« Toons | Main | Marks - Chapter 4 »
June 2, 2004
Response to Quixtar's New Rule
By QBlog in
The following message was sent to me as a response to Quixtar's New Rule by someone claiming to be a Quixtar IBO. I've made minor edits at the request of the author to keep it relatively anonymous:
MESSAGE: The new rule introduced by Quixtar in May 2004 which prevents any Quixtar IBO from operating or participating in another multi-level, "network" marketing business of any kind, in my opinion, infringes on human rights and the right to free enterprise in both the US and Canada. We have been threatened with termination because my husband started another network marketing company, the residual profits of which are helping to "grow" (an important financial asset). We have operated a profitable Amway/Quixtar (non-system) business for 30 years and now they're telling us we must make a choice or be terminated.I didn't (and still don't) have any real advice for this person. I guess I'd advise against getting a divorce. Beyond that, I just don't know what to say right now. If this is true, and I have received indications that it is, then it's truly tragic.We have been IBOs in good standing for 30 years and have never abused or tried to hurst anyone's organization in any way. The only option available to us if we want to keep both businesses (based on their new rules) is to divorce. Where might we go to seek some advice or assistance as to whether these new rules are actually legal and enforceable. I understand new IBOs sign a contract that gives Quixtar the right to make changes in the rules from time to time. However, we have been involved for 30 years when there were very few rules in place and have been an automatic renewal for probably 10 years or more. Any suggestions or advice would be most appreciated.
Asking Questions
If you're a Quixtar IBO ask yourself some questions:
- Is it good for my business that Quixtar can change rules without my input or the input of representatives that I help elect?
- Do I know the people who passed this new rule and can I be sure that they are concerned about what's in my best interest?
- Why did I learn about this rule change from this blog (if you did learn about it here)?
- Am I operating a secondary business that is now considered a violation of the Rules of Conduct with the addition of rule 6.5?
I've spoken with a few IBOs who are furious with this new rule. Like the message I posted above, they feel somewhat betrayed by a business they've been loyal to for years. And yet, I've spoken to other IBOs who think the rule is great because they don't plan to violate it and if they do break it, Quixtar won't come after them. They say that the rule is only for people like Bo Short and Quixtar would never enforce such a rule on some lowly IBO doing his 4000 pv.
Why have a rule if you only plan to selectively enforce it?
Free Enterprise
Here's an interesting quote that I think sort of relates to this post. It's from the Quixtar Response site:
...neither NBC nor anyone else can deny IBOs their right to free enterprise and to pursue their goals through Quixtar-powered businesses or through the legitimate sales aids and training programs some IBOs purchase and market.What is your definition of "free enterprise?"
Comments
If I had to venture a guess, Quixtar is afraid of competition because their prices are usually not competitive. Quixtar has a loyal niche market of IBO's who do over 80% of all the purchases, and if another, new business came along that offered similar quality products at better prices, it would cut into Quixtar's profitability.
As for the non-compete clause, Quixtar can probably make new IBO's sign it and make it stick. The question is for IBO's such as the one who sent the letter who has been an IBO for many years, can Quixtar "grandfather" in a rule that significantly changes a big aspect of the business? A lot would depend on the renewal contracts, but my guess without reading into anything is Quixtar would probably win because most MLM contracts between the company and the distributor (IBO) allow the company a lot of power, including the power to change the deal such as Quixtar has done. Be interesting to see if any long-term IBO has the time, money and guts to take on Quixtar and challenge this new rule in court.
Before I make this statment let me make very clear I in no way support this new rule. I don't like it and I think it's a huge mistake on Quixtar's part.
I also appologize in advance for mis-spelling and grammer.
I work in the wireless industry and I am actually an employee of my company there for I would not be able to go sell for a competiter. That would violate my employment agreement.
However...there is nothing that says I can't go work part time for another industry if I so desire.
I would have to ask...are you employed by quixtar or are you truelly an Independent Business owner who just wants to sell there product lines?
I make these comments from my experience working with contracts in the wirelsss industry...
The problems lies in the fact that as an "IBO" you signed a binding contract with a company you wanted to be a "rep" for. This goes back to being a customer and you were "sold" the grand idea of Quixtar and signed on the bottom line before making good business decisions as a business owner.
I am only assuming here but legally most will not be able to get out of this contract unless they are small fish in the sea and Quixtar could care less if they go somewhere else.
As noted in a previous post the little 400PV folks will probably never hear anything about this rule if they left. The bigger pins..Emeralds and above..Well we'll see.
Big mistake Quixtar...HUGE!
Maybe even bigger for the folks who signed off on it?
Good luck!
"We have operated a profitable Amway/Quixtar (non-system) business for 30 years..."
Curious what was meant by "non-system".
I think that the new "non-competitive" clauses are at present illegal, since you cannot change the terms of the contract on a whim or without the consent of those under the contract. Now, since the company has the distributors sign a new contract every year, I'm sure they'll include the "non-competitive" and "non-future competitive" rule changes in next year's contract, and at that point they will be legal and binding (since they have been "agreed to" by the contract's signing).
"We have operated a profitable Amway/Quixtar (non-system) business for 30 years..."
Curious what was meant by "non-system".
Posted by: Greg at June 2, 2004 02:32 PM
==================================
There are several lines of sponsorship that do not participate in an educational "system" of tools (books, tapes/CDs, seminars/functions). IBOs in those lines often achieve profitability quicker than those in "system" lines if they promote retailing, which most "non-system" lines do - and most "system" lines don't.
PW
What are the lines-of-sponsorship that don't have systems? I've personally never heard the name of one, and didn't know that there were such animals!!! Anybody have a name??
Dave, your last paragraph was a great explanation of why the "IBO's" are getting the raw end of the deal. They should be called Quixtar Product Sellers or QPS's, but in no way are they independent business owners.
P.S.
Dave's entry is at the bottom of the page
All IBO are members of IBOAI (Quixtar can't make changes without approval from IBOAI).
All platinums are voting members. All diamonds and above are qualified to run for board of directors and/or special committee, who get elected by majority from the voting members.
Anyone can initiate the change proposal (Quixtar, committee, or any IBO). The revalent committee make its recommendation and its approval get voted by the voting members of the IBOAI.
In other words, its a representative democracy. Rules are changed because the majority approved of it. [If you're going to say 4000 platinum doesn't constitute majority for 750,000 IBO, sorry bud, but 700,000 IBO generate 0 sales shouldn't be heard).
All new rules changed are highlighted upon logging into quixtar website under "what's new" and they are also highlighted under the business section.
As for the "I'm independent and can operate any damn businesses I want how I want"--try that with a traditional franchise. Buy a Mickey-D franchise and open Joe's Burger and see what happen. Heck. Buy a Mickey-D franchise. Sell it. Wait 7 years. Open Joe's Burger and see what happen.
Outside of MLM, some vendors have non-compete clause. Want to be a retailer reselling their products, you can't sell any competitors' products. Free enterprise is alive and kicking. Don't like the rules, don't sell their products.
The anti-raiding rule is a good one. How would you feel if your upline diamond go behind your back and try to push other ventures to your organization which you built? The backlash may be they get disgusted by him and quit on you. This is a good protection for you.
If you want to build another non-competing MLM, there's nothing stopping you. Just build it on the relationship you had personally develop and don't interfere with other people relationship that you had not personally develop.
As for the retail store analogy--if you want to be able to sell competing products, don't sell an exclusive-right products like Quixtar.
If you're upset because you worked your butt off for 30-year and want to be grandfathered in, that doesn't make sense. The rule is designed to prevent sales cannibalization and grandfathering in older business will not serve that purpose. This is a case of the good of the many outweigh the good of the few.
It's a good thing Jennifer Lee clarified these new rules. I wonder if she is the Jennifer Lee of Gary and Jennifer Lee Brown...you know the Emeralds from Arizona?
