SCAM REPORT @NAPOLEONREFS - $150

[150]

Scammers Profile Link: https://cracked.st/NapoleonRefs
Sales Thread: https://cracked.st/Thread-%E2%9A%A1-150%...D%E2%9A%A1
Amount or Item(s) Scammed: 1
Proof of Payment: https://live.blockcypher.com/ltc/tx/28df...8031cff0d/
Screenshots of Communication: Will provide in DM as it contains confidential information (method)
Additional Information:
 I purchased this mentorship based on several specific claims made in the sales thread, including:

• “LIFETIME MENTORSHIP”
  
• “EXCLUSIVE AMAZON METHODS”
  
• “Exclusive AMAZON 2026 method”
  
• “Repeat Guide (How to Get refund Repeatedly from the Same Store)”
  
• “We don't want to overuse our methods, which is why we limit the number of sales each month.”
  

These claims were important to my decision to purchase. In particular, Amazon was heavily emphasized in the advertisement, and the alleged exclusivity of the methods was a major selling point.
 
I did not request a refund because a refund attempt failed. I never even reached that stage.
My issue started while I was trying to understand how to properly implement the Amazon method.
 
He stated that Amazon required an aged account with previous order history. The training also included a page with sellers/accounts, but the process of obtaining or preparing an account that actually met the required conditions was not clearly explained. This is exactly why I contacted the seller for clarification through the mentorship/support.
 
The Terms of Service themselves state:
“The Training includes access to 1:1 support as part of the program. This support is provided to assist Participants with the implementation and understanding of the Training materials and resources.”
Therefore, I believed that asking how to satisfy the requirements and properly implement the Amazon method was exactly the type of question the mentorship was supposed to cover.
 
Instead of simply explaining the process, the seller told me that “anyone can do Amazon” and that I only needed to buy aged accounts and warm them up with orders, while claiming that this was already explained in the guides (it wasn't).
 
My issue is that this specific implementation process was not clearly explained in the material I received, which is why I asked for help in the first place. If I had been given an actual procedure for obtaining/preparing/warming up the accounts, even a basic one, I would not have had an issue.
I was not asking for a guaranteed successful refund or for a “magic” method. I was asking for guidance on how to reach the prerequisites required to even attempt the advertised method.
 
Another major concern is the use of the word “exclusive.”
 
After purchasing, I found that at least one of the methods presented in the mentorship appeared to be almost word-for-word the same as a method that had already been publicly available on the forum.

My complaint is not simply that paid information can also exist for free. Information can obviously be compiled and sold.
The issue is that the product was specifically marketed using statements such as “EXCLUSIVE AMAZON METHODS” and “Exclusive AMAZON 2026 method,” while also claiming that sales were intentionally limited because they did not want to “overuse” the methods.
 
If a method was already publicly available on the forum before this mentorship was sold and the version provided is substantially the same, I believe moderators should consider whether describing it as “exclusive” was an accurate representation.
I raised this issue directly with the seller. Rather than clearly addressing whether the method was actually exclusive, he responded sarcastically that I should report every refund service because methods can sometimes be found for free.
 
I also want to provide context regarding the communication and my removal from the group now.
 
During the discussion, while I remained respectful and did not personally insult the seller, he called me a ‘zgeg’ and made the comment ‘Les français toujours des zgeg.’ I responded by pointing out that I had approached him respectfully and that he was insulting me.
 
He then called me a “zgeg” again.
 
I then stated that some of the methods appeared to be available for free elsewhere and that I intended to ask the forum, in general terms, whether selling freely available content as part of a paid mentorship was considered normal. I did not threaten to share, leak, repost, or distribute any of his private materials.
 
Shortly afterwards I was temporarily removed from the group for allegedly violating the Terms of Service.
I believe the chronology is relevant because the Terms include rules concerning respectful conduct and complaints, while the seller himself initiated the personal insults during a legitimate discussion regarding the product.
 
