Corporate Greed Case Study: Infinity 2 Global & Its Impact on Thousands of Defrauded Investors

TLDR: A company called Infinity 2 Global (I2G) stole approximately $34 million from thousands of investors by operating what the FBI determined was a fraudulent pyramid scheme. Its top executives were convicted of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and securities fraud after a 25-day trial revealed a labyrinth of lies, including false promises of passive income from an online casino, fake celebrity endorsements, and revolutionary software that was actually a near-copy of a free online product. While the company’s inner circle reaped millions, an astounding 96% of its investors lost their money.

Read on to uncover the full story of corporate deception and the systemic failures that allowed it to thrive.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction: A System Designed to Consume Its Own
2. Inside the Allegations: A Labyrinth of Deceit and Corporate Misconduct
3. Regulatory Loopholes and the Illusion of Legitimacy
4. Profit-Maximization at All Costs: The Core Incentive
5. The Economic Fallout: A $34 Million Transfer of Wealth
6. Public Harm: The Betrayal of “Passive Income”
7. Exploitation of Workers: The Distributor as Victim
8. Community Impact: The Corrosion of Trust
9. The PR Machine: Changing Names and Burying Critics
10. Wealth Disparity and Corporate Greed Personified
11. Legal Minimalism: Doing Just Enough to Stay Plausibly Legal
12. Profiting from Complexity: When Obscurity Shields Misconduct
13. This Is the System Working as Intended
14. Conclusion: A Predictable Outcome of a Flawed System
15. Frivolous or Serious Lawsuit?: A Resounding Verdict

1. Introduction: A System Designed to Consume Its Own

A business model designed to consume its own participants is the very definition of a predatory system. This was the nature of Infinity 2 Global (I2G), a company that the FBI concluded was a pyramid scheme. The scheme extracted some $34 million from investors who paid to join, nearly all of whom lost every dollar they put in.

This case alarming illustration of systemic failures inherent in a deregulated, profit-obsessed capitalist landscape. The story of I2G reveals how corporate structures can be weaponized to commit widespread fraud under the guise of legitimate “multilevel marketing.” It exposes a system where the incentives for profit far outweigh any meaningful commitment to ethical conduct or consumer protection.

2. Inside the Allegations: A Labyrinth of Deceit and Corporate Misconduct

At its core, the case against Infinity 2 Global, its president Richard Maike, its vice president for sales Doyce Barnes, and top distributor Faraday Hosseinipour was built on a foundation of deliberate deception. After a 25-day trial, a jury convicted them of conspiracy to commit both mail fraud and securities fraud. The evidence presented painted a picture of a company whose primary revenue source was not the sale of products, but the recruitment of new victims.

The company’s leadership made a series of false and fraudulent representations to lure people into the scheme. Maike lied to potential recruits, claiming they had been offered $100 million for its “Touch” social media software. This statement was baseless. In reality, the Touch software was rife with glitches, never generated any appreciable income for distributors, and was a near-copy of a product that its creator’s bankrupt firm had previously offered for free online.

Hosseinipour falsely claimed that musicians like Britney Spears, Justin Timberlake, and Lady Gaga had agreed to endorse the company’s “Songstergram” music platform. She also lured recruits with the promise of “passive income” from an online casino, suggesting they could join as a top-tier “Emperor” and make money without ever recruiting or gambling. Barnes echoed this misrepresentation, telling potential investors they could just “sit on the couch” and draw money from the casino pool. The reality was a pittance; one top distributor testified his casino income topped out at around $90 for the first month and then ran near $15-20 per month thereafter, while monthly fees were ten times that amount.

The deception extended to live events. At conferences, Infinity 2 Global’s leadership, including Maike, Barnes, and Hosseinipour, had top recruiters hold up oversized, six-figure checks for amounts they never actually received. In one instance, the software developer, Rocky Wright, was introduced to an audience as “Bob Johnson” to conceal the fact that his firm had recently declared bankruptcy. When a distributor accused I2G of running a pyramid scheme, Hosseinipour’s response was chilling and unequivocal: “There is no alternative except to bury him.”

