EarnByLoaning - earnbyloaning.com

[aj9088]

i dont care about all the personal bs going on here..name calling etc...all i care about is whether or not EBL is legal in its present structure...after reviewing all that has been said, i still believe that it is NOT legal....and the key to WHY it is not legal is what is posted by LRM...i know of him from another forum, and he is indeed an ass, but i dont care abou that, if he is right, then he is right and his personality doesnt matter to me....obviously jp seems like a much nicer guy than lrm, but again, who cares about that stuff, as all i or anyone should care about is who is tellling the truth here...(and im not implying that if one is wrong, then that person is lying. just misinformed i would assume)

LRM said

"It's simple really.

The important definition is the one used by the courts:


Quote:
There is an investment of money, a common enterprise and expectation of profits to come primarily from the efforts of others."


that is the crux of this issue...if u read howry closely, u see all of the criteria that the courts use to ascertain if a stock, or a "loan" is a security, and if it is a security, if it MUST be registered with the SEC .... ONE of those criteria is what LRM posted above...

IF there is an investment of money (or "LOAN" as in the case with EBL, as the courts have said numerous times that a "loan" in THIS sense, is the same as an investment), a common enterprise, again which fits the EBL model, and most importantly to me, "THE EXPECTATION OF PROFITS TO COME PRIMARILY FROM THE EFFORTS OF OTHERS", which again fits the case here with EBL as we all "loan" our money for a set period of time, and we then "expect" profits to come to us all because of the efforts of others, meaning EBL, then this fits the definition of a security which MUST be registered with the SEC....as LRM said earlier, it really is or at least seems pretty simple...

i HOPE i am dead wrong...i wish someone from EBL would post SPECIFICALLY pertaining to THIS issue, meaning the howry case...there ARE CLEARY reasons to believe that EBL is legit, (use of paypal, the pension plans, sending off 1099s, require all of those docs etc) so i hope they really DO have all of their t's crossed and i's dotted...it would be a very pleasant surprise...

EBL? any comments? thanx...

[littleroundman]

Of course I'm an ass, and a very pompous one, at that.

I revel in being an ass. I practice being an ass. I don't deny being an ass.

Unfortunately for Captain jlpicard and crew, on this occasion, I'm an ass who's correct in stating the bloomin' obvious.

The subject of "loans" being defined as "securities" has been covered countless times in the courts, most recently in the cases of "The Dinner Club," "Women Empowering Women" and "The Garden Club" as well as countless similarly named programs.

This is a ponzi "game" pure and simple.

And it will go the way of everything else Captain Picard touts.

Down the gurgler.

[4loan]

Are folks like littleroundman, aj9088, okosh, overlooking some relevant info?

What makes this a legal program? They are so above board in all that they do.

1. A SD IRA Trust company (Pensco Trust) has done due diligence on EBL (includes reviewing their business plan/model) and has approved them
2. PayPal has done due diligence on their business and approved them, even based on Homeland Security requirements (PayPal has a strict No Ponzi Allowed policy)
3. EBL is a registered company in the USA. I know anyone can register a company, but they have a real address, with real people that have been met in person (the CEO has a family and has met in person with some members).
4. They file their taxes and generate 1099-INT forms to all lenders for tax purposes
5. They require all lenders to submit due diligence information for their records to meet Homeland Security and IRS requirements
6. All loans are made under a written contract that has been reviewed by independent lawyers and accountants
7. Then there is their track record. They have been around since Feb 2006 and have not had a single problem in payments.
8. They have excellent support staff reachable via e-mail, forum, Skype voice and via phone.
9. The CEO is available via phone and in person

check out some of this DD and see for yourselves

[hpagan]

Originally Posted by littleroundman

Of course I'm an ass, and a very pompous one, at that.

I revel in being an ass. I practice being an ass. I don't deny being an ass.

Unfortunately for Captain jlpicard and crew, on this occasion, I'm an ass who's correct in stating the bloomin' obvious.

The subject of "loans" being defined as "securities" has been covered countless times in the courts, most recently in the cases of "The Dinner Club," "Women Empowering Women" and "The Garden Club" as well as countless similarly named programs.

This is a ponzi "game" pure and simple.

And it will go the way of everything else Captain Picard touts.

Down the gurgler.

littleroundman,

You've got to be the first ASS that can write. At least you have a talent with your ASS and we all know where your brains is!

