ATM LEASEBACK SCHEMES-- any insight?

[snookered]

This is from the receivers website.....Joel and Ed will be in court today. Perhaps they will also be arrested?

SEC News Release – December 16, 2014
Two Woodland Hills Men Charged with Running Ponzi Scheme involving ATMs that Caused Investors to Lose Well Over $100 Million
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

December 16, 2014
LOS ANGELES – Two San Fernando Valley men were charged today in a federal fraud case that alleges they ran a 15-year-long Ponzi scheme that collected hundreds of millions from investors who were told their money would be used to purchase profitable automated teller machines.

Joel Barry Gillis, 74, of Woodland Hills, and Edward Wishner, 76, also of Woodland Hills, were charged today with mail fraud and wire fraud in a case that caused well over $100 million in losses to nearly 2,000 investors.

According to the criminal information filed today in United States District Court, Gillis and Wishner operated the Calabasas-based Nationwide Automated Systems, Inc. (NASI), which purported to place, operate and maintain ATMs in high-traffic locations, such as hotels, casinos and convenience stores. NASI claimed that it operated over 30,000 ATMs and was involved in more than $1 billion in ATM transactions every month.

The information further alleges that Gillis and Wishner told victim-investors that NASI would lease back the ATMs and pay investors 50 cents for each transaction performed at their particular ATM, guaranteeing annual returns of 20 percent on each ATM. In addition to these high-yields, NASI and its salespeople urged some investors to use their retirement savings “by claiming that investments in NASI’s sale/leaseback program would outperform most traditional retirement investment accounts,” according to the information.

NASI did make monthly payments to investors, but that money came from other investors. While NASI did operate a small number of ATMs – no more than 250, which were owned by the company and not investors – the overall operation was a sham hidden under the veil of a Ponzi scheme. Gillis and Wishner prevented investors from discovering the fraudulent nature of the business by providing bogus monthly reports to the investors that falsely detailed the performance of the investors’ ATMs. In reality, the purpose of these reports was to conceal that the true source of the payments sent to investors were monies received from other investors. Gillis and Wishner also included a “non-interference” provision in the lease agreements that prohibited victim-investors from visiting the locations where their ATMs were supposedly located.

The scheme unraveled this past summer. In August, “NASI bounced approximately $3 million in checks that had been sent by NASI as monthly returns to victim-investors,” according to the criminal information. “By the end of the month, NASI had drained its bank account, drawing it down to a balance of less than $200,000.”

In response to hundreds of calls from victim-investors, Gillis and Wishner “falsely sought to reassure the victim-investors that NASI was only suffering from accounting problems and technical delays relating to system upgrades, and that timely payment of investor returns would likely resume by the beginning of October 2014.” Even as the Ponzi was collapsing, Gillis and Wishner allegedly continued to raise another $4 million from victim-investors.

The information filed today charged Gillis and Wishner with conspiracy, two counts of mail fraud and one count of wire fraud. If they are convicted, Gillis and Wishner each would face a statutory maximum sentence of 20 years in federal prison for each of the four charges.

Gillis and Wishner are expected to make their initial court appearances tomorrow afternoon in United States District Court.

This case was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission provided substantial assistance in the matter.
The SEC filed a civil lawsuit in relation to the NASI scheme in September, which resulted in a court order freezing the company’s assets and having a receiver appointed to oversee the assets (see: http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleas ... r23106.htm).
Release No. 14-163

[Tednewsom]

The problem with this scenario is that it runs afoul of some very painful facts:

(a) These guys are senior citizens. So regardless of whether they go to jail, there isn't going to be much time for them to enjoy the haul wherever they stashed it. A clever scammer would have left much earlier so he could spend his haul while he had the wits and physical ability to enjoy it.

They were not senior citizens when this started. And if either had more than three working brain cells, they knew the scheme would end in one or both of two ways: overwhelming bankruptcy because of the eventual negative cash-flow, and /or jail.

(b) The likelihood of them being free for the short time they have left on this earth is rather unlikely. Again, if they were as smart as you paint them, they would have cleared town years ago.

Ah... but not if they were under threat of death or their families' dismemberment. As for spending their few remaining years in the slam-- I hope they develop a taste for sodomy and very hard beds. Enjoy yourself, boys. You won't be there long.

(c) Given the above two issues, I would argue that if they were really clever enough to establish a cash hoard beyond the reach of anyone, they would have been smart enough to realize when to shut the operation down and flee to a country where there are no extradition treaties. But these guys didn't do that.

Now, imagine there was nowhere in the world they could hide, no way they could guarantee the safety of their family.

And imagine this huge cash flow (and it did generate an immense amount of money, especially in the first decade) was not being squirrelled away by the principals, but by a third party. A third party experienced in running identical successful rackets exactly by the playbook repeatedly through the years, a third party whose intention was always a) fleece the suckers and give them enough to keep them quiet then re-invest and 2) suck the company dry and leave a couple of chumps to hang for it. A couple of chumps who were allowed to live pretty high through the years and knew the penalty for opening their pie holes. "Cute little granddaughter you got, Joel. Nice school she goes to out in Calabasas, those weeping willows out front. What is she now, eleven, twelve? They're pretty at that age, capice? Oh, it'd be a shame if something happened. Nose to the grindstone, buddy. See you next month." That's what I'm getting at.

They kept running the scheme right up to the bitter ending and then meekly admitted everything to the first official who started asking questions.

Well, "meekly" ... not really. Who knows how long they dodged official investigation? We know for a fact they applied for SEC sanction early on, and for some reason, decided to let it expire. And, yes, I'm sure they were relieved to get off the treadmill, for whatever reason.

What is even more astounding is how these two clever fiends knew there was trouble starting 5 years ago and still stayed at the helm as the ship slowly sunk. Smart enough to squirrel money away, but not smart enough to run away? Even when they were spotted a five year lead?

Ah, but not if -- you know. And five years, hell. They knew from git-go how it would end. Every other ATM scam like this ended the same way. And office machine leasebacks, private pay phones, Xerox machines. In the old days, it used to be jukeboxes. Same business plan, bigger scale.

(d) Given that our dastardly duo threw a ton of money away on a Fuel Doctor investment seems to be another fact that argues that Ed and Joel couldn't be that smart, cunning and clever.

It's a ludicrous invention which doesn't provide what it promises -- but how many half-hour info-mercials on TV sell precisely the same sort of bogus products? There's a sucker born every minute, and these two clearly knew that dictum. You get in, hype it, pump the grift as long as you can then burn the restaurant... rather, file bankruptcy.

(e) And oh, yeah, they also sunk money into those trailers to rent out. That was another brilliant brainstorm.

It's actually a great business idea. Actor Lyle Waggoner has made an absolute fortune in the business, and there is not, as far as I know, another competitive independent company which specializes in this service.

As I pointed out earlier, Ponzi schemes require most of the money being paid to go back to the "investors." The more money that gets skimmed off the top, the more investors that the conman has to round up. Otherwise the scam is going to run out of money a whole lot sooner. Ed and Joel kept this scam running for 19 years and only had 2000 investors involved at the end. That alone suggest that the amount of money being skimmed off the top wasn't large enough to threaten an early demise and that they were able to keep the rubes happy until the last couple of months.

Ah, but not if-- well. The notion of having your children disappear and your own leftovers becoming shark bait wherever in the world you run would be a fine inducement to keep working long into "retirement years" at an enterprise which costs you millions every year.

So I would argue that our twosome were just taking enough money to keep their bills and expenses paid, and to splurge here and there on luxury items and bad investments. The only reason they hung on was because this was their meal ticket, their support for their lifestyle and family.

OK... now take the last sentence and add occasional visits from a big guy named Guido. Or Boris. Or Nguyen. Or Alfonso. Or Mordacai. Or Brigham.

I know people don't want to hear that their money is gone, but in all likelihood it is.

Oh, I'm not arguing that it's not gone... exactly. I should bet that it is.

[The Observer]

They were not senior citizens when this started. And if either had more than three working brain cells, they knew the scheme would end in one or both of two ways: overwhelming bankruptcy because of the eventual negative cash-flow, and /or jail.

