ATM LEASEBACK SCHEMES-- any insight?

[webhick]

speaking of Joel/Ed's reporting "expertise"...(I do not believe this was ever mentioned in all 47 pages)...
For anyone who owned multiple machines...there are no statistical coincidences in life.
If you are one of these people that have invested with multiple machines, simply check out how they all went up or all went down from month-to-month by values that were simply statistically IMPOSSIBLE to have happened. If you have been vocal on this website and never saw these monthly reports then you missed the biggest clue of all.
If you DO have these monthly reports and did not see this obvious pattern from all of your machines in locations from one state to another and another...I guess it's too late now, so sorry.
If you never invested then you never received these reports. but if you did invest then these reports were your best way to execute your due diligence. The pattern was a joke. I cannot believe Joel and Ed actually used this method of reporting. Simply unbelievable.

I'm interested in this pattern. Please elaborate. I have one report from one investor, and I noticed that the difference in totals of earnings vs payout was suspiciously...even. I'm assuming that this is one part of the pattern you mentioned.

[MarvinGardens]

For anyone who owned multiple machines...there are no statistical coincidences in life.
If you are one of these people that have invested with multiple machines, simply check out how they all went up or all went down from month-to-month by values that were simply statistically IMPOSSIBLE to have happened. If you have been vocal on this website and never saw these monthly reports then you missed the biggest clue of all.

Actually, I think there was a far more apparent red flag that should have stopped any investor from being fleeced:

A guaranteed 20% return on investment, per year, over several years, in a passive investment.

Talk about your statistical improbabilities. The odds of that being true, especially in a mature industry, with interest rates at record lows, are vanishingly small.

[The Observer]

Actually sitting in a corner doing nothing might just be a better undertaking that what some people are doing at the moment.

Yes, but my remark was aimed at the people who are not gathering all of their records up. Just doing that alone may relieve some worried minds.

Actually, I think there was a far more apparent red flag that should have stopped any investor from being fleeced:

A guaranteed 20% return on investment, per year, over several years, in a passive investment.

And the next thing that should have occurred to any investor was the question, "Why is Joel and Ed willing to allow me and everyone else to get this 20% return instead of them investing their own money and keeping the profits for themselves?" Not unlike the guy who walks up to you with the "winning" lotto ticket for $1 million and offers to sell it to you for $1000.

[grimreaper]

speaking of Joel/Ed's reporting "expertise"...(I do not believe this was ever mentioned in all 47 pages)...
For anyone who owned multiple machines...there are no statistical coincidences in life.
If you are one of these people that have invested with multiple machines, simply check out how they all went up or all went down from month-to-month by values that were simply statistically IMPOSSIBLE to have happened. If you have been vocal on this website and never saw these monthly reports then you missed the biggest clue of all.
If you DO have these monthly reports and did not see this obvious pattern from all of your machines in locations from one state to another and another...I guess it's too late now, so sorry.
If you never invested then you never received these reports. but if you did invest then these reports were your best way to execute your due diligence. The pattern was a joke. I cannot believe Joel and Ed actually used this method of reporting. Simply unbelievable.

I'm interested in this pattern. Please elaborate. I have one report from one investor, and I noticed that the difference in totals of earnings vs payout was suspiciously...even. I'm assuming that this is one part of the pattern you mentioned.

I have personally seen multiple bank statements covering as many as 20 machines and the *activity* levels are all within a couple transactions of each other for any given month. This is not within any reasonable variability one expect, especially for machines scattered across the country.

[grimreaper]

And the next thing that should have occurred to any investor was the question, "Why is Joel and Ed willing to allow me and everyone else to get this 20% return instead of them investing their own money and keeping the profits for themselves?" Not unlike the guy who walks up to you with the "winning" lotto ticket for $1 million and offers to sell it to you for $1000.

I have had other's tell me the exact same thing when I discuss this with them...and it's a valid point. The only thing I could come up with was one might not want to raise the money themselves (loans) and prefer using other peoples money, even if it meant settling for less.
In any event, the real question is whether the initial investment was in *good faith* thus escaping sacrificing the PRINCIPAL AS WELL. Some have argued that the glaring interest of 20% is simply not possible and that any reasonable person should know this>>>ERGO they invested knowing something was shady, thus NOT in good faith. Personally, I don't they will hold the bulk of investors as *bad faith* unless they were *insiders*.

