« August 2004 | Main | October 2004 »
September 30, 2004
Ask Amway About Dyson
By QBlog in
Who is James Dyson? Well he’s a world famous entrepreneur and inventor who developed the top selling Dual Cyclone vacuum cleaner. His autobiography details the struggles and obstacles he overcame while working to bring his revolutionary invention to market. Interestingly Dyson’s book explains that one of his biggest obstacles to success was none other than the Amway Corporation.
I recently got a copy of the book and found the story quite stunning. Dyson paints a picture of a predatory Amway Corporation who tried to steal his invention and used their vast wealth and army of lawyers to fight his attempts to regain control of his invention.
MLM Survivors has a summary of the book that you may want to check out. This little event was definitely not Amway's proudest moment.
The Presidential Debates '04
By QBlog in
The first round of Presidential Debates has ended. I'd love to know who you think won the debate and why you think he won.
And for those keeping score at home, it was approximately 29 minutes into the debate before Kerry uttered the word "Vietnam" (remember, I have TiVo). And to stay "non-partisan" I'll add that George W. Bush is still saying New-Kew-Lar.
September 29, 2004
Sitting Here
By QBlog in
I'm sitting here in the relative silence of my TV Room typing another boring blog post on my aging laptop. Our diet-immune black and white cat sits across the room, noisily licking herself as she plots to take over the world (that's what cats do you know, good thing they sleep so darn much). The hard drive on the TiVo makes a soft whirring sound as it records "Seinfeld" or "ER" or maybe "Kim Possible." And now that I think about it, should that hard drive be whirring like that? Or maybe it's the fan I'm hearing. Fans are suppose to whir, right?
The rest of the family is asleep, stricken by a streptococci infection. I fear that my throat is next on that nasty bacteria's hit list. I just plucked an apple from the fridge because an apple a day keeps the doctor away and maybe it will keep streptococci away too. I've also found that apples make a great snack.
In my opinion, apples are the greatest fruit in the fruit kingdom (do fruits have a kingdom or is it more of a representative democracy?). They are juicy but not too juicy (like watermelons). They don't require peeling (like bananas) and can be held comfortably in one hand (unlike grapes). Their texture is pleasant to bite into (unlike peaches) and they aren't very fragrant (unlike oranges). Yes, apples are truly wonderful fruits. And why shouldn't they be? Johnny Appleseed made quite a name for himself with those tasty fruits. Could you imagine celebrating Johnny Pomegranateseed or Johnny Orangeseed? Me neither.
And the clock just struck so I guess it's time for me to think about getting off to bed. I think I may start reading my new Carl Hiaasen book, "Skinny Dip." I heard it's great.
Good night.
Conversation With A Former Quixtar Employee Redux
By QBlog in
After I posted my conversation with a former Quixtar employee we had another little chat. "Quixtar Guy" (as I call him here) had a few comments about IBOs, end of the month ordering and "burntass pizza." What follows are excerpts from that brief conversation.
QBlog: Your interview was a big hit but of course some doubted your
credibility.
Quixtar Guy: Cool. *Reading Post
and comments*
Who got the idea that employees can't be IBOs?
QBlog: I don't know, not true?
Quixtar Guy: Not to my knowledge, at least. We had one guy
in my training class who was an IBO. Nobody cared. I, and I assume other CSRs,
often told IBOs that we couldn't be (IBOs) but that was only because we got
at least one recruiting pitch a week. Read: blatant lie.
QBlog: Well I'll call Quixtar and ask them. Could there be a difference
between temps and full-timers?
Quixtar Guy: Possibly. I really have no idea. I don't think anyone
there wanted to be an IBO. They knew the reality of it. I'm serious. End of
month, every month, we'd get scads of people calling in waiting on hold for
half an hour so they could make their 100 PV. WHO THE (HELL) CARES ABOUT 100
PV? That's like $5. The only people who care are the uplines.
QBlog: How many calls would you say your department fielded each end
of month?
Quixtar Guy: Around 30,000. About 80% of those were the 100 or 300
PV range. We'd average less than 10,000 calls on non-EOM days.
QBlog: Ok I must go get the food out of the oven, doing late night
cooking.
Quixtar Guy: I hear ya. I just finished my burntass pizza.
Don't let yours burn. The only reason it had any flavor was because of the tobasco
sauce I added.
September 28, 2004
- Annoyed by Quixtar
By QBlog in Quixtar Chatter
- Annoyed by Quixtar
"You're better off not knowing about them"
What's Wrong With Multi-Level Marketing? - III
By QBlog in
When I first began searching for information about Quixtar, sometime around the summer of 2002, I stumbled across Dean VanDruff's article titled "What's Wrong With Multi-Level Marketing?" Something about the article struck a chord with me and it's points have lingered in my mind ever since. I love the article's pragmatic tone and the meticulous way in which VanDruff defuses each potential objection, the sign of a skilled debater.
At my request, VanDruff has graciously granted permission for me to republish
his article here on Quixtar BLOG. His article analyzes four "problem areas"
with MLM and I will publish each specific analysis as a separate post (see parts
I,
II & IV).
I consider this article required reading for everyone involved in any Multi-Level
Marketing business.
- by Dean VanDruff
III. Morality and Ethics: A Problem of Greed
Moral Riddle: What is Ever Present but Universally Condemned?While issues of morality and ethics can be tricky to discuss, materialism and greed are universally condemned by every major religion, and even by most of the irreligious. This does not mean people are not materialistic or greedy; in fact, the common ethical call to not be so is strong evidence that we are.
For most people, this means if we are going to be materialistic or greedy,
we would rather not be obvious about it. Thus, Madison Avenue has subtle, highly
polished ways of appealing to these vices without being heavy handed. We don't
mind so much... as long as it is "veiled." This hypocrisy, while sad, is the
status quo. So, Madison Avenue is trying to be ever more subtle in appearing
not to be manipulating our immoral "bent" towards greed and materialism.
A Blatant Appeal to Materialism and Greed
Not so with the MLM crowd. Pick up any brochure or videotape for an MLM and
you are more than likely to see a cheesy, obvious, and blatant appeal to greed
and materialism. This is offensive to everyone, even die-hard materialists.
Typical is an appeal to "the American dream." Usually there will be a mood shot
of a large new home, a luxury car, a boat, perhaps a beautiful couple boarding
a Lear jet, and so on.
While this need not necessarily be part of the MLM approach, it usually is.
Such a transparent appeal should make people suspicious. "Why the bait?" "Are they trying to 'get my juices going' so that my brain turns off?" "Couldn't they show people doing more wholesome things with the money they make?" "If this is really a legitimate opportunity, why not focus on the market, product, or service instead of people reveling in lavish materialism?"
But we have reason enough to know, having read this far, why the distraction is needed. Unbridled greed suspends good judgment. When the eyes gloss over in a materialistic glaze, common sense is a stranger.