Exactly my point. But they stuck around. So they couldn't be the evil geniuses that were squirreling money away.

Ah... but not if they were under threat of death or their families' dismemberment.

For which you have no shred of evidence and a ton of baseless speculation. And the fact that in the end, Ed and Joel basically turned themselves in and we have not heard of any family members showing up in little pieces as a result, that kind of puts a damper on this conspiracy theory.

Now, imagine there was nowhere in the world they could hide, no way they could guarantee the safety of their family.

Sure, let's just throw logic and reality to the wind and dream up wild-ass scenarios. With those kind of parameters, the sky is the limit.

That's what I'm getting at.

Yeah. I see what you are getting at quite clearly. But it would actually help if you could, you know, come up with some facts for this.

Well, "meekly" ... not really. Who knows how long they dodged official investigation?

Right. According to your theory, Ed and Joel are up to their ears in organized crime alligators. Yet the first time the government gets involved with a bankruptcy hearing, instead of taking some money and getting an attorney involved to throw a monkey wrench in the works so that their 12-year old granddaughter doesn't get an ice pick in the ear, Ed and Joel suddenly turn straight. And throw the granddaughter under the bus. And those ugly guys with the bent noses suddenly disappear. How convenient.

There's a sucker born every minute, and these two clearly knew that dictum. You get in, hype it, pump the grift as long as you can then burn the restaurant... rather, file bankruptcy.

So if they knew the scam, there really is no need for shady underworld figures to be telling Ed and Joel how to do it. They already knew how to do it, had tried it before, and were doing it again. Which is my premise - they just thought they could keep it running up until they died.

It's actually a great business idea. Actor Lyle Waggoner has made an absolute fortune in the business, and there is not, as far as I know, another competitive independent company which specializes in this service.

Which seems to suggest that you can't be competitive in this market; otherwise smarter and better people would be out there competing with Waggoner's company and thriving. Seems to suggest that there can only be one gorilla on the block and Ed and Joel just threw good money away again thinking they could be Waggoner's competitors.

The notion of having your children disappear and your own leftovers becoming shark bait wherever in the world you run would be a fine inducement to keep working long into "retirement years" at an enterprise which costs you millions every year.

Yeah, but again facts to support this theory are non-existent. My alternate theory is that extraterrestrials took over Ed and Joel's brains and made them operate this scheme, and they had no ability to resist. No, I am changing my mind, it had to be the 12-year old grandaughter who was the real player here and blackmailed the two senior citizens into operating the Ponzi for her benefit. Perfectly possible, kids are so precocious nowadays, doncha think?

OK... now take the last sentence and add occasional visits from a big guy named Guido. Or Boris. Or Nguyen. Or Alfonso. Or Mordacai. Or Brigham.

Or Mork. Or ALF. Or my favorite Martian. Or Mr. Spock. Or Q. Or the Brady Bunch. Or Gilligan. The list goes on. And can go on as long we want to idly speculate.

[JamesVincent]

... According to your theory, Ed and Joel are up to their ears in organized crime alligators....

I thought DK was supposed to put them down?

[Tednewsom]

Ed and Joel suddenly turn straight. And throw the granddaughter under the bus. And those ugly guys with the bent noses suddenly disappear. How convenient.

Well, no. Copping to the obvious is hardly going straight. And once under scrutiny, they take full blame? Does that not sound oddly out of character for two mooks who've been lying and running a crooked scam for nearly 20 years? And taking full responsibility for the whole thing: if, let's say, there was some other entity syphoning off money under duress-- it is scarcely throwing the granddaughter under the bus by saying "I did it all. There's nobody else. You can stop looking now." That's called keeping your yap shut, continued omerta to insure nothing happens. Which it would if they talked.

Nope, no proof at all, just as I had no proof five years ago when I started this shebang. But sometimes a situation lends itself to an instinctive explanation. "When I see a naked man chasing a woman down a dark alley with a knife and a hard-on, I don't figure he's collecting for the Red Cross." -- Sgt. Harry Callahan, SFPD, c. 1970.

[Gregg]

Your tinfoil hat is showing

[grimreaper]

This saga isn't only about the perpetrators...it's about GREED and those who took the bait.

