"Trustworthy" Agencies?

[ecr844]

There is a great deal of what is written that would be better sent in PM. For example, the allegations that emails can be pilfered from RWD. That is simply not based in fact.

Alas, there are MANY different motives in play - and some folks just want/need to air their beefs in public.

- Dan

"Dan,"

   I speak on my own behalf, and no one else's. My "beef" is the curious reception of SPAM which is both unsolicited and unwelcome. That has already been explained and discussed previously in this thread. I notice that there are no "denials" from "Mr. Bragg," about the factual nature of the actual sending of the aforementioned "SPAM".

His denial comes in the form of the specifics of how he went about obtaining a singular email address.. It's telling really.

Intially, my motive was to provide a point of reference that would show "Mr Bragg" is as guilty of undertaking some of the "ethical grey area" tactics in his "side business" that he is accusing others of doing.

Additionally, I wanted to him to admit that he was indeed doing this and rectify the situation. Since i had indeed clicked on multiple occassions the "I don't send me this crap anymore link" in the offending emails. That's it, nothing sinister, or backhanded about it. I'm able to stand behind my words and actions can others? 

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=GGLR%2CGGLR%3A2005-39%2CGGLR%3Aen&q=Jack+Bragg+First+Dream
http://www.brama.com/travel/messages/18468.html

[BC]

"BC"

I have nothing to hide, and I also have nothing to do with "flooding". Are you insinuating that "Jack," Googles everyone to get an email he would like to send a SPAM email to? would you like that we all share and post each others personal information on the board in this thread? Others have, I can post some neat Google search info to. It'll be fun, can we all do it? 

ecr,

I'm not insinuating anything, just saying it is possible for anyone to get a high percentage of 'hits' using forum names and just adding @yahoo, @gmail, etc.

As far as spam is concerned, 1994 spams went to my email account in the last 30 days and I didn't see one of them.  Gmail is excellent. You should try it.

[Admin]

"Dan,"

   I speak on my own behalf, and no one else's. My "beef" is the curious reception of SPAM which is both unsolicited and unwelcome. That has already been explained and discussed previously in this thread. I notice that there are no "denials" from "Mr. Bragg," about the factual nature of the actual sending of the aforementioned "SPAM".

His denial comes in the form of the specifics of how he went about obtaining a singular email address.. It's telling really.

Intially, my motive was to provide a point of reference that would show "Mr Bragg" is as guilty of undertaking some of the "ethical grey area" tactics in his "side business" that he is accusing others of doing.

Additionally, I wanted to him to admit that he was indeed doing this and rectify the situation. Since i had indeed clicked on multiple occassions the "I don't send me this crap anymore link" in the offending emails. That's it, nothing sinister, or backhanded about it. I'm able to stand behind my words and actions can others? 

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=GGLR%2CGGLR%3A2005-39%2CGGLR%3Aen&q=Jack+Bragg+First+Dream
http://www.brama.com/travel/messages/18468.html

ECR,

I see you posted something from Brama circa 2002. Do you ascribe validity to the 'information' in that post? Do you know anything about Brama?

- Dan

[Jack]

Ladies and Gentlemen, have just received an e-mail from another member that this thread was still going on. I have looked at the post's and you will see my replies in the order in which they appear in this thread.

Some of you, like Sculpto, will find my replies hilarious and a complete waste of your time. My suggestion would be that if you don't have an interest in the outcome of this debate, don't read, do something else with your time. Spend it with the wife, the kid's, looking at pretty photos of Russian women.

msmoby_ru, I really think you will find my responses a complete waste of your time as well and urge you "don't waste your time", you have more important things to do with that beautiful wife of yours than to be spending so much time on this or other discussion boards I would think.   msmoby_ru,  I do protest to much when I see someone spreading untruths about me.  I have never cheated, never scammed a single man in an industry full of scam and deceit.  I will never cheat or scam and I take it damn seriously when some low life indicates otherwise. And as much as you will not agree msmoby_ru, I will protest to much for your liking.  Best case senerio msmoby-ru is probably not to read my post's, I will protest when I see untruths written because it does matter to me.   Just as with Ben Armen, if your going to say bad things, please, at least be able to back them up, to prove them.  I do make mistakes, I learn from mistakes, the least Ben Armen could do is tell me of my mistakes and who all these pro-daters are that he says I introduced him to. He would not (he could not).  When trying to question Ben Armen about all these women he mentioned it quickly changed to one woman, then to two women and then his very last post, don't know if anyone else caught it, his last post regarding all my ladies who are pro-daters I set him up with was this,....

  I took Jack's offer for a back up plan, referred me to some agencies.  I met two ladies I was interested "Olga" and "Ludmilla"

Now he is saying he met ladies from OTHER agencies, women not even with my agency. I think most have seen I caught Ben Armen in a few lies and anything he says in the future I think will be suspect at best.





Now Eric Jones is contending I "stole" his e-mail address from this site and then spammed him. I will respond to his statements in the order they were made.

I notice no one has mentioned the fact that "Jack," has been sending out spam emails

Eric Jones, maybe, just maybe, it's because no one else was spammed. 

Now where does one suppose he got the email addresses of people like myself

How about from your e-mail to me on July 4th 2006.  It is the ONLY way I received your private e-mail, the only way. YOU sent it to me.


----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Jones
To: nunya@ix.netcom.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 8:08 AM
Subject: re:Russianwomendiscussion PM


Jack,

  I post on RWD as ECR844, here's my e-mail address as requested. Thanks,
Eric

Umm.. Your missing the "full text" of said email, since your only trying to disseminate the parts that suit you..

Eric Jones, I sent you the "full text" of said e-mail with header in a previous reply.  Do you want to dispute that you sent me this e-mail on July 4th 2006?  Nooo, I didn't think so.

I know you were STUNNED to see that e-mail.  You forgot all about that e-mail.  After all you wrote, on this discussion board and another Russian discussion board, you had to feel 6 inches tall.  Man, I know that caught you by surprise.  You forgot all about sending me your e-mail address until I showed it to you in this thread.

Aren't the archives fun "Jack,"? Two can use them to tell the truth you know.

Yes Eric Jones, and these archives pretty much PROVE who is lying through their teeth.

Look at the date of the information posted on the public forum.





Quote from: Jack on June 30, 2006, 08:22:03 PM
whoaaaa, $3800 a month for a flat?  In Voronezh!!!!

Eric, something is not right here. How about $350 to $400 a month to be in the center of Voronezh and $175 to $250 away from the center.

Eric I don't know anything about your SO or your situation but I think you have a reason to be concerned.  It's a wonderful idea for you to live there and be close to her for a few months, and after reading what you wrote, you had better spend some time with this woman.

I say you have to by-pass your SO and the agency. Wrote me a PM if you are going to go thru with this and we'll get you a good flat in the center.




On July 1 you wrote me a lengthy Private Message after I shared with you some advice and offering opinions.  I won't post the private message but IN ADDITION to YOU asking me for additional idea's, hints, sources, some of your other quoted remarks were "  Again, thanks for the help and info.",  and  "I respect your experience and wisdom in this endeavor".


With the last sentence of your second paragraph you write  "Any info and or opinions would be appreciated.",   I therefore asked you to send me you e-mail for the continued help, advice, opinions YOU were ASKING ME for.   I would rather send replies on an e-mail as opposed to a PM just because it is easier to write e-mails than it is to write PM's.

Prior to this I NEVER had your e-mail address.    It was one or two days later, on July 4th, where YOU sent me your e-mail so that I could continue giving you my FREE advice and opinions that YOU had asked for.

Additionally, I did reply to you via PM, in my naivete thinking you were a decent guy looking to help out

You mean you were not truthful with your previous statments when I had offered my time to you when you wrote "Again, thanks for the help and info.", and  "I respect your experience and wisdom in this endeavor"?   

