Randomizers, are they legal or not?

[SuperEasyStuff]

What are your opinions on randomizers? Are they illegal or legal?

[MatrixWatch]

I'm not sure. How do these "randomizers" work?

[ycchen]

I am not sure if it is legal or not. However, you could ask yourself another question on fairness.

Is it a fair business practise? If it is unfair like the pyramid-matrix scheme which priviledge early birds against the latecomers, then it is definitely not a fair business for everyone.

[dawhatnow]

hey i am intrested on this too....this was a site I was looking at http://www.dollarsblaster.com/index.asp ....its flooding ebay too. I wanted to join because it just seems so reasonable but I thought that of the matrix before I seen it through other perspectives... If anyone has any info on it please reply....thanks

[MatrixWatch]

I would recommed staying far away from get-rich-quick schemes like this. Only the owner and his closest friends usually benefit the most from these scams.

Let paypal know that this randominzer account is using their services. See what they think about it.

[ycchen]

This is 100% scam, a revised version of "Chain Letter Pyramid Schemes?"

http://www.interleaves.org/~rteeter/pyramid.html

It will only works for few early birds (usually the owners and their friends) before it get sued or get too many negative coverage by the media.

Beside, it is operating in the black box and you never know how it actually works.

I spot an obvious lie on their front page: This Program also has an Amazing RESPONSE RATE of 75%. They said they will send out millions spam email on your behalf. Let's assume 1 million email with 75% response rate. That means 750,000 people will pay you $9. You should earn at least $6,859,000 (6.8 millions) in no time, much more than $8100!!

This is not bluffing, simply lie.

Okay, if you still want to take the risk, are you early enough in the game? I don't think so. You are not the early birds. Even though you might get your money back and earn a hundred buck (if you are lucky, but forget about 8100), do you care if you name is distributed with the spam (and scam) email all over the world?

Beside, how can the owners create 'unique' 1 million new email for each customers? Of course not. They will just send to the SAME mailing lists! Then, your chance of getting a response to YOU (not others) is very slim. People will just get pissed if they repeatedly receive the same spam mail and will automatically trash it or report to the authorities.

Yes, you might get some money back, but not more than $200, I bet. Only those insiders or very early bird might get a bit more.

[fuse2k3`]

It does not work, I have registered 20, count that, 20 accounts by using the scam way of signing up but not paying...I did this about 2 months ago and have not even recieved a penny yet...:D

[ycchen]

Thanks for sharing your experience.

I thought if you participate there is a slim chance that you might get a few bucks. I guess I was too optimistic. The main reason is probably becaue this scam idea is getting old already. People has discovered about this scam already. Those who got the money are the lucky early birds.

This is very similar to the pyramid-matrix scheme. It can only works for a short while, make a huge profit and then die.

Gotmatrix is an exceptional case that can still survive until today, but not for long , mostly because of lies and help from its collaborators -- matrix ranking website, illegal matrix auction sellers and diehard promoters.

As I have said repeatedly, the death of gotmatrix will be the closing chapter of the whole pyramid-matrix scam, at least on the U.S. soil.

After that, there will be another owner coming up with another online pyramid-scam...:) Pyramid scheme has been in this world for a long time, and it will continue to transform and reinvent itself. Even though they are all scam, I actually respect the pioneers (since they invented the wheel) more than the copy-cat (including gotmatrix and movemeup) ..:D

What is most pathetic is that some copy-cat matrices (Greg and Karen knows what they are doing) don't realize that they are copying a pyramid scheme...:D

[asdffhjglj]

I wonder randomizer site are scam or not. It sound to be fair that all member has equal chances of getting payment from next member sign up. At least it's better than matrix site. I have an accout in one of the randomizer website, $15 sign up, but get only $5 back since I sign up for about 2 or 3 months ago. I'm curious whether it's scam or not...

[Andrew2]

My take on randomizers, is that they are simply a variation on the illegal pyramid scheme.

They are created to earn the operator money.

Early participants might happen to make their money back, but the majority of sign-ups will lose money.

These schemes also spawn spam through-out the net which sucks.

They are best left alone.

[QuickSliver]

talking about Randomizer Legal Or illegal i have few question ..

Are Randomizers are Legal in UK/USA ?
I have found a site which looks sister of GetGiftsforFree.com It is GetCashforFree.com anyone have an idea about it?

But if ppl want to get qucik rich what will one do and what should i do i need some monthly income any one suggests any income making ideas which are 100% Legal.

[Arzel]

talking about Randomizer Legal Or illegal i have few question ..

Are Randomizers are Legal in UK/USA ?
I have found a site which looks sister of GetGiftsforFree.com It is GetCashforFree.com anyone have an idea about it?

But if ppl want to get qucik rich what will one do and what should i do i need some monthly income any one suggests any income making ideas which are 100% Legal.

I would steer clear of any randomizer. On the legality there are a few things you should look at.

On thing to consider is if you have a chance of "winning" it is most surely not legal. Any scheme where you must purchase a position for consideration of a prize would be considered a lottery. Lotteries can be legal, but they have several stipulations which must be followed to be legal.

If your only goal is to get rich quickly, you are looking in the wrong place. my personally feeling is that any site that promises you to get rick quick is a scam of some type. If it was really as easy as they say, everyone would be rich. Since not everyone is rich, they cannot work. Also if someone did have a really good way of making money quickly, they would have no benefit in telling anyone else. Doing so would elimiate their benefit. Those that claim to sell you a method to get rich quickly have no real way of getting rich quickly, other than selling you their method, if they did there would be no reason to sell it because in doing so it would soon not be a way to get rich quickly anymore.

There are ways to earn money, but they require actual work, and are rarely very quick.

[Doc.Logix]

I am seeing some very interesting viewpoints in this forum.. One in perticular, the concept that theyonly make the operator, and a few closet friends money...
I have been doing some coding for a randomizer by definition. They do actually work, and quite well, and yes they do make the operator money, but tell me, would you venture into a business to NOT make money?
The problem isn't the randomizer, the whole concept is kinda neat. The problem lies in the randomizer operator. Many operators 'stack' the database to lean their way, which is a cheat. Many bill randomizers to "gaurantee you'll get rich", This is BS. By design a randomizer won't make you rich, but also by design, can make you extra money. The spam thing, again, operator, a responsible operator isn't into spamming anyone, and will respect the privacy of clients.
Back to design, yes the more people who 'join' the less the odds for a member to be picked. The "wieghted" concept is another, and true the more 'entries' one has the better the odds of that random pick. But in reality the benefit of the randomizer isn't in the random pick anyway, but rather a sponsered hit. It has the random pick capability which is in a way a selling point, because people seem to like to gamble, so the "game of odds" becomes inviting. But in reality it is the sponsers who earn the cash. The system rewards those who advertise for them, I don't see a problem there, 1. that is a smart business practice, and 2. Properly and responsibly done, the randomizer is a sideline, or sidekick, a bonus if you will for another product or service being offered. Unfortunate though that most of them these days the product is email lists, or ebooks that are either bogus, copyright violations, or free anyway.
If there is no product or service being sold, and you have a chance to "WIN", well I would suspect fraud. If there is no gaurantee of privacy, or members names/emails are visible, I would think scam, Just as if the claim is that it will make you rich! As well "selling' extra positions/entries, without representation of product/service, then you'd be pointed more at lottery.
Properly operated, it is not a scam, ie: everyone has the same shot at the bonus, not a lottery ie: a tangible product or service is being sold, and those who are more active at sponsering, are rewarded for there efforts. No privacy is violated, even when pay-outs take place. Also a tangible product or service is offered with it, and no extra positions are for 'sale' Then it would not be a P-Scheme but rather a sponsered way to advertise a product or service, that actually benefits the sponsering members. That makes it work more like a rewards card at your local supermarket.

Doc.

[mercinary]

Doc.Logix:

You'd do well to use your programming skills for a legitimate cause. Personally, I wouldn't be able to sleep at night if I knew that my code was hurting innocent people. I can speak from this perspective, being a software engineer myself.

-Merc

P.S. I'm not answering to any of your previous comments, because all the arguments have been made before. Maybe one of the other Mods/Admins/members is willing to go through this argument one more time....

[concerned]

I have been doing some coding for a randomizer by definition. They do actually work, and quite well, and yes they do make the operator money, but tell me, would you venture into a business to NOT make money?
The problem isn't the randomizer, the whole concept is kinda neat. The problem lies in the randomizer operator.

Since you know the code behind one of these sites, then you know the logic. The logic is simple. You take money from someone new, and pay out someone that is ALREADY in the randomizer. Is this a correct and VERY simple version of the overall logic as you see it?

[Doc.Logix]

I can understand what you are saying to an extent, obviuosly you've been burned. My concern is in your concept of hurting others... The whole Idea I spoke of is to use one in a quite legit fashion, that doesn't hurt anyone. Anymore than a local trip to a super market and buying a product from them and getting points on your reward card.
Or did you miss the fact that the entire first 80 percent of my post was about what is WRONG with the 'radomizers' out there?

[concerned]

Actually, Mercinary and I both have never participated in a randomizer, and therefor have never been burnt. Can you please answer my question about the simple logic that goes into the randomizer? Is it true that it takes money from a new "customer" and randomly give it to an already existing customer?

[Doc.Logix]

Since you know the code behind one of these sites, then you know the logic. The logic is simple. You take money from someone new, and pay out someone that is ALREADY in the randomizer. Is this a correct and VERY simple version of the overall logic as you see it?

Yes I do see the logic, but the point missed is the product/service involved, Those already in the randomizer are currently sponsering the product/service, the one joining would then have that chance too. But again I use the term randomizer by definition only, because the resulting bonus isn't the random pick, but the sponsered hit. Just how many randomizers have you 'stumbled' into? More likely you'd find a link for one somewhere, which would be a sponsered hit. that means someone put up the effort to advertise, and is thus rewarded for the effort. It just happens that the funds used for that reward come from the sale of the product/service being advertised.
Again mind you I am in no way defending randomizers as they are commonly used in a less than honest fashion by the operators.

[Doc.Logix]

Actually, Mercinary and I both have never participated in a randomizer, and therefor have never been burnt. Can you please answer my question about the simple logic that goes into the randomizer? Is it true that it takes money from a new "customer" and randomly give it to an already existing customer?

I am glad to hear you haven't, myself I hate scams, as well as spam, which is why I am coding this one, for a specific reason.
To answer your question, yes it does by design. However not by practice. True randomizers have been marketed based on that very concept, playing the numbers, to get you picked at random and payed by millions, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that isn't reality, nor should it be billed as the case, once again the operator.
If you were to market a product, and relied on word of mouth to advertise, tell me, wouldn't it be the new customers money, paying the old customer the commission for the advertising?

[Arzel]

Yes I do see the logic, but the point missed is the product/service involved, Those already in the randomizer are currently sponsering the product/service, the one joining would then have that chance too. But again I use the term randomizer by definition only, because the resulting bonus isn't the random pick, but the sponsered hit. Just how many randomizers have you 'stumbled' into? More likely you'd find a link for one somewhere, which would be a sponsered hit. that means someone put up the effort to advertise, and is thus rewarded for the effort. It just happens that the funds used for that reward come from the sale of the product/service being advertised.
Again mind you I am in no way defending randomizers as they are commonly used in a less than honest fashion by the operators.

It does not matter in what manner you define your randomizer. The underlying aspect of chance is what makes them illegal.

There are several clear laws regarding games of chance and their legality, some of the more important ones are that lottery tickets (which is what you are selling) cannot be sold across state lines (pretty much a guarentee for randomizers). To opperate a game of chance you must have a licence to do so. The selection of winners must be done by a group independent from those running the lottery (to prevent fraud).

The most interesting aspect of randomizers, is that they evolved mostly from the failed Matrix scheme, and are clearly illegal, whereas the Matrix scam is mostly illegal (however to be legal they would never be a viable business model).

[Doc.Logix]

It does not matter in what manner you define your randomizer. The underlying aspect of chance is what makes them illegal.

There are several clear laws regarding games of chance and their legality, some of the more important ones are that lottery tickets (which is what you are selling) cannot be sold across state lines (pretty much a guarentee for randomizers). To opperate a game of chance you must have a licence to do so. The selection of winners must be done by a group independent from those running the lottery (to prevent fraud).

The most interesting aspect of randomizers, is that they evolved mostly from the failed Matrix scheme, and are clearly illegal, whereas the Matrix scam is mostly illegal (however to be legal they would never be a viable business model).

Actually what I am selling is PO3 based email accounts, the randomizer code is a advertising gimmick, ie: the incentive for member advertising. Hence based on the sponsered advertising commission for selection. The difference is the fact that the clients (aka members) have the possibility of a bonus pay-out for participating. I don't believe that makes it a lottery concept, but If it does, I'd like to see a reference to it, because I have not yet found one.
Doc.

[jokach]

The difference is the fact that the clients (aka members) have the possibility of a bonus pay-out for participating. I don't believe that makes it a lottery concept, but If it does, I'd like to see a reference to it, because I have not yet found one.


What you described is the definition of a lottery ...

lottery:
1. A contest in which tokens are distributed or sold, the winning token or tokens being secretly predetermined or ultimately selected in a random drawing.
2. A selection made by lot from a number of applicants or competitors.

