throbber
Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 1 of 43 PageID 1
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
`
`FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,
`
`Case No. 3:23-cv-46
`
`COMPLAINT FOR
`PERMANENT INJUNCTION,
`MONETARY RELIEF, CIVIL
`PENALTIES, AND OTHER
`RELIEF
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`WEALTHPRESS HOLDINGS LLC, a
`limited liability company,
`
`INVESTPUB LLC, a limited liability
`company,
`and
`
`CONOR LYNCH, individually and as an
`officer of WEALTHPRESS HOLDINGS
`LLC, and
`
`ROGER SCOTT, individually and as an
`officer of WEALTHPRESS HOLDINGS
`LLC
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`Plaintiff, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), for its Complaint alleges:
`
`1.
`
`The FTC brings this action under Sections 5(m)(1)(A)-(B), 13(b), and
`
`19 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 45(m)(1)(A)-
`
`(B), 53(b), and 57b, and under Section 5 of the Restore Online Shoppers’
`
`Confidence Act (“ROSCA”), 15 U.S.C. § 8404, which authorize the FTC to seek,
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 2 of 43 PageID 2
`
`and the Court to order, temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunctive relief,
`
`monetary relief, civil penalties, and other relief against Defendants for engaging in
`
`acts or practices that violate Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a) and
`
`Section 4 of ROSCA, 15 U.S.C. § 8403, and that the Commission has previously
`
`determined to be unfair or deceptive, in connection with the sale and marketing of
`
`Defendants’ goods and services.
`
`SUMMARY OF CASE
`
`2.
`
`Defendants, operating under the name “WealthPress,” convince
`
`consumers to spend hundreds, often thousands of dollars each, to purchase one of
`
`Defendants’ numerous services that recommend trades in the financial markets.
`
`Each service is led by an individual claiming substantial relevant expertise which
`
`he will deploy—typically through a “system” or “strategy”—to provide subscribers
`
`recommendations of specific trades to place in the financial markets. Defendants’
`
`marketing features numerous examples of supposed highly profitable trades,
`
`testimonials from purportedly successful subscribers, claims about the purported
`
`experts’ own wealth and expensive lifestyles supposedly funded by trading profits,
`
`and other claims, to convey the impression that purchasers will or are likely to
`
`make substantial profits by taking the recommended trades.
`
`3.
`
`Defendants have no reasonable data to support their lavish earnings
`
`representations, which are often flatly made up or plainly false. Indeed, many
`2
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 3 of 43 PageID 3
`
`purchasers of Defendants’ “services” lose money trading, on top of the hefty sum
`
`they pay Defendants.
`
`4.
`
`Defendants’ deceptive practices have violated the FTC Act and
`
`ROSCA.
`
`5.
`
`On October 26, 2021, the FTC sent Defendants WealthPress
`
`Holdings, LLC and InvestPub, LLC (via its parent company), Notices of Penalty
`
`Offenses Concerning Money-Making Opportunities and Testimonials and
`
`Endorsements (the “Notices”), noting that Defendants could be subject to civil
`
`penalties for violations of the FTC Act in connection with their marketing claims,
`
`pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 45(m)(1)(B); 16 C.F.R. § 1.98(e). The Notices stated that it
`
`is an unfair or deceptive trade practice to make false, misleading, or deceptive
`
`representations concerning the profits or earnings a participant in a money-making
`
`opportunity can expect or to engage in certain acts or practices related to consumer
`
`testimonials. Defendants have continued to use deceptive or unsubstantiated
`
`earnings claims in their marketing even after receiving the Notices.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`6.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§
`
`1331, 1337(a), 1345, and 1355.
`
`7.
`
`Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2), (c)(1),
`
`(c)(2), (c)(3), and (d), 1395(a), and 15 U.S.C. § 53(b).
`3
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 4 of 43 PageID 4
`
`PLAINTIFF
`
`8.
`
`The FTC is an independent agency of the United States Government
`
`created by the FTC Act, which authorizes the FTC to commence this district court
`
`civil action by its own attorneys. 15 U.S.C. §§ 41–58. The FTC enforces Section
`
`5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a), which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or
`
`practices in or affecting commerce. The FTC also enforces ROSCA, 15 U.S.C. §§
`
`8401 et seq., which prohibits certain methods of negative option marketing on the
`
`internet.