Independant is not a hard word to define. A person who buys a McDonald's is clearly not an Independant Business Owner. The person who opened the first McDonald's would be considered an IBO. Stop giving people the illusion they own their own business because they do not. Just tell them they are sales associates and get on with life.
With all due respect to Jennifer Lee, that is how these decisions should be made. The reality of the IBOAI board is far different from the representative democracy picture she paints. I believe she is sincere in her view but I know the inner-workings and she is wrong.
As one IBOAI rep told me when discussing the board..."they are not concerned about the average IBO, they are only concerned about themselves."
While her rationale reads well it is not a realistic view. It is like saying that the "system" is like a college education or its only purpose is to teach you how to build a Quixtar business. For those that believe that, they will also believe her description of this situation.
Once again, I do not question her sincerity, however the reality of the situation is different.
Sincerely,
Bo
With all due respect to Bo, IBOAI mechanism is a good way for platinum to exert their influence. It is their collective decision on who can be directors of the IBOAI and who can remain directors.
If the platinum collectively failed to exercise their critical thinking and choose bad directors and continue to choose bad directors, where should the responsibility for bad rules rest on?
To say IBOAI only care about themselves is akin to saying all politicians are corrupt slimeballs. Nothing more than a smear campaign.
From all the data I have, I didn't see any elections rigged, nor the voters coerced, threatened, nor intimidated. That means all the voters, on their free will, put the directors in place. So whatever decisions IBOAI made are reflection of the want/wish/need of the voters.
It's no difference than in American politics. There are corrupt slimeballs out there. But I love the system and would not trade it for any other system.
Jennifer:
You are missing it. The board is elected by platinums and above, most of whom are system pins. If you read the Postma memo you'll know that Platinums are not profitable in their Quixtar business and rely on BSM money to offset losses. Thus, most platinums will vote for their system's representative (as ordered) to protect the system business in hopes of getting a larger share.
As far as democratic? Now you're being silly. Those voting platinums make up a small fractio of one percent of IBOs
There are many competing MLM companies, and given Quixtar's IBO turnover, it is a bit of a stretch to think that this is a way to keep the vast majority of low-level IBOs from engaging in competing enterprises. Quixtar doesn't care if 95% of the IBOs are members of competing MLMs or other direct selling companies. Most of them will leave the business within a year anyway, regardless of the MLM "competition".
I see it that Quixtar is setting up a rule to prevent future Bo Short situations - a big pin starting a competing MLM company, taking his downline with him. If you think about it, for better or worse, the IBO network is Quixtar's greatest asset - how else could they sell premium-priced product and earn such high margins? Put LOC on the retail store shelf -think it would sell for near what the current IBO cost is? There are literally hundreds of contract manufacturers out there that can produce competing products at a lower cost. All you need is a sales plan that is "better" than Quixtar, coupled with contract manufactured products that are "better" and cheaper than Quixtar's, and most importantly, a nice downline organization to provide critical mass.
If an IBO leader gets annoyed with Quixtar, they could just do a Bo Short. Taking this a bit further, it could leave one to assume that Quixtar anticipates some rough waters with big pins in the future, and wants to prevent them from being able to take their organization elsewhere, say if Quixtar starts actively enforcing rules violations - which are rampant. Thinking even a bit further, aren't systems businesses competing with Quixtar for "share of wallet" of the IBOs?
Platinum average $25k/yr and Q12 average $40k/yr. Even if you're a tape-head, you would still only spend $5k/year on the "system". That imply $20k to $35k in traveling expense. What, the platinum travel to Bali each week to do plans??? Taking $0.28/mile car expense, one would have to travel 71k to 125k mile per year to spend that much. Platinum not profitable, baloney.
Even Bo Short haven't gone so far as to say platinums are corrupt slimeball. Everything I read from him had indicated he believe platinum and below are all hard-working honest people.
Mr Lawyer, you got anything other than hearsay to show me platinum are corrupted slimeball?
As far as being silly, hey, the US election process isn't "democratic". The adult population is representative of all human being in America. Let's include teenager, pre-teen, infant, babies, fetuses. Heck, let's include illegal aliens, too.
Why would allowing the estimated 85% to 95% of IBO who generated zero sale to vote be more "democratic"?
You've got it all wrong again, Jenn.
"Platinum average $25k/yr and Q12 average $40k/yr."
The average income at Platinum - according to Quixtar- is 15K and 32K at Q12. You are using WWDB's numbers which, because WWDB is on "standard fulfillment" are misleadingly elevated by not subtracting out the amout a platinum has to pay to her downline for bonuses. Get with it.
http://www.amquix.info/quixtar_income.html
As far as expenses, there is a lot more than tapes and a little travel at the platinum level. You have to show you are CORE to fight back the 75% quit rate among first year "distirbutors." That means tapes, books, ALL opens, ALL monthlies, ALL regionals, ALL FEDS and Family Reunions, Website Access, monthly Kate, bad food at Denny's, mileage, hotels, airfare, lost ad packs, cd cards and business cards, samples and paying too much for your household products.
According to the only objective study ever conducted of average direct/platinum income AFTER EXPENSES - conducted by the Wisconsin Attorney General - the average was a NET LOSS of $918/year!
Platinum not profitable? True. The Postma memo agrees. Read it and weep.
"Even Bo Short haven't gone so far as to say platinums are corrupt slimeball. Everything I read from him had indicated he believe platinum and below are all hard-working honest people."
Who said platinums were corrupt or slimeballs? They were lied to. They are in the hole and the only thing they know to do is to do what they are told. Vote for their systems leaders to represent them on the board and protect the business as it is. Do you think there is some sort of politicing and public debate about the "issues" facing the board? Do you think it matters? Grow up. The pins vote for their systems' approved representatives for the IBOIA. Period.
"As far as being silly, hey, the US election process isn't "democratic". The adult population is representative of all human being in America. Let's include teenager, pre-teen, infant, babies, fetuses. Heck, let's include illegal aliens, too."
Say wha'?
"Why would allowing the estimated 85% to 95% of IBO who generated zero sale to vote be more 'democratic'?"
Talk about making stuff up! Where did you get this number? Seriously. I want to see a scan of a document or a link to a source for the statistic you quote here.
I can give you either an objective source or a company document for everything I've said. Where's your proof?
The average income at Platinum - according to Quixtar- is 15K
Let me be more precise in my data. The $25k/$40k number is from 2001 International Leadership Development Profile of Success which Scott had verified to be authentic Quixtar data. The 2003 showing the $15k had not be verified and it's nothing more than a screen shot of some website. Got another source for 2003 which can be verified and I'll listen. It's fairly impossible for the income of platinum to drop 40% when Quixtar sale & payout increased by 40%, if I recalled correctly.
You should check your sources. WWDB "income" is defined the same as everybody else--retail minus cost of good plus bonus RETAINED. Their number is not misleading. Show me your objective source which indicate otherwise. Get with it.
As for expense, the $5k/year is the total system costs. That's a lot of business card/ad pack/samples for $20k-$35k. I would venture that travel & lodging account for the entire business expense. Even if you double the tools cost to $10k/yr, that's still a lot of traveling.
As for the Wisconsin Asst AG, the only thing I seen is the conclusion of a loss of $918/year. This is based on personal income tax return. Everybody and their grand-ma-ma know that's a lot of creativity goes into income tax return. The number one way to reduce income tax liability is to shift personal expense to business expense. Doesn't mean the business lost money.
Take me as an example. I travel to work 150 mile each day. That's 36k mile per year of personal, non-expenseable expense. Start the Quixtar business. Follow the law to the teeth and I'll convert that 36k personal mile to 36k Quixtar business mile (read 4,000 contact & invite). Now my Quixtar business have a loss of $10k on my tax return. Does this really mean my Quixtar business have a negative $10k cash flow?? Heck no. In fact, I'll have an extra $4k in my back pocket even though my Schedule C Quixtar showed a $10k loss.
