossible to tell what they'd done, even though they'd done it with a great lot of money.

At this point until a real audit and inventory is done no one is going to know what is real and what isn't.

[Tednewsom]

As for my insistent statements that there were always at least two consistent prices to buy into this no-lose scam-a-roonie, and the equally persistent counter-claims from some that I was blowing smoke out my patoote...

See, this is why you're full of it. ... I find you the least credible person here. ,,,
Some forums, from your posts, would consider you to be a troll. .

Note to SomeYuppie: Kiss my ass.

[dawnth]

I can tell you that when my mom started investing she was paying the lower amount. We both live in California. I think its possible that the earlier investors may have continued to get this amount for some time, at which point, newcomers would be charged the higher fee.
Another interesting fact, I just remembered. She was actually allowed to invest in 50% of an ATM machine at one time, and then she would buy the other 50%.. How do you buy half a machine? I told her before I invested.. They let you do that? Apparently.

Is there a geographic component to this? Do investors in Boston & LA get sold the $19.8K machines while those in Grand Rapids get sold the $12K machines?

[Judge Roy Bean]

I have not seen the agreements and have no first-hand knowledge of the scheme, but what are the owner/operators of the convenience stores facing should the network be shut down?

How much might they be owed?

[JamesVincent]

I have not seen the agreements and have no first-hand knowledge of the scheme, but what are the owner/operators of the convenience stores facing should the network be shut down?

How much might they be owed?

If, and that's a big if I realize, their contracts are standard contracts, absolutely nothing. Everything in every contract I dealt with or had heard about is based on a percentage of the intake. If no one is servicing the machines and there's no money coming in, then they aren't owed anything unless there is a minimum owed built into the contract.

Now what I was wondering is what exactly the owners can do, legally, if they actually have a machine in their building, have customers using or want to use the ATM, and no one is servicing it? It will be months, at least, before the SEC gets around to seizing machines as part of their receivership. Are these owners going to be able to, legally, remove the machine and have another company bring one in? Would be interesting to see a copy of the agreement they used for location owners.

[Tednewsom]

I can tell you that when my mom started investing she was paying the lower amount. We both live in California. I think its possible that the earlier investors may have continued to get this amount for some time, at which point, newcomers would be charged the higher fee.

Okeydoke, Dawn, I'll take you at your word. Question is, when did your Mom first buy in? Because the $19,800 price goes back at least to 2002, when I was offered it. If your mother started her association with the outfit later than that, then your reasonable assumption -- that they started at 12K and rose to $19K -- goes out the window and the double-prices just become arbitrary again.

Plus, there are a lot of people who've posted here and report they've been buying in for 12K apiece-- long after the $19.8K figure was standard.

[Judge Roy Bean]

... Are these owners going to be able to, legally, remove the machine and have another company bring one in? Would be interesting to see a copy of the agreement they used for location owners.

Knowing some of the owners of chains of convenience stores, there will be a new machine in place the next day or two if a customer can't get cash out of the ATM and no one responds. The old one will get put in the back room or trucked off to a storage space and they'll worry about the agreement when the time comes to deal with it.

[Lost Income]

Currently no one knows how many ATM Machines NAS actually owns, if any, what means the SEC will actually have to help pay anyone back, where Joel & Ed are hiding, or how this may turn out. So we are all waiting for the SEC to reply to e-mails or somehow make contact with us victims. Unfortunately everything is just speculation until then. So if you lost money, pray, and wait for contact from the SEC or FBI, or try following up with the bankruptcy court.

[grimreaper]

I own a alternative investment broker dealer in Los Angeles. Every year 5 to 10 of my clients come to me to investigate gillis and the ATMs. Each year I try to call him expressing my desire to do homework for clients and if him and his ATMs pass our firms due diligence, we could potentially bring them more money than they could handle. Year after year it is the same story. No response at all. Call after call nothing. I have met many clients who have been involved for over a decade and swear by their 20% returns but when I push them for more detailed descriptions of the machines they own. Unfortunately they don't have solid answers other than they get checks each month. Ponzi's can run for years until they implode on themselves.

If an investor can't answer the questions poised above in the other comment about their investment I suspect they too are being led down the yellow brick road of blind belief. Sadely these stories end in the same fashion year after year.

Legitimate investments shout to the world about their accomplishments and welcome scrutiny. I have worked and raised hundreds of millions for hundreds of great alt investments. Beware of the "secrete" friends and family only deals that shroud themselves in a "trust me" lack of transparency.

Old post....right on the money

[grimreaper]

Currently no one knows how many ATM Machines NAS actually owns, if any, what means the SEC will actually have to help pay anyone back, where Joel & Ed are hiding, or how this may turn out. So we are all waiting for the SEC to reply to e-mails or somehow make contact with us victims. Unfortunately everything is just speculation until then. So if you lost money, pray, and wait for contact from the SEC or FBI, or try following up with the bankruptcy court.

