March 27, 2001
FTC vs. BigSmart
$5 Million Settlement
Bigsmart Pyramid Promoters Settle FTC Charges
$5 Million for Consumer Redress
Operators of an Internet-based business opportunity that promised easy income for
investors in an Internet shopping mall network have agreed to settle Federal Trade
Commission charges that their scheme was an illegal pyramid operation. Under the terms of
the settlement, Bigsmart.Com L.L.C. and principals Mark and Harry Tahiliani will provide
up to $5 million in consumer redress and post a $500,000 performance bond before engaging
in any new multi-level marketing activity. The defendants also are prohibited from
engaging in any illegal pyramid schemes.
Bigsmart is based in Mesa, Arizona.
According to the FTC complaint detailing the charges, Bigsmart marketed Internet theme
"malls" that it claimed would enable investors to earn substantial income from
commissions on products purchased through the Internet. The malls were a collection of
links to retail sites maintained by independent third-party merchants, such as
MarthaStewart.com, and to a "Superstore" maintained by Bigsmart, itself. Traffic
was directed to the malls through the personalized Bigsmart "welcome pages" that
members bought access to for a $10 application fee and a $99.95 "hosting" fee.
Although Bigsmart claimed that members would make substantial amounts of money, the scheme
was structured in such way that to realize continued financial gains, would depend on
". . . the continued, successive recruitment of other participants," not on
retail sales of products and services to the public. The FTC charged that the claims that
consumers who invested in Bigsmart would make substantial income were false; that
promotional materials that made the false and misleading claims provided the means and
instrumentalities for others to deceive consumers; and that Bigsmart was actually a
pyramid scheme. All three were violations of the FTC Act.
To settle the FTC charges, Bigsmart and the Tahilianis will provide up to $5 million in
consumer redress. They also will be required to post a $500,000 performance bond before
engaging in any new multi-level marketing activity.
Consumers who believe they may qualify to receive consumer redress should call
This case was brought with the invaluable assistance of the Offices of the Attorney
General of Texas and the Wisconsin. Department of Agriculture, Trade, & Consumer
Protection, Division of Trade & Consumer Protection. It was filed in U.S. District
Court for the District of Arizona, March 12, 2001.
NOTE: A Stipulated Final Judgment and Order is for settlement purposes only and does
not constitute an admission by the defendant of a law violation. Consent judgments have
the force of law when signed by the judge.
Copies of the Stipulated Final Judgment and Order are available from the FTC's web site
at http://www.ftc.gov and also from the FTC's Consumer Response Center, Room 130, 600
Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580. The FTC works for the consumer to
prevent fraudulent, deceptive and unfair business practices in the marketplace and to
provide information to help consumers spot, stop and avoid them. To file a complaint, or
to get free information on any of 150 consumer topics, call toll-free, 1-877-FTC-HELP
(1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters Internet, telemarketing and other fraud-related
complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to hundreds of
civil and criminal law enforcement agencies worldwide.
Claudia Bourne Farrell
Office of Public Affairs
James A. Kohm
Bureau of Consumer Protection
(FTC File No. 002 3365)
(Civil Action No. CIV01 0466 PHX ROS)