For this Discussion Board, you will be using the following ethical situation:

Recently, a student came into a faculty member's office and handed the faulty member a card he had found in the business school building advertising a company called 12 Daily Pro. He said someone had been distributing these cards around the building, encouraging students to invest in a "business opportunity." It suggested that you could invest $6 to $6,000 and earn a 44 percent return in 12 days. The card called this program a "new economic paradigm." The faculty member decided this had to be a Ponzi-type scheme and sent an email to all students in the school reminding them that such schemes are illegal, unethical, and immoral. The next day a local TV channel carried the story, and the following day the electronic payment service for the scheme froze all the company's accounts and essentially shut them down. A few weeks later, the SEC filed a securities fraud charge against the head of the company and against the company itself, calling it a Ponzi scheme.

Original Post* Stance:

Read through the ethical situation. For the Original Post*, you will answer the following questions:

• What do you think made the faculty member believe it was a Ponzi-type scheme? Explain.
• What is the annual return the scheme operators were promising on investments in the scheme? Explain.
• Why do you think this scheme , which had been operating for over a month, attracted so many investors? Explain.
• Was the action taken by the faculty member appropriate? Explain.

NOTE: You will not be able to see any of your classmates' Original Posts* prior to posting your Original Post*. This better ensures that all Original Posts* are unique and adds a greater variety of responses for you to reply to on the Reply Post*.

Reply Post* Stance:

When it is time to complete the Reply Post*, you will need to read through your classmates original thoughts. Find one Original Post* to reply to. You have the option of agreeing or disagreeing with your classmate's Original Post*. If you disagree, you must produce counter arguments to the point(s) made. If you agree, you must bring new arguments or points to the discussion to reinforce your classmate's stance in the Original Post*.

Reply to Andrew:

Discussion 4

COLLAPSE

1. The first and most obvious reason on how the faculty member could recognise this as a Ponzi-Type scheme would be the large amount of returns promised in sucha short amount of time. No legal investment is going to knowingly be able to give you a 44% return in only 12 days. Them being a faculty memeber at a University I am sure over thier studies they have seen many cases like this and its obvious what this scheme is trying to do.

2. With a 44% return in only 12 days they are looking at potimsiing a return of over 1000% annually. To be exact it owuld be 1338.33% anualy which is an outrages figure to promsie.

3. The promsie of such high returns would draw many peoples interests. The get rich quick model is atrrative to many people and the curiosity enough would casue some poeple to invest who don't have the knowledge of these schemes.

4. Yes they did exactly what they needed to do. They were educated in this matter and recongnied it immediatly. It was thier reposobility to use the knowldge thye had in this situation to get the news out as quickly as possible to pottintial investors in this scheme what they were really getting into and that these acts were in fact illegal.