LOL

[littleroundman]

Originally Posted by hpagan

You've got to be the first ASS that can write.

That's because, not only am I an ASS

I'm a smartASS.

Originally Posted by 4LOAN

1. A SD IRA Trust company (Pensco Trust) has done due diligence on EBL (includes reviewing their business plan/model) and has approved them Great, you won't mind showing us the results then, will you ??
2. PayPal has done due diligence on their business and approved them, even based on Homeland Security requirements (PayPal has a strict No Ponzi Allowed policy)Easy fixed. We can email PayPal direct for verification
3. EBL is a registered company in the USA. I know anyone can register a company, but they have a real address, with real people that have been met in person (the CEO has a family and has met in person with some members). Funny, Bryan Marsden and Charis Johnson are real people too AND they both had real addresses WITH pictures and they both met LOTS of people.
4. They file their taxes and generate 1099-INT forms to all lenders for tax purposes Cool. Get the IRS involved as well. What a great idea.
5. They require all lenders to submit due diligence information for their records to meet Homeland Security and IRS requirements Sure they do. BUT do they act on them as well ???
6. All loans are made under a written contract that has been reviewed by independent lawyers and accountants Excellent idea. Just scan and post a few of their conclusions here, could you ?? So we can all save ourselves having to pay for them to be assessed AGAIN
7. Then there is their track record. They have been around since Feb 2006 and have not had a single problem in payments. Not a single problem ?? Not even a teensy weensy bitty little one ???
8. They have excellent support staff reachable via e-mail, forum, Skype voice and via phone. Yep. The only question that remains is, will they answer?? Oh, and what are the numbers so we can check??
9. The CEO is available via phone and in personWonderful. Let's get his numbers and all give him a call or, better still, I'm sure we have someone who lives near him. Get his address and we'll get someone to pop around for a nice espresso and some of those yummy Italian almond biscotti

[jlpicard]

Originally Posted by aj9088

...that is the crux of this issue...if u read howry closely, u see all of the criteria that the courts use to ascertain if a stock, or a "loan" is a security, and if it is a security, if it MUST be registered with the SEC .... ONE of those criteria is what LRM posted above...

If you believe that ALL securities must be registered, with all due respect, you are very much mistaken. There are many many exemptions to registration. If you do not believe me, read through Rules 701 and Regs A & D. Jeez, if you're too lazy to even do this, how about just reading the titles?....

Rule 144 - Persons deemed not to be engaged in a distribution [of a security] and therefore not underwriters [17 CFR 230.144]

Rule 147 - Exemption for intrastate offers and sales of securities [17 CFR 230.147]

Rule 701 - Exemption for Offers and Sales of Securities Pursuant to Certain Compensatory Benefit Plans and Contracts Relating to Compensation [17 CFR 230.701]

Regulation A - Conditional small issues exemption from registration under the Securities Act of 1933 [17 CFR 230.251 - 230.263]

Regulation D - Rules governing the limited offer and sale of securities without registration under the Securities Act [17 CFR 230.501 - 230.508]

Regulation CE - Coordinated exemption for certain issues of securities exempt under state law [17 CFR 230.1001]

If you can't see this after reading even just the titles, then I can only conclude that you want to believe that there are no exemptions even though they clearly exist. I've listed several examples throughout the last several pages. I'll repeat two of them yet again... small company stock with less than 35 non-accredited shareholders and properly structured loans.

If you are willing to admit your error around the requirement of ALL securities needing to be registered, I'll be happy to go into the details as to why loans that are properly structured ("properly structured" is critical) are exempt. Otherwise, I'm not going to waist my time. You seem sincere though, so I hope you validate my assumption.

Originally Posted by aj9088

IF there is an investment of money (or "LOAN" as in the case with EBL, as the courts have said numerous times that a "loan" in THIS sense, is the same as an investment),

The reason why the courts rule that some, but not all "loans" are considered securities that needed to be registered is because they were not structured properly. An excellent example of this i the Global Online Direct case which I pm'd you details about and can be found here:

Originally Posted by http://highyieldrebates.com/GOD_vs_EBL.htm#summary

Summary of GOD Findings:

1. GOD did not comply with numerous cease and desist orders that were served from several states.

2. GOD represented their loan as secured by their inventory (when it wasn't).

3. GOD could not account for individual deposits.

4. GOD did not file it's taxes for 2005 & 2006.

5. No written loan agreements existed between members and GOD.

6. 1099 INT forms were not sent to "lenders".