Besides being cheesy and offensive to our sensibilities, this is not a big deal for participants, right? But consider that all companies must have control over the way they are presented to the public. Thus, an MLM has the right and obligation to dictate what material is used. Otherwise any agent could say whatever he or she liked about the nature of the company, causing obvious problems. Again, it would take too much time to audit and approve each individual's idea for a presentation where the goal is mass marketing. Using "boilerplate" presentations affords the added benefit of consistency. This is basic "information quality control."
The net effect is that the MLM rep is "stuck" with the company-approved video,
brochure, and presentation outline.
"Not Me, I Would Never Stoop That Low!"
In 1991, some distributors in the MLM FUND AMERICA began to produce their own,
improved recruitment material. They were summarily fired, which did not please
them since many of them were founding members who had "gotten in early."
Later the same year, by the way, the founder of FUND AMERICA was arrested
for having generated some 90% of revenues selling "distributorships" versus
product... making it clear that this particular MLM was little more than a pyramid
scheme.
Job Opening: Salesperson of Sin!
Do you want to be involved in the blatant promotion of values contrary to your
belief system?
In most MLMs you will have no choice. You are going to have to sit through meeting after meeting after meeting after meeting. You are going to be "motivated" to coerce your friends and family to hear "the pitch." This is the way the "dream" is planted and fertilized. Get used to it.
If you are a materialist, you only have to get over the cheekiness of the
presentation. But if you do not wish to promote such ideas, if you consider
them sinful, then this puts you at the focal point of a moral dilemma. Do you
wish to be a salesperson for materialism?
Lack of Information Quality Control: An MLM Incentive?
On the flip-side of the issue of being stuck with the recruitment "pitch" is
the fact that the MLM organization is otherwise loose, to say the least. This
is part of the appeal to many, to "be your own boss."
But in practice this leads to loony product claims, many of which are deceptive and some of which can be positively dangerous.
Hyperbole is a given in an MLM. When inexperienced salespeople are turned loose to sell on full commission without supervision or accountability, what else could happen?
Since MLM organizations are notoriously flash-in-the-pan, one has to wonder why any new company would choose this flawed marketing technique. Perhaps one of the things to consider is that the MLM organization can effectively skirt the Federal Trade Commission by using word-of-mouth testimonials, supposed "studies" done by scientists, fabricated endorsements, rumors and other misrepresentations that would never be allowed to see the light of day in the real world of product promotion, shady as it is.
Thus, MLM has evolved into a "niche": it can be used to sell products that
could not be sold any other way. An MLM is a way to get undue credibility by
exploiting people's personal friendships and relationships via "networking."
This is an intrinsic moral difficulty with MLMs that will be expanded in the
last section.
MLM Sales Technique: Rumors, Slander, Defamation
Hyperbole is not limited merely to product claims, however. When MLMers
turn to their competitors it can get ugly indeed. Some of the most outlandish
rumors of modern history can be traced to MLMs. In recent years, for example,
the international rumor that the president of a major real-world corporation
was a Satanist, and that the logo of his company contained occult symbols, turned
out to have a commercial motive and was traced to specific Amway distributors.
These were successfully sued in 1991, but the rumor persists. And how much else
of the MLM negative "sales pitch" is fabrication or outright lie? Not all the
negative selling claims are as scandalous or widespread as the previous example,
but the MLM culture produces so much of this stuff it would be hard to prosecute
it all.
Again, what else could be expected from inexperienced salespeople thrown into an oversaturated sales market on full commission and no accountability?
Negative selling is not unique to MLMs, but MLMs have a legacy of fostering a culture of credulity, of bizarre "gossip-as-fact." After all, this is a friend telling me this!
Telling lies about people or groups is slander. Systemic and malicious slander
is illegal in most civilized countries. Slander is a sin listed next to murder
and adultery in Biblical texts. But how will you know when you become the slanderer
by repeating what you heard in an MLM meeting?
Great Men?
Another morally questionable practice that is not intrinsic to MLMs, but seems
axiomatic, is the pent-up idolatry of the leaders.
In FUND AMERICA, the "approved materials" showed what a great man the founder was, depicted the depth of his management experience, showed him in mood shots, etc. It is easy to swoon in admiration of such a powerful, visionary man, dedicated to bringing this wonderful opportunity to common Americans like us.
It turned out he was a criminal fugitive from Australia, where he had been run out of town for doing the same.
But you would never guess it from the company material. A great man.
There are more than a few MLM "executives" like this who will pop up tomorrow in the MLM du jour. MLM exploitation can be very profitable and the jail sentences light. Let the MLM "dream" buyer beware.
I have been taken to task for making this point too strongly--and do not wish to imply that all MLM leaders have criminal records--but it does pay to do some research here. Are the idols you are being asked to worship in MLM worthy of respect, or contempt? Have they been prosecuted or sued for exploiting people in the past? Have they done prison time?
Do not expect to hear the full truth in the MLM video.
Pride and the Secret Closet: Vanity and the Way MLMs Grow
"Mr. Prospect, now you aren't required to buy more than three product units,
but why bother joining unless you plan to succeed? Besides, all of our products
are 100% money back guaranteed."
"Hmmm... To ask for a refund, then, is to admit defeat. Others appear to be doing O.K. at this. I'm no failure! Perhaps I should go to another motivational seminar or strong-arm and alienate one more friend to join. I wasn't fooled! I'm no failure!"
So, the "inventory" and "recruitment kits," never viable, collect dust. They
become a pile in the back closet or attic, a trophy to pride being unable to
admit that greed seized the moment.
Back to the Pyramids: Innovative Marketing or Organized Crime?
It is generally agreed that to mislead people in order to get their money is
morally reprehensible. It is labeled "theft" or "fraud," and those who do it
should be punished. No one is naive enough to suggest that you can't make money
at it. Crime can pay, at least temporarily.
Pyramid schemes are illegal. They are illegal because they are exploitative and dishonest. They exploit the most vulnerable of people: the desperate, the out-of-work, the ignorant. Those who start and practice such fraud, should, and increasingly are, being punished for their crimes.
But add a product for cover, and call it an MLM, and people are willing to
swallow its legality. Is this true? Really? Who says so?
The Feds versus the MLM Gang: The Other Side of the Story
It is a fact that a few large MLMs have survived against the best efforts of
law enforcement officials to shut them down, spending millions of dollars to
protect, lobby, and insulate themselves. But the same could be said for any
organized crime. It is difficult to stop once it becomes so large.
And MLMs look so legitimate to the public, so decent. So many nice people are involved. Surely, it can't be illegal! The people lower down may even defend the very organization that is robbing them, hoping that they might get their chance to make "the big money" later.
But if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck. Unless it is an MLM, and then it is NOT a pyramid.
The Feds generally see it differently... when the ML (multi-level) aspect begins to eclipse the M (marketing) of products or services.