To summarize, my dispute is not:
 
“I tried the method, it failed, therefore I want my money back.”
 
My dispute is that I purchased a product specifically advertised as a lifetime mentorship with 1:1 implementation support, heavily promoted around an allegedly exclusive Amazon method and exclusive/limited methods.
 
When I encountered a basic implementation problem before I could even attempt the method and asked for the promised mentorship/support, I did not receive the level of clarification I reasonably expected from the advertised service.
I also discovered that content presented as exclusive appeared to substantially reproduce material already publicly available before the mentorship was sold.
 
After I raised these concerns, the seller personally insulted me and later removed me from the group.
I am providing the sales advertisement, Terms of Service, and conversation screenshots so moderators can independently review the claims, the support promised, the responses I received, and the sequence of events.
 
I am not asking moderators to assume that every method must be unique or that any refund attempt was guaranteed to succeed. I am asking to judge whether the product and mentorship I received reasonably matched the specific representations that caused me to purchase it 

Crypto address for a refund: M8dtxZxPa1JSkdrv432Z71SZ9UX8dXte9F

[1]

System bot message: @NapoleonRefs (NapoleonRefs) has been notified about this dispute via private messages and has 24hours to reply in this thread

 

Taking care of cracked.st's leechers. Every day.
If you have a question regarding your leeching level, click here.

[648]

Hello,

The buyer contacted me on October 16th on Telegram, sending me the link to my mentorship thread.

He simply asked me about the difference between the $150 version and the $500 version. I explained that the only difference is that the $150 spots are limited, and that the normal price of the training is $500.
He didn't ask any other questions. He ask me an LTC address, paid me, and then received the invitation to the group.

The next day, he contacted me asking what the best method for Amazon was, as I provide several methods. I replied that X was currently the best one.

He then asked me for advice regarding buying accounts, and asked me for suppliers. I simply told him that Amazon isn't the easiest thing to start with, because you have to be very careful not to have links between these accounts.
He then asked me anyway where he could get "good accounts." At no point, either in the description of my training or through any request from the buyer, did I say that I provide a reliable account seller. Despite that, as a bonus, I still provide a way to obtain accounts inside the training, without making any guarantee regarding their quality.

He then sent me a screenshot of a random thread on Cracked talking about an Amazon method, while mentioning himself that the methods were not clear.

I replied that my methods work, but that they require an Amazon account that is more than one year old, as well as around ten orders (warm-up required).

I then answered his questions about other possible stores.

He later came back to me saying that he was entitled to ask for a refund because "I don't have an old account, what am I supposed to do? I'm entitled to a refund."

I explained that my training contains methods for 450+ stores, as well as more than 3 methods for Amazon and around a dozen guides. The title of my training is not "Get Amazon RF unlimited with fresh accounts and same ID." I believe this person was expecting some kind of magic.

He then complained that some of the methods are sometimes available for free on Cracked. Yes, there aren't 1,000,000 different methods. The methods are functional, and obviously they sometimes get leaked on threads (sometimes with the correct methods, sometimes with the wrong ones).

I am not responsible if, among the hundreds of thousands of threads, one random topic happens to contain a method that is actually correct.

I then told him that he could simply do Amazon, and that he could also try buying an account and warming it up himself if he wanted to use that method. I even suggested easier stores that don't require any prerequisites.

He then told me, "I'm going to ask on Cracked," while accusing me of selling methods that are available for free.

As stated in my terms of sale, I consider this to be a threat or an attempt to leak the content, because he could very well go to the forum and say that X method is provided by Napoleon.

As also stated in my terms of sale, in case of a dispute, I temporarily remove the person from the group until the dispute is concluded, in order to prevent any potential leaks depending on the outcome of the scam report. The person will be added back to the group at the request of the admin if necessary.