7. GOD's commission structure was an unrealistic 25%.

8. GOD did not use funds exactly the way they had described to investors.

9. GOD needed new member funds in order to continue operations.

A table summarizing the differences between GOD vs. EBL can be found here:

http://highyieldrebates.com/GOD_vs_EBL.htm#eblvgod

Originally Posted by aj9088

a common enterprise, again which fits the EBL model, and most importantly to me, "THE EXPECTATION OF PROFITS TO COME PRIMARILY FROM THE EFFORTS OF OTHERS", which again fits the case here with EBL as we all "loan" our money for a set period of time, and we then "expect" profits to come to us all because of the efforts of others, meaning EBL, then this fits the definition of a security which MUST be registered with the SEC....as LRM said earlier, it really is or at least seems pretty simple...

Again, not all securities must be registered. Again, read the darn reg's, or better yet, ask an accountant. I keep saying this over and over, yet no one seems to do this... Why is that? LRM and okosh's ego wouldn't likely be able to handle the revelation otherwise, they'd be recommending the same thing (which they don't), but if you are sincere, just do it.

You can also e-mail the SEC, but as I've mentioned, my experience is that they won't provide anything useful and will refer you to a lawyer. If you don't believe me, again, go ahead and give it try.

Originally Posted by aj9088

i HOPE i am dead wrong...i wish someone from EBL would post SPECIFICALLY pertaining to THIS issue, meaning the howry case...there ARE CLEARY reasons to believe that EBL is legit, (use of paypal, the pension plans, sending off 1099s, require all of those docs etc) so i hope they really DO have all of their t's crossed and i's dotted...it would be a very pleasant surprise...

EBL? any comments? thanx...

I talked with Kerry last night on the phone. He mentioned that he almost jumped into this thread, but mentioned that there wasn't anything to add to what I've already mentioned.

Here are two things I suggest you do if you REALLY want the to get to the bottom of this issue:

1) Again, talk to your accountant. If you don't have one, get recommendations from people you trust and respect. Take them to lunch and interview them. Then select one. If you aren't willing to do that, then you probably don't have any business putting money into anything outside the standard mutual funds and publicly traded stocks IMHO.

Notice how LRM and okosh have NOT recommend this. Ask yourself "why not?".

2) Become a free member and talk to CJ, Kerry and or Troy yourself. They'll tell you the same things I have. Ask them anything you'd like. CJ is particularly articulate in these areas.

Sound reasonable?

Originally Posted by littleroundman

I'm a smartASS.

So far, you haven't shown you are that smart...
.

[littleroundman]

Uh Oh,

Jean-Luc has entered into "If you can't dazzle them with science, baffle them with bu**sh**" mode.

Why would anyone advise anyone else to take an accountant out to lunch to discuss a penny-ante HYIP which advertises in a forum which specializes in the discussion and promotion of other penny-ante ponzis ???

The good Captain Pickard can continue to go "round and round the mulberry bush" for ever and a day, but, the fact remains, redefining the EBL business as "loans" does NOTHING at all to remove it from the definition of securities.

As for reading the titles of the Securities Act as a means of interpreting the act itself, I would urge Cap'n Jean-Luc to pay in full for his next "Be Your Own Securities Attorney" mail order course so he can receive the full articles next time. Reading the headings only can bring him no good.

Seeing as how Ol' Cap'n JL is so keen we should all read more, can I respectfully suggest he do the same with regard to the previously mentioned "The Dinner Club," "Women Empowering Women" and "The Garden Club" cases???

I always find that good, juicy court cases are way more interesting than dry old legal definitions.

[jlpicard]

1. A SD IRA Trust company (Pensco Trust) has done due diligence on EBL (includes reviewing their business plan/model) and has approved them Great, you won't mind showing us the results then, will you ??

Why not call them yourself?

Fax: 415-956-3016
Client Services: 1-800-969-4472
Sales: 1-866-818-4472

2. PayPal has done due diligence on their business and approved them, even based on Homeland Security requirements (PayPal has a strict No Ponzi Allowed policy)Easy fixed. We can email PayPal direct for verification

Others have done this already. Please do and report back what you find. Anyone want to bet we don't hear back from him on this?...

3. EBL is a registered company in the USA. I know anyone can register a company, but they have a real address, with real people that have been met in person (the CEO has a family and has met in person with some members). Funny, Bryan Marsden and Charis Johnson are real people too AND they both had real addresses WITH pictures and they both met LOTS of people.

This is true, however PIPS and 12DP are very different from EBL...

4. They file their taxes and generate 1099-INT forms to all lenders for tax purposes Cool. Get the IRS involved as well. What a great idea.

They are. Like all smart business owners, they contact the IRS whenever they need clarification. Members on the call last night heard of one small adjustment they made recently as a result of this.

5. They require all lenders to submit due diligence information for their records to meet Homeland Security and IRS requirements Sure they do. BUT do they act on them as well ???

This is a good question, probably the first one I've seen from you. I do not know the process they use to determine a legitimate or illegitimate member. I will find this out. Again, good question.

6. All loans are made under a written contract that has been reviewed by independent lawyers and accountants Excellent idea. Just scan and post a few of their conclusions here, could you ?? So we can all save ourselves having to pay for them to be assessed AGAIN

You can view the loan agreement yourself and review it with your own accountant and lawyer. We know you won't, but you can if you really wanted to evaluate the legitimacy of the agreement.

7. Then there is their track record. They have been around since Feb 2006 and have not had a single problem in payments. Not a single problem ?? Not even a teensy weensy bitty little one ???

Depends on how you define "teensy weensy bitty little one" I guess, but I'm assuming that you are just being sarcastic. If not, clarify and we'll be happy to address the questions more specifically.

8. They have excellent support staff reachable via e-mail, forum, Skype voice and via phone. Yep. The only question that remains is, will they answer?? Oh, and what are the numbers so we can check??

Quest Holdings Inc.
8 WEST 29TH
SPOKANE, WA 99203

I have CJ's number, but will not disclose it publicly. You may speak with him or the support staff through skype. To do this, you must become a free member (registration, no funding required), register with the forum and then go to the Contact the Support Team section. It is explained there.

9. The CEO is available via phone and in personWonderful. Let's get his numbers and all give him a call or, better still, I'm sure we have someone who lives near him. Get his address and we'll get someone to pop around for a nice espresso and some of those yummy Italian almond biscotti

CJ is more of a "beer" kind of guy than an "espresso" kind of guy. That said, he is quite accessible and is willing to meet with people if you email or talk to him to set something up with him in advance.

He is having some surgery this week, but will be in Portland this weekend and mentioned that he's willing to meet anyone up there who is in that area.
.

[jlpicard]

Originally Posted by littleroundman

Uh Oh,

Jean-Luc has entered into "If you can't dazzle them with science, baffle them with bu**sh**" mode.

Why would anyone advise anyone else to take an accountant out to lunch to discuss a penny-ante HYIP which advertises in a forum which specializes in the discussion and promotion of other penny-ante ponzis ???

And the real reason you don't want people to discuss EBL with their accountant is because?...

Originally Posted by littleroundman

The good Captain Pickard can continue to go "round and round the mulberry bush" for ever and a day, but, the fact remains, redefining the EBL business as "loans" does NOTHING at all to remove it from the definition of securities.

A loan is most definitely a security. I have said this repeatedly. The issue is the registration requirement.

Originally Posted by littleroundman

As for reading the titles of the Securities Act as a means of interpreting the act itself, I would urge Cap'n Jean-Luc to pay in full for his next "Be Your Own Securities Attorney" mail order course so he can receive the full articles next time. Reading the headings only can bring him no good.

This is why I recommend you talk to your accountant. I wonder why you don't think this is a good idea? Hmmm, maybe it's because you're afraid that people might discover that a properly structured loan does not need to be registered?...

Originally Posted by littleroundman

Seeing as how Ol' Cap'n JL is so keen we should all read more, can I respectfully suggest he do the same with regard to the previously mentioned "The Dinner Club," "Women Empowering Women" and "The Garden Club" cases???

I always find that good, juicy court cases are way more interesting than dry old legal definitions.

When short on argument, resort to sarcasm. Seen this a million times. Sorry, now you're starting to look more and more ridiculous.

Let's remind everyone who is recommending that you discuss EBL with your accountant and who is not: who is asking you to read the reg's and think for yourself and who is screaming that you must accept his interpretation...
.

[mishugenah]

Kerry's around Portland too, isn't he, JLP? I might see if I can sneak in a quick beer/wine when visiting my niece in Corvallis. Of course, I'd rather be doing it all by car on an early retirement trip - we really hate to fly these days. There are several other members around there too, aren't there? this could be fun after all.