People can make money in an MLM, undeniably. The moral issue is: Where is the money coming from? Selling product? Then why not sell the same product in the "real world"?
But everyone knows that the real incentive is the pyramid aspect, and the
product just the excuse to make it legal, or at least the MLM promoter would
like you to believe it is legal.
The Mob and the MLM: A Stretched Analogy?
Talk to a mobster, and he will tell you that he is "merely misunderstood in
his benevolent intentions." "We are just trying to 'build our business.'" "It's
all a conspiracy to make us look bad." "The Feds are out to get us because they
are jealous or afraid of our new way of life." "Why, look at all the good we
do!" "We are looking more legitimate every day." "Here's a statement from a
famous DA that the Mob is really a good organization and no harm ever comes
from it." "We've even got a minister to endorse us now!"
Propaganda and MLM Expansion
The MLMers of the new millennium are starting to sound a lot like the gangsters
of yesteryear. In an era where management science and the law generally condemn
MLM, they've "got their own experts," from academia or law, who are "on the
payroll." Confidence, remember, is key.
Regardless of all the vehement denials, MLMs are all to some extent pyramid schemes, and pyramid schemes are illegal. Sure, some are "getting away with it," but so did the Mafia for decades. It is hard to stop a juggernaut, especially one that has taken such pains to look legitimate and misunderstood, that is highly organized, and that has so much money from its victims to propagandize, lobby, and defend itself. And so the exploitation goes on.
If these guys show up in your neighborhood, you are either "in" or "out," family or target, friend or foe. Suspicion rules the day; everyone has an "angle"; greed supplants innocence. The "neighborhood" is turned into a marketplace, and may never recover from the blow.
The ethical questions remain: Are MLMs a morally acceptable way to make money?
Are they--and will they continue to be--legitimate?
MLM Proselytizing: Beneath Begging?
If money is needed that badly, why not simply ask friends and family
for help rather than taking money from them under false pretenses--and also
selling them a bill of goods? By "sponsoring" them, you have not only conned
them and profited at their expense, you have made them feel like losers, since
they are not able to make a success of the hopeless MLM concept.
Once seen, only the morally blind, or consciously criminal, could continue in such a "business."
But wait, perhaps you could recruit... your mother!
Moral Inventory
By way of review, the prospective MLM initiate has to face and resolve these ethical issues:
- Do I want to be involved in encouraging people to be more materialistic?
- Do I want to sell a product that perhaps couldn't be sold any other way?
- Do I want to be a part of an enterprise famous for slander, libel, and rumor?
- Do I want to be a part of a company that may employ criminals as marketing experts?
- Do I want to make money off my ability to convince people that an unworkable marketing system is viable?
- Do I want to be known among my friends and family as a person who tried to con people with a thinly veiled pyramid scheme?
- By Dean VanDruff - republished with permission.
September 27, 2004
Challenge for Quixtar Advocates
By QBlog in
Many Quixtar Advocates allege that critics of the business lack the necessary qualifications to make critical comments. Yet those allegations are rarely followed up with any description of the missing qualifictions. Surely such a description exists, right? I imagine Ray A. Kroc qualifies but not everyone can start a global fast food franchise. So what are the qualifications?
Challenge to Quixtar Advocates
My challenge is simple: List the qualifications you require of Quixtar critics before you'll listen to their criticisms. Be specific. Be honest. Be candid. Be as brief as possible.
For the language challenged, "listen to" means to thoughtfully consider with an open mind. It means to acknowledge that you may be wrong and the person talking (or writing) may be right. It means to be willing to concede that the other person may know more about the subject than you do.
= TOD is not Quixtar
By QBlog in Quixtar Chatter
= TOD is not Quixtar
"Quixtar is the shopping portal, nothing more"
Monday Reader Mail: 14
By QBlog in Reader Mail
Today's Reader Mail is an oldie but a goodie. It comes from "RG" who says he is an IBO and the owner of a retail store (watch out for Rule 6.5 violations). As always, my comments are in bold.
name: RGRG closes with a sentiment that many share - do not hide things from us. That evasiveness, secrecy and inability to answer questions candidly is what motivated me (in part) to start this blog. Why is it so difficult for people in Quixtar, in so many businesses, to just be honest and transparent? I admire the few IBOs I've met who display such candor but I just don't understand why they're the exception rather than the rule... at least in my experience. Maybe I'm just running in the wrong circles? Should I move to Michigan?
date: January 25, 2003message: I have been IBO for 2 years. Consider myself decent businessman. My wife and I own a retail store and make 60,000 year but working 70 hours + a week gets old. Our good friends showed us this business and I really thought it would be cool if it worked after all the site is pretty impressive.
RG wrote this in 2003, nearly two years before the big Quixtar redesign. RG, like many others, was easily impressed... at least with Web sites.
In my opinion the products are too expensive and I couldn't convince myself to tell my friends knowing they would have to spend more of their hard earned money than traditional stores. so we use it off and on for convenience. What's amazing is the company is doing 1.2 billion in sales but I see people making $20-30 month. My wife and I went across stage for 1000pv. I was excited however my heart sank when I found out our friends downline spent $1400 of their own money to get there. We don't see our friends anymore too bad they are really hooked however only still making $10-30 month and probably spending $300. If you want someone to walk beside you to achieve a dream THERE CANNOT BE SECRETS!
September 26, 2004
Purchasing Products at Quixtar
By QBlog in
I just bought a 12-pack of Cherry Blast XS energy drink at Quixtar. The entire processs was pretty simple and I appreciated the improvements Quixtar made to their site. It was easier to find the products I wanted and just made a lot more sense than the old version of the site. I may write a thorough review of those changes later.
For now I'll just say that the hype matches the reality from my perspective, and that's saying something. Quixtar went from having a real bad Web site to having a pretty darn good one. They did their homework and it shows.
About the energy drinks - I'm not big on energy drinks but my wife likes them and was thrilled to see the new Cherry Blast flavor so she'll be getting a dozen in 2-10 business days. I was a bit surprised at the price ($28.36 for 12 cans, including shipping & handling) but if you compare it to a Starbucks Frappuccino ($2.00 or more per bottle) then it's really not so much. I plan to drink a couple of cans and write a review, kind of like Steve Don't Eat It! but not as funny and hopefully not as gross ;o)
Blog Problems
By QBlog in
ALERT ENDED: (8:25 p.m. EDT)
All problems have been resolved. I've tested the site on multiple browsers and found the source of the problem (the script embedded itself in one of my secondary templates) and corrected it. Again, this was not an attack on this site, it was an attack on a sister server and the script just transferred to all connected servers.
If you're running Internet Explorer you will have no problems and can comment without any fear of executing a malicious script though I still advise everyone to use a different browser just because I dislike Microsoft's incompetence in this area.
Again, I apologize for this inconvenience and steps were taken to prevent this from happening in the future. Please contact me if you have any questions, comments or are experiencing any problems regarding this site.