To summarize, the buyer most likely expected to be able to get unlimited refunds without any prerequisites. Obviously, some stores require certain account prerequisites and a certain level of anonymity if you want to repeat the process over and over.
He is now expecting to be refunded 24 hours later, even though the Amazon methods are clearly present and working, and the training also contains methods for 450+ other stores, as well as around a dozen guides.
All of this simply because he doesn't have the required account for Amazon and doesn't want to warm it up like anyone normally would.

Overall, this has simply been a waste of time for me and for the admins.

I am attaching screenshots of the conversation, screenshots of my ToS, and I remain available to the admins for any further requests or additional information.


Conversation :
https://i.imgur.com/9ffnQyI.png
https://i.imgur.com/KJOUpt7.png
https://i.imgur.com/s4Fah45.png

ToS :
https://i.imgur.com/AKzRnxo.png
https://i.imgur.com/dlJHGrD.png

 

[150]

Hello,

The buyer contacted me on October 16th on Telegram, sending me the link to my mentorship thread.

He simply asked me about the difference between the $150 version and the $500 version. I explained that the only difference is that the $150 spots are limited, and that the normal price of the training is $500.
He didn't ask any other questions. He ask me an LTC address, paid me, and then received the invitation to the group.

The next day, he contacted me asking what the best method for Amazon was, as I provide several methods. I replied that X was currently the best one.

He then asked me for advice regarding buying accounts, and asked me for suppliers. I simply told him that Amazon isn't the easiest thing to start with, because you have to be very careful not to have links between these accounts.
He then asked me anyway where he could get "good accounts." At no point, either in the description of my training or through any request from the buyer, did I say that I provide a reliable account seller. Despite that, as a bonus, I still provide a way to obtain accounts inside the training, without making any guarantee regarding their quality.

He then sent me a screenshot of a random thread on Cracked talking about an Amazon method, while mentioning himself that the methods were not clear.

I replied that my methods work, but that they require an Amazon account that is more than one year old, as well as around ten orders (warm-up required).

I then answered his questions about other possible stores.

He later came back to me saying that he was entitled to ask for a refund because "I don't have an old account, what am I supposed to do? I'm entitled to a refund."

I explained that my training contains methods for 450+ stores, as well as more than 3 methods for Amazon and around a dozen guides. The title of my training is not "Get Amazon RF unlimited with fresh accounts and same ID." I believe this person was expecting some kind of magic.

He then complained that some of the methods are sometimes available for free on Cracked. Yes, there aren't 1,000,000 different methods. The methods are functional, and obviously they sometimes get leaked on threads (sometimes with the correct methods, sometimes with the wrong ones).

I am not responsible if, among the hundreds of thousands of threads, one random topic happens to contain a method that is actually correct.

I then told him that he could simply do Amazon, and that he could also try buying an account and warming it up himself if he wanted to use that method. I even suggested easier stores that don't require any prerequisites.

He then told me, "I'm going to ask on Cracked," while accusing me of selling methods that are available for free.

As stated in my terms of sale, I consider this to be a threat or an attempt to leak the content, because he could very well go to the forum and say that X method is provided by Napoleon.

As also stated in my terms of sale, in case of a dispute, I temporarily remove the person from the group until the dispute is concluded, in order to prevent any potential leaks depending on the outcome of the scam report. The person will be added back to the group at the request of the admin if necessary.

To summarize, the buyer most likely expected to be able to get unlimited refunds without any prerequisites. Obviously, some stores require certain account prerequisites and a certain level of anonymity if you want to repeat the process over and over.
He is now expecting to be refunded 24 hours later, even though the Amazon methods are clearly present and working, and the training also contains methods for 450+ other stores, as well as around a dozen guides.
All of this simply because he doesn't have the required account for Amazon and doesn't want to warm it up like anyone normally would.

Overall, this has simply been a waste of time for me and for the admins.

I am attaching screenshots of the conversation, screenshots of my ToS, and I remain available to the admins for any further requests or additional information.