[Tednewsom]

Your tinfoil hat is showing

Gregg... cruise through the early pages of this thread and you'll see a lot of agreement with that. OK, they're all from happy pro-NAS investors who were convinced I didn't know what I was talking about, but there you are.

[webhick]

J&E operated so low-key that I'm sure the scam could have kept going until they died except that about five years ago, the internet started talking trash about them and even though they created a bunch of bullshit content in (what I see as) a clear attempt to knock the trash-talking off the first page of Google results, it still remained no worse than fifth position and often would pop up in the first.

Gee, I wonder if it became harder over the past five years to procure new investors as well as maintain the prior pool... you know, what with the internet and all...

NASI didn't have much of a web presence when this thread fired up. I know, I looked for it. Then suddenly they had all this crap floating around - possibly as late as this year. I'm not sure the client portal site was even there until after this thread started becoming a thorn in their side.

Maybe Q will get a mention in court?

[Tednewsom]

Gee, I wonder if it became harder over the past five years to procure new investors as well as maintain the prior pool... you know, what with the internet and all...

Well... they seemed to have had no trouble nailing some multi-million dollar investors a mere six months ago. And that's documented in the SEC & FBI stuff.

[webhick]

Gee, I wonder if it became harder over the past five years to procure new investors as well as maintain the prior pool... you know, what with the internet and all...

Well... they seemed to have had no trouble nailing some multi-million dollar investors a mere six months ago. And that's documented in the SEC & FBI stuff.

Not everyone believes what they Google. Or don't Google at all.

[grimreaper]

For the last 15 years or so, they probably had several years worth of payouts in the bank. Once that began to shrink from lack of sufficient #s of NEW investors, reserve losses went from a *trickle* to a ragging river very quickly. My theory is that this may have started back when we had the financial melt down back in 2007/08. I was very surprised to see Gillis hang in this long though.

[Tednewsom]

Gee, I wonder if it became harder over the past five years to procure new investors as well as maintain the prior pool... you know, what with the internet and all...

Well... they seemed to have had no trouble nailing some multi-million dollar investors a mere six months ago. And that's documented in the SEC & FBI stuff.

Not everyone believes what they Google. Or don't Google at all.

Ah, clearly not everyone has read the official SEC complaint and the receiver's summary.

[webhick]

Well... they seemed to have had no trouble nailing some multi-million dollar investors a mere six months ago. And that's documented in the SEC & FBI stuff.

Not everyone believes what they Google. Or don't Google at all.

Ah, clearly not everyone has read the official SEC complaint and the receiver's summary.

I think we're having a miscommunication. I didn't mean to imply that they weren't able to get new investors, just that the new investors were likely harder to come by because anyone googling NASI would find this thread. That surely would have scared off more than a few people. In addition to that, those who did google NASI may not have believed what they read here and invested anyway.

Also, I think we both know that I read both the complaint and the receiver's report since I'm the one with the blog.

[The Observer]

Copping to the obvious is hardly going straight. And once under scrutiny, they take full blame? Does that not sound oddly out of character for two mooks who've been lying and running a crooked scam for nearly 20 years?

What is unusual about that? It's what Madoff did - and the first persons he confessed to were his sons, letting them know that everything up to this point had just been one big scam and one big lie. And a number of Ponzi promoters roll over and play dead simply because they have been the only people involved in the scam day in and day out. There is no one else that they can blame or point fingers at. Yeah, some may blame it on alcohol or drugs, or a cruel childhood. You may even find a few who will blame banks or big business for ruining their "investment plan." But I have yet to see a Ponzi scammer blame some total stranger who had no involvement in the scam.

Here's the point, Ted. When confronted with a simple explanation or a complicated one for the causation of an event, Occam's Razor indicate the simple one is typically the correct explanation.

And taking full responsibility for the whole thing: if, let's say, there was some other entity syphoning off money under duress-- it is scarcely throwing the granddaughter under the bus by saying "I did it all. There's nobody else. You can stop looking now."

But that behavior would also be the same result if Ed and Joel were truly responsible - which is the simple explanation.