[ATM'd]

Just spoke with the receiver who said there will be a website up and running today or tomorrow nasireceivership.com (at least I think it's .com)

The FBI is also involved but we can't get any info on when arrests might be made.

Apparently they have all "lawyered up", even the secretary.

[worried]

And... ya know... there's another little human tendency that is taken advantage of in order to help the scam proliferate:

Believers will try very hard to get other people to 'believe' as well. They HAVE to, they don't have any COLD, HARD data to validate their beliefs, so they do the next best thing: they try and get as many other people they possibly can to agree with them. That's why posters would show up on this forum happily sharing with us why they thought NASI was perfectly legitimate. They don't see what they're doing, but it's crystal clear when you understand this concept. You can see this throughout daily life as well, not just in this scam.

The extra $1000 for successfully getting someone to agree with your belief is literally a BONUS when you look at it this way.

I know imnewhere thought I was being harsh when I challenged NASI-promoting posters like him/her to explain WHY they were posting on this forum, but I was trying to do 2 things:
1. Get them (if possible) to see that they were only trying to validate their belief, but, in the process, they were unwittingly HELPING Joel/Ed, and
2. STOP the scam in its tracks

Apologies to anyone I offended... except Joel and Ed...

[grimreaper]

The extra $1000 for successfully getting someone to agree with your belief is literally a BONUS when you look at it this way.
..

I wasn't aware that all investors who recruited others to invest got this? Could you elaborate?

[imnewhere]

Webhick: To elaborate, simply compare the month to month increase or decrease in transactions by machine. i.e. If your ATM in Ames, Iowa had 407 transactions in March and 418 in April then your ATM in Sioux City, S.D. that had 505 transactions in March would increase to 511 in April. Now picture 20 or 30 ATM's on the same monthly statement all having the same similar increase (or decrease) that month between 7-12 transactions. Not very sophisticated, in fact, ridiculous...and impossible.

[notorial dissent]

The various comments about the monthly payouts and the "peculiarities" involved are quite valid, and really not surprising, given that there were no actual profits to speak of and that NASI was making it all up as they went along, and would/should jump out at someone who knew what to look for, and they studiously avoided involvement with anyone like that.

The other component of this scam that came to mind over time was that NASI was targeting a very specific type of "investor", specifically unsophisticated, most likely retired, someone looking for a safe, consistent investment with a good rate of return, and I would say 20% qualifies for that, but specifically unsophisticated. The reason being that they wouldn't want someone questioning the too good to be true ROI, the consistent earnings, and the statements themselves. They wanted "investors" who would look at the checks they were getting and not at the statements, and it sounds like they were pretty good at picking their clients. If they guessed wrong and someone got suspicious or started asking too many embarrassing questions all they needed to do was buy them back and close them out and be rid of them, and I think that is pretty much what happened. I think the old adage of don't look a gift horse in the mouth was in full play here for most of the "investors", and in truth honestly think that most of them wouldn't think or know to look any closer, that was after all why they were accepted in the first place.

[Lost Income]

I'll be happy to wait for contact with the SEC etc before doing anything, so to get accurate direction from them (everybody's hypothetical is giving me a headache). If anyone can confirm a website for contact with SEC etc and releasing documents to them, please advise.

[grimreaper]

The various comments about the monthly payouts and the "peculiarities" involved are quite valid, and really not surprising, given that there were no actual profits to speak of and that NASI was making it all up as they went along, and would/should jump out at someone who knew what to look for, and they studiously avoided involvement with anyone like that.

The other component of this scam that came to mind over time was that NASI was targeting a very specific type of "investor", specifically unsophisticated, most likely retired, someone looking for a safe, consistent investment with a good rate of return, and I would say 20% qualifies for that, but specifically unsophisticated. The reason being that they wouldn't want someone questioning the too good to be true ROI, the consistent earnings, and the statements themselves. They wanted "investors" who would look at the checks they were getting and not at the statements, and it sounds like they were pretty good at picking their clients. If they guessed wrong and someone got suspicious or started asking too many embarrassing questions all they needed to do was buy them back and close them out and be rid of them, and I think that is pretty much what happened. I think the old adage of don't look a gift horse in the mouth was in full play here for most of the "investors", and in truth honestly think that most of them wouldn't think or know to look any closer, that was after all why they were accepted in the first place.