You made an offer to help a guy presumeably out of the kindness of your heart, and then go on to spam him 2-3 years later to promote your commercial interests

Eric, I help a lot of people, like you, free of any charge.  I don't always know guy's are an ass when I first begin to help them.  Sometimes, such as in your case, it takes a while.  It was VERY obvious in my professional opinion that you were a guy who was not the sharpest tack in the bunch and YES, I committed the cardinal sin of adding you and your e-mail address to my mailing list after helping you and receiving your e-mail address from you. Guilty as charged. 

Moving on..are you stuttering and spouting ..."BUT...BUT..BUT.." yet "Jack,"? Is your blood pressure up?

No, I think I am making myself perfectly clear, don't you?   And the more clear I make it for you, AND others, I think most people will be forming their own opinion.

After you solicited those PM's and a one line email, I never being a client, or having solicited your services,

Just a minute here Eric, here is one of your direct quotes,....."Any info and or opinions would be appreciated." and  "Do you have any hints or ideas on where to look or other sources for a flat or hotel?    Eric, as I read those statements you were soliciting my services,  my services being my opinions, my advice, my help, my sources.  I don't have to charge for my time for things to still be my services. In your case you had wrote "a little difficult for me financially" and as such I gave you my time freely as I do to a lot of guy's indicating some financial difficulties.   But you write one thing here today with regards to not soliciting my services, and something completely else when you were asking for my services. 

Your obviously less astute than you like to give yourself credit for.

Well Hell's Bell's Eric, even you gave me credit for being astute I thought when you wrote  "I respect your experience and wisdom".    Again it appears you are changing your expressed thoughts. This seems to happen often with you.

Matter of fact, could this be part of the reason you have no wish for those PM's to be posted?

Ok, Eric Jones, I think this will be interesting and educational for all to know a little more about what a small man you are. YES, you have my permission, please feel free to post my PM to you.  And I assume you will have no problem with me posting your PM.  OK, deal?

Once again, THANKS FOR PLAYING PLEASE DON'T TRY AGAIN...

"DON'T TRY AGAIN", but Eric, I find this type playing with you LOT'S of fun.  And it's just beginning. 

Let's see if we can prove someone here to not being totally truthful with the statements they have written, ok?  You game for that? 

"Jack," You must really subscribe to the school of thought that if you utter a statement enough even if false it becomes true..

ahhh, yes, yes, yes, but I think we can say "Eric, You must really subscribe to the school of thought that if you utter a statement enough, EVEN if false, to you Eric Jones it becomes true".    Such as realzing YOU had sent me your e-mail address after forgetting you did and making a complete fool of yourself.

You did get my email from here, as well as from me. It's listed in my profile..and then a second time from your solicitation..The land of delusion and SEROQUEL isn't treating you all that kindly after all now is it?

Eric Jones, I got your e-mail from ONE source, from you.  I asked you to send me your e-mail in a PM when you asked me for more support. If I had already had your e-mail I certainty would not have asked you for it.  Hard, proven reality is not treating you so kind, is it Eric Jones?

"Dan," I did ask and even clicked the If you don't want to recieve these email links included in the e-mail. 

Now Eric Jones, are you being 100% truthful here with this statement? It looks by the way you are writing this that you had clicked links that you did not want to receive these e-mails more than once?   

To prevent my letters from being spam, according to Yahoo, and other sources, if I have a link in my mail that you can click to no longer receive e-mails, and you click this link and no longer receive e-mails, it is not spam. Or something like that.  The ISP's out there have indicated that my letter does not fall into the spam category since we include this link and remove any e-mail address from my list that notifies us they would like to be removed.

Here Eric Jones, here below is the ONLY time YOU ever used this function.  I sent you a letter in February of this year about information about our Spring tour.  Here is the reply I got from you, and I might note, you have NEVER received another letter from me once I got this e-mail from you.  How can I be spamming you? You ask to receive no more e-mails, you received no more e-mails.



----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Jones
To: manager@firstdream.com
Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2008 10:08 AM
Subject: 'Remove


I'm not intersted in any of your spam...Don't send me any more of this crap.







Eric Jones, this is the first, and ONLY reply you have ever sent me asking to be removed from my mailing list.

Please show Dan any e-mail you received from me after receiving this one e-mail from you asking for no future e-mails?  And you cannot.

*edited to add:
Oh, look at that. I can post again. I kept getting these pesky 403-404 and you don't have permission to post error messages when I tried to reply to "Jack's" last post. Pesky forum bugs. It could easily lead one to wonder if their posting permissions had been modified.

It must be a conspiracy Eric Jones.

The timing was impeccable if that were the case. 

I tell you, it must be a conspiracy.

Imagine my surprise when I hadn't been posting here and about three years go by when I start receiving these messages.  Why now?
"Jack," is all to happy to proclaim that this came from an approx three word e-mail I sent him in 2006 (at his request).

Eric Jones, prior to YOU sending me YOUR e-mail address on July 4th 2006 I never had your e-mail address, I had never wrote you. 

Eric Jones, had you ever received an e-mail from me prior to you sending me your e-mail address on July 4th 2006?

You know I sent out information about our 2006 Spring trip in February and March, wonder why you did not get those letters if your saying I had your e-mail.  I sent out information about our 2005 winter trip to Kiev in November 2005, did you receive an e-mail from me then?   And just as with the spring 2006 letter, the answer is no, because I did not have your e-mail address.  You know I also sent out these letters in July 2005 for our fall trip and in February 2005 for our spring trip. WHY Eric Jones did you only receive your first e-mail from me after you sent me your e-mail address on July 4th 2006?  And the answer is, because I never had your e-mail address prior to you sending it to me.

this came from an approx three word e-mail I sent him in 2006 (at his request).

"At his request"   Eric Jones, YOU asked for my help, my support, my advice, my sources and I did not want to write all this information on a little Private Message box on this site.  Eric Jones the space to write detailed e-mails in these PM's box's are to restrictive for me. Since YOU were asking for my help, my support, my advice, my sources, I thought the least you could do was make it easy for me by allowing me to reply, free of charge I might add, by e-mail instead of the restrictive PM boxes.  So you want to continue to say "at his request" but the truth was it was easier for me to help you by writing to an e-mail address to help YOU with YOUR request. 


What was that statement you wrote above Eric Jones, "The land of delusion and SEROQUEL isn't treating you all that kindly after all now is it",  yea, that one.  Seems to fit you well I would say.

Now that leaves one to wonder. If this is the perhaps one of the only forums (that I am aware of) where we are both active together and where my email is freely visable, what might be ones reasonable conclusion?

Well Eric Jones, since you NEVER received an e-mail prior to YOU sending me your e-mail address on July 4th 2006, I think it's quite reasonable for MANY people here to reach a very comfortable conclusion, although not the one your trying to piant for them.



----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Jones
To: nunya@ix.netcom.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 8:08 AM
Subject: re:Russianwomendiscussion PM


Jack,

  I post on RWD as ECR844, here's my e-mail address as requested. Thanks,
Eric

I can tell you my first guess wouldn't be a 2-3 year old 3 line email. It would be right here, on this forum where he is a long term active member and or perhaps moderator, etc..

Eric Jones, WHY would your first guess not be from a 2 year old 3 line e-mail. You have never received an e-mail prior to that and AFTER I got your e-mail, now you start receiving my letters advising you of my tours.  And you keep writing about this 3 line e-mail as being 2-3 years ago, it was two years ago Eric, two years and a month when you first started writing 2-3 years ago.  You keep wanting tosay 3 years, 3 years. it was 2 years ago Eric, July 4th 2006.

he is a long term active member and or perhaps moderator, etc..