Thanks.
IMPORTANT ALERT!!!: (7:00 p.m. EDT)
If you use Internet Explorer as your browser DO NOT POST A COMMENT! As I stated below there was a malicious script run on this server and it is apparently still running but only seems to execute on the Internet Explorer browser. If you use IE do not click the "comment" button.
Still trying to fix this.
Thanks.
UPDATE: (6:30 p.m. EDT)
All problems seem to have been resolved. I apologize for any inconvenience. The problems resulted from some malicious script executed on a sister server by a hacker. Some of you reported that you were asked to download something when trying to view comments on this blog and that was the result of the script "infecting" all connected servers. It was not caused by anything malicious being done specifically to this site. It was also not anything that I had control over.
However, I recommend that everyone who experienced a download prompt to run their virus software and quit using Internet Explorer as your primary browser (I recommend FireFox, Mozilla or Opera). There is really no reason to be using Internet Explorer today and with its horrendous record of security holes I advise everyone to ditch it (except when necessary to access certain sites that choose to work only with IE) and use something else. Anyway, I don't see any signs that the script deployed a virus or worm but it can't hurt to err on the side of caution.
So, comments should be functioning now. If you notice any problems, please email me or leave a comment here. Keep it brief but descriptive. As I tried to troubleshoot this problem earlier, I disabled the comments on selected posts. I will try to turn those back on but may not get to them all until tomorrow.
Thanks for your patience.
As you may know, this blog is experiencing some server problems. Work is being done to resolve those issues but for now, please be patient. Comments are being disabled to help with this effort.
Thanks.
What's Wrong With Multi-Level Marketing? - II
By QBlog in
When I first began searching for information about Quixtar, sometime around the summer of 2002, I stumbled across Dean VanDruff's article titled "What's Wrong With Multi-Level Marketing?" Something about the article struck a chord with me and it's points have lingered in my mind ever since. I love the article's pragmatic tone and the meticulous way in which VanDruff defuses each potential objection, the sign of a skilled debater.
At my request, VanDruff has graciously granted permission for me to republish
his article here on Quixtar BLOG. His article analyzes four "problem areas"
with MLM and I will publish each specific analysis as a separate post (see parts
I, III & IV).
I consider this article required reading for everyone involved in any Multi-Level
Marketing business.
- by Dean VanDruff
II. Pyramid Structure: An Organizational Problem
The Un-PyramidFor most MLMs, the product is really a mere diversion from the real profit-making dynamic. To anyone familiar with MLMs, the previous discussion (which focused so much on the fact that MLMs are "doomed by design" to reach market saturation and thus put the people who are legitimately trying to sell the product into a difficult situation) may seem to miss the point. The product or service may well be good, and it might oversaturate at some point, but let's get serious. The product is not the incentive to join an MLM. Otherwise people might have shown an interest in selling this particular product or service before in the real world. The product is the excuse to attempt to legitimate the real money-making engine. It's "the cover."
Intuitively, we all know what is really going on with MLMs. Just don't use the word "pyramid"!
"You see, if you can convince ten people that everyone needs this product or service, even though they aren't buying similar products available in the market, and they can convince ten people, and so on, that's how you make the real money. And as long as you sell to a few people along the way, it is all legal." Maybe...
But the way to make money in all this is clearly not by only selling product,
otherwise you might have shown an interest in it before, through conventional
market opportunities. No, the "hook" is selling others on selling others on
"the dream."
Math and Common Sense
MLMs work by geometric expansion, where you get ten to sponsor ten to sponsor
ten, and so on. This is usually shown as an expanding matrix (just don't say
"pyramid"!) with corresponding kick-backs at various levels.
The problem here is one of common sense. At a mere three levels deep this
would be 1,000 people. There goes the neighborhood! At six levels deep, that
would be 1,000,000 people believing they can make money selling. But to whom?
There goes the city! And the MLM is just getting its steam going. Think of all
the meetings! Think of all the "dreams" being sold! Think of the false hopes
being generated. Think of the money being lost.
It Will Fail??? It Cannot Fail???
Nothing irritates a die-hard MLMer more than the preceding argument. If you
point out the absurdity, for example, that if "the pitch" at an Amway meeting
were even moderately accurate, in something like 18 months Amway would be
larger than the GNP of the entire United States, then listen closely for
a major gear-shift: "Well, that is absurd, of course. Not everyone will succeed,
and so the market will never saturate."
Well, which is it? Are we recruiting "winners" to build a real business, or planning by design to profit off of "losers" who buy into our "confidence"?
During "the pitch," anyone can make it work. "It's the opportunity of a lifetime." "Just look at the math!" But mention the inevitable saturation and the losses this is going to cause for everyone, and then you'll hear, "Of course it would never really work like that." "Most will fail," you will be told, "but not you, Mr. Recruit. You are a winner. I can just see it in your eyes."
If you are a starry-eyed recruit, it will grow as presented. If you are a logical skeptic, then of course it would never really work like that.
But the dialog usually never even gets to this. The fact that MLM is in a
mad dash to oversupply is largely chided as mere "stinkin' thinkin'." Expert
MLMers know how to quickly deflect this issue with parable, joke, personal testimony,
or some other sleight of mind.
New Solution: A Retarded MLM
Some modern incarnations of MLMs attempt to address this particular problem
by limiting the number of people you can sponsor, say, to four. But the same
geometric expansion problems exist; the failure mechanism has just been slowed
down a bit. And now there is the added problem of even more unnecessary layers
in the organization.
The claim that an MLM is merely a "common man" implementation of a normal
real-world distribution channel becomes even more absurd in this case. Imagine
buying a product or service in the real world and having to pay overrides and
royalties to five or ten unneeded and uninvolved "distributor" layers. Would
this be efficient? What value do these layers of "distributors" provide to the
consumer? Is this rational? Would such a company exist long in a competitive
environment?
Confidence Men and the Shadow Pyramid
The age-old technique of "con men" is to create "confidence" in some otherwise
dumb idea by diversion of thought, bait, or force of personality. The victim
gets confidence in a bogus plan, and, in exchange, the con man gets your money.
MLMers are very high on confidence.
Since the brain inevitably intrudes itself into the delusion that an MLM could ever work, spirits drop and attitudes go sour. But this depressive state can itself be exploited. As doubts grow when the MLM does not do what recruits were first "con"fidenced to expect, then a further profit can be made keeping the confidence going against all common sense.
Thus, a parallel or "shadow" pyramid of motivational tapes, seminars, and videos emerges. These are a "must for success," and recruits are strong-armed into attending, buying, buying, and buying all the more. This motivational "shadow pyramid" further exploits the flagging recruits as they spiral inexorably into oversaturation and failure. The more they fail, the more "help" they need from those who are "successful" above them.
So, MLMs profit by conning recruits up-front with a "distributorship fee,"
and then make further illicit money by "confidencing" these hapless victims
as they fail via the "sale" of collateral material.
Special MLM "Job" Offer: A Losing Proposition
Would a rational person, abreast of the facts, go to work selling any product
or service if he or she knew that there was an open agenda to overhire
sales reps for the same products in the prospective territory?
What do you think? Is this a good "opportunity" or a recipe for collective disaster?
So, as the saying goes, "Get in early!" This is a rationalization on the level of "getting in early" on the L.A. looting riots. If profit from the sale of products is fundamentally set up to fail, then the only money to be had is to "loot" others by conning them while you have the chance. Don't miss the "opportunity," indeed!
Where is the money coming from for those at the top? From the sucker at the bottom... as in every pyramid scheme. The product could be, and lately has been, anything.
The important thing is to exploit people while the exploiting is good, if you want to make quick money at MLM.
- By Dean VanDruff - republished with permission.
September 25, 2004
Quixtar Doesn't Advertise?
By QBlog in Quixtar
How many times have you heard the words, "Quixtar doesn't advertise?" I've heard those words many, many times and in fact, those words are printed on Quixtar's own Web site:
Quixtar has maintained a low profile with mainstream news media covering the more well-known e-commerce sites. After all, Quixtar doesn’t advertise, instead channeling those dollars to Independent Business Owners who generate sales at Quixtar.com
So, we can all agree that Quixtar does not advertise and that the lack of advertising results in more bonuses for IBOs and a lower profile in the media. But if that's true (and I'm not saying it isn't) then can anyone explain the following images?
I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer but those sure look like advertisements to me. Ok, so they aren't Super Bowl commercials but they are ads and they do cost money, unless Google is running some sort of "Quixtar Charity" program.
Then there's also an interesting comment from a recent site visitor calling himself "Chris" (no last names please).
Hartman, yes, I have an independent business that does advertising for Quixtar.
UPDATE: Chris has responded with a clarification:
QBlog, here is some clarification from my point of view. I may not have the best legal terminology, but I will do my best.
I am an IBO and IBO's do advertising for Quixtar. As an IBO, I am an independent business owner and i do advertising, marketing and sales towards Quixtar and the products they have to offer.
So it was my misunderstanding and I apologize if I caused any confusion. However, this brings up a new question about Quixtar's non-Advertising.
If IBOs, like Chris, are doing their own advertizing and marketing of Quixtar's products then isn't Quixtar sort of just advertising by proxy? I mean isn't the advertising and marketing burden (ie. costs, research, market data, etc.) shifted onto the backs of the IBOs who are mostly ill-equipped to manage such a campaign? Something to think about I guess.
Anyway, next time you hear the words "Quixtar Doesn't Advertise" you might want to ask for a bit of clarification because from what I see... well you can see what I see.
September 24, 2004
= Amway/Quixtar Tools Scam Exposed by Dateline!
By QBlog in Quixtar Chatter
= Amway/Quixtar Tools Scam Exposed by Dateline!
"When I saw the show, it was pretty humorous"
Blogging 101 - Blog Comments
By QBlog in Blogging 101
One of the coolest features built into most blogging tools is the ability to allow reader comments. As blogs have gained popularity, it's the comment functionality (in part) that has appealed to individuals and businesses who wish to explore new and dynamic methods of communication. As you undoubtedly noticed, I enable comments to virtually every post on this blog and I do so because I believe it adds value to my ramblings.
Comments: Enable or Disable?
Because I enable comments on this blog, some may wrongly assume that I'm some "raving comment advocate." In fact, I regularly read (and enjoy) blogs that do not enable comments and I even run a couple of private blogs that don't allow comments (yes, private blogs do exist - oxymoronic as it may seem). The truth is, the decision about whether comments should be enabled or disabled is determined by the author (blogger), the purpose of the blog and in some ways the blog's audience. Different needs and goals call for different methods.
Value of Comments
I've often said that blogs are a lot like talk radio in that blogs provide a format for one dominant voice (blogs = blogger; talk radio = host) and many secondary voices (blogs = comments; talk radio = callers). Rush Limbaugh is arguably the pioneer of modern talk radio and his show is defined by his persona (love him or hate him) and could probably sustain much of its popularity without taking a single caller. Yet Limbaugh does take callers (some days more than others) and I believe such exchanges add depth and value to his show. "Open Line Friday" wouldn't really be much if the lines never opened. Similarly, blogs with comments enabled often become much more dynamic and can allow new ideas, new discussions and new debates to flourish. Web communication at its finest.
Problems with Comments
There are some very real problems with enabling comments, though some of these problems are being solved through technology. The main reason bloggers decide to disable comments is the fear of being "flamed." As a blog grows in popularity the potential for flaming or comment spam tends to increase. Managing such nonsense can become a royal hassle and some bloggers would rather avoid such a task. However, as Danny Ayers points out, you won't know for sure until you've tried it. Additionally, requiring comment registration (like Blogger) or adding improved filtering (like MT 3.1) diminishes the impact of flamers and spammers.
As I stated previously, a blogger must truly understand her purpose for blogging and what she wants to accomplish. The Uber Geeks present a compelling reason for disabling comments in "Disabling Comments, The Pros":
...for those that decide to disable comments, an added step would need to be taken on behalf of the reader in order to comment. They would actually have to post about it on their own blogs. Genius. This not only creates countless amounts of links back to their Blogs from various other blogs, but it also puts to use the Trackback feature, which if used correctly, can really help the blog in search engine results.I agree that such a move is pretty clever but don't forget that it also eliminates the instant feedback and exchange of opinions and ideas. There is a trade-off and again, the blogger must know what he wants to accomplish.
I've already mentioned some of the benefits of enabling comments. A couple that I haven't mentioned is the potential for meeting new people, discovering new and interesting blogs (via the links left with the comments) and letting the audience feel that you (the blog author) are approachable and accessible. Such access often nurtures a strong relationship between the author and the readers, a relationship that is much more difficult to achieve when comments are disabled. I've experienced this first-hand and it's an awesome thing.
So What Should I Do?
The decision about comments is up to you. Personally I'd like to see them enabled on almost all blogs because I prefer the real-time feedback and the open exchange but it's really just something you'll have to decide for yourself. Just remember, if you disable comments you need to be prepared to clearly explain why you've disabled them.
Blogging 101 publishes every Friday and the archives can be found by typing "Blogging 101" into the blog search. Tune in next Friday when Blogging 101 discusses the value of Blog Competition.
+ In Defense of Amway
By QBlog in Quixtar Chatter
+ In Defense of Amway
"The letter highlights some inaccurate information"
September 23, 2004
What's Wrong With Multi-Level Marketing? - I
By QBlog in
When I first began searching for information about Quixtar, sometime around the summer of 2002, I stumbled across Dean VanDruff's article titled "What's Wrong With Multi-Level Marketing?" Something about the article struck a chord with me and it's points have lingered in my mind ever since. I love the article's pragmatic tone and the meticulous way in which VanDruff defuses each potential objection, the sign of a skilled debater.