I haven't been able to locate the actual data that Wisconsin Asst AG have. If you have it, I'll be interested in seeing the breakdown: Gross revenue, "tools cost (tapes/book/function tix/kate/blah)", travel, lodging, sample, returns allowance, & marketing materials. BTW, food is not expenseable. You only get to expense "meal cost" if you're talking to somebody about business and even then you can only expense your prospect meal cost, not your. 2 co-worker going out to lunch doesn't count, nor does 2 IBO going to have bad Denny's food.
Whether or not the platinum vote their conscience or their wallet depends on if they are profitable. Most of what I had seen indicate they are profitable.
You yourself, Mr Lawyer, have been able to get your businesss to the 4000 PV level for 2 months running through retailing of vitamin. You said you didn't make any money. I don't see how you can not. To keep it simple, say you retailed 4000 PV worth of Double-X. Did you retail at the suggest retail price? If you did, then you would have to retail 42 cases of double-x. Suggested retail is $11,709 with your cost being $7,854 for a retail differential of $3,855. Also, you'll have 4065PV on 11062BV which will yield a retained bonus of $2,323. Gross income for that month: $6,178 (or $74k annualized).
How can you have an expense of $6k/month? You gave them the entire box of double-x as sample? You drove 21k mile to deliver to 168 customers? You gave out and lost 6000 ad pack? There's no system expense, so what other expense did you incur to wipe out $74k annualized?
Say the product was overpriced and you sold at cost. You would still have received a bonus override of $2.3k which you will retain all of it since you have no downline to pay out to. That would annualized to $28k. You did better than platinum and emeralds. How can you not make money retailing 4k PV?
As for the estimate of 85% to 95% generating no sales, why it's Jim favorite--the platinum index number. SA4400 in the early 90's showed only 40% of IBO are active; late 90's, 50% active; 00's 66% active. Active is defined as either 1) attempting at least 1 retail sale, 2) showing at least 1 plan, 3) receiving a bonus check, or 4) attending a meeting. I would venture to say if you're not active, you have put zero hours into the business and had generated no sales. And then take the platinum index number showing 87% not sponsoring anybody, 0.23 clients/ibo, 67% not reaching 100PV once, etc, and you can extrapolate that 85% to 95% generate no sales.
Selective reading again Jenn.
Where did I say I didn't make money retailing products? Please, point me to it.
I have more info on both the Wisconsin AG study and income data. But I will not show it until I see an outside source for your bogus claim that 85%-95% of IBOs generate zero sales.
I'm waiting . . .
While you're at it, please show me the average expenses for a WWDB platinum and average net profit/loss (after expenses). Not you're hypothetical, made up numbers - actual data. You have NOTHING, Jenn. You respond to the data Scott has saying it's just a screen capture. Wake up. The screen capture is from a large system's website and the reason that data is there is because the Federal Trade Commission requires it specifically of Amway because of false income claims. Do you really think Team 5000 would falsely understate the average income for Platinum by 33%?
If you do, you aren't being honest or even slightly objective.
But we already knew that.
I'll be waiting for a source on that 85%-95% number.
According to the Postma Memo "loyalty and dependency is the ultimate objective of the 'system.'"
http://www.amquix.info/amway_postma_memo.html
Congratulations on the loyalty, Jenn.
How's the dependency coming?
Nice riposte. Loyalty. Dependency. Too bad I disassociated myself and my org from the AQMO weeks ago when the emerald wouldn't provide me with audited financial data for WWG.
I paid $12 for annual web access when I first signed up, so I still have access to WWG info and I still use my access for data mining. As for loyalty, it's to Number One.
I'll paraphrase you: the retail profit wasn't worth your time, so you gave your accounts to somebody else.
