Printable View
Just read this:http://lwb.lawnet.com.sg/legal/lgl/r...rts/49802.html
I wonder are there any gins members in this forum so can share with us .
since gins been investigate by bon and I wish to know what gins going to do with members who invested.The program also 2% daily which similar to pips.
Is that the statement from BON ? So what BON want gins to do next.Just get some inform on gins and will pips be the same situation we dont know.
Thank you all for sharing .
mmm
The case was heard in Singapore. The cad, not BON were involved in bringing about the prosecution.You cant really compare it to pips.Gins began life in Singapore but ended in Malaysia if I remember well.
There is a new plan for 10% monthly about to be released.
Read through the case files for all the info.
wow that was a long read.
So GINS was a scam after all. I was hoping it wasn't. Not that I had invested in it, I was about to before it got shut down.
I got a bit confused about one thing mentioned in the text. It said that PPPs are not viable, not real. Do they mean all PPPs in general or only the 6 PPPs in this case? Are all PPPs fake?
It is too early to say GINS was a scam and PPPs are not viable. GINS lawyers were ready to present a lady who is in trading in PPPS and came all the way from Hon Kong to stand at a witness stand to testify in favor of GINS or Dr. Tan, the owner and the accused, but the young judge told the defense lawyers that he has heard enough already and no more witness is needed. It was the biggest mistake of the defense lawyers who did not insist to have the most important witnerss to testify. It looks like the judge has predetermined to file the case against Dr. Tan by all means.Quote:
Originally Posted by moonbear
pinetree
Having read all of the documention contained in the above link, it would seem that PPP's are viable, but after commissions would fall short of providing enough capital to pay the investors the returns promised. In other words, had GINS promised a lower rate of return to investors, everything would have been okay.
Further, it looks as if this judge had a serious problem with the defendants lack of any kind of a sense of urgency where the investors were concerned. I believe, after reading the judges' rulings, that if the accused had at least made a serious attempt to complete entry into ONE PPP, seen it through to fruition, this judge may not have made the decision that he did.
I was not invested in GINS, and have absolutely no background or history on this program at all. This is just how I interpret the courts findings. Further, I invested in PIPS in mid April, '05, so I don't know alot about how the inner management functioned. In GINS, seems as if it was the individual responsible for finding the investments that was held responsible for any wrong doing with regard to the investors. With PIPS, who was responsible for making these investments? In other words, if investments had been made by the GINS accused, I don't think he would be going to prison.
Again, that's just my take on what I read,
treasurhunter1
Interesting,
After reading and re-reading this case over and over, it becomes obvious that PPP's are nothing but smoke and mirror pyramids. What we see here is one pyramid investing in yet another. The example given which was based on a deal where he pulled out the money and did not reinvest again, so he saw $450K in less than a year, and thought this was for real. Little did he know he was lucky, which is the basis of all pyramids, being lucky to get in and out first, so with no real DD being done, they start a copycat to PIPS.
Sorry, but this reads just as I expected it would. I have researched so many of these so called PPP's and have yet to verify that they are indeed real. There is always something that changes at last minute to skuttle most deals. This was the perfect example of why there was no proof provides that these deals to exist. They are always based on some secret investment that the rest of the world never hears about. Sure sounds fishy to me.
Bottom line, there was never any investments made as promoted, in fact, outright lies that investments had already been placed with PPP's. The only investment of any kind was in a lounge, and wow, does that ever sound familiar. I guess if you are going to copy a PIPS, you might as well copy everything exactly. Sure was an interesting read.
Good luck to all, Mike
Wow Mike!Quote:
Originally Posted by Offshore-Wealth.com
I haven't investigated stuff as much as you did for sure, but I'd like to believe you got the nail on its head there. Especially the points I highlighted.
Agreed with all you said, mainly because it supports most of what I once suspected (and now understand better).
Wacky
-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Just curious! Anyone interested in decent, FREE forex intro lessons? ~PM me~
I feel inspired to teach!
Was PIPS investing in PPS?
Hopefully no! But I doubt anyone can give you an informed answer to that.
I’m of the impression that legit PPS’s exist. As an example, isn’t that United Nations program that PIPS was invested in a PPS? Or is that something entirely different?
HUH??Quote:
Originally Posted by Chester
A legal pyramid scheme!?!Quote:
Originally Posted by Chester
I think it's something different!
All I can say, and am allowed to say as an investor w/ Gins, is that all the information you have is suspect in the least...
I love how everyone is always willing to jump all over things they know very little about...
And as for the PPP's... I personally know 3 people who invest in them on a regular basis through private programs and have been paid multiple times over the years... and never have they been scammed in the programs they are associated w/... I am working diligently to get to the minimums required to allow entry...
So much for that theory...
/shred
PPP:s exist !!
The have been in west europan banks fore more than 100 years..
But the big buissiness starting after world war 2,but no bankir in the world will say that the are existing.. And why not ?? Thats the big mystery !!
But the exist !!
Tiiger
PPP's are just bank investment vehicles, that they let individuals with $10 to $100k invest in --- this is basically what GINS and many other programs try to do -- gather enough money from individual investors to be able to join a PPP.
The problem with GINS is they never invested in any PPP and kept paying out money from the money they were taking in from investors.This caused money to be missing from the investment pool and they came up short when the tabulation was done.
PIPS on the other hand, had money in PPP, and investors investing in the market as well -- this is why they were able to pay out more than was taken in.If PIPS was working the way GINS was, then the investigation by BNM would have taken a couple weeks -- but as most of the reporting so far claims they just suspect that something is not right and did not yet find anything to prove this, so they were giving the more senior investigator a go at it to see if he could find anything before they turn it over to the prosecutors.
Anyway PPP's are viable vehicles used by banks to make money -- you can usually only get into them by invitation, and with a very large sum of money. The banks will also if asked claim that there is no such thing -- but if you put $500k or more in the same bank -- you might all of a sudden get an invitation to join the PPP -- the reason they do this is because they retain a large amount of the returns for themselves, and they cannot just take your money and invest it in a PPP -- they have to have your permission to do so. Oh, by the way you would also have to sign a non-disclosure agreement if you get invited into a PPP, so you would not be able to go around proving to everyone that you are in this PPP.
Thanks you shredder, tiiger and weseeall,
I can acertain that PPPs definitely exist and work very well too...the only problem is that there are a lot of scammers around that pretend to represent PPPs and scam people out of funds when they cannot deliver...So every 9 out of 10 PPPs out there are seen as scams...
Mostly the minimum required is $1M to participate but even this needs to be pooled together with other $Millions in the end...so they prefer to start with $100M+
But as my learned friend has just explained because PPPs all request for a sgned NCND Agreement from the investor, it does mean that the investor never gets to go to the media or the internet to confirm that he is being paid...
How do you all think that Citi bank, HSBC and other large banks get to make profits of $10+ Billion per year for their shareholders??
my 2% worth
spongebob
Yes, as I recall, Pips was reportedly investing in PPP's. This was discussed on the old Pips forum. And that was part of the reason there had to be a humanitarian component, because many PPPs require that.Quote:
Originally Posted by way2go
Weseeall.....I'm curious....you said Pips paid out more than it took in.....where did you come up with that? For one thing, none of us had access to those numbers except Bryan... Also, Pips essentially stopped paying in Dec. of '04 except for a very tiny trickle here and there up until around March of '05, but people were investing clear up until the investigation shut everything down in August of '05. It seems likely far more went into Pips than was ever paid out, especially since many people were letting their accounts grow for quite some time rather than withdrawing after they put money in. And the big question is, where is all that money? Hence, part of the reason for the investigation.....