Conversation :
https://i.imgur.com/9ffnQyI.png
https://i.imgur.com/KJOUpt7.png
https://i.imgur.com/s4Fah45.png

ToS :
https://i.imgur.com/AKzRnxo.png
https://i.imgur.com/dlJHGrD.png

I want to correct several points in the seller's response because his summary does not accurately represent my complaint.
First, I have never claimed that the mentorship promised “unlimited Amazon refunds with fresh accounts and the same ID.” I never asked for such a guarantee either.
My issue is not that Amazon has prerequisites. My issue is what happened when I asked for help understanding how to meet those prerequisites.
The product is explicitly advertised as a “LIFETIME MENTORSHIP”, not merely as access to a database of methods. The seller's own ToS state:

“The Training includes access to 1:1 support as part of the program. This support is provided to assist Participants with the implementation and understanding of the Training materials and resources.”

Amazon is also one of the most heavily advertised parts of the offer:

• “EXCLUSIVE AMAZON METHOD” in the thread title
  
• “Exclusive AMAZON 2026 Method” in the description
  
• Amazon prominently displayed in the promotional material
  
• The overall program is advertised as “Beginner-friendly”
  

I therefore chose Amazon and asked for guidance when I encountered the account requirements.
I did not refuse to warm up an account.

This statement from the seller is therefore inaccurate:

“All of this simply because he doesn't have the required account for Amazon and doesn't want to warm it up like anyone normally would.”

The entire reason I was asking questions was because I wanted to understand how to properly obtain/prepare/warm up an account that would satisfy the requirements of the method.
If the seller had simply explained a process such as what type of aged account to obtain, how he recommends warming it up, what kind of order history is required, what to avoid, or alternatively told me that Amazon was unsuitable for my situation and recommended another specific method, I would not have had an issue.
That is what I reasonably expected from something sold as a mentorship with 1:1 implementation support.
I never attempted an Amazon refund. I never reached that stage. Therefore, this is not a case of me trying a method, failing, and then demanding my money back because results were not guaranteed.

The implementation problem occurred before I could even attempt the method.
The seller now repeatedly refers to what I purchased as “my training” and emphasizes that I received 450+ store methods and guides. I am not disputing that I received training materials.
I am disputing the mentorship/support component of what was sold.
If this had simply been advertised as an ebook, course, or database containing 450+ methods, my expectations would obviously have been different. But it was explicitly sold as a LIFETIME MENTORSHIP, and his own ToS explicitly include 1:1 support for implementation.
There is also an important correction regarding Cracked.
I never threatened to leak, publish, redistribute, or disclose his private material.

What I actually said was:

“je vais demander sur cracked si c'est normal”

I was referring to asking the community whether it was normal for methods available for free on the forum to also be sold as part of this mentorship.
The seller has interpreted that as:

“a threat or an attempt to leak the content”

I strongly disagree with that characterization.
Asking moderators/community members for an opinion about a commercial practice is not the same thing as threatening to disclose private content.
In fact, after this dispute started, another user contacted me privately asking about the Amazon method. I specifically refused to discuss the methods because I did not want to disclose any private material while this scam report was ongoing. I can provide that screenshot to the admins if necessary.
Regarding the methods being available for free, the seller also slightly misrepresents my argument.
My argument is not that selling information that can also be found for free is automatically a scam.
The concern is the way the product was marketed.

The advertisement specifically uses:

“EXCLUSIVE AMAZON 2026 Method”

and the original sales thread states:

“We don't want to overuse our methods, which is why we limit the number of sales each month.”

I found material that appeared almost word-for-word the same, apart from formatting, in a thread dating from 2025.
The seller's response is that methods “sometimes get leaked.”
The relevant question is therefore chronological: was the allegedly exclusive material publicly available before or after this mentorship was sold?
If a method was publicly available in 2025 and substantially the same content was later marketed as an “Exclusive AMAZON 2026 Method,” I believe that is relevant for the admins to evaluate.
Unfortunately, I was removed from the group before I could take additional comparison screenshots of the material inside. I can still provide the public 2025 material and any evidence I retained.
Finally, I want to address the conduct issue because the chronology matters.
I did not initiate personal insults against the seller.

