Articles for Publication Asset Monetization Bank Instruments Collateral Instruments In The News Large Projects Preparation Proof of Funds Real Estate Projects Trade Programs

Trading Programs – From Chris a Seasoned Trader

Jeff introduced me to Chris, a Seasoned Trader, in August 2009. If you want access to these programs send me Proof of Funds so we can vet you. We have programs available with Chris and Gregory.

Chris called me Saturday.

Here’s the newsletter that was sent over Saturday January 16, 2010:

Hi Team,

First of all i want to wish all of you a most happy and successful 2010.  May it bring the joy of dreams fulfilled !!!  Some of you have worked very hard to bring good clients to trade and many of you have enjoyed the financial rewards that came from that work.

2009 was a great year for many of us and for others it was a disappointment.    So for my first newsletter of the new year i thought it would be appropriate to share some lessons learned and some exciting advise so 2010 can be even better!

First of all lets talk about new rules for 2010.  No more LEASED instruments for trade, this was a big one in 09, lots of people putting LEASED to trade.  Leased Cash is STILL OK.  Leased Instruments is all but dead.  The government has just said no.  If anyone wants info on the Leased Cash trade (client needs at least 600K USD or equivalent Cash to lease 10M) let me know and we will resend this updated information.

I have compiled some statics for 2009 that i thought you might find interesting.

From January 1, 2009 until December 1, 2009 we received 161 client submissions for trade that were over 1B.  At first glance you would say Wow!! until you look a little closer.  Of those files want to guess how many turned out to be real ?  9, yes that’s right 9 files turned out to be real money owned by the person who was on the CIS!    Now in contrast over 82% of all the files we received under 25M turned out to be real !  the smaller files were the big money makers in 2009.

WHY THE 1M WAS SO IMPORTANT   It Worked !!!  A client with 10 or 20M likes the idea of running a test.  This trade group will only accept 1M from a new client.  The funds can be borrowed or leased or owned!  this creates lots of flexibility for you and the client.   Once the client has gotten the first 4 weeks of payouts of 20M!  the trade group will send their Jet to pick up the client (anywhere in the world) for a face to face meeting here in Southern California to discuss how to put the balance of their funds to trade!   Get rich by thinking small !

Some of you Hunters only want to Hunt Big “Game” (500M plus) and that is ok if you have a cash flow to support that.  The comments below are designed for you Elephant Hunters! we will try to assist you to weed out the fraud early.  For those of who who want to make money quickly focus on the under 50M clients or ANY client who will permit a 1M test.

This HY group likes the 1M file because it gets the client into the game and allows them to see what a REAL trade can do with just 1M !   If you want me to send you the details on our HY 1M trade just ask and i will forward you the write up… for my Big Game Hunters the advice below is perfect for you!

Good Hunting and good luck in 2010 !   Chris


We have received numerous application packages relating to accounts in Citibank, Singapore.  The Esplanade Branch.  You probably have as well.  Cash funds.  $1 Billion USD or multiples thereof.  Five Billion.  Ten Billion.  (Never say, for $6,473,821,359.00) And the account holders are typically Chinese or Taiwanese nationals.  Welcome to the “inheritance bank” – and to the byzantine world of the Mei Hua Society!  You see, these are heritage funds.  Pure and simple.  And – well,  I hate to put sand in anyone’s gas tank – but these mega-size cash accounts AIN’T tradeable.  Not now.  Probably not ever.

Here’s what you need to know:  The  Mei Hua Society number over 4,000 members. With six divisions throughout Asia.  The matriarch is 96 year old Mrs. Chen who, along with her granddaughter, lives in the Central Part of Taiwan.  In the mountains above Taichung.  In 1996, Grandma Chen gave out “inheritances” of $10 Billion USD each to all of her family members. Some 300 or so bequests.  A cool $3 Trillion USD or thereabouts!  BIG FAMILY!  Now, for some strange reason, though, the heritage accounts were opened in Citibank, Esplanade Branch, rather than Citibank’s Singapore head office where the Society maintains its master account.  Stranger still, none of the “beneficiaries” were invited into the bank to sign account-opening documents. Go figure!

Well, fast forward – and here’s the rub:  The Mei Hua funds on deposit in the master account are restricted funds; they can only be drawn down against receipt of a bank instrument.  Use of these funds in a trade program, therefore, is strictly “VERBOTEN”.  And, of course, what applies to the master account applies equally to the 300 + sub-accounts. So, you can forget the whole lot of them!

But the story doesn’t end there.  You see, the beneficiaries – none of whom are signed on the accounts – found themselves, from the outset, unable to transact their funds. Not one red cent.  Needless to say, this posed a huge problem for the family members, many of whom were on nodding terms with poverty. Necessity being the mother of invention, though, a number of beneficiaries happened upon the idea of renting out their Proofs of Funds. Thus was born a thriving industry in leased Citibank, Singapore bank document! A nice little money-spinner! Of course, it didn’t take long for the Shenzhen “copy shops” run by the notorious Tong – the Chinese Mafia – their motto is “Foil Justice. Do Evil” – to muscle in on the action.  IT’S A RIGHT HOLY MESS!  A bad beginning in search of a worse ending! So take my advice, dear readers, and steer clear of Mei Hua funds altogether.  Truth is, these heritage funds ain’t worth a bucket of warm spit!



There is nothing worse than spending several weeks preparing a client submission, and then turning the paperwork over to the trading entity – only to have the transaction declined straight away because the bank documents are found to be fraudulent.  Unfortunately, it’s an all too common occurrence in our business.  The problem, regrettably, is that there exists a deep-rooted “culture of deception” in many parts of the world:  A belief system that disdains honesty and integrity, and advocates, instead, that the only “truth” that matters is what you can get away with.  And just how pervasive is this attitude?  Sadly, it permeates many of the transactions that regularly cross our desks.

Fortunately, though, there are things you can do – early on in the game – to filter out false bank documents in order to save you time and effort and increase your odds of bringing forward a genuine transaction.  Remember this: The best strategy for countering deception is to ATTACK ON THE FACTS!  That’s right, put the burden on the client to prove his financial capability beyond a reasonable doubt.  And not by making self-serving statements,  but by providing objective, unassailable evidence to support his application.

So here is my preferred list of “FIGHT BACK!” tips:

1) Clients often claim to hold funds in a bank half way around the world.  Not convinced? Then request the client provide the date he presented himself at the bank to open his account. Obtain that information first.  JUST THAT.  Then go back to the client and ask for a copy of his passport page which shows his entry visa/landing stamp permitting entry to the country on the date in question.  It’s a great “GOTCHA” technique!

2) Clients often claim that they purchased the bank instrument with their own cash funds. Not convinced?  Then request a copy of the client’s account statement immediately preceding his purchase of the bank instrument.  SHOW ME THE MONEY!

3)  Bank instruments that have been taken out of the banking system are worthless.  And fraudulent bank instruments – well, they have probably never been put into the banking system in the first.  So you should  always request, along with a copy of the bank instrument itself, a current tear sheet or account statement for the “paper account” holding the bank instrument.  Viewing the bank instrument without the corresponding account statement or tear sheet, frankly, makes no sense at all.

4)  Accept photo-quality scanned copies of the ORIGINAL bank documents only.  If the client can’t organize a high-resolution scan of his original bank documents, it probably means he doesn’t control the bank instruments in the first place.  So why go any further?

5) Clients often claim that they acquired the cash funds/bank instruments by means of  “inheritance”.  Not convinced?  Ask the client for a certified copy of the probate documents.

6) Clients often claim that the funds are freely transferable funds.  Not convinced? Then request the client withdraw $1000 USD from his account and provide you with a copy of the withdrawal slip.

7) Clients often claim that they earned the cash funds/bank instruments through “investments”.  Not convinced?  Then request the client provide past account statements (or his passbook) showing the transaction activity (deposits and withdrawals) on his account over the two-year period.

One final word:  Don’t waste time having the client fill out an endless stream of compliance documents.  Listen to me: If the client has supplied fraudulent bank documents, it doesn’t matter what the client provides by way of self-serving statements.  And no client, upon being asked to complete a set of largely “fill-in-the-blanks”-style documents, is going to see the error of his ways and suddenly “fess up” to having committed bank fraud.  So why bother?  My suggestion is leave the documents for the time being. There is plenty of time for that later.  Instead, focus your efforts, with laser beam intensity, on one thing – AND ONE THING ONLY:  Corroborating the client’s bank evidence of funds.  Remember : ITS THE BANKING, STUPID!


The cardinal rule in this business is that you can’t enter a trade program with assets you don’t own.  Of course, with cash funds, it relatively easy to determine “ownership”.  After all, clients can only acquire title to cash funds in one of two ways:  By earning the money from their legitimate business endeavors.  Or by inheritance. There is no third way!  So forget leased funds.  Forget borrowed funds. Forget assigned or pledged funds.  Forget “nominees” account holders.  The task is to focus like a heat-seeking missile on the legal owner of the cash funds.  And no one else!

With bank instruments, though, the considerations are a little different.  After all, when we talk about bank instruments, there is no “owner” as such; we refer to holding (rather than owning)  an instrument.  Let’s get down to basics.  A bank instrument is simply a promise to pay; an “IOU” involving three parties: (1) The bank that issues the instrument and is legally responsible for making payment; (2) The Applicant who purchases (or causes the issuance of) the instrument by putting up his cash funds; and (3) The Beneficiary in whose favor, or for whose use, the instrument is issued.

Oftentimes, of course, the Applicant and the Beneficiary are one and the same person.  For example, when Mr. Brown, unhappy about the low yields offered on his savings account, up and purchases a Certificate of Deposit from his bank.  In that instance, Mr. Brown is both the Applicant and the Beneficiary of the CD.  But just as frequently, the Applicant and the Beneficiary are different parties altogether.  For example, when Bank Guarantees, Standby Letters of Credit and the like are issued in favor of third-party “sellers” of goods in order to guarantee payment in commercial transactions.

So who is eligible to participate in a trade program when a bank instrument is involved?  Is it the Applicant?  Or the Beneficiary?  Well, the answer might surprise you! You see, only the Applicant is eligible to participate in a trade program, for the simple reason that the Applicant alone has “purchased” the instrument with his cash funds. Remember the “ownership” rule!  BUT THERE IS AN OVERARCHING PROVISO: The Applicant must hold the instrument for his own use only, and not have issued the instrument in favor of a third-party Beneficiary.  In other words, the Applicant must also be the Beneficiary of the instrument, as well.  (Were it otherwise, of course, the Applicant would have nothing to go into trading with!)  So to put it succinctly: The holder of an instrument, in order to participate in a trade program, must be both the Applicant and Beneficiary simultaneously.  If he is not – if say, he is one, but not the other – then he is not eligible to enter a trade program.  Not under any circumstances!

DISCLAIMER: Sender is not a United States Securities Dealer, Broker or US Investment Advisor. This electronic transmission and or attached documents have not been verified or authenticated & are not to be considered a solicitation for any purpose in any form or content, nor an offer to sell and/or buy securities and or properties. Merely describing the details of an existing private placement program does not constitute an offer or solicitation of any kind and, if presented, is done so as a request for information. Upon receipt of these documents, you as the recipient, acknowledge this disclaimer and warnings herein. By reading beyond this point, you agree, acknowledge and accept that this is a privileged, proprietary and confidential communication and you agree to keep it private if not  please return to sender.

Leave a Reply