Ahhhh, there you go again, "it's a conspiracy", or maybe it's "The land of delusion and SEROQUEL".

So after a few years one may indeed wonder whether said email address is indeed valid.

Eric Jones, every time I do a mailing I always get a reply back as to e-mails that are no longer valid. When I do get such a reply back I remove those from my list.  Your e-mail always indicated as it went through and was a valid e-mail.  But a good try if your looking at every angle to support your conspiracy.

How could a proprietor easily verify this? Look through members profiles.

Noooo, to much work Eric Jones. Just see if the e-mail bounces back. If it does, it's not a valid e-mail.

You are all smart folks which would you consider first?

Good statement Eric Jones. I guess we'll see.

Now top all of that off with being called a liar.

If the shoe fit's,...... 

being called a liar. Well, that's just not polite, now is it?

And I assure you Eric Jones, I never take this lightly and call someone a liar this unless I think it can be proven.  I think when this thread is over and done with, people are going to form their own opinion. Now they may not call you or me a liar because they are too kind, but me, when someone tries to distort the truth about me, and I can PROVE them to be a liar, I have no problem in doing so.

That is part of what irked my ire.

I bet Eric Jones. It's tough to be proven a liar.  Damn, if only you had not forgotten that you had sent me your e-mail.

I'm not here to be intimidated or pushed around by someone who thinks he can do whatever he chooses.

And I am not going to sit here and let some lo-life spread lie's about me, and when I can prove otherwise, as to who is doing the distorting of the truth, I will do so.

I've always said I'll stand up for myself and I'm going to do that.

Same here Eric Jones. 

If I make a mistake, I'm a reasonable guy. I'll own it. I'll even apologize. But expect the same in return. 

Well Eric  Jones, I guess we'll see if you are a man of your word, but I wouldn't advise anyone to hold their breath.

I'd hope I haven't garnered a reputation for jumping to hasty conclusions and making wild accusations..

Noooo, we would never think such a thing.

I can back up what I say.

You can?   Well let's see, what did you say to ever receiving an e-mail from me prior to receiving your e-mail address from you on July 4th 2006.   Did you receive any letters about our 2004 tours, our 2005 tours, our spring 2006 tour?  No?   You only began receiving e-mails from me about my tours after I received your e-mail address, and your right, I had to ask you for this address.   

You have indicted in a sly way to Dan that you did click on the links to my e-mails to be removed from my mailing list. Other than the one, and only one, that you replied back to in February of 2008, can you provide proof of any other e-mail you replied back to asking to be removed?  I have copies of all my sent and received e-mails, can you provide proof that you had to reply to more than the one link. And that's link, without an s.  Your reply indicates links with an s.


Eric Jones, as you can back up what you say, why did you never reply to Dan's question below?

Why do you believe that Jack might have picked up your email address from RWD? What makes you think your email is "freely visible" here?  - Dan

"Dan-Admin," Just to clarify, said "chip" was placed on my shoulder when my integrity was called into question.

As it should have been.

My "beef" is the curious reception of SPAM which is both unsolicited and unwelcome.

Eric Jones, YOU did solicite my help, my advice, opinions, sources, they were welcomed by you. I can show the entire PM to prove this if your saying you did not ask for my help, advice, opinions, sources.  As far as the spam is concerned on February of this year you replied back that you wanted no more e-mails from me. 

Question, have you received a single e-mail from me after you asked not to receive any more e-mails?  And the answer is no.   Can you provide proof that you ever sent a previous request not to receive any future e-mails?  I think the answer is no but will allow you to prove otherwise.

I notice that there are no "denials" from "Mr. Bragg," about the factual nature of the actual sending of the aforementioned "SPAM". 

WHAT!!!!  Well Eric Jones, I guess you can consider this my denial.  I have been very busy and away from the board for three days. I only responded tonight after getting an e-mail from another member here about your continuing li, oppps, errr your wild imagination.

about the factual nature of the actual sending of the aforementioned "SPAM".

There is NO denial.  I sent you an e-mail telling you about our fall 2006 tour, I sent you an e-mail letter telling you about our winter 2006 tour, our spring, fall, winter 2007 tour or my e-mail to you about our spring 2008 tour.  No denial at all.  I sent you these e-mails after offering you help and support and receiving your e-mail address from you. 

After receiving your request for no more e-mails in February of this year, you received no more e-mails.  Once you used the feature to be asked to be removed from my mailing list, you were done so.  But let me say here and now, I do make errors and it is possible that you could have asked to be removed earlier. I did check each and every e-mail I have ever sent you or received from you and I have no other e-mail from you, at the same e-mail address I sent my letter to, asking to be removed.

His denial comes in the form of the specifics of how he went about obtaining a singular email address.. It's telling really.

Eric Jones, I think it comes down to who can prove what. I can prove how I got your e-mail. I can prove you sent it to me on July 4th 2006. I can prove you never received any previous e-mail from me prior to you sending me your e-mail address.   Dan asked you a good question, how could anyone get your e-mail address from RWD.  You did not answer. You went silent.   Did I miss your answer?     I agree with you here, the answer is quite telling as to who knows what in the _ _ _ _ they are talking about, and it ain't you baby!!!!!

Intially, my motive was to provide a point of reference that would show "Mr Bragg" is as guilty of undertaking some of the "ethical grey area" tactics in his "side business" that he is accusing others of doing.

Eric Jones, I send letters to guys who I think I can help and who might be interested in one of our tours. If sending these letters you think is an ethical gray area, well, no one can keep you from having your own expressed opinion.  BUT when your expressed opinion is laced with falsehoods, then I think if one can expose such a person for being this type person, he should and I think I have.

Additionally, I wanted to him to admit that he was indeed doing this and rectify the situation.

HEY I admit I send out these letters. I have never denied sending out letters to men about our tours.  I also provide a link in each of these letters to men that they can use to no longer receive my e-mails.  You used this link for the first time in February and have not received an e-mail since.  I do offer you the opportunity to prove otherwise and I don't think you can.

But for you to say I got your e-mail address from this or any other Russian discussion board is an absolute falsehood on your part.


This last reply addresses all your questions, statements, fabrications up to reply number 76.




Now on another Russian discussion board Eric Jones made this statement

"Oh, and for those who may be curious I have just narrowed down the probable 'source' as 'another forum, et.al"


No Eric Jones, you made another false and mis-leading statement (some would refer to as a lie) on this other board. Not the probable source of how this agency got your e-mail, but the real and verfiable source was from YOU, not from the RWD as you were eluding to on this other board.

Shame on you Eric Jones.

[Sculpto]

This is hilarious...

You know, if you guys spent as much time verifying the sincerity of the ladies you exploit, whoops I mean represent, and paying attention to who is active and who is a ghost, then so much of this discussion would not even be taking place. 

What I see is past excesses are finally catching up to ALL of the sites and agencies, plus with the general economic downturn there has certainly been a  downturn in business and fewer guys able to make the trip.  What a pity the easy money isn't flowing so easily anymore. 

I still haven't seen a single one of the agency/site owners tell us why they are qualified to be matchmaker?  One must conclude none of you have ANY qualifications except for the entreprenurial moxie to set up a site or an agency.  Congratulations, now we know all of you are good capitalists.

I think it is too late.  I think the damage is done.  I think too many guys have been scammed and abused and the word is out and spreading.  Same as the ladies now know a good percentage of the men are sex tourists or psychotic control freaks when they do get a girl over here.  Game over!

Kevin, if you want to survive take a far more personal approach and interview every man who joins your site.  Get a staff psychologist to interview the ladies.  Stop pretending they can't communicate without a terp.  Dump the majority of the profiles of both the men and the women and take payment, at a considerably higher rate, AFTER there is a successfull matchmaking. 