During a legitimate discussion about the product, the seller told me:

“Les français toujours des zgeg cest ouf ?”

I responded:

“je viens dans le respect tu me traites de zgeg”

He then replied:

“Oui tu es un zgeg.”

Only later did I state that I believed he was reselling methods available for free and that I would ask on Cracked whether this was normal.
I did not insult him in return, and I did not threaten to leak his material.
This is particularly relevant because his ToS contain provisions concerning respectful conduct, complaints, and removal of 1:1 support.

So I want to make my position very clear for the admins:

I am not asking for a refund because Amazon requires an aged account.
I am not asking for a refund because an Amazon refund attempt failed as I never even attempted one.
I am not claiming that the seller promised unlimited refunds from fresh Amazon accounts.
I never refused to warm up an account; I was asking for guidance on how to properly do it.
I never threatened to leak or redistribute his content.

My complaint is that I purchased something explicitly marketed as a LIFETIME MENTORSHIP, with 1:1 support explicitly promised for implementation and understanding, and I believe the mentorship component I received when I actually needed implementation assistance did not match what was advertised.
This is combined with my concern regarding material marketed as “exclusive” that appeared to already exist publicly before the mentorship was sold.

I am happy for mods to review the complete conversation, the sales advertisement, the ToS, and the available material and make their own determination.

[648]

The methods for Amazon work, and they are included in the training.
I don't see what more I can say. It is my exclusive method, and it is the one I use for my clients.
I have not gone through forums from all over the world to see if someone had already proposed my method.

Furthermore, I was right to temporarily remove the buyer from my group.

My ToS are very strict and clear on this matter: NO COPYING of the mentorship content, under risk of being banned without a refund.
The buyer himself admits in the post above that he wanted to take screenshots:
 

"Unfortunately, I was removed from the group before I could take additional comparison screenshots of the material inside. I can still provide the public 2025 material and any evidence I retained."

The buyer's version also contradicts itself. At one point, he says that he did not receive the help he requested (even though I answered all of his questions), and at another point, he says it is because he found pieces of a similar method among the thousands of threads...

 

[150]

The methods for Amazon work, and they are included in the training.
I don't see what more I can say. It is my exclusive method, and it is the one I use for my clients.
I have not gone through forums from all over the world to see if someone had already proposed my method.

Furthermore, I was right to temporarily remove the buyer from my group.

My ToS are very strict and clear on this matter: NO COPYING of the mentorship content, under risk of being banned without a refund.
The buyer himself admits in the post above that he wanted to take screenshots:
 

"Unfortunately, I was removed from the group before I could take additional comparison screenshots of the material inside. I can still provide the public 2025 material and any evidence I retained."

The buyer's version also contradicts itself. At one point, he says that he did not receive the help he requested (even though I answered all of his questions), and at another point, he says it is because he found pieces of a similar method among the thousands of threads...

 
There are two important inaccuracies in this response.
First, taking a screenshot for the purpose of documenting evidence in an active dispute is not the same thing as leaking, redistributing, or publicly sharing mentorship content.
The sentence you quoted explicitly says “comparison screenshots.” The purpose was to document my claim (to mods in dms) that material advertised as exclusive appeared substantially similar to material publicly available in 2025 
 
I have never threatened to publish, leak, redistribute, or share the mentorship content.
 
More importantly, this sentence was written after you had already removed me from the group. It therefore cannot be used as the reason why you originally removed me. At most, you can say that you interpreted it afterwards as supporting your concern.
 
Second, there is no contradiction between my two complaints.

1. I dispute whether the mentorship/1:1 implementation support I purchased was adequately provided when I encountered an implementation problem.
   
2. Separately, I question the advertising of material as an “Exclusive AMAZON 2026 Method” when substantially similar material appears to have been publicly available in 2025.
   