Nope, no proof at all, just as I had no proof five years ago when I started this shebang. But sometimes a situation lends itself to an instinctive explanation.

But the situation at that time met your simple explanation that this was a Ponzi scheme. Your detractors were coming up with complex contrived explanations for why NASI was not a scam. This time around, you are the one coming up with a complex explanation for what was going on behind the scenes at NASI.

"When I see a naked man chasing a woman down a dark alley with a knife and a hard-on, I don't figure he's collecting for the Red Cross." -- Sgt. Harry Callahan, SFPD, c. 1970.

Right, let's fall back on sensational quotes from fictional movie characters instead of relying on what has been the correct way to discovering the truth.

[Tednewsom]

I'm almost satisfied with the simple explanation: two sharp grifters worked their butts off for a decade like dogs on a treadmill, getting nowhere but doubling their accounting and sales efforts every year so they could run a company which was hemorrhaging like a bayonet wound. They kept up regular payments to 2000 or 3000 customers because they didn't want all those people to be cross with them. And because they grew up with the Lone Ranger and Superman as heroes, they didn't keep any of the money themselves, content to make strangers smile every month when the check came in. Yeah, okay, sure, that's acceptable.

[The Observer]

almost satisfied with the simple explanation

Except you skewed it and overlooked facts:

(1)

...two sharp grifters worked their butts off for a decade like dogs on a treadmill, getting nowhere but doubling their accounting and sales efforts every year...

No Ponzi scheme runs itself. If you want the marks to send you money, then you need to hustle and make the scam look bigger than life. And you were the one who ran that little spreadsheet exercise, so you know that Joel and Ed had to keep the pump going if they wanted the money to come in. I don't know of any Ponzi gurus who gave up after two days, saying, "Wow, I didn't realize it was this much work."

And what effort in accounting? From what I have read so far, the accounting that was found at NASI was pretty much not accurate, not current and not so much there. So I have doubts that Joel and Ed were burning the midnight oil, making sure that their ledgers were adding up.

(2)

"...so they could run a company which was hemorrhaging like a bayonet wound.

No, so that the money would keep coming in that they were skimming off for themselves. And all Ponzi schemes hemorrhage. It's the nature of the beast. That is why the hucksters keep bringing in new bait. Every Ponzi scheme runs in this manner.

(3)

They kept up regular payments to 2000 or 3000 customers because they didn't want all those people to be cross with them.

No, they want those people to either keep reinvesting, entice their family and friends to invest, or be testimonials that the scammer can point to as evidence that he can be trusted. That is the whole mission statement of a Ponzi scam.

(4)

And because they grew up with the Lone Ranger and Superman as heroes, they didn't keep any of the money themselves, content to make strangers smile every month when the check came in.

Who said they didn't keep money for themselves? Are you forgetting that they blew money on Fuel Doctor? And some trailers? I am sure a good forensic audit is going to show that Joel and Ed lived very well, that their families were supported, and that there were a number of times when Ed and Joel splurged for items that you and I would not even consider raiding our nest eggs to purchase. We know that Ed managed to pay off the mortgage on the home that was quit claimed to his wife a month before the scam went down the tubes. You going to tell me that money came from successful trailer rentals?

The other thing that a forensic audit will show is that this scam, like every other Ponzi scheme, used most of the incoming money to pay the marks so they would remain complacent and happy. Some of the money went into overhead costs, others towards the 250 ATMs and the bad investments.

Which brings up another point: If your theory about Gillis/Wishner being extorted by the mob is correct and they were scared witless of standing up to these thugs, where did Joel and Ed get the guts to skim the mob's money so they could waste it on Fuel Doctor, ATMs, trailer purchases and then plow some into their personal residence? I mean, I know organized crime gets real upset when they find out that kind of pilfering is going on, you can gather enough tales in Vegas about croupiers disppearing mysteriously for palming chips off the tables in the 50's and 60's. Yet Ed and Joel are still walking about after pulling those stunts?