I will never spend another cent on a site/agency for all the reasons that have come up in this thread and my personal experience.  I do believe there is still room for a legitimate matchmaking service, but, at this time, to my knowledge, one does not exist.

[Admin]

This is hilarious...

You know, if you guys spent as much time verifying the sincerity of the ladies you exploit, whoops I mean represent, and paying attention to who is active and who is a ghost, then so much of this discussion would not even be taking place. 

What I see is past excesses are finally catching up to ALL of the sites and agencies, plus with the general economic downturn there has certainly been a  downturn in business and fewer guys able to make the trip.  What a pity the easy money isn't flowing so easily anymore. 

I still haven't seen a single one of the agency/site owners tell us why they are qualified to be matchmaker?  One must conclude none of you have ANY qualifications except for the entreprenurial moxie to set up a site or an agency.  Congratulations, now we know all of you are good capitalists.

I think it is too late.  I think the damage is done.  I think too many guys have been scammed and abused and the word is out and spreading.  Same as the ladies now know a good percentage of the men are sex tourists or psychotic control freaks when they do get a girl over here.  Game over!

Kevin, if you want to survive take a far more personal approach and interview every man who joins your site.  Get a staff psychologist to interview the ladies.  Stop pretending they can't communicate without a terp.  Dump the majority of the profiles of both the men and the women and take payment, at a considerably higher rate, AFTER there is a successfull matchmaking. 

I will never spend another cent on a site/agency for all the reasons that have come up in this thread and my personal experience.  I do believe there is still room for a legitimate matchmaking service, but, at this time, to my knowledge, one does not exist.

Sculpto,

You raise some excellent points. I'd like to select from your post some of the points I take away, and see if those are as you intended - and invite others to respond as well.

First - it seems like you are promoting the notion that an international marriage agency (IMA hereafter) is also a "matchmaker". I wonder if that is a feature of an IMA that is sought by many? What I seem to recall from many past posts, is that most guys would say their first (and often sole) criteria for an IMA is access to a large database of sincere and beautiful (they ALWAYS say 'beautiful') women.

I think it might be useful for us (RWD) to initiate a poll (or survey) and inquire as to the Top 'N' features a western guy desires in an IMA. Would also be interesting to see a similar (separate) poll as to what foreign women seek in an IMA.

If this is an idea that inspires anyone, the first thing needed is composition of the question, and a list of possible responses. We could begin that process in this topic, if desired. Post suggestions on the question to be posed, and then we can develop the list of responses.

Second point you make is the decline of the IMA business model - and you ascribe a few negative elements as support for your surmise. Once again (guess I am demonstrating my bent toward quantitative analysis), this would be interesting to gather facts to prove/disprove the hypotheses. One problem is that many (most?, all?) of these IMA's are so small and closely-held that I do not believe any of them have financials available for review. Absent those financials, one is left to either trusting them when asking the question (NOT wise, IMO), or depending on anecdotal information (NOT nearly as reliable).

I see a TON of speculation about what is happening (or not happening) with these businesses, but virtually none of it is based on facts and data.

Since we are conducting business with most of the larger agencies in all major markets (FSU, Latin, Asia), we have the opportunity to see *some* of the trends, and from a 'backoffice' side, we are able to make some observations, but those are likely quite different from the customer side of the equation. To address this, RWD will be announcing a new program soon, and we will soon have the largest and most comprehensive database of information about IMA's on the planet. Probably already have that, but this time, it will be focused on customer interaction with IMA's.

I should give credit to Kevin Hayes. Whilst I doubt he was seeking this particular outcome, the recent exchanges between he and I, in PM's and in the open forum, spawned this thought and it is soon to become a reality and I suspect Kevin will be among the beneficiaries when we complete the first phase of the program. I really do think highly of Kevin - even if/when he does not see things my way and insists on listing a corrupt site among his "honest" sites.

Third, you made an interesting point about the "entreprenurial moxie" of the IMA's, and that in other ways (qualifications) they are lacking. While related to your first point about customer expectation - I interpreted your point a bit differently here. When GAO interviewed me in January, I rejected their notion that there exists any form of an organized "MOB Industry", and characterized it like a guy picking up shells on a beach in Brazil, and someone asks if he would sell one of the shells he picked up. The guy soon realizes that if he picks up those shells and polishes them a bit and puts them on top of a table on that beach with maybe a sign or two pointing to his table, he can sell quite a few of those shells. In effect, this is the exact same way in which many (most?, all?) IMA's came into being. After all, to the best of my knowledge there is no school anywhere offering a degree, or even a course, in how to own and operate an IMA.

My point being - it should come as little surprise that these IMA's are NOT, in many cases, professionally run organizations. They lack professionalism. They lack regulation. They, in many MANY cases, are run by folks that are corrupt. Sadly, that is the state of the 'industry' (such as it is), and my global comments should not be taken as condemnation of any one IMA - they are global in nature. And BTW - we also have the grand privilege of working (on the 'backoffice' side) with some VERY honest and VERY professional IMA's.

As I wrote initially - yours was a good post and provokes thought on a number of levels.

- Dan

[Kevin]

I've seen a large decrease of request for matchmaking service over the last year. A few years ago everyone wanted direct contact with the ladies even though we had the highest success rate in the matchmaking service. Today I get many request for models and request from guys who want us to interview a bunch of ladies for them and then they will decide which ones to meet. Often these request are for free service and time.  The major problem is the number of men making the trips because of the recessions is very noticeable. Cost are going though the roof. The only thing that hasn't change is the number of ladies joining is one the rise.  I've had to increase my rates to 1/2 of the competitors rates just to stay open.

Their is no model of operation that seem to work. Some of the dishonest agencies have started to send out letters to Men with the false impression they are from the ladies to get more service.  I started to over daily free chats with the ladies to show they are interested.

I've seen 7 agencies close up shop this year that I recommended to others.  I personally believe in the next 5 years it will be automated sites and HIGH end sites only. As the smaller agencies go under.

To many guys support the dishonest agencies.

Kevin

[Admin]

I've seen a large decrease of request for matchmaking service over the last year. A few years ago everyone wanted direct contact with the ladies even though we had the highest success rate in the matchmaking service. Today I get many request for models and request from guys who want us to interview a bunch of ladies for them and then they will decide which ones to meet. Often these request are for free service and time.  The major problem is the number of men making the trips because of the recessions is very noticeable. Cost are going though the roof. The only thing that hasn't change is the number of ladies joining is one the rise.  I've had to increase my rates to 1/2 of the competitors rates just to stay open.

Their is no model of operation that seem to work. Some of the dishonest agencies have started to send out letters to Men with the false impression they are from the ladies to get more service.  I started to over daily free chats with the ladies to show they are interested.

I've seen 7 agencies close up shop this year that I recommended to others.  I personally believe in the next 5 years it will be automated sites and HIGH end sites only. As the smaller agencies go under.

To many guys support the dishonest agencies.

Kevin

Kevin,

>>To [sic] many guys support the dishonest agencies.<<

Why do you suppose that is?

I recall Richard (Tver Angels) making the same complaint. In fact, there was a topic - one of the last in which Richard participated heavily before leaving Russia - and there was IIRC a great deal of sound business advice offered.

- Dan

[Jack]

Kevin,
>>To [sic] many guys support the dishonest agencies.<<
Why do you suppose that is?
I- Dan

Dan, if you don't mind me butting in on your question to Kevin, ....uneducated men for the most part support dishonest agencies.  Again, for the umpteenth time,  education is one of the key factors to finding a good Russian bride.  The more a guy can educate himself to all aspects to the pursuit of finding a good Russian/Ukraine bride, the better he will do.


  The scam agencies best client is the uneducated consumer.