`
`DEFENDANTS
`
`9.
`
`Defendant WealthPress Holdings, LLC (“WealthPress”) is a Delaware
`
`limited liability company with its principal place of business at 7751 Belfort
`
`Parkway, Suite 120, Jacksonville, Florida 32256. Previously, WealthPress’s
`
`principal place of business was 495 Town Plaza Avenue, Ponte Vedra, Florida
`
`32081. WealthPress transacts or has transacted business in this District and
`
`throughout the United States. At all times relevant to this Complaint, acting alone
`
`or in concert with others, WealthPress has advertised, marketed, distributed, or
`
`sold trade recommendation services to consumers throughout the United States.
`
`10. Defendant InvestPub, LLC (“InvestPub”) is a Florida limited liability
`
`company with its principal place of business at 495 Town Plaza Avenue, Ponte
`
`Vedra, Florida 32081. InvestPub transacts or has transacted business in this District
`4
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 5 of 43 PageID 5
`
`and throughout the United States. InvestPub shares or has shared office space with
`
`WealthPress, and shares ownership. InvestPub participated in WealthPress’s
`
`operations, including by marketing WealthPress’s products or services. At times
`
`relevant to this Complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, InvestPub
`
`advertised, marketed, distributed, or sold trade recommendation services to
`
`consumers throughout the United States.
`
`11. Defendant Conor Lynch (“Lynch”) was Head Publisher of
`
`WealthPress. Until recently, Lynch owned one third of WealthPress through
`
`Happy Camper Publishing, Inc., a Canada-based company that Lynch solely owns.
`
`At times relevant to this Complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, Lynch
`
`has formulated, directed, controlled, had authority to control, or participated in the
`
`acts and practices of WealthPress, including the acts and practices set forth in this
`
`Complaint. For years, Lynch has managed the day-to-day operations of
`
`WealthPress. Lynch has written promotions or other marketing materials used to
`
`market WealthPress goods or services. Lynch has resided in Toronto, Canada and,
`
`in connection with the matters alleged herein, transacts or has transacted business
`
`in this District and throughout the United States.
`
`12. Defendant Roger Scott (“Scott”) is WealthPress’s most featured
`
`purported trading expert and participates in managing WealthPress. Scott appears
`
`in WealthPress’s advertising, stars in a substantial portion of its marketing videos,
`5
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 6 of 43 PageID 6
`
`develops new WealthPress programs, and claims to operate a number of its trade
`
`recommendation services. Scott owns one third of WealthPress through Market
`
`Geeks LLC, a company he solely owns. At times relevant to this Complaint, acting
`
`alone or in concert with others, he has formulated, directed, controlled, had
`
`authority to control, or participated in the acts and practices set forth in this
`
`Complaint. Defendant Scott resides in Ponte Vedra, Florida, and in connection
`
`with the matters alleged herein, transacts or has transacted business in this District
`
`and throughout the United States.
`
`COMMON ENTERPRISE
`
`13. Defendants WealthPress and InvestPub (“collectively, “Corporate
`
`Defendants”) have operated as a common enterprise while engaging in the
`
`deceptive and unlawful acts and practices and other violations of law alleged
`
`below. Corporate Defendants have conducted the business practices described
`
`below through interrelated companies that have common ownership, managers,
`
`business functions, employees, office locations, advertising, and marketing.
`
`Because these Corporate Defendants have operated as a common enterprise, each
`
`of them is liable for the acts and practices alleged below.
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 7 of 43 PageID 7
`
`COMMERCE
`
`14. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendants have maintained a
`
`substantial course of trade in or affecting commerce, as “commerce” is defined in
`
`Section 4 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 44.
`
`DEFENDANTS’ BUSINESS ACTIVITIES
`
`15. Defendants offer or have offered scores of services to the public that
`
`recommend trades in financial markets (“trade recommendation services”), chiefly
`
`through online video promotions. Defendants frequently launch new trade
`
`recommendation services. Each trade recommendation service is ostensibly led by
`
`a specific purported WealthPress expert who stars in its promotional videos.
`
`Defendants represent that the purported expert leveraged his extensive expertise to
`
`develop an algorithm or strategy that consistently identifies extremely profitable
`
`trades, that he uses the algorithm or strategy to generate substantial trading profits,
`
`and that subscribers will get specific trade recommendations from the algorithm or
`
`strategy, leading to similar substantial trading profits for them, regardless of their
`
`experience, knowledge, available capital, or available time. Defendants represent
`
`that the alerts provide all the information needed to place and close the trades—
`
`subscribers do not need any special knowledge or expertise.
`
`16. Subscribers to a WealthPress trade recommendation service are given
`
`access to a members-only page on WealthPress’s website, and periodically receive
`7
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 8 of 43 PageID 8
`
`trade alerts via email or text message. The trade alerts advise the subscribers that a
`
`new trade recommendation has been posted to the members-only page. Subscribers
`
`who log on can view specific details regarding the recommended trade, such as the
`
`security, the price, and the timing of the recommended trade. For example:
`
`6/7/21
`Ticket: KAR Kar auction services
`Expiration: July 16, 2021
`Strike price: $20 strike calls
`Position size: medium (4-6%)
`Buy to open the KAR July 16, 2021 expiration 20 strike calls at .40
`First profit target: .60
`
`17. Defendants represent that subscribers will or are likely to make
`
`substantial profits by taking the recommended trades. In numerous instances,
`
`however, consumers have instead lost substantial sums of money when investing
`
`based on Defendants’ trade recommendations, not counting the thousands of
`
`dollars individual consumers paid for access to Defendants’ trade recommendation
`
`services.
`
`18. Buried in a purported disclaimer on their website, described further
`
`below, Defendants admit they have no substantiation for their claims that
`
`consumers are likely to make the advertised profits or income. Defendants admit
`
`that the claims made in their consumer testimonials are not typical of consumers
`
`using their services.
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 9 of 43 PageID 9
`
`19. Numerous consumers have realized Defendants’ services do not work
`
`as claimed. In many cases, Defendants have denied consumers’ refund requests.
`
`20. Defendants instruct their customer service representatives to funnel
`
`cancellation requests to a team of “retention specialists” who are tasked with trying
`
`to induce consumers not to cancel.
`
`Defendants’ Advertising
`
`21. Defendants have offered at least eighty-five trade recommendation or
`
`other related services since WealthPress’s inception, each ostensibly helmed by a
`
`specific purported expert. Although the lineup of services and purported experts
`
`has changed over time, Defendants’ advertisements for their trade recommendation
`
`services typically follow the same playbook.
`
`22. Defendants use targeted advertising on widely-used websites,
`
`including YouTube, to show advertisements to consumers who search for or view
`
`content relating to securities trading. For example, FTC staff encountered a video
`
`advertisement for a WealthPress trade recommendation service, “Blitz Alerts,”
`
`while searching for videos on trading advice on YouTube.
`
`23. During this five-minute video, a purported expert represents to
`
`consumers that if they subscribe to his Blitz Alerts service, they will make
`
`substantial income, including through statements such as:
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 10 of 43 PageID 10
`
` “I’ll show you how you can potentially make $24,840 dollars—or
`more—every single week. With [] quick simple … trades that require
`zero market knowledge or trading experience.”
`
` He “hired a team of world-class programmers” who built “a specialized
`tool” that reliably identifies such trade opportunities before they happen.
`
` The system alerted subscribers to a trade on Nordstrom that the “expert”
`personally took, and which returned over 400% profit overnight, while
`he spent the day fishing.
`In many instances, the trades described were never actually made, and
`
`24.
`
`neither the purported experts nor their subscribers reaped the profits cited. Indeed,
`
`in many cases, the trades are entirely fictional, representing nothing more than
`
`calculations based on historical price data.
`
`25. Consumers who click the advertised link are taken to a WealthPress
`
`website with further marketing for the service. The websites frequently advertise a
`
`free presentation or webinar, which is in truth a lengthy, pre-recorded, video sales
`
`presentation or “video sales letter” (“VSL”). Defendants often depict the VSL in
`
`terms that imply it will be held, live, in a matter of minutes after the consumer
`
`arrives at the webpage, and request the consumer enter an email address to be
`
`given access to the VSL.
`
`26. For example, consumers who clicked the link from the Blitz Alerts
`
`YouTube advertisement described above would be taken to a webpage touting the
`
`service. The page offered a free event purportedly about to start within minutes and
`
`asked for the consumer’s email address in order to access it. Some consumers
`10
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 11 of 43 PageID 11
`
`arrive at such pages via other marketing channels, such as email marketing and
`
`banner advertisements.
`
`27. Defendants gather consumer contact information in additional ways,
`
`including by offering free newsletters and market analysis videos to consumers
`
`who provide an email address.
`
`28. After consumers submit their email address to Defendants, they are
`
`bombarded with numerous emails every day, advertising Defendants’ trade
`
`recommendation services. Consumers receive these emails directly from
`
`WealthPress, but also from its affiliates, such as InvestPub. The emails often
`
`feature various purported WealthPress experts promoting each other’s trade
`
`recommendation services.
`
`Defendants’ VSLs
`
`29. Many of the emails Defendants send to consumers urge consumers to
`
`sign up or register for purportedly live events or presentations. Those who do are
`
`sent a link. In many instances, the links take consumers to pre-recorded VSLs
`
`advertising Defendants’ services.
`
`30. The VSLs are typically between 30 minutes and an hour. They feature
`
`purported experts making numerous earnings claims. The VSLs often appear to
`
`be—but are not—extemporaneous discussions among the purported experts.
`
`Instead, they are scripted.
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 12 of 43 PageID 12
`
`31. Defendants’ purported experts describe specific trades that the service
`
`purportedly recommended to subscribers, invariably yielding substantial profits.
`
`For example, Roger Scott, in a VSL for a service called “Robinhood Effect,”
`
`describes numerous supposed profitable trades that his system alerted him to,
`
`including trades on which he claims returns of 260% in two weeks, 316% in just
`
`over a week, 71% in over three weeks, and 51% in just days. In the Blitz Alerts
`
`VSL, the purported expert tells consumers that his system alerted him to the
`
`purportedly lucrative Nordstrom trade described above. And that a week later, his
`
`system alerted him to two more trades, this time netting him and subscribers who
`
`invested $1,000, returns of $7,330 on Dollar General and $12,100 on Guess,
`
`overnight, while “you could have spent the … afternoon on the golf course.”
`
`Similarly, in a VSL for “Primetime,” another purported expert describes numerous
`
`supposed profitable trades that his Primetime system had alerted him to, including
`
`specific trades yielding profits of 88%, 68% overnight, $2,500 into $4,140, and
`
`$1,000 into $1,927 in three days.
`
`32.
`
`In many cases the trades depicted are not real, were not actually taken
`
`by Defendants, and were not sent to subscribers. Rather, Defendants searched
`
`historical price information for significant price changes, and then pretended that
`
`their service had predicted those changes before they happened. Defendants do not
`
`disclose this fact to consumers, but instead pretend that past subscribers were able
`12
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 13 of 43 PageID 13
`
`to place highly profitable trades that, in reality, are entirely fictional and shed no
`
`light on the likelihood that subscribers will actually attain substantial profits. The
`
`supposed Nordstrom, Dollar General, and Guess trades referenced above would
`
`have predated the offering of Blitz Alerts to the public and so could not have been
`
`sent to subscribers.
`
`33.
`
`In the VSLs, Defendants’ purported experts extol their own purported
`
`trading prowess, credentials, and expertise, including by name-dropping prominent
`
`institutions and individuals they claim to have worked for or with.
`
`34. Defendants’ purported experts represent to consumers that they are
`
`personally responsible for the trade recommendations sent to subscribers, or that
`
`the trades recommended by their service are based on an algorithm or strategy that
`
`the purported expert personally discovered or developed. These representations
`
`convey the impression that the trades the service recommends to subscribers are
`
`more likely to be profitable because of the purported expert’s supposed algorithms,
`
`expertise, inside knowledge, or personal involvement in selecting them.
`
`35.
`
`In many instances the purported expert also claims to have hired a
`
`team of programmers to help him develop and implement his strategy. For
`
`example, in the Blitz Alerts VSL, the purported expert tells consumers about his
`
`time working at “Citi Group, one of the biggest investment banks in the world,”
`
`where, he claims, he was tasked with making money for clients using Shadow
`13
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 14 of 43 PageID 14
`
`Blitzes. He tells consumers that when he saw how “powerful” they were, he hired a
`
`team of programmers to “build a specialized tool” that identifies Shadow Blitzes
`
`before they happen, for use in his own trading. He then claims that the Blitz Alerts
`
`service’s trade recommendations are generated by that “tool” and that he
`
`personally double checks them before they are sent out to subscribers.
`
`36. Contrary to the above-described representations, in many cases the
`
`trade recommendations sent to subscribers are actually generated by WealthPress
`
`with little or no involvement by the purported expert. Rather, in many cases, prior
`
`to the launch of a new service the purported expert provides WealthPress with
`
`some general trading concepts or strategy ideas, WealthPress devises a name and
`
`marketing strategy for the service, and, after subscriptions begin to be sold,
`
`WealthPress selects and sends trade recommendations to subscribers with no
`
`further involvement by the purported expert. In many instances, including Blitz
`
`Alerts, the purported expert, contrary to their claims, did not in fact hire a team to
`
`develop the strategy or algorithm.
`
`37.
`
`In the VSLs, Defendants’ purported experts represent to consumers
`
`that they personally make the trades recommended by their service, and have
`
`reaped substantial profits from those trades. In many cases, the purported experts
`
`specifically claim to have made the trades featured in the VSL, and assert that
`
`profits depicted are real, not fake or hypothetical. For example, in the Blitz Alerts
`14
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 15 of 43 PageID 15
`
`VSL the purported expert tells consumers: “Listen, this is not a hypothetical
`
`example. I personally placed the trade on Nordstrom. In fact, I took every single
`
`trade I’m about to share with you today.”
`
`38.
`
`In many cases, contrary to what they tell consumers, the purported
`
`experts did not actually place the trades they describe.
`
`39.
`
`In the VSLs, Defendants’ purported experts state or imply that they
`
`have reaped substantial profits by making the trades their system recommends to
`
`subscribers, including by depicting a lavish lifestyle that their strategy has
`
`purportedly afforded them, and which it will supposedly make possible for
`
`subscribers, as well. Roger Scott, in a VSL for “Robinhood Effect,” tells
`
`consumers that he has used the service’s method to grow his account from a few
`
`thousand to tens of millions of dollars, implying that profits from the service’s
`
`recommendations enabled him to buy a home in Beverly Hills next door to Julia
`
`Roberts and Eddie Van Halen, and charter private planes to take him on vacation.
`
`Similarly, in the Blitz Alerts VSL the purported expert tells consumers that his
`
`algorithm allows him to spend mere minutes placing trades, and then go about his
`
`days fishing, wakeboarding, and drinking and smoking cigars with friends, and the
`
`VSL features a montage depicting him doing that. He claims that his trading
`
`success allowed him to buy “a house in Tampa, [and] then [his] first boat,” and
`
`when he returns from his various leisure pursuits, he simply checks his previous
`15
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 16 of 43 PageID 16
`
`trades and realizes profits of close to $10,000. The purported PrimeTime expert
`
`claims his system allows him “to do whatever I want, whenever I want,” that it has
`
`“granted me ultimate freedom,” and he’ll never have to work again. He claims he
`
`has bought two houses and a brand new Corvette with profits from his system’s
`
`trades.
`
`40.
`
`In truth, in many cases the purported experts do not generate
`
`substantial income through trading in the financial markets, and do not fund their
`
`lifestyle with profits from their trading, but instead rely on income from the sale of
`
`trade recommendation services to consumers. And, as described below, Defendants
`
`have no reason to believe that the trade recommendations sent to subscribers will
`
`provide them with profits similar to those described, or wealth sufficient to fund
`
`the expensive lifestyle depicted.
`
`41.
`
`In the VSLs, Defendants’ purported experts depict or describe
`
`numerous supposed testimonials from allegedly successful users of the advertised
`
`trade recommendation service, implying that the results described are likely or
`
`typical. For example, the Blitz Alerts VSL features purported subscribers claiming
`
`results such as $4,497.50 overnight, and returns of 962.5%, and 1,250%. Similarly,
`
`testimonialists featured in the PrimeTime VSL claim to have turned $5,000 into
`
`$22,516.93, to get average returns of 20% per trade, and to be “just getting started”
`
`with profits of $7,404.
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 17 of 43 PageID 17
`
`42.
`
`In truth, the results described in the testimonials are far from typical.
`
`As explained in Paragraphs 60-61 below, Defendants admit, in poorly disclosed
`
`fine-print disclaimers, that “[t]he testimonials and examples used herein are
`
`exceptional results, which do not apply to the average member and are not
`
`intended to represent or guarantee that anyone will achieve the same or similar
`
`results.” In some cases, Defendants have featured testimonials in VSLs without
`
`making any effort to confirm the validity of the claims made in the testimonials. In
`
`some cases, VSLs feature testimonials that are not even from subscribers to the
`
`service being offered, or that are based on trades not recommended to subscribers
`
`to the service being offered.
`
`43.
`
`In the VSLs, Defendants’ purported experts tell consumers that
`
`purchasers will or are likely to reap substantial profits with the service’s trade
`
`recommendations. For example, in the “Robinhood Effect” VSL, Scott implies his
`
`service will let subscribers “track the BIG money” and “could quite literally
`
`transform your life.” He suggests subscribers can anticipate 200% to 500% gains,
`
`that returns of 64%, 58.4%, 148.48% and 235% are typical, and that 74% of trades
`
`are profitable. Similarly, in the Blitz Alerts VSL the purported expert tells
`
`consumers that if they “do exactly what the steps outline,” they could “collect an
`
`easy $7,000 the very next day,” implies that subscribers will reap at least 300%
`
`returns on every trade, and says he believes the service will “make you very
`17
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 18 of 43 PageID 18
`
`wealthy very quickly,” and “put you on the path to millionaire status, no matter
`
`your starting point today.”
`
`44.
`
`In truth, Defendants have no basis for representing that purchasers are
`
`likely to realize substantial profits, or any profits at all.
`
`45.
`
`In the VSLs, Defendant’s purported experts tell consumers that they
`
`will be able to easily make the trades recommended, without substantial capital or
`
`expertise, and that subscribers will be provided all the necessary details to place
`
`the recommended trades, such as the exact securities to purchase or sell, the time
`
`and price at which to execute the trade, and when and how to close out the trade.
`
`For example, in the Robinhood Effect VSL Scott claims the service is “real simple,
`
`its’s effortless, and it’s objective,” that consumers do not need any special
`
`knowledge or account to take the trades, that “we give you everything you need,
`
`and if you’re a beginner not a problem,” and that consumers only need a few
`
`thousand dollars to use the service to profit. Similarly, the Blitz Alerts VSL tells
`
`consumers they can profit without any experience or investing credentials, that the
`
`service is “so simple and so easy that anybody could do it with just a few minutes
`
`of free time,” and that subscribers need only place a trade before the market closes
`
`to reap the advertised profits.
`
`46.
`
`In many cases, subscribers are unable to place all of the trades
`
`recommended by a service, for example due to a lack of capital, or are not
`18
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 19 of 43 PageID 19
`
`provided with all of the details of how to open and close recommended trades. In
`
`many cases, subscribers who do place a recommended trade do not reap the
`
`advertised profit, and, in many cases, make no money or lose money.
`
`47. Toward the end of the VSL, Defendants’ purported experts offer their
`
`service for sale, and typically make representations designed to convey a sense of
`
`urgency. These claims frequently include a representation that the number of spots
`
`or subscriptions available is limited. The VSLs also represent that consumers who
`
`purchase promptly will receive a substantial discount, including through depictions
`
`of a purported “retail” price several times greater than the price advertised in the
`
`VSL. These claims attempt to pressure consumers to sign up quickly to avoid
`
`missing the opportunity. For example, in the Blitz Alerts VSL, consumers are told
`
`that spots are limited and that “the doors close” after 199 subscriptions are sold
`
`because the service would lose its power if it were made available to too many
`
`people. The PrimeTime VSL similarly claims “there’s limited spots available today
`
`at this special rate,” after which the price will be at least $14,997.
`
`48.
`
`In many cases in which Defendants have made such claims of limited
`
`availability, Defendants were willing to, and did, sell more subscriptions than the
`
`limited number they advertised, and did not actually charge prospective purchasers
`
`the purported “retail” prices. For example, contrary to the claims that only 199
`
`subscriptions of Blitz Alerts would be sold, in the first year alone Defendants sold
`19
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 20 of 43 PageID 20
`
`more than 1,800 subscriptions. And Defendants never sold the PrimeTime service
`
`for $14,997—most subscriptions were sold for $1,497, and all but a handful were
`
`sold for $2,497 or less.
`
`49. Defendants’ purported experts are paid a percentage of the revenue
`
`generated by the services they promote, and so have direct knowledge that sales
`
`exceed the advertised limits.
`
`50.
`
`In the VSLs, Defendants’ purported experts make representations
`
`stating or implying that purchasing the service and making the recommended
`
`trades poses low or no risk to consumers. These statements vary, but often include
`
`claims that the strategy selects low-risk trades, purported representations of past
`
`trade results that imply that trades are consistently profitable, and even explicit
`
`guarantees to consumers, the exact terms of which vary, but which impliedly or
`
`explicitly convey a drastic reduction or complete removal of the risk for
`
`consumers. Such statements convey to consumers that Defendants’ trade
`
`recommendation services involve little risk or no risk at all. For example, in the
`
`Blitz Alerts VSL, the purported expert tells consumers that if they place trades “at
`
`3:30 p.m., then cash out at 10 a.m.,” they will have “[l]ow risk [and] extremely
`
`high rewards;” claims that “because of the steep price discount and trading secrets
`
`you’ll receive … the risk is almost entirely on me;” and implies that every trade
`
`will yield at least 300% gains. The PrimeTime VSL claims the system exploits “a
`20
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 21 of 43 PageID 21
`
`repeatable pattern that’s handed out double digit winners over and over, like clock-
`
`work,” is “the best way to predict the next stock market move,” and is “the
`
`opportunity of a lifetime for anyone who wants to retire stress free.” At one point,
`
`the purported expert describes a series of profitable trades allegedly sent to
`
`subscribers, concluding “[y]our account would be at nearly forty grand in just a
`
`few weeks’ time, and you wouldn’t have even risked a penny of your profits along
`
`the way.” He also offers a “guarantee” that, he says, “take[s] all the risk of the
`
`program off you.”
`
`51.
`
`In truth, contrary to Defendants’ representations many purchasers
`
`have lost significant amounts of money or been unable to recoup the cost of the
`
`service through trading profits.
`
`Defendants’ Representations Are Deceptive and False
`
`52.
`
`In many cases, representations such as those described in Paragraphs
`
`15 to 50 were deceptive, unsubstantiated, or misleading for the reasons noted
`
`above at Paragraphs 15 to 51.
`
`53.
`
`In truth, and contrary to the claims made by Defendants and their
`
`purported experts, the testimonials and trading profits depicted in Defendants’
`
`advertising are not typical, and Defendants’ representations that subscribers are
`
`likely to reap substantial profits have no reasonable basis. Defendants do not know
`
`whether purchasers of their trade recommendation services typically make profits
`21
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-00046-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 01/12/23 Page 22 of 43 PageID 22
`
`or, if so, how much. In reality, many consumers who purchased Defendants’ trade
`
`recommendation services lost money trading in the financial markets. Defendants’
`
`own very limited internal surveys revealed that a number of purchasers had lost
`
`money, and that purchasers’ results typically varied—often substantially—from
`
`those documented in Defendants’ trackers. In some cases, Defendants’ own
`
`trackers demonstrated that tra

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket