Pyramids, Ponzis and fraud prevention: lessons from a case study

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to empirically identify factors that increase consumer vulnerability to pyramid scheme fraud and compares/contrasts dynamics and implications of pyramid and Ponzi fraud. Design/methodology/approach Statistical techniques, including multiple regression, are used to analyze participant data (with over half a million individuals) from a now-defunct US-based pyramid scheme, Fortune Hi-Tech Marketing. Findings Findings suggest that this pyramid scheme flourished in counties with identifiable affinity groups: religious communities, Hispanic populations and certain age cohorts (e.g. recently retired). Recruitment success varied significantly between geographic regions, with the highest levels of recruitment in the South. While prior research finds a possible positive relationship between education and Ponzi participation, this is not the case in the pyramid scheme studied. Furthermore, while Ponzi schemes might be pro-cyclical, collapsing during contractions when participants seek to extract their money, this pyramid scheme exhibited counter-cyclical behavior. Practical implications State and federal regulators, as well as consumer protection advocates, should learn from analysis of past pyramid scheme cases. Such analysis informs allocation of scarce resources and supports the case for targeted, active education. Clarifying differences between Ponzi and pyramid fraud helps to support clear and effective intervention. Originality/value This is the first research to analyze national participant-level data from a pyramid scheme to inform future action. While it confirms some past findings, such as the connection to affinity fraud, it adds to collective knowledge on pyramid schemes and the differences between pyramid and Ponzi fraud.

Ponzi Schemes and its Prevention: Insights from Malaysia

“…The lack of knowledge of the sophistication and how Ponzi schemes operate to defraud unsuspecting victims of their savings requires the regulators of financial markets to intensify education of investors on how to identify and avoid Ponzi schemes (Amoah, 2018). Bosley and Knorr (2018) suggested that the state and federal regulators should allocate resources and to actively engage in preventive education. In a similar line, Galasintu, Supanit, and Chaiittivej (2018) suggested that consumers must be self-regulated by becoming more aware of business fraud and learn to be more protective.…”

Voluntary Disclosure and Earnings Expectations in Multi‐level Marketing

“…In particular, those pursuing business or economics degrees may see this type of opportunity as more in line with their skills and interests. We capture self‐reported degree of religiosity using a question from the Pew Religious Landscape Study (Pew Research Center ) for two reasons: MLM often appeals to religious consumers (Bromley ; Luca ) and religiosity has been found to play a role in consumer vulnerability to financial fraud (Bosley et al ; Bosley and Knorr ; Consumer Fraud Research Group ).…”

Illicit Alcohol: Public Health Risk of Methanol Poisoning and Policy Mitigation Strategies

“…The case study approach allows for a more holistic inquiry that seeks to be exploratory, explanatory and descriptive [ 57 ] in order to drive a causal investigation [ 58 ]. Case study analysis is an accepted method for considering business fraud [ 59 , 60 , 61 ]. A limitation of this approach is the risk of selection bias, and this is considered in the analysis of the findings.…”