At my request, VanDruff has graciously granted permission for me to republish
his article here on Quixtar BLOG. His article analyzes four "problem areas"
with MLM and I will publish each specific analysis as a separate post (see parts
II, III & IV). I consider
this article required reading for everyone involved in any Multi-Level Marketing
business.
- by Dean VanDruff
I. Market Saturation: An Inherent Problem
Back to the Basics
A tutorial on market saturation hardly seems necessary in most business discussions,
but with MLM, unfortunately, it is. Common sense seems to get suspended when
considering if MLMs are viable, even theoretically, as a profitable means of
distribution for all parties involved. This suspension is created by a heightened
expectation of "easy money," but more on that later.
New, Innovative?
MLM can no longer claim to be new and, thus, exempt from the normal rules of
the market and the way goods and services are sold. They have been tried and,
for the most part, have failed. Some have been miserable failures in spite of
offering excellent products.
Marketing innovations are not rare in the modern world, as evidenced by the
success of Wal-Mart, which found a more efficient and profitable way to distribute
goods and services than the status quo, providing lasting value to stockholders,
employees, distributors, and consumers. But this is not the case with any MLM
to date, and after 25 years of failed attempts, it is time to point out the
reasons why.
Don't Some People Make Money in MLM?
First, we will analyze the "driving mechanism" of MLMs. We will detail how they
are intrinsically unstable, guaranteed by design to oversaturate the market
with no one noticing. We will look at why MLMs can never equalize into profitability
the way companies in the real world can, so that the result will be that the
organization as a whole cannot, even in theory, be profitable. When this inevitable
destiny occurs, the only money to be made is not from the product or service
but from the losses of people lower down in the organization.
Thus the MLM organization becomes exploitative, and many high-level MLM promoters have been shut down, the "executives" incarcerated, for selling the fraud of impossible success to others. Other, larger MLMs have survived by hiring large batteries of attorneys to ward off federal prosecutors, even bragging about the funds they have in reserve for this purpose.
The unfortunate "distributor" at the bottom is the loser, and once this becomes apparent beyond all the slick videotapes and motivational pep-talks, good people start to get a bad taste in their mouths about the whole situation.
So, yes, money can be made with MLM. The question is whether the money being made is legitimate or "made" via a sophisticated con scheme. And if MLM is "doomed by design" to fail, then the answer is, unfortunately, the latter.
But how exactly does this happen, and must it always?
Doomed by Design?
The first question is this: Is any company choosing this marketing strategy
destined to fail, to degenerate into an exploitative venture, regardless of
how good the product is?
To see this clearly we must go through an, otherwise, obvious and elementary
discussion of how any business must be careful not to overhire, overextend,
or oversupply a market.
The Real World
Any business must carefully consider supply and demand. For example, if the
ReVo Corporation thinks that it will have a full-fledged fad on their ovoid
sunglasses next summer, perhaps they should plan to build and distribute, say,
10M units. This involves gearing up factories, setting up distribution and dealer
networks, and carefully managing the inventories at each level so that ReVo
will still have credibility with their distributors, retail outlets, and the
public the following year.
If it turns out that there is a "run" on ReVo products, and they sell out in mid-June, then they have miscalculated demand and will miss out on profits they could have made. The more serious problem, however, is overestimating the saturation point for the product. If they make 10M units, and sell only 2M units, this may be the end of ReVo as a company.
The all-too-obvious point here is that management of supply and demand, and
keen insight into realistic market penetration and saturation are crucial to
any business, for any product or service. Mismanagement of this aspect of a
business will eclipse good market access, excellent product design, human resource
assets, production quality, and so on. Simply stated, a failure to "hit the
target" of supply and demand can ruin a company if the market is oversaturated.
Market Dynamics and the End of the Cold War
Interestingly, the issue of supply and demand is what brought the USSR to its
knees. By design, the Soviet government tried to macro-manage supply, where
bureaucrats would decide how many potatoes were needed, how much toilet paper,
etc. Assuming these bureaucrats did the best they could, unfortunately their
efforts to deliberately manipulate the control "knob" of supply and demand was
not good enough. Notwithstanding their good intentions, they were usually wrong,
which created huge shortages and surpluses, and led to a massive economic collapse.
Seeing the disastrous end of market naiveté in Russia should help clarify the fundamental problem with the MLM approach. In the real world, the profit of a company is directly related to the skill and prescience of the "hand" on the "supply knob," so to speak. In the USSR, that "hand" could not react fast or accurately enough to market realities through the best efforts of the bureaucrats.
With MLMs, the situation is much worse. Nobody is home. Even the Soviets had someone thinking about how much was enough! If the bureaucrat in Russia was having a hard time trying to play Adam Smith's "invisible hand" in setting the supply level in the Soviet Union, then an MLM "executive" is in a truly unfortunate position. Not only is there no one assigned to make the decision of how much is enough, the MLM is set up by design to blindly go past the saturation point and keep on going. It will grow till it collapses under its own weight, without even a bureaucrat noticing.
MLM is like a train with no brakes and no engineer headed full-throttle towards
a terminal.
"Everyone Will Want to Buy This Product!"
All products and services have partial market penetration. For example, only
so many people wish to use a discount broker, as evidenced by the very successful
but only partial market penetration of Charles Schwab. Not everyone wishes to
join a particular discount club, or buy gold, or drink filtered water, or wear
a particular style of shoe, or use any product or service. No one in the real
world of business would seriously consider the thin arguments of the MLMers
when they flippantly mention the infinite market need for their product or services.
The Demand Problem: Of Widgets and MLMs
Imagine a neat new product called a Widget that will sell for $100 (a fixed
price, to keep it simple). Now, while everyone could use a Widget, not everyone
will. Some will be afraid of anything new. Some will be loyal to existing brands.
Some will want to buy an inferior product for less money. Some will want a more
expensive product for prestige, regardless of quality. The reasons go on and
on, and the fact is that only "X" Widgets will sell at $100.
The question for would-be marketeers is... what is "X," and how can it be predicted to maximize profits? The fact that "X" is hard to pin down does not mean that it does not exist, and every Widget built beyond "X" will end up producing a problem for the organization. The market only wants "X" Widgets at $100. What are you going to do with your extra inventory of Widgets beyond "X" that no one wants, and the sales people you hired to sell them?
No one can perfectly predict "X," and the situation is not nearly as simple
as considered here, but the objective for marketeers is to forecast "X" as closely
as possible in order to provide lasting value to all parties involved: to avoid
missed opportunities as well as waste, loss, or failure.
The MLM Forecasting Approach: Ignoring the Target
Who has an eye on "X," the point of market saturation at a given price,
in an MLM? Well, the funny thing, or perhaps the tragic thing, is that "X" will
be reached and exceeded without anyone noticing or caring.