3. Regulatory Loopholes and the Illusion of Legitimacy

The I2G case highlights a critical weakness in the regulatory framework governing corporate America. Pyramid schemes often disguise themselves as legitimate “multilevel marketing” (MLM) organizations, exploiting a legal gray area. While federal law proscribes schemes to defraud, it does not specifically outlaw pyramid schemes by name, forcing prosecutors to fit them into broader fraud statutes.

This ambiguity creates an environment where companies can operate on the fringes of the law, using the facade of product sales to mask a business model centered on endless recruitment. I2G’s digital products—the glitchy “Touch” platform and the never-launched “Songstergram”—were nothing more than a feint. They were mediocre and overpriced decoys designed to deceive both recruits and regulators, lending an air of legitimacy to an inherently fraudulent structure.

The system’s reliance on a complex web of tiers, fees, and bonuses is another tactic to create what one court called “a labyrinth of obfuscation.” This complexity makes it difficult for the average person—and even regulators with limited resources—to quickly identify the fraudulent nature of the enterprise. It is a form of regulatory capture by complexity, where the sheer intricacy of the scheme acts as a shield against oversight.

4. Profit-Maximization at All Costs: The Core Incentive

Neoliberal capitalism’s core tenet is the maximization of profit, often detached from ethical considerations or the well-being of stakeholders beyond the executive suite. I2G is a textbook example of this principle in action. From its inception, the company’s structure was geared toward one goal: extracting as much money as possible from new recruits to enrich its inner circle.

The company’s own internal documents confirmed this. A spreadsheet prepared by Vice President Doyce Barnes projected over $30 million in revenue in the first year, with every single dollar coming from payments made by the distributors themselves. There was zero projected income from external product sales. The business was designed to sell participation in the scheme itself.

This profit-at-all-costs incentive structure is what distinguishes an illegal pyramid scheme from a legal MLM. The financial rewards were overwhelmingly tied to recruitment, not sales. This created a frantic, unsustainable push for new members, ensuring the system would survive only as long as its recruitment revenue did. The inevitable collapse left the vast majority of participants with guaranteed losses, a feature, not a bug, of the design.

5. The Economic Fallout: A $34 Million Transfer of Wealth

The human cost of I2G’s operation was staggering and widespread. The company reaped more than $34 million in revenue before it collapsed. Nearly all of this money, save for about $500,000, was paid in by the company’s own distributors.

This was a massive wealth transfer from thousands of hopeful investors to a small group at the top. The court record shows that most of the money went to the company’s top tier, including the convicted defendants. Court documents show Richard Maike was sentenced to 120 months in prison, Doyce Barnes to 48 months, and Faraday Hosseinipour to 30 months.

The devastating result was that 96% of the people who bought into the scheme lost money. These were not sophisticated Wall Street traders… rather they were ordinary people drawn in by promises of financial independence and “passive income.” Their losses represent shattered savings, delayed retirements, and profound financial distress, all for the enrichment of a few individuals who knowingly perpetuated a fraudulent system.

6. Public Harm: The Betrayal of “Passive Income”

The public harm extended beyond direct financial loss; it involved a deep betrayal of trust, particularly around the concept of a secure investment. The “Emperor” package was marketed as an investment that would generate passive income through a share of online casino profits. This promise was a cornerstone of the securities fraud conviction.

The company’s leaders, especially Hosseinipour and Barnes, repeatedly emphasized that this income required no effort. An Emperor could simply purchase the $5,000 package and collect their share. This was a calculated lure for individuals seeking a stable return without the complexities of active trading or business management, a promise that resonates deeply in an economy with precarious retirement prospects.

By packaging a worthless recruitment position as a legitimate, hands-off investment security, the defendants exploited the public’s desire for financial security. The scheme not only defrauded people but also undermined confidence in legitimate investment opportunities. When fraudulent actors can so easily mimic the language of sound investing, it corrodes the trust necessary for healthy capital markets to function.

