JamesVincent wrote:
Which, again, is not what's been stated by other posters claiming to be involved. Just like several others have stated different numbers for the initial investment, others have stated different returns.
I just skimmed and from what I saw only four people have stated numbers for the initial investment. Those four are myself, Ted, flatsix, and BeverlyHills. flatsix, BeverlyHills, and myself have all mentioned the current 12,000 cost per machine. The only one who stated anything different is also the only one of us four who
has never had any direct contact with NAS or Gillis.
Not what I asked. Is it licensed to you or them? If something happens and the fees don't get paid, who is responsible? If something happens within the company, are you totally shafted or do you at least have enough of a claim against the machine itself to recoup some of your money?
I believe I did answer this already. ATM's are insured by NAS to cover their liability to us. NAS has all the rights and liabilities of ownership per operating agreement. ATM is licensed to them. If something happens, it's on NAS. If something happens to NAS, we the investor are the beneficiary of an insurance policy that covers our original investment. That policy is paid from NAS's end and does not come out of our 50 cent per txn amount. We (the investor) are paid net 30, so I think we lose the check for the month if something like that happens.
Fees average in this area, where I live now, around $2.50. Plenty of $2 machine around and a few $3 ones around. Wasn't much different when I lived in Maryland, maybe a few more $3 machines. Only time you saw a $4 machine was either in a liquor store or a bar. Like I said before drunks like to spend money. And if they upped the fee, why didn't they up your cut?
Dealing with payment processors as part of my job, I do know that banks have raised their fees to processors, which in turn raise their fees on us. I know ATMs across the country have seen fee increases over the past 2 years, so I can assume costs have gone up and the increase is covering those costs. If I'm getting 30% anyways, why be greedy and complain?
We had this discussion before with BeverlyHills whatever. What and why are the locations getting getting part of your till? What is the agreement with them?
The what varies per contract and per how desirable the location is. I think I heard that it's about what we, the investor gets, which is around 50 cents but does vary. Why? This is obvious to me. Why wouldn't a business owner want compensation if an ATM is being installed in their "high traffic" area? Per the business model that Gillis told me, they compete for these profitable areas and win contracts because they pay location owners a few cents more than competitors.
Just because YOU don't know, doesn't mean it's false. Would not be the first time something like that happened in a business.
Again, it's just Ted, who hasn't dealt with NAS directly, with the most conflicting information. Everyone else seems to more or less say the same thing.
I said related party, not relationship. Processor facilitates the transactions between ATM and bank. This is something I have personal experience with. I brought up related parties because I researched the processor to make sure that they weren't owned by Gillis or NAS.
Talking about the same thing in different ways. I asked if it was the credit issuer since they should, and I would think have to be, a separate company. But they are still in a business relationship with NAS. I was hoping you had a third party audit, which I think a couple of others had also wanted.
I do respectfully disagree with the terminology. I have seen other leasebacks schemes (involving virtual hotel concierges) where the leasing company used a processor and were financially backed by another company, and all of these companies had the same owner. Needless to say, I didn't invest. I consider each company in that set up to be a related party.
With NAS, processor has completely different ownership and is located in Texas. Processor funds NAS with fees due with a transaction count per machine. NAS pays us out based on the transaction count and gives us a statement from the processor. I did mention a third party audit when I originally invested and Gillis said he doesn't have means to audit the processor he uses and that's the most important part since he simply sends us statements generated by the processor with the txn count, along with a check that pays 50 cents per transaction.
Where did the money come from to compensate him? See, that's one of the things that has been asked about. If a machine doesn't perform as advertised and someone gets compensated, where does the money come from? Do they take the money from the new people coming in to pay off the ones that are performing poorly?
Per your rough calculation, NAS makes a ton of money, even if the ATM's don't do near 400/month. Like I also said, if they perform badly, they are moved. Like I also said, there's been only one among the people I know where they didn't do 20% and it was for one investor and for one year, which still did 18%. Where does that money come from? Seems like per your calculation, NAS can easily afford it. If they truly have a system for success and know what they are doing, I don't see a single problem with this considering you're telling us that a good machine can pay for itself in a year, which would be a 100% return. If even in a bad area they don't average 400, yet still make 40% before giving out payment to the "investor", they can easily make money while still paying out a 20% return.
Some of them you have already answered to a point. One of the biggest problems so far has been completely contradicting posts from supposed "investors". Different fees, different initial, different times, etc. So you can see why people here are kinda hesitant about accepting "facts".
I'm hesitant of responding to Ted. He has an original post from 2009 showing concern, yet has never come into contact with NAS. Like I said, myself, the half a dozen people I know, flatsix, and BeverlyHills all say one thing, yet Ted is mentioning a possible third party charging rates that none of us get.
Make it last longer. One of the things that always destroys a good ponzi in the end is greed. If you can control that greed and trickle it over years instead of a great burst of money, then you can make more in the long run.
So if they want as much money as they can get their hands on, could be a Ponzi scheme. If they play it slow, could be a Ponzi scheme. Got it.
My friend would be the first to tell you that for every thing he did right, he did 20 wrong. Investing can be like that and, as any true entrepreneur will tell you, so is business. However, still does not look good to an outsider.
Yeah, when I said I work for a wealthy guy, he has made investments that have had ROE's in the thousands. He's also had investments where he literally pissed away a million or two. Point is, from my experience, 20% returns on passive investments aren't that farfetched.
Note: Edited for formatting
Join the Blue Ribbon Online Free Speech Campaign!