I can tell you that I personally know at least SEVEN people who were in this and SIX of them are very savvy successful people. Only ONE was elderly. I don't think you comprehend just how COMPELLING it is to see a relative or close friend make 20% for YEARS ON END and not *fall* for this. Greed is a VERY POTENT motivator and most of the time will *TRUMP* FEAR.

[grimreaper]

I'll be happy to wait for contact with the SEC etc before doing anything, so to get accurate direction from them (everybody's hypothetical is giving me a headache). If anyone can confirm a website for contact with SEC etc and releasing documents to them, please advise.

The website the receiver establishes will be your guide. He *works* for the SEC.

[ATM'd]

I'll be happy to wait for contact with the SEC etc before doing anything, so to get accurate direction from them (everybody's hypothetical is giving me a headache). If anyone can confirm a website for contact with SEC etc and releasing documents to them, please advise.

I have been told by the receiver that the relevant website, to be set up today or at latest tomorrow, is nasireceivership.com (at least I think it's .com

[notorial dissent]

I can tell you that I personally know at least SEVEN people who were in this and SIX of them are very savvy successful people. Only ONE was elderly. I don't think you comprehend just how COMPELLING it is to see a relative or close friend make 20% for YEARS ON END and not *fall* for this. Greed is a VERY POTENT motivator and most of the time will *TRUMP* FEAR.

I'm sorry if you don't think I understand how you are feeling, quite the contrary, I do, but it doesn't alter the facts or where things stand how much sympathy i have or don't have, or you think that I have. You can be to quote you, a "very savvy successful people" and still get sucked in to this, and when I speak of sophisticated I mean in the sense of being a seasoned investor. I do not think any of the people who got caught in this were in any way shape or form sophisticated investors, for the simple reason that NASI was specifically looking for non-sophisticated people to invest with them.

[Lost Income]

Thanks!!

It is not necessarily greed that invites investing into NAS. We are retired and given the bond mkt yield is about useless and the equity mkt is a roller coaster, it was reasonable to risk investing just enough in NAS to generate a stable base income. Glad we did not get greedy and we only invested just enough to provide base income.

[grimreaper]

Thanks!!

It is not necessarily greed that invites investing into NAS. We are retired and given the bond mkt yield is about useless and the equity mkt is a roller coaster, it was reasonable to risk investing just enough in NAS to generate a stable base income. Glad we did not get greedy and we only invested just enough to provide base income.

Well, if you didn't put all your eggs in one basket, that good, but in reality you really shouldn't have more than 5% of retirement in one investment vehicle. Even exposing *only 20%* to this scam can be devastating. Now, as far as the GREED issue, I'm sorry, but anyone who decides to go for >>>A GUARANTEED 20% should know that's simply not possible and the only thing that would lead one to do so is greed....an emotion that overrides rational reasoning. Even if it's just to cover *base income*. Hey, I'll be the the first to admit that I have been greedy in the past as well.

[webhick]

The Involuntary Bankruptcy docket has received a little new activity.

The first is a declaration by the creditors' attorney, which basically attests to the fact that NASI's decided to roll over on this matter.

The second is another Notice of Lodgment, filed by the creditors' attorney.

Both items were filed today, 10/6.

[grimreaper]

The Involuntary Bankruptcy docket has received a little new activity.

The first is a declaration by the creditors' attorney, which basically attests to the fact that NASI's decided to roll over on this matter.

The second is another Notice of Lodgment, filed by the creditors' attorney.

Both items were filed today, 10/6.

They're asking for appt of Bankruptcy Trustee to be selected ASAP, but already HAVE SEC Receivership...so now what? Guess they'll have to work it out. I would think SEC receiver will displace any Bankruptcy Trustee.

[webhick]

It's like they're trying to continue forward as though the SEC hasn't stepped in yet.

What's funny is that the SEC applied for the TRO back on 9/16 while the IB was filed on 9/19. I believe it was sealed until the 30th, so it's not like the IB creditors could have known at the time. But now it's public and there's a portion of the restraining order with wording barring victims from doing things like filing an IB. With the IB already started before the SEC stuff was unsealed, I imagine there's leeway, but I feel like this additional lodgment may be crossing a line.