As was reported on Wednesday July 10th, TelexFree latest
attempt to circumvent a business crippling injunction handed down against them
in June was to file an injunction appeal of their own.
Upon filing their injunction, which marks the third attempt
by TelexFree to lift the Acre injunction against the business, the company
advised that they expected ‘a preliminary decision later this week’. Last
Friday TelexFree’s injunction request was heard by Chief Justice Eva
Evangelista. The decision?
TelexFree’s
injunction appeal was denied.
According to a
spokesperson of the TJ-AC, the federal judge’s decision was taken after the
completion of a ‘detailed analysis, in which the entire case was considered,
with consideration of previous decisions’.
The decision by Judge Evangelista was reached after
TelexFree presented it’s case on Tuesday last week, with lawyer Djacir Falcão
arguing in court that an injunction against the injunction needed to be granted
because should TelexFree spend a few
more days being prohibited from signing up new investors, they would have no
money to pay the old ones.
As it stands now three appeals filed by TelexFree against
the initial Acre injunction against TelexFree have been denied, with the
company having failed to convince a single Judge, all of whom have analysed the
business model, that the company is not a Ponzi scheme.
Looking forward it’s unclear what TelexFree’s next course of
action will be. Several regulatory agencies in Brazil are investigating the
company with criminal charges expected to be filed against the company by
either Public Prosecutors in Acre or the Federal Police by the end of the
month.
Whether, as put forth by their lawyer, TelexFree goes
bankrupt as a result of the Acre injunction prohibiting the recruitment of new
affiliate investors or not, remains to be seen. In related news suspected Ponzi
scheme BBOM has gone on the defensive after the company’s assets were frozen
mid last week.
The decision to freeze BBOM’s assets was made after a Judge
examined evidence collected by federal Prosecutors against the company, and
‘agreed there was robust evidence indicating that BBOM’s business model is
actually just a Ponzi scheme‘.
Joao-Francisco-de-Paulo-founder-president-BBOM Speaking to
TribunaHoje, BBOM Founder and President João Francisco de Paulo (right) claims
that Prosecutors did no work in this investigation; they instead worked with
information from malicious people. BBOM take payments of $300, $900 or $1500
from affiliates and in exchange pay out $80, $240 or $400 a month respectively.
The company claims this money is sourced from the sale of
GPS tracker units to customers, which an affiliate “rents” when they hand over
money.
The problem however is that BBOM pay out their monthly
return to affiliates, on condition of affiliates investing in the scheme, as
opposed to trackers being sold to customers.
Affiliates who invest money with the company do little more
than hand over money, with BBOM, under the brand Unepxmil, selling the actual
units.
Naturally the question arises as to why BBOM need to collect
payments from affiliates if they themselves are doing all the selling to
customers on behalf of the affiliates.
The obvious answer? BBOM take money from affiliates and just
pay it out monthly to existing affiliate investors, using the GPS tracker
business as a front.
Francisco de Paulo meanwhile strongly denies this claim. We have acquired 1.5 million GPS trackers.
Of these 1.5 million trackers we generate a turnover of U.S. $120 per month.
Unepxmil via which
the services are marketed through, including monitoring and tracking, is
becoming the largest GPS tracking operator in the world. Today we add between 5000 to 10 thousand GPS
units per day. Far be it for me to point out the obvious, but wouldn’t clearing
the legitimacy of BBOM be as simple as providing a Judge with detailed receipts
of all GPS trackers rented out to actual retail customers?
Why this has not happened and Francisco de Paulo is instead
harping on about “malicious people” I have no idea.
In the interview, Francisco de Paulo also states that he
“does not know why” TelexFree has been targeted as a Ponzi scheme. I’m taking a
punt here but perhaps if Francisco de Paulo took some time to understand why
TelexFree continues to have every appeal they file denied based on analysis of
their business model – he might start to understand why.
And not only that, come to see why BBOM is in the same boat.
You can very much claim to have 1.5 million GPS trackers,
but in taking payments from affiliates and paying them out a monthly ROI, it
all means dick if you’re not actually selling trackers to retail customers as
you claim.
Time to pony up those receipts BBOM or come clean. Either
make the choice or have the Brazilian courts make it for you, either works for
us.