The above definition pretty standard in any web dictionary that you find. The above was on answers.com, thefreedictionary.com and on dictionary.com.

Basically, you are using their 'name' in the lottery as the token, because understand the token can be anything ( a paper, a chip, or a piece of data in a database).

jokach

[Doc.Logix]

What you described is the definition of a lottery ...

lottery:
1. A contest in which tokens are distributed or sold, the winning token or tokens being secretly predetermined or ultimately selected in a random drawing.
2. A selection made by lot from a number of applicants or competitors.

The above definition pretty standard in any web dictionary that you find. The above was on answers.com, thefreedictionary.com and on dictionary.com.

Basically, you are using their 'name' in the lottery as the token, because understand the token can be anything ( a paper, a chip, or a piece of data in a database).

jokach

And no I am not being cynical, I am actually trying to learn, and share my views here..

Hmmm, by definition I can see what you mean there. But wouldn't that also mean that for instance an employee picked for employee of the month, or singled out for a bonus would be a lottery also, since the employee is a name in a database, or list? Or perhaps the 1000th customer will receive a... Or even on say usendit my familiy uses this a lot, and on the site is advertising, advertising space purchased by companies, and the advertisements are randomly picked and display hence providing a random benefit to the company who owns the ad.. It gets rather confusing, but I was under the impression that if the sale was the tangible product, and a random reward was distributed to customers (or sponsers) of that product, that wouldn't be defined as a lottery.

[Doc.Logix]

Actually I'll clearify my intentions, I originally posted here because of the randomizer topic..
What I have is a product, I am selling this product. My clients assist in selling this product by sponsering, or advertising the product. For that they are paid for their efforts. That part is a basic "Affilliate Program" Enter the randomizer because should a customer find the product without the help of a sponser, I wish to still distribute the amount normally paid out to a sponser when this customer has no sponser by randomly selecting a sponser via the randomizer code. Is that still considered to be a lottery?

[jokach]

I won't respond to your first post after mine since it made no sense at all.

As for your clarification post, you should note that there are 3 elements that constitute an illegal lottery (i've posted this many times before):

1. Prize,
2. Chance,
3. Consideration.

In order to make a promotion legal, one of the three elements must be eliminated. To state it another way, when consideration (which means an expenditure of effort or anything of value, not just money) is given for the chance (usually in the form of a random drawing) to receive a prize, an illegal lottery exists.

So take your example, you're selling your "product" to a customer, therefore they are paying you (consideration). In return, you will pay them "money" (prize) that would normally go to a sponsor. If they are selected (chance) in your random drawing. It constitutes an illegal lottery because you didn't eliminate one of the 3 elements.

There are ways to eliminate one of the three elements, depending on what you are trying to accomplish.

jokach

[Doc.Logix]

I won't respond to your first post after mine since it made no sense at all.

As for your clarification post, you should note that there are 3 elements that constitute an illegal lottery (i've posted this many times before):

1. Prize,
2. Chance,
3. Consideration.

In order to make a promotion legal, one of the three elements must be eliminated. To state it another way, when consideration (which means an expenditure of effort or anything of value, not just money) is given for the chance (usually in the form of a random drawing) to receive a prize, an illegal lottery exists.

So take your example, you're selling your "product" to a customer, therefore they are paying you (consideration). In return, you will pay them "money" (prize) that would normally go to a sponsor. If they are selected (chance) in your random drawing. It constitutes an illegal lottery because you didn't eliminate one of the 3 elements.

There are ways to eliminate one of the three elements, depending on what you are trying to accomplish.

jokach

That makes sense to me, thank you. Now for my post immediately following yours.. If you provide labor for an employer (Consideration), and then are picked (Chance) from the pool of employees for a bonus (Prize) would be an illegal lottery also then right?

In my situation the product is a tangible service that is paid for once by the customer, after which the customer has that product to use freely. the 'prize' is a commission for sponsership or advertising, which would define as payment for services. Those who already are customers are already in sponser or advertiser status. Therefore when a customer openly purchases the product without the aid of a sponser, and a sponser is selected to receive that commission because he/she is already providing a service as an advertiser that would be a paycheck not a prize I would think. That would say consideration and chance are there certainly, but not prize. At the very best, bonus on commission. Or am I that far off base here?

[Arzel]

That makes sense to me, thank you. Now for my post immediately following yours.. If you provide labor for an employer (Consideration), and then are picked (Chance) from the pool of employees for a bonus (Prize) would be an illegal lottery also then right?