Let's just suppose that "X" has been reached today in a particular MLM; the
number of possible units sold at this price has just been exceeded, and you
happen to be a starry-eyed prospect sitting in an MLM meeting listening to the
pitch. Now consider: Does anyone in this company know about "X"? Does anyone
care? Is the issue being suppressed on purpose for some other motive? Since
we are supposing that the market saturation number "X" has been reached, everyone
joining the MLM from now on is buying into a false hope. But that is not what
the speaker will be saying. He will be telling you, "Now is the time to join.
Get in on the 'ground floor'." But it is all a lie, even though the speaker
may not know it. The total available market "X" has been reached and nobody
noticed. All the distributors will lose from here on out. Could this be you?
How could you possibly know at what point you will become the liar in an MLM?
Pop or Drop
Perhaps a better paradigm than the runaway train analogy offered earlier of
how MLMs perform over time is this: a helium balloon let loose in an empty room
with a spiked ceiling, where product quality is analogous to the amount of helium.
The better the product, the faster the balloon will rise, accelerating unhindered,
towards disaster. The other option would be the case of a lousy product, in
which case the balloon will sink of its own accord, never getting off the ground.
To be sure, equilibrium is not in the cards, except perhaps as an accident,
and then only temporarily. MLMs are intrinsically unstable. For any company
that chooses an MLM approach, it's pop or drop.
MLMs vs. the Real World
The basic question that needs to be asked is this: If this product or service
is so great, then why isn't it being sold through the customary marketing system
that has served human society for thousands of years? Why does it need to resort
to a "special marketing" scheme like an MLM? Why does everyone need to be so
inexperienced at marketing this! Is the product just a thin cover for what is
really a pyramid scheme of exploiting others? But more on that later.
From Contracted, Protected Distribution... to Mayhem
Imagine that Wendy's became suddenly possessed by the idea that "everyone needs
to eat," and opened four Wendy's franchises on the four corners of an intersection
in your neighborhood. Who would benefit from this folly? The consumer? Certainly
not the franchises; they would all lose. Wendy's corporate? Perhaps temporarily,
by speculative inventory sales while the unfortunate franchises were under the
delusion that they could all make money. But in the end, the negative image of
four outlets dying a slow death would likely offset the temporary inventory sales
bubble. Even the most unreflective of the hapless franchisees would think twice
about doing business in such a manner again. This is why real-world distributorships
and franchises are contractually protected by territory and/or market.
Again, the simple fact is that even the most successful products will have partial market penetration. The same is true for services. Demand and "market share" are finite, and to overestimate either is catastrophic.
So why are MLM promoters obscuring this? Who is in control of the supply "knob," carefully and skillfully managing the size of the distribution channels, number of salespeople, inventory, etc., to insure the success of all involved in the business? The truth is chilling: nobody.
Imagine trying to write a computer model of how MLMs work, and you will see
this point most vividly. An MLM could never work, even in theory. Think about
it.
The People Machine
Chernobyl had a control system that failed. MLMs have no control
mechanisms at all.
Where is the "switch" that can be flipped in an MLM when enough sales people are hired? In a normal company a manager says, "We have enough, let's stop hiring people at this point." But in an MLM, there is no way to do this. An MLM is a human "churning" machine with no "off button." Out of control by design, its gears will grind up the money, time, credibility, and entrepreneurial energy of well-meaning people who joined merely to supplement their income. Better to just steer clear of this monster to begin with.
There is simply no way to avoid the built-in failure mechanism of MLMs. If a company chooses to market this way, it will eventually "hire" (with no base pay and charging to join) far too many people.
Thus, the only "control system" will be the inevitable losses and subsequent bad image the MLM company will gain after it does what it was designed to do: fail. And sooner or later we have got to stop blaming this particular MLM company or that, and admit that the MLM technique itself is fundamentally flawed.
- By Dean VanDruff - republished with permission.
= Snopes.com: Quixtar, Team of Destiny, Amway
By QBlog in Quixtar Chatter
= Snopes.com: Quixtar, Team of Destiny, Amway
"I was wondering if Snopes will be doing a page on these business practices"
Old Blog is New Again
By QBlog in
An old blog is new again. Check out the new and improved "Whatever Blog." This blog was one of the original blogs discussing MLM and Quixtar. Go check it out.
+ My Business?
By QBlog in Quixtar Chatter
+ My Business?
"Dagger in hand I shall stab it in the heart"
- Required Topic Regarding Business
By QBlog in Quixtar Chatter
- Required Topic Regarding Business
"I met Eric for a coffeedate which was more like a pseudo-date"
Spanos v. Quixtar, Inc. et al.
By QBlog in
What is Spanos v. Quixtar?
Until yesterday I would have had to answer that question with a shrug. Like you, the only Spanos I was familiar with was real estate tycoon (and owner of the San Diego Chargers) Alex G. Spanos. However, while scanning the search logs of this blog I discovered something strange and quite interesting.
On September 15, beginning at around 9 a.m. EDT, this blog received an odd series of search requests. As you can see below, the search requests are exceptionally long and detailed. Knowing a little bit about the Web and search engines (of various types) I realized that whoever executed those searches wasn't really "searching" for information but was cleverly trying to leave me a message.
- Search: query for 'goetschel'
- Search: query for 'private attorney general lawsuit california'
- Search: query for 'orange county california case # 04CC00068 complex case division lawsuit for permanent injunction'
- Search: query for 'private attorney general lawsuit orange county california case # 04CC00068 Complex Case Division of Orange County Superior Court Defendants Quixtar Internet Services Corporation, Charles and Colleen Goetschel PDP Inc. for Permanent Inju
- Search: query for 'private attorney general lawsuit Susan Spanos suing on behalf of the General Public vs. Defendants Quixtar, Internet Services Corporation, Charles and Colleen Goetschel, PDP, Inc. for Permanent Injunction prohibiting Defendants from ope
- Search: query for 'Susan Spanos suing on behalf of the General Public of Calfiornia vs. Quixtar et al. court decision denying Quixtar's motion to compel arbitration '
- Search: query for 'Spanos vs. Quixtar, et al. Case # 04CC00068 Complex Division of the Orange County Superior Court, Defendants Notice of Appeal from the judge's order denying motion to compel arbitration, notice of appeal'
- Search: query for 'Lawsuit in California suing to protect the public from Quixtar's unfair business practices, false advertising, fraud, false income claims'
Somebody obviously wanted me to know about the Spanos v. Quixtar case for whatever reason. What was that reason? Well, I can only speculate but you better believe I checked this out and the case is public record according to the California Courts Web site.
Seriously, What is Spanos v. Quixtar?
I asked my friend lawDawg (of lawBlawg) to give me a "lawyer's summary" of the Spanos v. Quixtar case. Here's his brief analysis based on the public records.
