scheme in the public debate. The Kleine Zeitung reported that various experts were looking at the investment schemes for advertising campaigns organised by Lyoness, and whether a prospectus was required before attracting capital from investors. Lyoness-hired professor Susanne Kalls concluded that no capital market regulations were violated by not issuing a prospectus; attorney Karl Hengstberger came to the opposite conclusion but agreed with Kalls that the Lyoness business package does not constitute an investment. In the same article, Lyoness spokesman Mathias Vorbach admits that the company may have had some trouble before, but that those days are behind it – Lyoness has learned from its mistakes. He asserts that legal problems have only appeared in Austria (a contested claim) and that 95% of the Lyoness members just shop and do not participate in the earning models offered by Lyoness. However, the Beobachter, after reportedly considering internal Lyoness documents, published an article suggesting that 99.7% of the Lyoness turnover derives from down-payments on future purchases, not from actual shopping or (saved up) discounts. In September 2009, Lyoness hired criminal law expert Peter Lewisch to assess whether the company's business model violated the Austrian law concerning illegal pyramid schemes. The study, conducted by Lewisch in September 2013, argued that Lyoness is not a pyramid scheme under Austrian legislation. The judges of the regional court in Krems, Austria, however concluded that the business model of Lyoness is so "Ponzi-Scheme-like", that contracts between the company and its business partners are not valid. Lyoness has been declared a pyramid scheme by at least four independent civil courts in Austria. Additionally it was reported that the Austrian Consumers Union has filed suit against Lyoness for providing participants with unclear and deceptive terms and conditions. VKI represented clients who contended they invested money in the advertising campaigns organised by Lyoness, and several option trading packages offered by Lyoness, but were not provided with a prospectus. VKI won their case against Lyoness and the court ruled that the 61 contested clauses are indeed unlawful, making the contracts between Lyoness and its premium members not legally binding under Austrian law. Further civil proceedings have been combined into a class-action lawsuit worth millions of euros, initiated by process financier Advofin, and supported and recommended by the Austrian Consumers Union (VKI). The lawsuit will be filed in Amsterdam. Lyoness is suspected to be a pyramid scheme in several of the countries