So is Autosurfing Legitimate?
That's probably the question riding on everyone's mind. Are they ponzis?
Ponzis imply that there's no actual tangible product being sold. In the case of autosurfing, it is supposedly advertising, and your time spent viewing advertisements.
I like the article posted on Sam Freedom's Internet Marketing Controversy Blog arguing about the sustainability of 12DailyPro's business model. The numbers presented represent a much more believable picture, compared to the sensationalised media arguments we've seen on ABC4. However, that doesn't mean that 12DP is infallible. For someone were to look at 12DailyPro's sales pitch (Earn 12% daily in 12 days), they would find it impossible to believe as well. 12DailyPro's model is similar to most other autosurfs, in that they pay a percentage daily for viewing a certain number of ads. Many autosurfs have come and gone, enough to raise the suspicions of the authorities and the online community.
Autosurf & Investments blog questions the legitimacy of autosurfs, but says that it really depends on how we define autosurfing. (Has legislation finally caught up with the autosurf craze?) Firstly, is autosurfing considered (online) work? In order to earn money with autosurfing, you need to surf daily. If you miss a day, you lose the potential % earnings for that day. That implies that some work is done, doesn't it? Maximum profit is earned from loyalty to the autosurf, ie surfing loyally everyday for the duration of the upgrade. The problem arises, because of the belief that advertiser earnings alone do not generate the required money to pay off the active members. That would imply that people are getting paid not from advertising earnings, but from the investments (upgrades) of new members.
Some autosurf sites claim that the money you put in isn't an investment per se. The upgrades are sometimes referred to as membership fees. So, it means you're paying for the right to surf the site, but have the opportunity to earn back your fees, by surfing and viewing advertisements.
But how much money can an autosurf generate from advertisements alone? IS that revenue enough to sustain the business? There are other income sources. With Stormpay & NetIBA, there (WAS) an opportunity for autosurfs to earn commission from referring new members to sign up under their referral link. That would count as revenue, right?
Sources and related links:
Google Blogsearch for Autosurfing
Autosurf & Investments blog
Sam Freedom's Internet Marketing Controversy Blog
Bradford Moore Autosurfing info
So, Are Autosurfs Ponzis?
Ponzis imply that there's no actual tangible product being sold. In the case of autosurfing, it is supposedly advertising, and your time spent viewing advertisements.
I like the article posted on Sam Freedom's Internet Marketing Controversy Blog arguing about the sustainability of 12DailyPro's business model. The numbers presented represent a much more believable picture, compared to the sensationalised media arguments we've seen on ABC4. However, that doesn't mean that 12DP is infallible. For someone were to look at 12DailyPro's sales pitch (Earn 12% daily in 12 days), they would find it impossible to believe as well. 12DailyPro's model is similar to most other autosurfs, in that they pay a percentage daily for viewing a certain number of ads. Many autosurfs have come and gone, enough to raise the suspicions of the authorities and the online community.
Autosurf & Investments blog questions the legitimacy of autosurfs, but says that it really depends on how we define autosurfing. (Has legislation finally caught up with the autosurf craze?) Firstly, is autosurfing considered (online) work? In order to earn money with autosurfing, you need to surf daily. If you miss a day, you lose the potential % earnings for that day. That implies that some work is done, doesn't it? Maximum profit is earned from loyalty to the autosurf, ie surfing loyally everyday for the duration of the upgrade. The problem arises, because of the belief that advertiser earnings alone do not generate the required money to pay off the active members. That would imply that people are getting paid not from advertising earnings, but from the investments (upgrades) of new members.
Some autosurf sites claim that the money you put in isn't an investment per se. The upgrades are sometimes referred to as membership fees. So, it means you're paying for the right to surf the site, but have the opportunity to earn back your fees, by surfing and viewing advertisements.
But how much money can an autosurf generate from advertisements alone? IS that revenue enough to sustain the business? There are other income sources. With Stormpay & NetIBA, there (WAS) an opportunity for autosurfs to earn commission from referring new members to sign up under their referral link. That would count as revenue, right?
