In a new MetaForce video from August 17, Vladimir “Lado” Okhotnikov, the owner of Forsage, says, In this video, I’ll talk about what MetaForce is doing in response to the SEC’s position. I looked at the case docket because I thought this meant Okhotnikov had answered the SEC’s securities fraud complaint from August 1.
Nope. So, what does Okhotnikov keep talking about? Okhotnikov says that the SEC’s complaint is full of “unfounded claims” that are “not based on anything,” even though it is based on pages and pages of evidence. Okhotnikov says that the SEC does not know “how the blockchain works.”
It’s important to know that the SEC has filed a lawsuit against Forsage and Okhotnikov for securities fraud and running a Ponzi scheme. It doesn’t matter if “the blockchain” works or not.
Okhotnikov says this about Forsage’s supposed answer to a 2020 securities fraud investigation and warning by the Philippine SEC: We changed the word “reinvestment” so that there would be no words like “invest,” “investment,” etc., so that no one would confuse Forsage with an investment project.
Many other words on the site and in our materials have also been changed to avoid confusion. “Pseudo-compliance” is the name for this (similar to when a YouTube scammer tells you “this is not financial advice”).
When regulators look into what they think might be a scam, they look at both the marketing and the business model. If you are running a fake investment scheme, it doesn’t matter if you hide investment terms. Okhotnikov continues; Even though everyone in network marketing knows the word “reinvest” and has always thought it was a good word, this would never mean that we are talking about an investment program. This must be a strange way for Russians to think. I don’t understand.
Okhotnikov then talks about how the securities fraud stopped. Forsage said that the call he got from Montana made no sense. He doesn’t seem to understand that security fraud is against the law both in the Philippines and in the US. He (Montana) didn’t even try to learn a little bit about Forsage.
Instead, he just took everything from the Philippine SEC. I think that I and everyone else must follow the information on his site because of Montana. And it is not very clear what the order to stop Okhotnikov says that both the Philippine SEC and the Montana CSI were “incompetent” because they let Forsage off the hook for securities fraud. In August, the US SEC released information about the claims.
They have been just as clueless about blockchain, network marketing, and the subject of the dispute in general. And I not only answer them, but I also think about how we should handle everything.
Again, as of the time of publication, Okhotnikov has not responded to the SEC’s complaint against him. Okhotnikov is moving forward with MetaForce instead of filing a response and going to court to show that Forsage wasn’t a $300 million Ponzi scheme.
This version of Forsage is the sixth time the game has been started over. We’re strengthening our position and changing the way things are set up. This really changes things in our field. You won’t find any direct or even indirect scenes of a financial pyramid in MetaForce. Products are what marketing is all about. We are making a number of things.
These are real and metaverse things that have been turned into tokens. Adding products to a Ponzi scheme doesn’t, of course, change how the business works. Like adcredits of the past, MetaForce’s new products for the metaverse won’t change how money moves around the company.
And the SEC’s lawsuit has already been filed, no matter what Okhotnikov does or doesn’t do with MetaForce. Two and a half years of fraud that cost $300 million can’t be fixed.
We’ll let you know when Okhotnikov responds or when there are more meltdown videos.