Those are two separate issues and they can obviously both exist at the same time.
You now also state:

“It is my exclusive method”

while immediately adding:

“I have not gone through forums from all over the world to see if someone had already proposed my method.”

I will simply provide the evidence I have and let the moderators determine whether the use of the word “exclusive” was appropriate.
I would prefer to keep this discussion factual and let the moderators judge the evidence rather than continue arguing over interpretations.

[648]

More contradictions.
I’ve already wasted enough time dealing with this retard, so I’ll leave it to the admins to decide from now on.
I have provided the necessary evidence.

---

Last thing about this retard :

https://cracked.st/Thread-Deal-Dispute-HackingReam
https://cracked.st/Thread-Manipulation-s...om-Cracked
 He seems to be familiar with disputes for the same reason, so he thinks he can take advantage of other people’s content for free.
New method: buy paid content, search through hundreds of thousands of threads, and if 1% of the content you’re selling can be similar on a forum, then get a full refund :)

What a retarded dog

 

[150]

More contradictions.
I’ve already wasted enough time dealing with this retard, so I’ll leave it to the admins to decide from now on.
I have provided the necessary evidence.

---

Last thing about this retard :

https://cracked.st/Thread-Deal-Dispute-HackingReam
https://cracked.st/Thread-Manipulation-s...om-Cracked
 He seems to be familiar with disputes for the same reason, so he thinks he can take advantage of other people’s content for free.
New method: buy paid content, search through hundreds of thousands of threads, and if 1% of the content you’re selling can be similar on a forum, then get a full refund :)

What a retarded dog

Since Napoleon has decided to bring up my previous disputes and accuse me of having some kind of strategy to obtain paid content for free, I think my actual purchase history is relevant.
I have purchased other expensive mentorships on Cracked without ever opening a scam report against the seller.
 
For example, I purchased this Airbnb FULL MENTORSHIP for approximately $250:
https://cracked.st/Thread-%E2%9C%A8NEW-D...-%E2%9C%A8
 
Did I open a scam report against that seller? No.
I paid for the mentorship, received the service, and had no reason to dispute it.
 
There is actually something particularly relevant in that thread. A reviewer describes the mentorship component as:

“THE MOST IMPORTANT PART”

and explains that when the buyer gets stuck, the seller:

“will help you to get out of the situation and guide you thru the whole process”

This is essentially the exact distinction I have been making throughout this dispute.
A mentorship is not merely receiving files or guides. The value of the mentorship component is precisely that when you encounter a problem implementing the material, the mentor helps you understand the situation and guides you forward.
 
That is what I expected here.
 
I was not asking Napoleon to guarantee an Amazon refund. I had not even attempted one.
 
I encountered a prerequisite/implementation problem and asked for guidance on how to proceed. If he had explained how he recommends obtaining/preparing/warming up an appropriate account, or simply told me that Amazon was unsuitable for my situation and properly guided me toward another method, I would have had no issue.
 
This is also why the accusation that I systematically buy content and then search for an excuse to refund it makes no sense.
 
I have already spent approximately $250 on another mentorship on this same forum without opening any dispute whatsoever.
Regarding the previous disputes Napoleon linked, the sellers ultimately refunded me after I presented evidence concerning the content involved. The admins are free to read those disputes in full and judge their merits and outcomes themselves.
 
And in this case, Napoleon himself explicitly told me:

“Oui fonce, ouvre un scam Report ;)”

So I followed the forum's dispute process and let the admins judge the situation.
 
Opening a dispute that the seller himself told me to open is not evidence that I intended to obtain his content for free.
 
The current dispute should be judged on its own facts: what was advertised, what “LIFETIME MENTORSHIP” and the promised 1:1 implementation support represented, what I actually asked for, what assistance I received, and whether material specifically marketed as “exclusive” was accurately represented.
 
I am perfectly willing to pay for mentorships when I receive what I reasonably understand a mentorship to be. My purchase history demonstrates exactly that.