Sources and related links:
Google Blogsearch for Autosurfing
Autosurf & Investments blog
Sam Freedom's Internet Marketing Controversy Blog
Bradford Moore Autosurfing info
So, Are Autosurfs Ponzis?
posted by manic_depressive_1 at 2/06/2006 07:14:00 AM
![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](http://kitconet.com/charts/metals/gold/t24_au_en_usoz_2.gif)
4 Comments:
none of it is legit. the entire industry is a scam.
These autosurfs are ponzi/pyramid scams. After reading the case for a sustainable 12DP, I have to say it's not much of a case.
Point #1 -- subtracting StormPay fees might mean less money for the member, but it doesn't mean less debt for 12DP.
Point #2 -- basing your business on the hope that people won't do what you've just told them is sooooo easy isn't much a business plan.
Point #3 -- fine, they sell advertising. But do they sell anywhere near enough advertising to be sustainable? Obviously not.
Point #4 -- again, extra income by deleting 'cheaters' seems like a pretty shake busikness plan.
Point #5 -- millions of dollars in start-up capital? Yeah, right.
If you read some of the legal definitions of pyramid-type scams, as well as some of the past court cases for these and other investment scams, it becomes pretty clear that most of the 'loopholes' people use for autosurfs (but they sell advertising so it can't be a ponzi...but you don't have to recruit to be paid....but they tell you the risks before you join...) have been tried before. And they didn't hold up in court.
Hi MD1,
Thanks for the mention and the link. What Wil, God bless his busy mind, failed to understand was that my "Case for a Sustainable 12DailyPRO" was not based in fact. It was merely a casual attempt at considering how a venture like 12DailyPRO might be sustainable.
Realistic? Improbable. Possible, sure. But anyways, since Wil likes to argue, I'll indulge him this once. :-)
Wil said:
Point #1 -- subtracting StormPay fees might mean less money for the member, but it doesn't mean less debt for 12DP.
It sure does. Where do you think a lot of those fees went? Stormpay's referral program runs 6 levels deep and guess who was at the top of the mountain? At 6 levels deep those fees add up fast.
Does THAT alone make 12DailyPRO sustainable? No, but it makes it MORE sustainable and therefore worthy of mention in a case for sustainability. Sorry I didn't spell out that "subtracting fees" from one's earnings also meant "adding some of those fees" to 12DailyPro's coffers.
Point #2 -- basing your business on the hope that people won't do what you've just told them is sooooo easy isn't much a business plan.
You're kidding, right? People like Wil spend some portion of their time saying things like, "you need to thin outside the box" but when it comes right down to it, for most, it's just a great buzzphrase to mention.
Take, for example, the picture at the top of my blogpost:
Sam Freedom Supports Denmark!
Do you know how many people will click that link?
Anyways, that's not the bulletproof example I suspect Wil would like to see, but his point is moot. Even if 12DailyPRO didn't plan their business around the fact that most people wouldn't do what they told them to, the fact that a lot of people would miss days of surfing would still make their business more.... SUSTAINABLE!
(There's that word again.)
Point #3 -- fine, they sell advertising. But do they sell anywhere near enough advertising to be sustainable? Obviously not.
But does that, along with the other points make their business MORE sustainable than if those conditions were not present? Obviously it does.
Point #4 -- again, extra income by deleting 'cheaters' seems like a pretty shake busikness plan.
Well, Wil, you're finally catching on. These businesses are shaky to begin with. It's not a far stretch to think these people begin building their business models from the real PONZI scheme plans and then pluck here, remove there, and try to factor in some of the things I'd mentioned in order to get it to a point where it's arguably legal and barely sustainable.
You know what they say about cops? In order to catch crooks, they have to think like 'em, and your argument sounds like that of a rookie. :-)
Best wishes,
Sam Freedom
12DailyPro Madness Blog
Point #5 -- millions of dollars in start-up capital? Yeah, right.
PS. Regarding...
Point #5 -- millions of dollars in start-up capital? Yeah, right.
Yeah right? Ok, like the 100s of autosurfs that have broken the surface of the ocean just to sink back down to the bottom several months later were all run by different people, huh? YEAH, RIGHT!
Already 12DailyPro and Alien Trust are trying to open new companies. The term "sociopath" comes to mind.
Sam
Post a Comment
<< Home