7. Exploitation of Workers: The Distributor as Victim

Under late-stage capitalism, the lines between entrepreneur, employee, and customer are often blurred to the benefit of the corporation. I2G’s distributors were cast as “Independent Business Owners,” but in reality, they were the primary consumers of the company’s worthless products and the unpaid labor force driving its recruitment engine.

This misclassification is a common tactic in the gig economy and multilevel marketing, absolving the company of the responsibilities of an employer while retaining control over its workforce. These distributors paid for the right to work, purchasing overpriced “packages” and paying annual fees for the privilege of generating revenue for the top of the pyramid. They were the fuel being consumed by the scheme.

The court document reveals the defendants had backgrounds in multilevel marketing, not software, indicating the business was always about the sales structure, not the product. The exploitation was structural, built into the “binary compensation system” that incentivized constant recruitment. The promise of commissions was always tied to bringing new people into the fold, a classic feature of a system that exploits its own participants.

8. Community Impact: The Corrosion of Trust

Pyramid schemes inflict damage that radiates outward, damaging social fabric and community trust. Recruiters are encouraged to enlist friends, family, and neighbors, turning personal relationships into transactional opportunities. When the scheme inevitably collapses, it leaves a wake of broken relationships and community-wide suspicion.

While the court document focuses on the financial and legal mechanics, the model itself relies on exploiting networks of trust. A recruit is more likely to believe a pitch from a friend than a stranger. I2G’s leaders leveraged this dynamic on a massive scale through conferences and online “Hangouts,” creating a high-pressure environment where social proof was used as a weapon of persuasion.

The harm is not just the lost money but the social fallout that follows. The email from a critic who labeled I2G a “classic Ponzi organization” highlights the recognition of this betrayal within the participant community itself. The need to “bury” such critics underscores the scheme’s reliance on silencing truth to protect its predatory model from being exposed to the wider community.

9. The PR Machine: Changing Names and Burying Critics

When a corporation’s conduct is exposed, its first instinct under a profit-driven model is often reputation management, not corrective action. I2G’s response to mounting criticism was a case study in corporate spin and suppression.

In July 2014, as negative online reviews and threats of class-action lawsuits mounted, Maike’s solution was to change the company’s name from Infinity 2 Global to Global 1 Entertainment. This was a purely cosmetic move designed to shed the company’s toxic reputation and continue operations under a new banner. It is a common tactic used by corporations to escape their history without changing their behavior.

Furthermore, the record shows that Hosseinipour acted to have some of the online criticism taken down and advocated for “burying” those who accused the company of being a pyramid scheme. This demonstrates a clear intent to control the public narrative by silencing dissent rather than engaging with legitimate concerns. It is a form of information warfare waged against consumers, prioritizing the scheme’s survival over transparency and accountability.

10. Wealth Disparity and Corporate Greed Personified

The I2G case is a microcosm of the vast and growing wealth disparity that characterizes modern neoliberal economies. It is a story of wealth being systematically funneled from the many to the very few at the top. The nearly $34 million that flowed into the company from its distributors was concentrated in the hands of the scheme’s architects.

While 96% of participants lost money, the defendants reaped millions. This outcome was not an accident but the explicit design of the pyramid structure. These schemes are inherently structured to reward the earliest entrants and founders disproportionately, at the direct expense of all subsequent participants.

The oversized, fake checks displayed at conferences were a symbolic representation of the wealth that was being dangled in front of recruits but was, in reality, only attainable for the inner circle. It is the illusion of meritocracy and opportunity used to justify a system of radical inequality, a narrative central to the maintenance of imbalanced capitalist systems.

11. Legal Minimalism: Doing Just Enough to Stay Plausibly Legal

Corporations in neoliberal systems often treat legal compliance not as a moral baseline, but as a strategic obstacle to be navigated. The goal is not to be ethical, but to remain plausibly legal, operating in the gray zones that regulation has not yet filled. I2G mastered this art of legal minimalism.

The entire enterprise was built on the pretense of being a legitimate “multilevel marketing” company. The existence of “products,” however dysfunctional or worthless, was a crucial piece of this facade. It allowed the company to claim it was focused on sales, even when its incentive structure overwhelmingly rewarded recruitment. This is a classic example of complying with the form of the law while completely violating its intent.

