President of internet marketing firm claims he was 'hoodwinked' in order to strike a deal with Feds in ponzi case

The president of internet marketing firm, Ad Surf Daily (ASD), says he only brokered a deal with federal prosecutors because they promised to grant him leniency in the 'ponzi' case against him. ASD president Andy Bowdoin and his new attorney, Charles A. Murray, filed a motion in federal court yesterday claiming Bowdoin should be allowed to fight for money seized by federal agents last year.

The motion filed by Murray is a 'response to order to show cause and a motion to rescind release of claims'. Bowdoin hopes to convince federal officials to restore his right to fight for ASD's assets even though he had previously agreed to release them to the government.

US District Judge Rosemary Collyer is presiding over the ASD case and will ultimately decide whether to grant the motion. Bowdoin must prove to Judge Collyer that he has a legal right to attempt to reclaim the funds. Charles Murray filed the motion to 'show cause' on September 14th which was the deadline set by Judge Collyer. The judge's original deadline was August 28th but she granted Bowdoin an extension after Murray insisted he needed more time to 'continue negotiations' with federal officials.

Last year Federal agents raided ASD's headquarters in Quincy, Florida and proceeded to seize millions of dollars after determining the company was a 'ponzi scheme'.

Several months after the seizure prosecutors say Bowdoin voluntarily 'walked away' from the money when he reviewed the federal charges against him. Soon after, Bowdoin changed his mind and decided to fight for the money. He and his attorney hope this new motion will convince Judge Collyer to allow him to stay 'in the case'.

Judge Collyer's deadline for Bowdoin to show Cause was September 14, 2009. She had extended her previous deadline of August 28th.

Murray believes Bowdoin chose to forfeit ASD funds because he received erroneous information from his former attorneys. In the court order Murray states, "On January 13, 2009, he (Bowdoin) filed a motion to release claims to seized property. Mr. Bowdoin’s January 13, 2009 motion was predicated on misinformation and misrepresentation; therefore, Mr. Bowdoin’s Motion to Release Claims is voidable and subject to rescission under Rule 60(b). Mr. Bowdoin hereby responds to the Order to Show Cause, and respectfully requests that this Court reinstate his claims to seized property."

Bowdoin also filed an affidavit yesterday in which he contends his former attorney Steven Dobson, "represented to me that I could possibly avoid prison or get a reduced sentence if I agreed to disclose details concerning ASD and releasing the assets."

US Department of Justice Senior Trial Attorney William R. Cowden maintains Bowdoin voluntarily ‘walked away’ from his claim on the money after reviewing the Government’s evidence against him. Cowden asserts Bowdoin was never offered any deals in exchange for his cooperation and is still subject to criminal charges.

Bowdoin says he was led to believe otherwise, "Cowden explained that I would be subject to the maximum penalty, under the statute, but that he would inform the judge that I cooperated."

Bowdoin says he surrendered ASD's funds to the government because he thought prosecutors would offer him a deal. Bowdoin now claims he "had been hoodwinked."

Federal prosecutors accuse Bowdoin of running an elaborate ponzi scheme which required its ‘members’ to purchase 'ad packs' in order to participate in the program. Members then received a profit each time they clicked on websites of businesses that advertised with ASD. The US Attorney General’s Office contends the company was a ‘ponzi’ because it could only generate revenue by having new members pay to participate in the program.

The government's confiscation of the funds netted $53M (fifty three million dollars) which Bowdoin had deposited in several Bank of America accounts.

Bowdoin hopes to convince Judge Collyer that his attorney and federal prosecutors misled and unfairly pressured him to forfeit his claim on those funds. Bowdoin states, "Government counsel wanted me to admit to criminal conduct despite my belief in my innocence."

Officials with the United States Department of Justice are hoping Judge Collyer will dismiss Bowdoin's motion to reclaim the assets and allow the government to assume complete ownership of the funds. Officials contend the government could then distribute the money to ASD members using carefully controlled methods.

US Justice officials have posted an online form for ASD members who wish to recoup any money they lost while doing business with ASD. Members can fill out the form by going to the government's website:
'www.usdoj.gov/usao/dc/Victim_Witness_Assistance/adsurfdaily.html'

Judge grants Ad Surf Daily & Federal Prosecutors more time to negotiate 'ponzi' case

US District Judge Rosemary Collyer granted 'Ad Surf Daily's' president, Andy Bowdoin, more time to continue negotiations in the federal case against him. Last week Bowdoin's attorney said he needed an extension based on the fact that negotiations were still taking place and "more time is needed to come to a solution."
Last year Federal officials seized millions of dollars in ASD funds after determining the company was a ponzi scheme. Several months after the seizure prosecutors say Bowdoin voluntarily 'walked away' from the money when he reviewed the federal charges against him. Soon after, Bowdoin changed his mind and decided to fight for the money. He and his attorney must now convince Judge Collyer why he, and ASD, should be allowed to stay 'in the case'.

Judge Collyer ordered Bowdoin to "show Cause no later than September 14, 2009," her previous deadline was August 28th.

Bowdoin's business model for ASD required its ‘members’ to purchase 'ad packs' in order to participate in the program. Members then received a profit each time they clicked on websites of businesses that advertised with ASD. The US Attorney General’s Office contends the company was a ‘ponzi’ because it could only generate revenue by having new members pay to participate in the program.

The government's confiscation of the funds netted $53M (fifty three million dollars) which Bowdoin had deposited in several Bank of America accounts. He claims the accounts were designated to maintain ASD revenue and, subsequently, Bank of America has also been named as a defendant in the federal case against Bowdoin and ASD.

Last week Bowdoin and his attorney, Charles A. Murray, spoke for several hours as they mapped out their next move. Since the seizure, Bowdoin has maintained he would find a way to "give the money back to the people." ASD is estimated to have had upwards of 125,000 members nationwide.
Officials with the United States Department of Justice are hoping Bowdoin will release his claim on the assets and allow the government to assume ownership of the funds. Officials contend the government could then distribute the money to ASD members using carefully controlled methods.

US Justice officials have posted an online form for ASD members who wish to recoup any money they lost while doing business with ASD. Members can fill out the form by going to the government's website:
'www.usdoj.gov/usao/dc/Victim_Witness_Assistance/adsurfdaily.html'
or contact the DOJ by emailing information to the Department at 'usadc.adsurfdaily@usdoj.gov'.

US Department of Justice Senior Trial Attorney William R. Cowden says the government is now ready to begin distribution of $14M it seized from Golden Panda (GP), another similar company they say was controlled by Bowdoin. In late July, 2009 the US Attorney General’s office completed its investigation into GP and officials say they were able to convince Bowdoin to release GP’s assets to the government. Cowden maintains Bowdoin voluntarily ‘walked away’ from his claim on the money after reviewing the Government’s evidence against him. Cowden asserts Bowdoin was never offered any deals in exchange for his cooperation and is still subject to criminal charges.

Some ASD members question the government's motives and refuse to post a claim on funds they have lost. They fear potential legal implications if they disclose their involvement with the embattled company. Many still remain hopeful charges will be dropped against Bowdoin so ASD can get back in business. Cowden says it has been difficult for ASD's members to face the facts, "Every time there's one of these cases the victims and people are disappointed to find out it's a fraud."

Ad Surf Daily's president wraps up negotiations as eleventh hour approaches.

The president of 'Ad Surf Daily' (ASD) hammered out last minute negotiations with his attorney today as they deliberated the fate of millions of dollars seized by the government. Attorney Charles A. Murray (below) represents Ad Surf Daily and its president Andy Bowdoin (left).


This afternoon, the two contemplated their next move as Friday's court deadline approaches. Bowdoin and his attorney are deciding whether to grant the government ownership of ASD's assets or if Bowdoin should continue fighting to keep the funds. Either way, Bowdoin maintains he will "give the money back to the people." US Department of Justice officials say it would be easier if Bowdoin released his claim on the funds and transferred them to the government because that way the government could distribute the money to ASD members accordingly.

If Bowdoin chooses to continue the case and fight, US District Judge Rosemary Collyer will review the file on Friday and determine if the US Attorney General's case against ASD should move forward.

Last year the US AG's Office determined Bowdoin’s internet marketing firm was a 'ponzi scheme' and the government seized $53M (fifty three million dollars) from several Bank of America accounts Bowdoin claims were designated to maintain ASD funds.
US Department of Justice Senior Trial Attorney William R. Cowden maintains ASD is a ponzi because it can only stay in business if new paying members join the company.

After federal investigators seized ASD's assets in August 2008, Cowden says Bowdoin met with federal officials, reviewed the evidence against him and agreed to release the company cash and assets to the Government. A few months later Cowden says ASD's president "changed his mind and now wants to keep the money."

This past January Bowdoin filed a waiver to reclaim the assets. Attorney Charles Murray says Bowdoin made the wrong decision to give up the money in the first place because he had received some bad legal advice from previous attorneys. Murray also blames federal investigators for the harsh manner in which they interrogated his client, "They scared the heck out of Andy Bowdoin, he signed the papers saying he waived the money and he felt he was sold out by his attorneys."

ASD is estimated to have upwards of 125,000 members and many purchased 'ad packs' from the company while attending ASD rallies.



Many ASD members still support Bowdoin and believe the company is a legitimate business. Cowden says it has been difficult for ASD's members to face the facts, "Every time there's one of these cases the victims and people are disappointed to find out it's a fraud."

The United States Department of Justice has posted an online form for ASD members who wish to recoup any money they lost while doing business with ASD. Members can fill out the form by going to the government's website:
'www.usdoj.gov/usao/dc/Victim_Witness_Assistance/adsurfdaily.html'
or contact the DOJ by emailing information to the Department at 'usadc.adsurfdaily@usdoj.gov'.

Is Ad Surf Daily really a ponzi scheme? CEO's experts say 'No'

The attorney representing Ad Surf Daily (ASD), an internet marketing company, says he has credible experts who have testified the company is not a 'ponzi scheme'.

Attorney Charles A. Murray of Bonita Springs, Florida represents ASD and its president, Andy Bowdoin. "Andy does not believe he did anything wrong," Murray said on Monday.

Last year the US Attorney's Office raided ASD's corporate headquarters in Quincy, Florida and quickly determined Bowdoin’s business model was indeed a 'ponzi scheme'. The government then seized $53M (fifty three million dollars) from several Bank of America accounts Bowdoin claims were designated to maintain ASD funds. Murray says Bowdoin "just wants to make sure all of the members get their money back."

US Department of Justice Senior Trial Attorney William R. Cowden maintains ASD is a ponzi because it can only stay in business if new paying members join the company. Many ASD members say that model is no different than other internet marketing companies such as Google's AdSense.

Making money with both companies seems relatively easy. Google pays people to simply display company ads on their websites. Companies pay Google to find these website owners who are willing to post the ads on their sites. Companies are charged a fee each time someone 'clicks' on the ad.

Google collects the fee and then pays the website owners a fraction of the profit. Unlike ASD, Google's program does not charge a fee to the website owners who wish to participate.

Murray hired three expert witnesses to examine ASD's business model and they contend it does not meet the definition of a ponzi scheme. Those experts include Keith Laggos, an author of a textbook on the Direct Sales Industry; Gerald Nehra a former Director of the Legal Division for Amway Corporation and Jerome Osteryoung who is a Professor of entrepreneurship and finance at Florida State University.

Osteryoung maintains ASD's model is effective because it only pays members a profit when they view an advertisement for a minimum of fifteen seconds. ASD "is much more valuable than the click per view for so much internet advertising (e.g. Google) which charges for each click no matter how brief the visit."

In a civil complaint filed by William R. Cowden in US District Court on August 5, 2008 he states, "in a Ponzi scheme, there is in fact no underlying profitable business to support the payments promoters say they will make to the investors/participants. Instead, unbeknownst to many of the participants, the promoters use the money obtained from a growing base of later investors/participants to pay so-called "profits" to earlier investors. Schemes that depend on growing the base of new participants to support payments to prior participants are also commonly referred to as pyramids."

Osteryoung says ASD is not a 'pyramid' because "a business that provides a vehicle for firms to advertise their products will be able to exist regardless if it attracts new members, as it is providing a much needed marketing tool."


Murray hopes his experts' testimonies will be considered by U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer who is presiding over the case. August 28th is the deadline for Judge Collyer to determine if the US Attorney General's case against ASD should move forward. At this point Murray is negotiating with the government and could reach a settlement before the upcoming deadline.

Mike Mason
Investigative Reporter