TWiki . Main . CyberRebateWarnings TWiki . { Main | Edumacation | TWiki | Test }
Main . { Home | Users | Changes | Search | Go }
Glad that you finally called this scam for what it is: a ponzi scheme. Not to be too critical, but I am surprised that you did not so state earlier. I had alerted several web sites that this was a scam (see CyberRebatePonziWarning web search for CyberRebatePonziWarning). I am very disappointed in the NY AG who seemed powerless to shut this thing down for what is was, a ponzi scheme. Ponzi schemes are illegal, and criminal charges should be forthcoming. I am going to contact the NY AG and let them know my opinion, there is still plenty of time for criminal action.

(BTW, with regard to your comment on continuing to operate, they have shut down their website and let their entire staff go, there is no way that even those crooks could continue to operate. To continue to take orders and promise rebates when you are majorly insolvent would have to be seen as criminal fraud.)

I have absolutely no doubt that CyberRebate never intended to be a legitimate business, but instead was always a ponzi scheme. Had the economy and the dot coms not taken such a hit they probably could have gone on much longer, and stuck the suckers for a much larger amount: instead of $40-80 million it would have been $200 million or more. I am sure that it was their intent to eventually declare chapter 11 and fold.

I am disappointed that so many consumer watchdogs did not realize that this was far worse than most consumer scams and actually a criminal enterprise. To further illustrate this point, in general, if a consumer gets ripped off, his maximum exposure is generally the value of the product. If he buys a microwave oven, his maximum exposure is $70-150 (depending on the VALUE of the oven) With CyberRebate, the exposure was, as you point out, many times the VALUE of the item, in the case of a microwave, $700-1500. And when CyberRebate recently changed their policy and allowed each customer to order as many rebatable items as desired (instead of one of each item) and also offered free shipping that should have been a dead giveaway that they were desparate to push more cash into the front end of the scheme and did not care how much rebate exposure they had.

The NY AG was really dumb for not spotting all this and realizing that something was terribly amiss, a classic example of mindless bureaucratic brainlock. I also fault ALL of the people who should have known better but still did business with CyberRebate, including the credit card companies, the manufacturers, the banks AND savvy consumers who were smart enough to know that someone else had to get ripped off but still greedily tried to get something for nothing.

(One final comment, it seems to be feasible to have a legitimate business that only sells rebatable products. I think that this may be a good idea, I only hope that CyberRebate has not poisoned the well so badly that noone will be able to make this venture.)

Thanks for your great site! -- Richard Olson - 20 May 2001

Topic CyberRebateWarnings . { Edit | Ref-By | Attach | Diffs | r1.1 }
You must register before editing pages or using other extended features on this TWiki system.
Revision r1.1 - 20 May 2001 - 18:38 by EliMantel web search for EliMantel
Privacy Policy 		Copyright © 2000-2005 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration tool is the property of the contributing authors. Collect email addresses here.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback.