Scam - or NOT a Scam ?

[Gator]

...sleazy sexual innuendo...

Are you a Puritan?

Please give me an example of such.  Kevin the Newkt received some sexually explicit leetrs, but those were from a woman, not the agency.

[Gator]

For me the scam occurs when:

Women write to you with the sole purpose of spending your credits.
Women who have no interest in you are paid to converse with you.
You are communicating with an agency employee and not the woman in the profile.

Yes, but what percentage of the corrrespondence is such?

[Gator]

I took the steps Dan listed in the original post. So far, no hot chicks have messaged me.  

It's only been a few minutes though...

I just checked my Inbox.  No letters from RW and it has been 24 hours.  I did put in my age so even AW has standards. 

However, Match.com is not asleep.  They sent me an email listing 5 women "selected just for me."

[Sculpto]

Gator.. part of the "art" of successful marketing/sales is to provide just enough information for the mark client to fill in the blanks with assumptions.  

Years ago when I was planning my first trip to Donetsk I came across A-web.. its really not possible to google Ukraine and not.. anyway.. my first impression at that time was SCAM.. and I never used them.  

After that trip softened me up a bit.. I was a lot more vulnerable to the fantasy of "getting one of those girls".  First time around marketing made me cringe.. second time.. it didn't seem impossible.  But.. with A-web i was never able to get away from a bad feeling with them.. and ultimately is what led me into the lap of other far more savvy marketers than A-web.

For me.. the bottom line is they.. almost all of them.. drop the word "marriage" far too easily and often and this word becomes an intoxicant to potential paying members.  

I can't find it on the a-web site right now but at times in the past.. and it might be hiding somewhere now.. they had a guarantee that every letter you sent would be answered.. or your money back.  I have heard from girls that were at least semi legit that they really hated that about A-web because they knew they were often leading men on but that because they had signed contracts with their affiliate agencies they had no choice.

That would be an accusation I would like to see either proven or dis proven.

The other thing I have to bring up in this discussion is the issue of affiliate agencies.  A-web itself is not an agency.. it is a site that allows member agencies to post their girls and have access to their other technologies.  It also gets the member agencies invited to the tour parties.  

My experience and research indicates the largest part of the scam in the MOB comes from the affiliates.  Some sites claim to put into practice serious obstructions to the kinds of bait and switch and other scam tactics agencies use and even ban agencies and girls they find in violation.  So, without a thorough investigation of the practices used by the affiliates it will in my opinion remain impossible to prove or disprove the scam.  I wonder if it would even be possible to infiltrate their professional organization.. I think it is called Ukrainian Marriage Agency Association or something like that.

Vegas vs. AnastasiaDate

Both are packaging an opportunity.  One to play, the other to date.

The difference is that everyone knows what happens in Vegas.  Few know the RW agency experience.

Sculpto, the text you quoted from AnastasiaDate leaves a lot to the imagination.  It does not say that a man can put a collar and leash on a pretty RW and take her home.   Given the name AnastasiaDate, I say it is packaging an opportunity to date a pretty RW.  How many men who join Anastasia want to get married vs. date a young sexy girl?

Of all that AnasatasiaDate expressed, IMO the largest misrepresentation is the following:

My opinion based on hearsay (or should I say readwrite) is that some RW (the young popular women) are not informed of all letters.

How do you substantiate  if that is true?  Only if the RW admits to such.

[Jumper]

Scuplto-
I certainly wasn't making a case for those agencuies to be a good resource!! lol !!!

but while clumsy or awkward, they are however one tool in a larger toolbox.

lol in my own work,not all the tools are specialized or get the same use,, but still can be useful handy to have around..
shock dyno's are cool..
*******************

Ed- FWIW  I wasn't saying *it had been done recently* ,  to na-say a project.

My point was i've quite recently been through it.
exactly as described.

while i din't post photos or a trip report..
 
my thoughts were what exactly can be gleaned? percentages?
it's a poor place to wade thru,but it's certainly possible.


maybe there is more data to be had ?
i'm asking, not making a closed statement.

if we can  outline what  folks want to know?
 (somewhat like shadow or someone suggested)
then i could currenty answer most of it at least in a  general manner,
certainly comprehensively as far as what a member there ,or similar agency could/ would expect.

but it would help if i knew exactly what answers the board is looking for in this quest. lol
if we are looking for black spots, grey areas of ethics etc,.. they are already known?
(i already qualified that my own opinion is that NO fsu agency is without spots.
some stick out like a leapord, others from a distance look one color ,but on close inspection will be covered in small spots,,ultimately little difference tio me, that's how corrupt i think it all is )


The other end of it:
is i certainly do not feel the need to outline the exact details,of my meeting or correspondence.
the actual details themselves serve no point.
why anyone would i jeapordize an on going relationship be detailing it out, i have no idea.
sending a new guy to outline and detail it,, seems a bit odd to me, as if he was succesful in meeting some sincere women dependent on details shared ,it could certainly sabotoge a begining relationship?



The jest of this, is whether a guy can expect to meet sincere women,amoungst all the *white noise* at such websites?

i did.in the past ad present..

kievstar has as well.

I'm sure there are others,,

but as stated i do think it depends on the given mans FSU experience level.

one thing i'm not sure of ,, if  i can outline the exact *hows* of making the decision of whom
 to pursue through the website.

 but if we can quantify what we are looking for, i'll try.

and obviously there is a new RWD member in the middle of a new anastasia membership.. that can give good input.

 

[Jooky]

Yes, but what percentage of the corrrespondence is such?

Good question... I don't know. How can a guy determine this?

I just got my first response and this woman is smokin' hot. She's also only 3 years younger than me and well within my 'league'. Maybe a bit too tall.

However... my profile is basically blank, so why would a real woman that looks like this need to write to every blank profile out there?

I will note: When I was on Elena's Models, I also received a lot of first contact emails to my almost blank profile.

[BillyB]

For those of you who are experienced with these agencies - GUIDE ME.

I don't have experience with agencies but I have experience with women. What goes on at those agencies is not real. Sign up for a dating site such as Bride.ru and Mamba.ru where women are looking for men without agency influence. At Aweb you will have a steady stream of women writing you. Some men have claimed to recieved hundreds of mail a month. Reality is that women rarely write men first. At dating sites you may have zero women a month writing you first.

Dan, I'm willing to bet that most of the mail you recieved, the lady never looked at your profile and didn't send it. The mail you recieve is the bait to get a guy hooked. Try some dating sites. Women rarely write men first and you will understand real behavior from real women.

A guy who owned a small agency posted here once. He was one of the good guys but he signed up to be a feeder agency to one of the big bad agencies. He gave them profiles of his top women. He said he made good money working with them but when he asked if he could list more profile with the big agency, they turned him down and told him that his ladies are not writing men enough. He didn't say what he was going to do but it's pretty obvious what a feeder agency has to do when doing business with a big agency.

In the end why do us experienced pros need to experiment with agencies that have plenty of disgruntled customers and agency women that spoke out and against the tactics of those agencies? There are too many better and less riskier options to recommend to newbies than AnastasiaDate/Aweb, Hot Russian Brides, Army of Brides, etc.... Those agencies should never be recommended by anyone here when there are better and safer paths to travel. Those agencies are for naive men and fools and you know what they say about fools and their money.

[Admin]

What can we make of the comments/votes so far?

It seems to me we have some rather interesting results. I am particularly perplexed by Jooky and Gator reporting no 'email' in their Inbox upon completing the registration. I wish now I had taken a screenshot of the profile I created to register, but I did not modify it much (if at all) and those 4 emails in the screenshot from the Inbox were already there - I think. It would be interesting to determine what 'triggers' are influencing those events, if possible - as I agree with Billy (and others) that I strongly suspect the emails and chat requests are automated.

Definition of a "scam" seems a core issue. Some are willing to declare 'scam' when they see elements emerging they recognize as likely to lead to a scam. Others are more legalistic and hold firmly to the notion that a 'scam' does not occur until a loss of something of value has occurred. Neither is necessarily more correct than the other, but as a reference point for determining scamming behaviors, a firm definition needs to be established.

I can't help but think that individual risk tolerance plays a role in a person's declaration of a scam. One of the most hardy risk-takers at RWD is AJ. Look at his reactions and thoughts from the perspective of one who makes a living taking daily risks. Gator as well, a highly successful (now retired) business owner who took measured risks routinely - offers insight into how those who are LESS risk-averse respond to the attractions and events.

OTOH - we have the jaded. Those who have been burned or are clearly on the risk averse side of the ledger. It seems like Sculpto and ECOCKS are both among the jaded, though with different 'takes' on the forward path - and Steamer and SANDRO43 appear to be sufficiently risk averse that they declare scam upon seeing a likely scam pattern emerging.

Several have suggested that our exercise should resolve to advising newbies to NOT use agencies and to use other meeting sites/methods. No doubt we should offer a broad range of alternatives - but that really was not the point I was hoping to get to. My reason for initiating this topic was to; (a) determine what really is meant when someone declares an agency is guilty of scamming, (b) follow the pattern of events and occurrences that lead to those scamming behaviors, and (c) witness the scam in real-time (or nearly so).

It seems a bit of a 'cop-out' to take at face value the reports of agency XYZ being a "scam agency." It is worse to leave that unexamined and then becoming a bit of 'tribal knowledge' - in the manner of a post in which someone writes; "Well, EVERYONE knows AgencyZ is the biggest scam on the planet - avoid them at all costs!" How many of you have seen such commentary related to Aweb? I'd bet nearly everyone. So much so that people who have never used Aweb also trumpet their alleged scamming behavior. And Aweb is not the only one.

In the interest of full disclosure, I should point out that Aweb has been one of our paid advertisers and they run an ad at Goodwife right now. I have spoken to the owner on a couple of occasions - mostly related to IMBRA. I speak occasionally to many/most of the big agency owners, and some not so big. The fact I speak to them offers no protection or insulation from whatever emerges from this topic. If anyone wants to run this same sort of exercise using a different agency and one in which there is no fiduciary relationship with RWD, that is OK with me.

Back on-point - we still have an open debate on a clearer definition of what constitutes a "scam." Let's see if we can reach closure on that question, and then move on. The definition stated upthread was:

Scam: The act of depriving by deceit.

This definition does not require the loss to have accrued. Instead, it describes the "act" in process. I tend to believe the loss must be realized before a scam has occurred.

Suggestions for rewording or modifying the definition (without writing a 'book' BTW)?

- Dan

[SANDRO43]

and Steamer and SANDRO43 appear to be sufficiently risk averse...

You make it sound as an inborn character trait. I shall not list the risks I've taken during my lifetime, except to say that they did not appear a totally reckless/hopeless gamble. In this particular field, it's more a question of EXPERIENCE accumulated over these past 6 years or so .

that they declare scam upon seeing a likely scam pattern emerging.

Isn't that wise ? Should one not call the fire brigade on smelling smoke, but wait until engulfed by flames ?

[Faux Pas]

Isn't that wise ? Should one not call the fire brigade on smelling smoke, but wait until engulfed by flames ?

There's quite a bit of difference in being burnt to a crisp and without life as opposed to having one's ass chapped because they didn't pay enough attention as to what was being offered and how it measured up to the fantasy 

[Lazarus]

Definition of a "scam" seems a core issue.

There has to be a "monetary" loss of some kind.
Loss of personal time, internet usage, emotional investment, etc. are not quantifiable, but any amount of money taken in a scam is easy to quantify.


Laz

[Admin]

There has to be a "monetary" loss of some kind.
Loss of personal time, internet usage, emotional investment, etc. are not quantifiable, but any amount of money taken in a scam is easy to quantify.


Laz

If defined in that way, doesn't it miss the fact that men will scam women for sex (as one example not involving $) ?

- Dan

[Lazarus]

If defined in that way, doesn't it miss the fact that men will scam women for sex (as one example not involving $) ?

Yes, people (male and female) "use" each other every day at the workplace and sadly socially.
Is it "scamming"?
Not IMHO.
The extraction of money takes it to another level.

Laz

[ECOCKS]

There's quite a bit of difference in being burnt to a crisp and without life as opposed to having one's ass chapped because they didn't pay enough attention as to what was being offered and how it measured up to the fantasy 

This is the same screwball argument used in court concerning the pirates. No "piracy" occurred since nothing was stolen, no one was killed and the ship (US Navy w/300 sailors on board) was not actually seized.

The scam/con begins with the laying of the trap and not the completion of it.

[Admin]

Yes, people (male and female) "use" each other every day at the workplace and sadly socially.
Is it "scamming"?
Not IMHO.
The extraction of money takes it to another level.

Laz

I am willing to go along with your suggestion if that is the consensus - however, I want to point out that I have sat across the table from a number of different ladies in Ukraine who were clearly very sincere in their interest to find a love/life partner and who had been misled (scammed?) by a foreign man. It was undeniable that they suffered losses. The monetary loss, if any, was inconsequential when contrasted to the dashed dreams and even humiliation they suffered.

How do we account for that in the realm of 'scamming' - or do we? If it resolves to only a monetary loss, we are essentially declaring that only men can be scammed.

- Dan

[Lazarus]

This is the same screwball argument used in court concerning the pirates. No "piracy" occurred since nothing was stolen, no one was killed and the ship (US Navy w/300 sailors on board) was not actually seized.The scam/con begins with the laying of the trap and not the completion of it.

Wouldn't "attempted" piracy be more appropriate?

Laz

[Gylden]

The key to a scam is in the intent, which is allways subjective depending on the individual interpretation. (it why we have courts and lawyers).
If the intention of an agency is to make money under the pretenses of providing a service of matchmaking and then hiring women to lure men into chat in order to facilitate earning money, IMO it is a scam.

[Admin]

This is the same screwball argument used in court concerning the pirates. No "piracy" occurred since nothing was stolen, no one was killed and the ship (US Navy w/300 sailors on board) was not actually seized.

The scam/con begins with the laying of the trap and not the completion of it.

Taking a legalistic POV, the 'crime' is not a crime until it has been committed. Planning to do something criminal is generally not a crime. Taking steps that lead toward a criminal action is generally not a crime. It is only when a person crosses the black letter of the law that the action becomes a crime and is prosecutable.

If we take the position that patterns which are likely to lead to a scam constitute the scam itself, there is enormous room for interpretation and misuse of the declaration.

- Dan

[Lazarus]

If it resolves to only a monetary loss, we are essentially declaring that only men can be scammed.
- Dan

It has been reported on RWD several times that FSUW have laid out their own funds (train ticket, hotel reservations, etc.) in anticipation of a meeting with a WM, only to have him "back out" at the last minute.

Laz

[Admin]

The key to a scam is in the intent, which is allways subjective depending on the individual interpretation. (it why we have courts and lawyers).
If the intention of an agency is to make money under the pretenses of providing a service of matchmaking and then hiring women to lure men into chat in order to facilitate earning money, IMO it is a scam.

Discernment of intent. Truly a black art.

I see your point. I wonder how to objectively and dispassionately discern intent?

- Dan

[Admin]

It has been reported on RWD several times that FSUW have laid out their own funds in anticipation of a meeting with a WM, only to have him "back out" at the last minute.

Laz

Yes, though rarely. The more typical scenario is that Western men are the ones funding this endeavor, hence, they are the ones most at risk of any monetary loss through scamming. At least, that is how I see it.

Others??

- Dan

[ECOCKS]

Taking a legalistic POV, the 'crime' is not a crime until it has been committed. Planning to do something criminal is generally not a crime. Taking steps that lead toward a criminal action is generally not a crime. It is only when a person crosses the black letter of the law that the action becomes a crime and is prosecutable.

If we take the position that patterns which are likely to lead to a scam constitute the scam itself, there is enormous room for interpretation and misuse of the declaration.

- Dan

Yes, and just like the piracy began when the boat opened fire on the American ship, I feel the scam starts when the membership is initiated and the "free" credits are placed in the account and immediately begin to be solicited for the fantasy fulfillment.

Now, am I somehow misunderstanding? Is there no fee collected prior to the free 20 credits in your name?

[Admin]

Yes, and just like the piracy began when the boat opened fire on the American ship, I feel the scam starts when the membership is initiated and the "free" credits are placed in the account and immediately begin to be solicited for the fantasy fulfillment.

Now, am I somehow misunderstanding? Is there no fee collected prior to the free 20 credits in your name?

No fee collected. I may have misled by calling them "free" credits. The term used was "complimentary" credits - if it makes a difference.

In your example, are you suggesting that firing on a US ship is not a criminal act? It may not be the crime of "piracy" but surely there must be some law to prevent hostile actions in open waters such as firing on a ship?!?

- Dan

[Admin]

The key to a scam is in the intent, which is allways subjective depending on the individual interpretation. (it why we have courts and lawyers).
If the intention of an agency is to make money under the pretenses of providing a service of matchmaking and then hiring women to lure men into chat in order to facilitate earning money, IMO it is a scam.

Expanding on this just a bit from my earlier post.

It seems easy enough to discern that the intent (or at least one of the intentions) of an agency is to generate revenue i.e. "make money." Given that, how does the agency's intent to generate revenue translate into scamming behaviors?

I wonder if we aren't struggling with the same issue the FTC struggles with in determining 'truth in advertising' claims? [If interested, definition here -- http://www.business.gov/business-law/advertising-law/truth-in-advertising/]

This is taking the position that unsolicited chat requests and emails are merely advertisements and not anything more.

- Dan

[ECOCKS]

No fee collected. I may have misled by calling them "free" credits. The term used was "complimentary" credits - if it makes a difference.

In your example, are you suggesting that firing on a US ship is not a criminal act? It may not be the crime of "piracy" but surely there must be some law to prevent hostile actions in open waters such as firing on a ship?!?

- Dan

Yeah it was more like a malicious assault charge or something with less than 7 years possible jail-time. The guy that took a hit when they fired back with a 25mm didn't get his case appealed though......

Imagine they needed cleaning when they discovered it was an US Navy ship they tried to board.

Added:                   

USS Ashland Captures Pirates

http://www.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=52519

Judge: Somali Pirates Who Fired on U.S. Navy Are Not Really Pirates

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/244390/judge-somali-pirates-who-fired-u-s-navy-are-not-really-pirates-andy-mccarthy