The defendants’ attempt to create an “anti-saturation” defense by capping the number of “Emperors” is another example of this thinking. They argued this cap prevented the endless growth characteristic of a pyramid scheme. The court rejected this as meritless, noting the cap was never reached and, in theory, only created an artificial point of saturation. It was a cosmetic policy designed to look like a safeguard while doing nothing to alter the scheme’s fundamentally fraudulent nature.

12. Profiting from Complexity: When Obscurity Shields Misconduct

In late-stage capitalism, complexity is often a tool for evading accountability. The more convoluted a corporate structure or financial product is, the harder it is for the public and regulators to scrutinize it. I2G’s business model was a masterclass in profiting from complexity.

The system was a “labyrinth of obfuscation,” with a byzantine network of rules, tiers, fees, and bonuses. The “binary compensation system,” “Fast Start Bonuses,” “Leadership Pools,” and different levels like “Novice,” “Player,” “High Roller,” and “Emperor” created a dizzying and confusing structure. This complexity served to overwhelm potential recruits, making it difficult for them to perform a clear cost-benefit analysis.

This obscurity was a core part of the strategy. It shielded the simple, fraudulent truth: the primary source of revenue was new recruits. By wrapping this reality in layers of jargon and intricate rules, the company could perpetuate the scheme long enough to extract millions before the truth became undeniable.

13. This Is the System Working as Intended

It is tempting to view the Infinity 2 Global case as an aberration, a story of a few “bad apples” who broke the rules. This perspective is comforting but incorrect. This case is not an example of the capitalist system failing, but rather it is an example of the system working precisely as designed when profit is structurally prioritized over people.

When deregulation clears the path, when regulatory oversight is weak, and when the rewards for predatory behavior are immense, outcomes like I2G are not just possible; they are predictable. The system’s incentives—profit maximization, shareholder value, and limited liability—create a fertile ground for such schemes to flourish. The fraud at I2G was a feature, executed by individuals who skillfully exploited its inherent weaknesses.

The conviction of Maike, Barnes, and Hosseinipour represents a moment of accountability. But the underlying conditions that allowed their scheme to defraud thousands of people remain firmly in place, waiting for the next set of entrepreneurs to exploit them.

14. Conclusion: A Predictable Outcome of a Flawed System

The conviction of Infinity 2 Global’s leaders provides a measure of justice for the thousands they defrauded. However, the story is a sobering reminder of the deep-seated flaws within our economic and regulatory systems. A company was able to operate for years as a pyramid scheme, using lies and deception to extract $34 million from the public, with 96% of its investors suffering losses.

This case lays bare the consequences of a system that valorizes profit above all else and allows complexity to be used as a shield for corporate misconduct. It demonstrates how the language of opportunity and entrepreneurship can be twisted to justify exploitation. The harm is the erosion of trust, the ruin of relationships, and the reinforcement of a cynical belief that the game is rigged.

Without significant structural reforms—stronger consumer protection, clearer laws to distinguish legitimate business from pyramid schemes, and a renewed focus on holding executives personally accountable—the story of Infinity 2 Global will inevitably be repeated. It stands as a stark warning that in the absence of robust ethical guardrails and regulatory enforcement, the pursuit of profit will always find a way to prey on the vulnerable.

15. Frivolous or Serious Lawsuit?: A Resounding Verdict

Any question of the lawsuit’s legitimacy was answered decisively by the jury. After a 25-day trial and the presentation of overwhelming evidence, the defendants were found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and conspiracy to commit securities fraud.

The legal action brought by the United States was a necessary and righteous effort to hold accountable the architects of a massive fraudulent scheme.

The evidence, from false advertising and phony celebrity endorsements to the near-total loss of investor funds, demonstrated a coordinated, deliberate, and sustained campaign of deception. The jury’s verdict, and the subsequent prison sentences, affirm that the harm inflicted by Infinity 2 Global was real, severe, and criminal. This was a textbook case of meaningful legal grievance against systemic corporate predation.