In all probability (read>>speculation on my part), the # of machines (if any at all) is trivial in this matter. They have become irrelevant and are dwarfed by the # of *phantom* machines out there.
The primary funds won't come from what *joel and ed are hiding*. They'll come from the CLAWBACK of distributions to those long term investors that profited.

[itzallgone]

Anybody aware of Joel's claims here that be was expanding to Puerto Rico: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/nationwid ... 51430.html

[snookered]

Following, is an email that was shared with me today, from another NASI "Investor" - FYI

We held a meeting today at 2:00PM for investors in NASI. The meeting was the first meeting for the group to help get organized and meet face-to-face with other investors.

About 16 people showed up. The main purpose of the meeting was to consider organization and gather information to help put together a group of investors. We also exchanged information we had.

It was the general sentiment that group's common interest of this organization was to learn what is happening to the company (NASI) and determine how the group should work together to maximize the results of the filed bankruptcy.

We addressed:
Should we have an organization?
If so, who will run it?
Should we identify professional management of the group?
Will members be willing and able to contribute funds to manage the group going forward?

We discussed what exactly a involuntary bankruptcy is and why a some investors were strongly advised by council that it was in the best interest to file for an involuntary bankruptcy on behalf of all investors.

The attorney that filed the petition was available for a phone conference and explained what the purpose of the bankruptcy is and what are the possible outcomes of filing the bankruptcy are. Since the bankruptcy was filed by 3 petitioners, the lawyer clarified that he can only represents those 3 people only and cannot answer personal questions regarding the case. The attorneys sole role will be to position the company to the point that a trustee is appointed who then will take on all the responsibilities of managing the entity, assets, debits, credits and liabilities. The attorney’s best estimate is that the company will accept the Chapter 7 bankruptcy. If the bankruptcy is contested additional resources, possible from this group may be required, another reason to form a group.

Any investors that wants to hire their own attorneys and ask questions about their position in their investment or get an education as to the process should do so. The role of the current attorney will not cover these downstream concerns, other than to cause a trustee to be appointed.

The final part of the meeting was about investors sharing some of the personal thoughts and information about their experiences with the company, conversations they had with the company and the agencies investigating the company. To our astonishment we learned that several investors are new investors (2014) and NASI cashed investor checks as early as last week! Further support of the expedient bankruptcy.

All investors are invited and encouraged to join this group. Regardless of how much money was lost or made everybody agrees that this Ponzi scheme is a tragedy and a forum such as this is a value proposition for all.

The process to sort out the facts and recover lost money will be long and unpleasant. With the FBI, SEC and other government agencies involved, hopefully the facts will help put together the truth about NASI and we proceed forward. No investor will have information that can be reliable be confirmed until the investigations are completed.

While this is not to be interpreted as a legal opinion: the reality is that the company will soon be control of government agencies and there is yet an opportunity for personal legal representation. With the trustee acting on your behalf it is unclear if the average investor requires separate council. Please get that opinion from your attorney

In summary, it was concluded that the value of an organization was to have a forum to exchange and obtain information, to be organized should further legal action be required on behalf of all the investors and to have a voice to the court so that a capable and skilled trustee is appointed. This case is alleged to be above half a billion dollar Ponzi scheme.

Downstream after the process is ongoing a creditor committee of the largest investors will be formed by the bankruptcy court and the need for this group should be reevaluated.

Temporary leadership was approved and this leadership will bring back a recommendation for professional management, a mission statement and possible funding - as required to best represent all the investors involved.

Kindly do not forward this notice but do forward contact information of all legitimate investors you know.

On behalf of the Nationwide ATM Investor Group.

[snookered]

So many victims... still holding on to the dream.

[snookered]

Comments from the meeting held today. FYI

Hi this is XXXX

Thank you for such detailed notes from today's meeting. I wanted to attend but, I had meetings that prevented my attendance.

I know I had sent some comments before the meeting. After reviewing your notes, I came up with some thoughts.

Do we know if there is an underlying viable business?
Answer: there are a variety of individuals who think otherwise. Sources clearly say no.