In my situation the product is a tagible service that is paid for once by the customer, after which the customer has that product to use freely. the 'prize' is a commission for sponsership or advertising, which would define as payment for services. Those who already are customers are already in sponser or advertiser status. Therefore when a customer openly purchases the product without the aid of a sponser, and a sponser is selected to receive that commission because he/she is already providing a service as an advertiser that would be a paycheck not a prize I would think. That would say consideration and chance are there certainly, but not prize. At the very best, bonus on commission. Or am I that far off base here?

In response to your "Employee of the Month" type situation, the aspect of lottery does not apply. You cannot view the employee working for a company as consideration, since they are already being paid (compansated) for their work. If the company held some specific event in which employees would have to go beyond their normal duties they might run afoul of lotteries issues, but under this example they have not done anything more than they would already be doing.

Many companies do hold raffles (as do non-profits), for the express purpose of some charitable event, this would be the closest thing to a lottery under the framework of your example, but I would assume that these institutions would obtain the proper permit to hold a raffle, also, under these situation the proceeds of such a raffle go towards a non-profit or some other chariatible cause.

[concerned]

If you provide labor for an employer (Consideration),

I guess you don't understand the definition of consideration. Consideration is SOMEONE paying YOU for a chance. Are you saying that the employee is paying the company to do his job?

[Doc.Logix]

I guess you don't understand the definition of consideration. Consideration is SOMEONE paying YOU for a chance. Are you saying that the employee is paying the company to do his job?

Actually I do understand, and if you had read the previous posts you'd have understood my analagy was in response to Jokach's response which I quote:

"To state it another way, when consideration (which means an expenditure of effort or anything of value, not just money) is given for the chance (usually in the form of a random drawing) to receive a prize, an illegal lottery exists."

Which would mean that actually a employee is indeed providing a consideration in the form of his/her skills and time ("expenditure of effort"). for the paycheck and the "Chance" at a promotion. That was where I was going with that. But I suppose when taken out of context you can make anything appear to be anything else.

[mvandemar]

Actually I'll clearify my intentions, I originally posted here because of the randomizer topic..
What I have is a product, I am selling this product. My clients assist in selling this product by sponsering, or advertising the product. For that they are paid for their efforts. That part is a basic "Affilliate Program" Enter the randomizer because should a customer find the product without the help of a sponser, I wish to still distribute the amount normally paid out to a sponser when this customer has no sponser by randomly selecting a sponser via the randomizer code. Is that still considered to be a lottery?

Regardless of whether or not it is a lottery, if it is a pyramid scheme then it would therefore be illegal.
From FTC.gov:
If a plan offers to pay commissions for recruiting new distributors, watch out! Most states outlaw this practice, which is known as "pyramiding." State laws against pyramiding say that a multilevel marketing plan should only pay commissions for retail sales of goods or services, not for recruiting new distributors.
Why is pyramiding prohibited? Because plans that pay commissions for recruiting new distributors inevitably collapse when no new distributors can be recruited. And when a plan collapses, most people -- except perhaps those at the very top of the pyramid -- lose their money.

Is there a seperate fee to become a sponser?

-Michael

[tgkrishna]

Quote
-------------------------
"The logic is simple. You take money from someone new, and pay out someone that is ALREADY in the randomizer. Is this a correct and VERY simple version of the overall logic as you see it?"
-------------------------


Let us think, this may not be scam if the logic changes to "new members must be paid by existing members in the randomizer" .

But, how it is possible?

[concerned]

Existing members ONLY pay 1 time. They don't ever pay anything else. Therefor, your try at changing the logic wouldn't work. Besides, why would you want to be first in the randomizer, if chances are that you would have more of a chance of paying people? Isn't the idea to make money rather than spend it? You really need to work harder on trying to make a scam legit.

[tgkrishna]

I wonder randomizer site are scam or not. It sound to be fair that all member has equal chances of getting payment from next member sign up. At least it's better than matrix site. I have an accout in one of the randomizer website, $15 sign up, but get only $5 back since I sign up for about 2 or 3 months ago. I'm curious whether it's scam or not...

As long as that website exists online, they must advertise your affiliate link "in random". They also provide your own affiliate link with your name. Advertise yourself online, and get benefit. You have the possibility to earn. Whenever enter your website link, first pay to you after pay to admin of website, to get their weblink. Here where is the scam?

I have joined few webhosting or such affiiate programmes, worked hard but, lost money by advertising those links. No returns .