Organized Mobster: Ok, youse guys are going to be working for us from now on. You turn over 90% of your net inome to us every month. And you gotta pay the marks! And we don't want to hear about no funny bizness like cookin' da books or skimming money fer yerselves? Or we will be sendin' youse guys to swim with the fishes! And your granddaughter too! And don't even think about goin' to the cops! Capiche?

Ed and Joel: Yes, your Caponess!

(Mobster leaves)

Ed: Oh, Joel, what are we going to do? We are going to have to be paying the mob for the next 19 years! How we will survive? We should go to the cops!

Joel: Weren't you listening? We say or do anything. its curtains for us, curtains!

E: I know, you are right. We need to clam up and just act like chickens and go along with the mob! They are so scary!

J: By the way, I have been looking at this Fuel Doctor investment. It seems pretty good, we should get it into it right away!

E: Yeah, but where are we going to get the money for it?

J: We will just take it from the mob's money.

E: But they will get mad at us!

J: So what? What does that goon know? Besides, I never like your grandaughter anyways.

E: You're right, I never liked her either! Let's do it!

(19 years later)

Mobster: Youse guys, you telling me, that you skimmed our money and lost it gettin' scammed? You bought trailers that you haven't made any money on with our money? And you then took our money and paid off your homes? After I warned you what would happen?

Ed/Joel: Yes, your Mobbishness!

Mobster: Jeesh, I dunno what to do here. This has never happened before. Everyone else always fell in line with our demands. And youse guys acted chicken all these years, making payments to us? And never complained to us, never moaned, always got our money to us on time? I'm confused, this ain't 'posed to happen. I'm going to have to talk to the boys downtown about this.

E/J: We have Ed's granddaughter tied up in the back in case you want to take her downtown with you, we even have the cement mixed up already. It might help smooth things over.

Mob: Oh, well at least you have that goin' fer ya. Appreciate you at least trying to make amends for this. Okey-dokey, I will talk to the boys to see if we can call it even between youse and us.

[JamesVincent]

J&E operated so low-key that I'm sure the scam could have kept going until they died except that about five years ago, the internet started talking trash about them and even though they created a bunch of bullshit content in (what I see as) a clear attempt to knock the trash-talking off the first page of Google results, it still remained no worse than fifth position and often would pop up in the first.

Gee, I wonder if it became harder over the past five years to procure new investors as well as maintain the prior pool... you know, what with the internet and all...

NASI didn't have much of a web presence when this thread fired up. I know, I looked for it. Then suddenly they had all this crap floating around - possibly as late as this year. I'm not sure the client portal site was even there until after this thread started becoming a thorn in their side.

Maybe Q will get a mention in court?

Something interesting about what Web said. 4-5 years ago, when I first got involved in this thread, I looked online for NAS and found a couple of cheap websites. One of those websites talked about NAS' great network of service personnel across the country to service all of those ATMs. A year or so ago that website was gone. I went to look it up during another of the drive-by supporter post wars and could not find it. It was just gone. It was not a NAS site, it was something else where they had contributed the information. At the time I had found that site there was no NAS site that I could find. Obviously now they do have a NAS site, the receiver has taken it over. But a lot of the arguments that the "supporters" used was that NAS was so great it didn't need a website and that it was typical for companies like them to not have a web presence. Which, of course, is a load of hooey. Any company that doesn't have a website in this day and age is not going to get business, word of mouth or not. People want to be able to look online and find it, to see what it is you offer. And, of course, any smart investor will Google your company before they invest. And if they can't find it they won't invest.

[Judge Roy Bean]

J&E operated so low-key that I'm sure the scam could have kept going until they died except that about five years ago, the internet started talking trash about them and even though they created a bunch of bullshit content in (what I see as) a clear attempt to knock the trash-talking off the first page of Google results, it still remained no worse than fifth position and often would pop up in the first.

Gee, I wonder if it became harder over the past five years to procure new investors as well as maintain the prior pool... you know, what with the internet and all...

...

Just think - if they could have kept it going, they could have offered all their investors the opportunity/requirement to upgrade their non-existent ATM's to handle the smart-card technology in 2015. I wonder what they would have charged for that little service?

[Tednewsom]

observer:

I like it! It has the air of verisimilitude, in a Marx Brothers sort of way.