If so, liquidating the ATMs could be the worst possible decision. The machines will have little to no value on the open market. If there are machines, it could be insanely short sighted to dismantle the business which is the only value. This is a service business and, assuming there are actually operable machines in the field, I believe the machines should be viewed the same way buckets and mops would be viewed in a janitorial business. If you liquidate the buckets and mops, there will barely be enough to pay the trustee and attys. The real value is keeping the janitors using the buckets and mops and cleaning the buildings that currently contract for the janitorial services.
Answer: The options are no longer under our control. The trustee will make this decision in the best interests of the entity. Again, very reliable sources claim there is no residual capital, income or equipment. The FBI and SEC will be looking into how assets were handled and if this was once a legitimate business and when it became the alleged PONZI scheme. Having said that the involuntary bankruptcy was the unanimous recommendation of a dozen high level experts from across the country with many skills (banking, bankruptcy, criminal etc.) as this empowers the creditors the most and is the fasted to prevent further fraud and reassignment of assets. The SEC and FBI by their own admission to investors indicated they could not move faster. Keep in mind investors lost hundred (?’s) of thousands EVEN last week. GIVING THE NEED FOR BANKRUPSTY the comments here can only be directed to the trustee when appointed and he as a trustee would already understand these concerns and is responsible for keeping the legitimate business (some believe is present) operational so that it can be liquidated at the best price for all. The bankruptcy creates a level playing field for all the creditors and debtors to find a common general formula for fair treatment while freezing the business for further fraudulent conduct which is harmful to all the parties. The involuntary bankruptcy was filed as a good Samaritan act on behalf of all investors with unanimous legal support and the highest level and after a very careful analysis of alleged source material. The bankruptcy inadvertently protects management by preserving their 5th amendment rights and is not expected to be contested by management

If they just go through the process of liquidating the assets, they will see who has made money beyond the principal and will start to claw it back. If the people in charge don't understand how to quantify the potential of a service business and the risks of liquidating prematurely, it will cost a lot of people a lot of money! But the trustee and attys will do well.
Answer: Reliable sources indicate the money is gone and the situation would be worse with delay. The trustee must determine the value proposition of continuing the business and how daily operations have been outsourced once they take the helm.
While there may be a dispute among investors about the issue of ongoing business opportunities the company is bankrupt just by the “promise to buy back equipment” and make monthly payments. If you don’t like this wording consider “there was a run on the bank” and the bank has no funds and no insurance (other than to distribute new income from sale of equipment which was on- gong as of last week)

Consider this, lets say these guys had a real business for many years and got greedy. They then started screwing people criminally but, the underlying business, while overstated, was still functioning. It may be far more advantageous to take over the operations than to just liquidate. And, depending on the particulars of the business, there may not be a lot of time to figure it out and stabilize it if its possible.
Answer: There were no options to go to management and ask them to step aside and show us the books and operations.

I am very concerned for my mom's well being and the well being of many others who could not afford to loose their annuity.

I do not wish to be glib here, everyone is in pain and we have heard of homes being sold, retirements ruined. The FBI agent has said to some and you can find this in many places “If it is too good to be true it is too good to be true” Trite but all of us heard that before the investment.
Consider this:
1. Denial and Isolation

2. Anger

3. Bargaining

4. Depression

5. Acceptance


Please let me know if there is in fact some underlying business. Even if its a fraction of what we believed it to be, 25% of something is better than 100% of nothing. Even if this is true current management cannot be trusted to distribute these operations and are facing criminal charges.

Answer: We will have to wait for Monday morning quarterbacking by the FBI, SEC, IRS and local state governments. Sources claim there is no sustainable business to handle the current debt, although some claim these assets may have been transfered, sold or partnered since the June 17 SEC subpoena; rather than alert us to this development they continued to bring in new investors to pay old investors. So there was no way to evaluate and keep exiting business, even if present going. Best to seek the advice of your CPA as to how to plan the fraud loss and also to your attorney for a legal education

This is email is not intended to provide legal advice or completely trustworthy information until the facts are known and made available by the courts.


This is one person’s assessment.


Warmest regards to all


Thanks again

[Nationwideinvestor]

From what I recall, NAS has about 3 weeks to respond, if not the BK will go forward. However, during this period the SEC will either intervene and block the BK or they will work out a joint plan with the parties involved in the BK process.

Here is a famous case where SEC had to step in:

http://stjohns.abiworld.org/node/117

Byers is significant because it has enabled the SEC to keep control of Ponzi schemes by preventing creditors from filing bankruptcy petitions once the SEC initiated a receivership. Instead of limiting anti-bankruptcy injunctions to situations where the receivership had already started to liquidate the debtor, Byers has empowered the SEC to enjoin involuntary bankruptcy proceedings as soon as a receivership is established. [19] Thus, Byers has made the creditors’ ability to file bankruptcy petitions depend entirely upon whether an SEC receivership has been filed. [20] This change in policy poses a serious threat to creditors by ultimately allowing the SEC to trump their rights to file involuntary bankruptcy petitions and choose their preferred forum for liquidation. Because bankruptcy procedures afford creditors greater protections and more certainty than equitable receiverships, many creditors would normally opt for liquidation occurring through bankruptcy.[21] Byers, however, forced the creditors to accept the broad and uncertain relief available through equitable receiverships.

This explains why the group acted first with the involuntary bankruptcy. If the SEC acts first they can prevent an involuntary bankruptcy. Any one know about the reverse scenario. If the bankruptcy acts first does the court have protective powers from the SEC controlling the case ?
Can someone explain the difference in powers and advantages and disadvantages of SEC vs. Bankruptcy?