[Admin]

Dan, if you don't mind me butting in on your question to Kevin, ....uneducated men for the most part support dishonest agencies.  Again, for the umpteenth time,  education is one of the key factors to finding a good Russian bride.  The more a guy can educate himself to all aspects to the pursuit of finding a good Russian/Ukraine bride, the better he will do.


  The scam agencies best client is the uneducated consumer.

Jack,

No, I don't mind you butting in at all.

Your response begs the question - What is the solution?

I also think it is too broad to be helpful. For instance, the phrase "scam agencies" - as we explored in this and other threads - is TOO broad and non-specific to be meaningful - or HELPFUL to guys. A clearer definition of what constitutes a 'scam' or 'scamming behaviors' needs to be developed, and consistently applied.

There is another problem (at least another, and probably MANY others), and that is - Whom to believe? Another for instance - there is a site that claims to provide guidance to allow people to circumnavigate AWAY from scam agencies. Their model is to create their list of the good agencies, and another list of the bad agencies. HOWEVER - there are some interesting FACTS to be found - such as, one of the agencies on their bad list employs almost identical practices to an agency on their good list. Identical in every meaningful way. So how can that 'anti-scam' site justify the difference? Well, justification and transparency of motive was never an objective of that site - but all one need do is look at which of those sites generates a revenue stream for the site owner, and you can draw your own conclusions.

My point is - education of the consumers is one area for improvement, but there are many others that are equally important. Some, maybe more so.

- Dan

[Kevin]

Dan
There are 3 main reason I can think of why men use dishonest agencies. (No Research,Dreams and Money)
1. Lack of knowledge by the men who don't take the time and research agencies or use common sense when dealing with any company. (Research).
2. Hot Ladies/Models photo's. The ideal that (Beauty and the Beast) is a real life story. (Dreams)
3. Good sites/forums and discussion groups that advertise for known dishonest agencies. (Money)

One of the most common dis-honest(my opinion scam) is the spam of letters a men gets when he join such agencies networks. There is no connection between the Men profiles and the ladies letters he gets.  I can prove on such sites that no matter how bad I make the profile. I get multiple Letters from beautiful ladies.  This can be caused by a dishonest agent as claimed by many. But when the evidence is given to the Primary Network owners the agents are not removed. Therefore showing a acceptance by the network of such practices.  It is what I called(baiting) men into paying for such letters.

I got a complaint for a client this week. He sent out quite a few intro letters to ladies on my site and he pick the best looking ladies and got a 90 percent rejection.  He was very upset at me for "wasting his time and money" When I explained to him my policy of insisting to the ladies that they only respond back to men who they are interested in and not to write just to write men. The rejections were because the ladies did not find his profile interesting.  The amount of money that I saved him from additional letters and making a trip to Kherson was greater then the $79 he spent.  BTW He did get 2 letter from interested ladies.  The client know understand our policy and agrees with it.

If I had been a dishonest agencies, i could had required the ladies to write the men. Had the staff write the men or send him letter from other ladies (spam him) to generate more money.  But It not something I would do.  I was scammed enough during my early days to understand the effects of it.

[Jack]

Your response begs the question - What is the solution?
I also think it is too broad to be helpful.

Getting as much education as possible might be to broad an answer but I think it is the one most single important element. Once one can become educated as who the scam agencies are, then these will be agencies that are avoided.  If one fish's from a sea of shark's, one is going to catch shark's. So we are trying to educate ourselves as to where are the best places to fish.

For instance, the phrase "scam agencies" - as we explored in this and other threads - is TOO broad and non-specific to be meaningful - or HELPFUL to guys. A clearer definition of what constitutes a 'scam' or 'scamming behaviors' needs to be developed, and consistently applied.

Dan their will ALWAYS be debate about who is and isn't a scam agency. I think their is no larger scam agency in the industry than _ _ _ _ _ . I won't mention their name so as to not get this current discussion sidetrack. I KNOW this agency is full of scam. I know other people who have been involved with this industry as long as I who will agree with me 100%, such as Kevin, as to this agency being the largest, most effecient scam agency in the industry.  And then their might be someone who says, "Well, I guess it all depends on how one defines scam".  So of course the debate will go one because the EXACT wording of scam is not agreed to by all.  And I suspect never will be, all the time the scam agency keeps right on scamming.

There is another problem (at least another, and probably MANY others), and that is - Whom to believe?

Well, here again Dan, I think their will never be a consensuses.   I think Kevin is the most honest agency owner in the industry, but yet every now and then someone will holler scam. Kevin is NEVER going to scam anyone. This just goes to show you that you can never please everyone and today with the internet it's so easy for someone who has a beef with someone else, someone who never used someone's service's, to make unfounded and disparaging remarks.  I know a few agency owners who do care about people making unfounded and untruthful remarks about them.

Another for instance - there is a site that claims to provide guidance to allow people to circumnavigate AWAY from scam agencies. Their model is to create their list of the good agencies, and another list of the bad agencies. HOWEVER - there are some interesting FACTS to be found - such as, one of the agencies on their bad list employs almost identical practices to an agency on their good list. Identical in every meaningful way.

Oh Dan, I see your trying to be nice.   Dan, if an anti-scam site is paid or makes money from sites they recommend, how could such a site be impartial and trusted with their recommendation?  If I recommend ABC company and I have a link on my site that takes visitor's to ABC company as a result of this recommendation, AND am paid for each click from ABC company, then I do have a vested interest in promoting that agency.  These type anti-scam sites are a joke. 

So how can that 'anti-scam' site justify the difference? Well, justification and transparency of motive was never an objective of that site - but all one need do is look at which of those sites generates a revenue stream for the site owner, and you can draw your own conclusions.

I should have read further, I see we come to the same conclusion.

My point is - education of the consumers is one area for improvement, but there are many others that are equally important. Some, maybe more so.

I think education is the single most important aspect. And I think that open Russian discussion board's, such as this one, are probably the single best way to start and continue with one's education.

[Admin]

Getting as much education as possible might be to broad an answer but I think it is the one most single important element. Once one can become educated as who the scam agencies are, then these will be agencies that are avoided.  If one fish's from a sea of shark's, one is going to catch shark's. So we are trying to educate ourselves as to where are the best places to fish.




Dan their will ALWAYS be debate about who is and isn't a scam agency. I think their is no larger scam agency in the industry than _ _ _ _ _ . I won't mention their name so as to not get this current discussion sidetrack. I KNOW this agency is full of scam. I know other people who have been involved with this industry as long as I who will agree with me 100%, such as Kevin, as to this agency being the largest, most effecient scam agency in the industry.  And then their might be someone who says, "Well, I guess it all depends on how one defines scam".  So of course the debate will go one because the EXACT wording of scam is not agreed to by all.  And I suspect never will be, all the time the scam agency keeps right on scamming.






Well, here again Dan, I think their will never be a consensuses.   I think Kevin is the most honest agency owner in the industry, but yet every now and then someone will holler scam. Kevin is NEVER going to scam anyone. This just goes to show you that you can never please everyone and today with the internet it's so easy for someone who has a beef with someone else, someone who never used someone's service's, to make unfounded and disparaging remarks.  I know a few agency owners who do care about people making unfounded and untruthful remarks about them.






Oh Dan, I see your trying to be nice.   Dan, if an anti-scam site is paid or makes money from sites they recommend, how could such a site be impartial and trusted with their recommendation?  If I recommend ABC company and I have a link on my site that takes visitor's to ABC company as a result of this recommendation, AND am paid for each click from ABC company, then I do have a vested interest in promoting that agency.  These type anti-scam sites are a joke. 





I should have read further, I see we come to the same conclusion.





I think education is the single most important aspect. And I think that open Russian discussion board's, such as this one, are probably the single best way to start and continue with one's education.

Jack,

There is a natural deterrent to replying to your posts.... I don't know where to start.

So I'll ask Kevin a question instead.

Dan
There are 3 main reason I can think of why men use dishonest agencies. (No Research,Dreams and Money)
1. Lack of knowledge by the men who don't take the time and research agencies or use common sense when dealing with any company. (Research).
2. Hot Ladies/Models photo's. The ideal that (Beauty and the Beast) is a real life story. (Dreams)
3. Good sites/forums and discussion groups that advertise for known dishonest agencies. (Money)

One of the most common dis-honest(my opinion scam) is the spam of letters a men gets when he join such agencies networks. There is no connection between the Men profiles and the ladies letters he gets.  I can prove on such sites that no matter how bad I make the profile. I get multiple Letters from beautiful ladies.  This can be caused by a dishonest agent as claimed by many. But when the evidence is given to the Primary Network owners the agents are not removed. Therefore showing a acceptance by the network of such practices.  It is what I called(baiting) men into paying for such letters.

I got a complaint for a client this week. He sent out quite a few intro letters to ladies on my site and he pick the best looking ladies and got a 90 percent rejection.  He was very upset at me for "wasting his time and money" When I explained to him my policy of insisting to the ladies that they only respond back to men who they are interested in and not to write just to write men. The rejections were because the ladies did not find his profile interesting.  The amount of money that I saved him from additional letters and making a trip to Kherson was greater then the $79 he spent.  BTW He did get 2 letter from interested ladies.  The client know understand our policy and agrees with it.

If I had been a dishonest agencies, i could had required the ladies to write the men. Had the staff write the men or send him letter from other ladies (spam him) to generate more money.  But It not something I would do.  I was scammed enough during my early days to understand the effects of it.

Kevin,

Of your three items, what is your FACTUAL BASIS for your opinion? Have you actually had people complain about ANY of those actually happening to them?

- Dan

[msmoby_ru]

I should give credit to Kevin Hayes. Whilst I doubt he was seeking this particular outcome, the recent exchanges between he and I, in PM's and in the open forum, spawned this thought and it is soon to become a reality and I suspect Kevin will be among the beneficiaries when we complete the first phase of the program. I really do think highly of Kevin - even if/when he does not see things my way and insists on listing a corrupt site among his "honest" sites.

and YET.. despite asking us to believe you have facts to back your contention - re this corrupt site - and it's owner - you keep ignoring requests to tell us all who this owner is ... to protect members..

In this very thread you ask others for facts, why can't you do the same ?!

I know this is YOUR site and I'm "pulling your chain" ... but as you are now passing judgment on Kevin ( the "but" takes off the shine of the earlier praise !..) and you have FACTS - I don't understand WHY you won't / can't name names.....

[Kevin]

Dan
 I didn't think you wanted me to post the sites on the forum. But since you asked for facts. I will post the two biggest offenders.

Guys, Log in fact and please don't change the information. I don't expect the profile to stay active long after this posting.
http://www.anastasia-international.com/login.php (your login: 1911180, your password: 9uT5N6X0)
Profile name.  Mr. No Spam. 42 years old, 4ft 6in tall. 331lbs. No photo. No Description.
42 letters in about a week.  As young as 19. Mostly Models.

The other one is www.ua-ladies.com aka www.confidentialconnections.com , It appears they are reading this forum as my account was just deleted. I had about 60 letters. My Profile was khersonGirls .  I used Grumpy of the seven dwarfs. 4ft 6in. 220lbs. A cartoon photo. In this profile i stated in the description that I was married. That this profile was being used to test this network for scamming. I made very clear though out the profile that I did not want any letters. 
I got about 7 a week from models.

Both of these networks can be tested by anyone. Just create a very offensive profile and count how many letters you get within 72 hrs..   

Such profiles can verify that the Ladies are not reading the profile and "someone" is sending out intro letters for Money from these ladies. At a minimum it is a very dishonest to send such letter to client with the impression that the lady had read his profile and is interested.  I consider it a money scam. Others just say dishonest business money making processes.

I recommend that before using any network site. Create a test profile.

kevin

[Shadow]

We have been over the use and validity of test profiles before.
BeSmart gave a much better proof of dishonest practices as any fake profile does. However he did not (yet) take this matter up with the main agency as far as I know.

There lies the heart of the matter. When someone contacts an agency about a female client or subagent being dishonest, it should be investigated and when shown that he complaint is correct, measures should be taken. If it shows that the dishonesty or scam practice was founded, but the agency does not take any actions, then one might conclude that they either agree or promote dishonesty.

Howeve that bings me back to Kevin. In a thread there was a woman who was accused of taking holidays to exotic locations at the expense of men. She was listed by Kevin. On my question if Kevin would do any investigations, he replied that he would wait until he got a first-hand report. Yet he feels that making a fake profile is proof of dishonesty of an agency, while it can be subagencies or even the women (or fat Yuri) who are the dishonest party. This shows a double standard.

I do not in any way doubt Kevin's integrity, or feel that Aweb is a business free from any kind of blame. However if we set equal standard for the level of proof needed, it needs lot more than dubious letters arriving to a fake profile.

[Faux Pas]

Shadow,
It would appear you don't wish to recognize the big pink elephant in the corner of the room. It makes no difference if the profile is a test profile or a real one. When an agency sends emails purporting that they were sent by a lady when they were not is clearly a deception. That would be unless of course the receiver signed up with the agency to receive letters from the agency instead of the women. I have never heard or read of anyone that signed up with an agency for the agency to write letters to them. this may be the case in some instances, I don't know.

If the agency prefaced these type emails or letters that they are in fact agency letters before requiring money or credits to open them, that would not be a deception. Do you know of any agencies that do this? Me neither. 

When an agency collects money from a client for opening a letter that they (not the lady) sent to to the client, that is a scam. It is money by deception.

This could be discussed to death with semantics but the bottom line is when agencies collect money from clients for letters they sent, it is dishonest no doubt but, it is also a scam

[Shadow]

Shadow,
It would appear you don't wish to recognize the big pink elephant in the corner of the room. It makes no difference if the profile is a test profile or a real one. When an agency sends emails purporting that they were sent by a lady when they were not is clearly a deception. That would be unless of course the receiver signed up with the agency to receive letters from the agency instead of the women. I have never heard or read of anyone that signed up with an agency for the agency to write letters to them. this may be the case in some instances, I don't know.

If the agency prefaced these type emails or letters that they are in fact agency letters before requiring money or credits to open them, that would not be a deception. Do you know of any agencies that do this? Me neither. 

When an agency collects money from a client for opening a letter that they (not the lady) sent to to the client, that is a scam. It is money by deception.

This could be discussed to death with semantics but the bottom line is when agencies collect money from clients for letters they sent, it is dishonest no doubt but, it is also a scam

Faux Pas, all we established here is that a profile that is constructed not to receive letters still attracts them.
There is no absolute certainty who sent out the letters. It can be the internet agency, it can be the sub agency it can be the women (or others) who are controlling the profile.
Either one of these three is a viable possibility, all we know for sure is that new profiles are scooped and targetted by a letter without viewing the profile. From a technical point of view, if the internet agency provides their sub-agencies and female with a list or feed of new profiles, it is a very easy task to send a form letter to them by a script.
This should be a strong suspicion that the letters might be fabricated, and sent out with the object of financial gain only. However the caveat is that there is zero proof for this.
One might suggest (as has been done) that the form letter is a way to promote real and seeking women to all new subscribers, picking those that will react and are within the criteria of the women. One might suggest that the posters of the profile are the culprits, in order to gain by other dishonest methods (scam, pro-dating).
All three are possible, and any mix of them as well. Fact is that without further investigation there is no proof for the pink elephant, we only hear some noises go bump in the night.

As mentioned before, my wife did not post her profile direct but through a 'ghost agency' that sent out first interest letters on her behalf, this through a 'dating site'. In your definition this is a deceptive way of working that could even be labeled as dishonest. Yet behind it there was at least in one case a real and sincere woman, and the 'ghost agency' never came up until when we discussed marriage agencies and sites much later. There is a strong chance that many profiles on free sites, and even a number of them on agency sites are not managed by the women, but by 'ghost agencies'. Women pay for these services, and get promotion in return.

The bottom line is that it is easy to put a label on an operation, and as said I support the label myself. However there is a distinct difference between putting a label and providing proof. Setting up a fake profile and showing it gets letters is not proof. It is an indication that the letters received do not discriminate by profile and there for might be suspicious.
That still makes it needed to do due diligence on a business model, and when choosing it to provide you with services to know how to use it in your favour. Thinking you are God's gift to women will cost you.

[Kevin]

Shadow
If I get a complaint from someone that they read somewhere else on a open forum about a lady. I take the time and read the same complaint and send a email to the person who started the threat. In the case you mention the person who started the thread got it from another thread and it was based on heresay from another poster. I was never able to find the "scammed person". who took such lady on exotic vacations. 

As far as agents in my network. I have one agent account on hold because I got a complaint that a photo was touched up for a gift delivery.  I am still not sure if the photo was touched up or just a bad quality photo. But I responded with the suspension until I was sure.  I do take such complaints very seriously. If I found any agent sending out "intro letters" without the lady reading the profile. That agent wouldn't be on line by the end of the day.

The proof I presented isn't heresay or third person. I created the fake profiles and I got the fake letters.

kevin 

[Shadow]

Shadow
If I get a complaint from someone that they read somewhere else on a open forum about a lady. I take the time and read the same complaint and send a email to the person who started the threat. In the case you mention the person who started the thread got it from another thread and it was based on heresay from another poster. I was never able to find the "scammed person". who took such lady on exotic vacations. 

As far as agents in my network. I have one agent account on hold because I got a complaint that a photo was touched up for a gift delivery.  I am still not sure if the photo was touched up or just a bad quality photo. But I responded with the suspension until I was sure.  I do take such complaints very seriously. If I found any agent sending out "intro letters" without the lady reading the profile. That agent wouldn't be on line by the end of the day.

The proof I presented isn't heresay or third person. I created the fake profiles and I got the fake letters.

kevin 

Kevin, did you check on the lady's behavior ? That would be the easiest thing to do instead of hunting tor reports. I do understand that you need to be fair and balanced as men also are known to file false reports.
If I were to read a report about a client of you feeling scammed, and I had a question I would go to you for your side of the story or at least make you aware of it, not trying to contact the client to see if he might be confused about the agency.

I never doubted that you got the letters. The discussion is about what they represent.

[CCowboy]

Hello group,

Along with AnastasiaWeb and UAlady AKA Confidential Connection, Army Of Brides http://army-of-brides.com and Natasha Club http://www.natashaclub.com should be included.  I have a profile on each site, though I've never spent any money responding to "letters" or buying contact information.  It's part of my education process.  I use the sites to cross reference from other sites, mostly free sites.  To date, I have received nearly 900 "letters" on Anastasia and a similar amount on the other sites.  I'm so popular !!  Although many are of reasonable age difference, I do get many letters from girls 30-45 years younger than me.  Even though my profile states I'll be visiting a certain city, I get letters from the far reaches of the FSU.  I've also had the opportunity to meet a few women in person from these sites and they all deny placing their profile with them.  Although Natasha Club is not actually and agency, I have a strong suspicion they are connected with Anastasia.  Many profiles and photos are duplicates of profiles on Anastasia.  However, I also know that some profiles are legitimate and actually placed by the woman.  But I'd say the majority of the profiles are placed by other agencies.  Natasha Club charges $10-20 to read a letter, which may contain 4 words.  Letters can be sent for free but responses must be paid for.  I was able to get contact information from one woman I planned to visit in Kharkov.  Her address happened to be her agency's address.  The first thing the agency wanted was $60 to set up a meeting.  It didn't matter if a man had spent $100-200 for corresponding fees.  With experiences like this, it's understandable I'm very anti-agency.  Who can you really trust?  I also had suspicions about CuteOnly that is advertised on RWD.  A woman I'll be meeting in Dnepropetrovsk in 2 weeks is listed on their site.  Same photos as another site but instead of her 5'9" is says she's 5'6" and lives in Kiev.  She says she never put her profile on CuteOnly.  I've received over 100 letters spread out over the FSU and many of them from women in their 20's and late teens photo model types.  I've noticed that these "photo model" profiles have been removed.  So at least CuteOnly seems to be policing the women on their site and removing the pro-daters and potential scammers.  So, my experiences have taught me that it's a big gamble using agencies.  There are the obvious scamming agencies listed here, but most agencies fall into that grey area.  They are not really scammers, but they maintain outdated profiles, with outdated photos and with outdated information.  There are just too many better options now available.  Free sites like Flirt.Com and LovePlanet give men and women an opportunity to meet each other online.  They can exchange photos, contact information, and to be able to ask and answer important questions that will determine if two people are right for each other, all for free.  When you go to an agency and spend $20-40 just for the meeting, another $20-30 for 2 hours of translation, and $20-40 for food and drink, you can easily spend $100 just to meet one woman.  If you spend the $8-10 per letter corrsponding before meeting, it's even more expensive.  The money isn't the main issue with me.  But when I meet a woman based on the photos the agency posted and she's now 10-20 kilograms heavier because the photos are 6 years old, I feel scammed.  When I tell the agency that I'm not interested in a woman who has dependent children or wants to have a child and then I learn she has a 12 y.o. at home or she's 40+ and is only interested in a man who will have a child with her, I feel scammed.  An agency doesn't need to be a matchmaker, but they need to know their women well enough that there is a REASONABLE chance two people are a good match.  So, when I check out an agency and I see old profiles, old photos and old information, I assume the worst, because that is what I usually experience.  That's why I got on Jack's case.  It's not so difficult to keep profiles on an agency current.  I think that is the number one gripe men have who use agencies.  That and bogus letters being sent out to men.              

[Admin]

Shadow
If I get a complaint from someone that they read somewhere else on a open forum about a lady. I take the time and read the same complaint and send a email to the person who started the threat. In the case you mention the person who started the thread got it from another thread and it was based on heresay from another poster. I was never able to find the "scammed person". who took such lady on exotic vacations. 

As far as agents in my network. I have one agent account on hold because I got a complaint that a photo was touched up for a gift delivery.  I am still not sure if the photo was touched up or just a bad quality photo. But I responded with the suspension until I was sure.  I do take such complaints very seriously. If I found any agent sending out "intro letters" without the lady reading the profile. That agent wouldn't be on line by the end of the day.

The proof I presented isn't heresay or third person. I created the fake profiles and I got the fake letters.

kevin 

>>The proof I presented isn't heresay or third person. I created the fake profiles and I got the fake letters.<<

Kevin,

Do any of the sites where you created a BOGUS account have rules prohibiting such behavior?

Dan
 I didn't think you wanted me to post the sites on the forum. But since you asked for facts. I will post the two biggest offenders.

Guys, Log in fact and please don't change the information. I don't expect the profile to stay active long after this posting.
http://www.anastasia-international.com/login.php (your login: 1911180, your password: 9uT5N6X0)
Profile name.  Mr. No Spam. 42 years old, 4ft 6in tall. 331lbs. No photo. No Description.
42 letters in about a week.  As young as 19. Mostly Models.

The other one is www.ua-ladies.com aka www.confidentialconnections.com , It appears they are reading this forum as my account was just deleted. I had about 60 letters. My Profile was khersonGirls .  I used Grumpy of the seven dwarfs. 4ft 6in. 220lbs. A cartoon photo. In this profile i stated in the description that I was married. That this profile was being used to test this network for scamming. I made very clear though out the profile that I did not want any letters. 
I got about 7 a week from models.

Both of these networks can be tested by anyone. Just create a very offensive profile and count how many letters you get within 72 hrs..   

Such profiles can verify that the Ladies are not reading the profile and "someone" is sending out intro letters for Money from these ladies. At a minimum it is a very dishonest to send such letter to client with the impression that the lady had read his profile and is interested.  I consider it a money scam. Others just say dishonest business money making processes.

I recommend that before using any network site. Create a test profile.

kevin

>>I didn't think you wanted me to post the sites on the forum.<<

Kevin, your posts are YOUR posts. So long as they do not violate the RWD ToS, you can post freely.

In this instance, I expect (but am not certain) that you have very likely violated a legal agreement. Most sites that have logins, also have language that prohibits divulging those login details to others. The reasoning behind such a 'rule' should be obvious, but it is to prohibit abuse - such as the abuse YOU have now exposed those companies to.

I raise this now as an issue for a couple of reasons.

One is - you may want to edit that post to remove the potentially litigious materials.

The other is - this exposes a side of you Kevin that I did not know existed. I never imagined that you would resort to possible (likely) violation of a legal agreement in an attempt to prove a point. I had understood you to have some background in law enforcement. If accurate, one would expect you received training in collection of evidence. Would your actions in; (a) creating a BOGUS (a/k/a fraudulent) account, and (b) violating the written terms of a legal agreement, allow your 'evidence' to be admitted in a court?

>>Such profiles can verify that the Ladies are not reading the profile and "someone" is sending out intro letters for Money from these ladies. At a minimum it is a very dishonest to send such letter to client with the impression that the lady had read his profile and is interested.  I consider it a money scam. Others just say dishonest business money making processes.<<

Kevin, we already established that the mere distribution of profiles is no different than sending a newsletter (like you do), or publishing a website (like you do). Advertising the lady's (and the men's) profiles, whether through a website, a newsletter (which is sent to a list of emails), or directly in emails, is merely an advertisement.

Your issue, if I understand it correctly (you seem to have a propensity for making an accusation while never answering ANY of the follow-up clarification questions), is that some agencies will send a profile, and claim it is a "mail" - all contained within the confines of that agency's website - and 'misleading' the guy into thinking the girl in the profile had personally read about him and responded to him.

Is THAT your issue - or is it the mere dissemination of profiles?

>>I recommend that before using any network site. Create a test profile.<<

To be clear, you are employing a euphemism of "test profile." The much more accurate characterization would be 'fraudulent profile.'

- Dan

[Jack]

Shadow, and Dan, I hear where both of you are coming from.

However their becomes a time when common sense has to prevail.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck, but the creature says he is a pink elephant and the creature demands you prove he is a duck when he say's he is a pink elephant. One has to sometimes use common sense if it's not going to be possible for you, or anyone, to convince this duck he is not a pink elephant.

It used to be years and years ago in America if someone was convicted of a terrible crime such as murder our legal system said the prosecution had to present a body, a murder weapon.  Well, cleaver murders were able to dispose of bodies in such a way that they were never found. If you could destroy a body or dump a body in the middle of the ocean and no one could present a body the defense would argue the person is still alive, but is in S. America hiding from the world, you cannot convict my client of this crime.  And for years and years with the American legal system you had to have a body, or parts of a body, to PROVE that the person was dead or had been murdered.

Then prosecution teams across America started presenting all the circumstantial facts and events. They had no body, no murder weapon, so smoking gun, but all the circumstantial evidence and events, or "common sense" pointed to one person as being the murderer.  Prosecution teams then said "Let's present what we have and let a jury decide, let a jury use common sense". 

Kevin is applying common sense. Sure, it's not enough evidence for some people, never will be. But with enough reports, very much like this new guy BeSmart, their comes a time when common sense has to prevail.

Look at what the new member BeSmart wrote just yesterday, ..."Conclusion: Based on my personal experience in over 20 “third party flower deliveries” to ladies on their website: AnastasiaWeb is a complete and total scam. Try to argue that with me, I have all the evidence.".....

Time and time again, reports like this, year after year.  At some point common sense has to prevail.

[Admin]

and YET.. despite asking us to believe you have facts to back your contention - re this corrupt site - and it's owner - you keep ignoring requests to tell us all who this owner is ... to protect members..

In this very thread you ask others for facts, why can't you do the same ?!

I know this is YOUR site and I'm "pulling your chain" ... but as you are now passing judgment on Kevin ( the "but" takes off the shine of the earlier praise !..) and you have FACTS - I don't understand WHY you won't / can't name names.....

>>and YET.. despite asking us to believe you have facts to back your contention<<

Actually, I merely made the statement that every word is supported by fact. Some will consider that credible, others will not - that is up to each of them.

>>you keep ignoring requests to tell us all who this owner is ... to protect members.. <<

In point of fact, this is entirely consistent with the values expressed here for a very long time. RWD is not now, and will never be, a site filled with 'blacklists.' We simply do not operate in that space. There are plenty of sites that do, and if that is what 'floats your boat,' you should go there. [Will you now demand that I tell you where those are as well?]

In terms of actions "to protect members" - RWD does VASTLY MORE than any other site on the internet - witness:

* We publish tools to allow guys to draw their own conclusions about potential scams. Ref. http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?pid=34, http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?pid=6, and http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?pid=3.

* We created the Certified Marriage Agencies site to promote honest and ethical behavior by agencies, utilizing the centerpiece of the Agency Code of Ethics (in three languages).

* We have a DRAFT (that is long overdue for release) of a Standard of Conduct for Men.

* We are in the midst of collecting the ONLY wide-scale objective fact-based statistics on the experiences of Cross-Cultural Marriage and Divorce ever created.

* For those who may find the 'backoffice' interactions with agencies across the globe of some interest, we created The GoodWife Report to provide definitive metrics on agency affiliate programs, as well as report on other aspects of the interaction.

And this is only the start. RWD has several high-impact programs underway right now and those results will begin to trickle out in the near term.

There is simply no question that RWD works tirelessly "to protect members" by providing valuable, accurate, objective information to our members and to others in this community - and doing so consistent with the RWD Vision, which states: "RWD practices tolerance of diversity in opinions expressed and experiences shared, and promotes the notion of individual choice wherever and whenever possible."

Through the development and delivery of highest-calibre information, RWD members (and readers) are able to make more informed decisions than ever before. THAT is "protection."

- Dan

[Kevin]

Dan
"Do any of the sites where you created a BOGUS account have rules prohibiting such behavior?"
I didn't look.  I was more concern about the sites BOGUS letters.  If the site has such a rule it would show more evidence that they are aware of the practice of spaming clients with letters and don't want people to discover it with test profiles.

"Kevin, we already established that the mere distribution of profiles is no different than sending a newsletter (like you do), or publishing a website (like you do). Advertising the lady's (and the men's) profiles, whether through a website, a newsletter (which is sent to a list of emails), or directly in emails, is merely an advertisement."

Dan, You keeping saying Profiles. I keep saying Letters.. My complaint was the letters notice that I got.  The notice of letters do include a lady profiles that give the "impression" that the lady is sending the letter because she is interested. Again it has nothing to do with advertisment of profiles.  Do I make myself clear enough this time. It was notice of Letters that I sent you. Here is a copy of one I got today
*****
Dear no spam,


You have new e-mails in your Anastasia International mailbox.

One credit will be deducted from your account for opening this letter.
Evgenia's First Letter
 Evgenia(ID: 1117316)
Age: 20
Odessa, Ukraine
Never married lady with green eyes and ginger hair.  
Read the Letter
 
***