I don't recall when you were involved, but your strategy and mine look similar. Retail at close to cost with focus on vitamin, XS drinks, & weight loss products. Drive customer expansion through referrral. Target is the health nut, most can be found at gym/weight loss center. After a couple of months, try to get them on ditto delivery, using 5% off & convenience as incentive.
I haven't develop my retailing to 4,000 PV like you had, but even at 2,000 PV I'm pleased with the ROI. I got about 40 clients, most of the older one I successfully converted to ditto delivery. I spend about 15 hr/wk getting new customers and about 2 hr/wk servicing existing customers. This ROI is superior to my other business and I'm pleased with Quixtar potential. If you take the myopic view, my "hourly rate" is only $8/hr. But if you take the growth view, my ROI is 9 months, and that's exceptional.
As for ave expense info, there are none available. I already state that. Given that there are no info available on expense, I find it preposterous to make any claim toward net profit, either the AQMO claiming financial freedom nor the critic claiming 90% lost money. To me, they're both BS.
I never claimed that platinum didn't lose money. What I said was that I find it hard to believe platinum lose money because in order for the platinum to lose money, the expense must be on the ridiculous side. I know there are no data on expense. But with objective data on expense, I'll question any and all net income claim, either positive or negative.
If you have info on expenses, I would like to see it. I'll do my due diligence, cross-referencing it with other objective data and trying authenicated the data.
As for the 85% to 95% generating no sales, I already stated that this number is an extrapolation. The extrapolation is based on Quixtar 2001 SA-4400 stating only 66% are active. It's reasonable to conclude that if you don't try to retail at least once and if you don't try to show the sales & marketing plan, that you don't have any clients nor IBO under you. I am making the leap of faith that this type of business wouldn't personal use either. So from the SA-4400, 34% doesn't generate any sales.
On top of that, Jim's favorite is the platinum index number. Last one I seen is a 2001 one which showed 87% didn't sponsor anybody. Ave # of clients/members registered is 0.23. If I recall correctly, 67% did not make a purchase within the last 12 months. It is a leap of faith, but I would venture that if 87% didn't register anybody and the ave client/member is 0.23, that this 87% doesn't generate any sales either.
Add the 2 number up and I would estimate 85% to 95% generate no sales. Based on my empirical data within my org, this is true. I'm aware that my org is only one data point and it's impossible to derive any conclusion from such a limited sample. Is this number hard fact? No, but it is derivative from hard facts. This number will be way off if my assumption regarding IBO w/ no sponsoring & next to 0 clients/member not doing any personal use is wrong. I understand that and I'm continuing to data mine. But I believe this assumption is reasonable and my estimate accurate.
I resent your insinuation that I'm not objective. Just because I question your conclusion, asking for the data used to arrive at your conlusion, does not make me biased. I questioned AQMO claim and their data, and rejected them when they failed to provide independently verifiable sources. Just because I question your claim & data doesn't make me biased. It's just a matter of scrutinizing everything and using critical thinking, to paraphrase QBlog.
Explain to me why this is biased and not objective: "I find it hard to believe that platinum ave income can drop 40% when Quixtar sale & payout increased 40%".
The average income at Platinum - according to Quixtar- is 15K and 32K at Q12. How sad and pathetic. You are using WWDB's numbers, which, because WWDB is on "standard fulfillment" are misleadingly elevated by not subtracting out the amount a platinum has to pay to their downline for bonuses.
http://www.amquix.info/quixtar_income.html
As far as expenses, there is a lot more than some tapes and a little travel at the platinum level. That means all of the tapes, books, opens, monthlies, regionals, FEDS and Website Access, mileage, hotels, airfare, lost tools, business cards, samples and paying too much for your household products.
There is a 75% quit rate among first year distributors! This is a huge amount of turnover! Why would all these distributors be leaving?
According to the only objective study ever conducted of average direct/platinum income AFTER EXPENSES - conducted by the Wisconsin Attorney General - the average was a NET LOSS of $918/year! I have seen the report! This is not hearsay!
Platinum not profitable? True. The Postma memo agrees. Read it and weep.
The average income at Platinum - according to Quixtar- is only 15K !!!! How sad!
QBlog said it best, scrutinize everything and use your critical thinking.
KB, had you actually look at the sources of your info and independently verify them? Thus far, your entire post is nothing by a regurgitation of lawdawg post.
In regard to business expense, Schedule C is a novel-in-work and it not reflective of the true business expense. My working definition of true business expense--those expense you would not had incurred had you not been in business.
Schedule C is an exercise in creativity where one try to move personal expense into the business expense column and move business income out of the income column or shift it to a lower tax rate (read shift income)
Examine http://www.amquix.info/tax_cases/Jordan_TC_memo-1991-50.html
http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/InOpHistoric/NISSLEY.TCM.WPD.pdf
http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/InOpHistoric/OGDEN.TCM.WPD.pdf
and you'll see most of the "business" expense are personal expense disguised as business expense.
Look at Direct Jordan case. His retained bonus is 25k 1982 & 23k 1983. I would say true business expense are out-of-town travel, standing order, seminars & training, demos & samples, handling fees, and part of the car expense and maybe part of the supplies. That's about 8k in 1982 & 7k in 1983.
The rest of the expenses, phone & utilities, use of home, office, foods, daughter wages, most of the car expense, are personal expenses--eg, if they weren't involved in the business, they would had incurred these expenses anyway. They're not true business expenses.
Look at the Nissley. In 1995, their car total mileage is 43k. Out of this, they claim business mileage of 38k. Only 3k personal & 2k other. This is from a couple where both work fulltime. 3k personal commute between 2 full-time worker. Don't think so.
Take away the creative accounting and the Jordan will have a net profit of 16k & 15k. Likewise, do the same for the Nissley.
If you have the complete Wisconsin AG doc from 1982 which details the expenses, I would like to see it. Why don't you scrutinize it and see which expenses are true business expenses and which are personal disguised as business expenses?
In regard to your Posta memo, at least quote it right. "[Direct] is basically one legged, he is not profitable in his Amway business". Just curious if you know what "one-legged" platinum means? Do you have the percentage of platinum which are one-legged? If you don't know the percentage, where's your critical thinking when you claim "[all] platinum are not profitable".
Could anyone please explain the actual purpose of the system... i wonder how independent it is since the ones who suggest you join force you to do things their/your way... this is happening a lot and people don´t like to be so pushy...
please... someone explain it to me :)
What is it with Quixtar being so afraid of competition? From what I understand, the "new rules" essentially are trying to prevent IBO's from starting a business which might have products which compete with Quixtar offerings. So my question is: What is wrong with allowing IBO's to do this? Shouldn't the ultimate selling point be the quality of the *Product*?
One common approach in business circles is that if you want to do well, to make sure your product is available right along side with your biggest competition. The result is that as long as both reasonable products, both you and your competition will prosper.
This is not only taught within business circles, but I see it every day when I walk into a department or grocery store. For example, when I look at the laundry soap aisle, I can often find a store brand, but I can also find such name brands as Tide, Cheer, and many others. The end result? I make my purchase decision based on a number of factors - the experience on how well a product has worked for me in the past, the price of the product and value for the money, etc. Every other customer will make their purchase decision based on their own reasons. The end result for the store? It will sell (and thus make profit) on some of each brand of product. The end result for the soap makers? Each company will have product sales.
As for the store itself, many stores use more then one supplier to stock shelves. The store owners know that by stocking a variety of competing products from a variety of vendors they will make money. The product manufacturers will also make money.
It has been said over and over again that Quixtar is just a "web portal" or "wholesale supplier" for products. If this is true then why can't Quixtar IBO's have the same opportunities available as the store owner down the street? If an IBO is truly an *independent* business owner then why can't he / she be able to select more then one supplier for his or her business? Why can't he / she be able to let the cusomer decide which product is best? Why is Quixtar afraid of allowing their products to compete on a level playing field?
Posted by: Dave | June 2, 2004 9:32 AM