The best I can gather is that the Spanos v. Quixtar lawsuit in Orange County, California is based on claims that Quixtar and Chuck Goetschel have violated California's consumer protection laws.What's really interesting about this case is that Spanos apparently found a way around the BSMAA arbitration requirements. Very clever. But will this tactic prove successful? Well, I guess that's why they're in court.Quixtar apparently (as it always does) tried to move to compel the dispute to arbitration under the BSMAA.
But California apparently has a statute that allows private citizens to sue on behalf of the State of California or the Attorney General of California.
So Spanos successfully argued (so far) that since it is the State suing, and not an IBO, the arbitration agreement doesn't apply.
Quixtar appealed the decision to the California Court of Appeals, Fourth Appellate District, Division Three.
There's an email update feature at the California Courts site where you can sign up to receive alerts whenever something happens in the appeal. And now you know about Spanos v. Quixtar and knowing is half the battle.
September 22, 2004
Conversation With A Former Quixtar Employee
By QBlog in
I recently had a conversation with a guy who worked at Quixtar in customer service for about a year. What follows are excerpts from that conversation.
QBlog: Describe the atmosphere at Quixtar.
Quixtar Guy: In my department, pretty tired. They rarely hire people
in; almost everyone that you talk to at the Customer Service line is a temp.
They do that because they have such an insanely high turn-over rate that hiring
people in is silly.
QBlog: Why such a high turnover rate?
Quixtar Guy: Because the dept. is open 7 a.m. to midnight, and other
than that, there are no guarentees about when you will be scheduled. So one
week you might work 12 hours total, a 4-hour shift 7 a.m. to 11 a.m. and an
8-hour shift 3:30 p.m. to midnight; then the next week you'll work 30 hours,
etc. It burns people out pretty fast.
QBlog: I understand. And by "pretty tired" what do you mean
exactly?
Quixtar Guy: Fairly typical "boy this employer really goes out
of its way to (screw) its employees up the (rear) attitude" that you find
pretty much anywhere, but more pervasive and intense, IMO. Pretty much everyone
knows they're only there temporarily.
QBlog: Is most of the workforce temporary across all departments or
is that unique to Customer Service?
Quixtar Guy: I'm actually not really sure. The only other departments
I had much experience with were the manufacturing ones; and those seemed to
be a mix of about 20% perms, 60% long-ish term temps, and 20% day-by-day temps.
But that's just judging from my 4 or 5 days as a day-by-day temp.
QBlog: So how was the food at Quixtar?
Quixtar Guy: Some of the worst I've ever had. And the cafeteria
lady charged you for plastic silverware, and little packets of condiments
QBlog: You were charged for plastic forks?
Quixtar Guy: Yep, something ridiculous, like 8 cents.
QBlog: Briefly describe the average IBO call that you'd get.
Quixtar Guy: I'd say most, or at least half, were just straight-up
orders. Folks call in, give their name, IBO number, ship-to address, and list
the SKUs and quantities of the products they were purchasing. We'd give them
the totals (tax, shipping, grand total, PV/BV) for the order, offer them their
PV/BV totals for the month, take the credit card info, ask them if there's anything
else we can do to help, and thanked them for calling
QBlog: What did you like most about Quixtar.
Quixtar Guy: The actual work was cake. I like talking to people. And
as customer service gigs go, it's hard to beat, because NOBODY complains about
Quixtar. I think I took 3 complaints in a year of calls.
QBlog: What were those complaints about?
Quixtar Guy: One was about some craptastic service that a client got
from her IBO... something about a broken artistry eye makeup stick, I think.
The others were about shipping delays.
QBlog: Why do you think nobody called to complain? Any ideas?
Quixtar Guy: Combination of the fact that they can complain to their
uplines, and the whole ubiquitous "Quixtar can do no harm" mentality
QBlog: Describe what it's like working for the Quixtar Corporation.
Quixtar Guy: Did you ever see Tron? Do you remember the part at the
beginning, where they show the place where the guy works and it's like a solid
mile of cubicles? Kinda like that except the cubes were lower and the people
fatter, and dumber
QBlog: What do you mean "fatter and dumber?"
Quixtar Guy: ...than the people in Tron. The average waistline
of the CSRs at Quixtar is astonishing.
QBlog: Some believe you can tell the true character of a business
by how it maintains its restrooms. So how bout those Quixtar restrooms? Any
details?
Quixtar Guy: Pretty uninteresting, as restrooms go. Decent
paper products. Body Series hand soap and lotion.
QBlog: So what's the story on the neverending party atmosphere we hear
about from the "Quixtarian" blogs? True? Embellished? Fiction? No
idea?
Quixtar Guy: No idea where they originate, at least. If they're not
completely fabricated, they're probably based on the atmosphere that decends
when Platinums go to visit... which just as rapidly dissipates as soon as they're
out of the room
QBlog: What do you mean? What happens when Platinums come?
Quixtar Guy: Everyone comes out and cheers for them and sings songs
or something. I dunno; I was never involved. But I know they put on a big show.
We'd get e-mails from Ken McDonald every couple months about it.
QBlog: Well, that's all I have time for, thanks.
Quixtar Guy: Later
+ Quixtar Defender
By QBlog in Quixtar Chatter
+ Quixtar Defender
"I love quixtar - yes I do"
Quixtar Backbone Project - Entry Two
By QBlog in Backbone Project
About This Project
The main goal of this project is to initiate a dialogue with regular,
hardworking IBOs by reaching out to what I refer to as the "Quixtar Backbone"
(project details). If you'd like to participate send an email
to quixtar@webraw.com
(and put "Quixtar Backbone" as the subject).
Entry Number Two
Name: Evan Yeh
Line of Sponsorship: Chuck and Colleen Goetschel, Team 5K
Current qualifying pin level: 1000
How long you’ve been in Quixtar/Amway contiguously: 9
months
Professional or educational background: Internet Business Consultant
Additional comments: I am glad that you are getting responses
and once again I appreciate you providing a forum for an underrepresented voice
that I really feel composes a majority of IBOs actively building a business
powered by Quixtar.
You're work publishing your honest opinions through your blog has established
you as significant voice on the web for those looking for information about
the opportunity. Thank you again for using some of your time to bring light
to some of the IBOs that, in your well-chosen words, compose "the backbone"
of a growing community of business owners.
The Five Questions
- What is it that you most enjoy about your Quixtar business?
Personal Development. Constantly engaging in a process that is growing me into the person that I want to be. Actively mentoring others going through the process. - If you could change any one thing about Quixtar, what would it
be?
Improve website providing business owners with more developed tools to deliver a high-touch, profound shopping experience to other team members and retail clients. - Did you watch the Dateline show and if so, what were your thoughts
about it? If not, why not?
I did not watch the Dateline show. I was at a Team 5K function when it was airing. I did not seek out a video of the show because the main sources quoted and the producers of the show do not have a high level of credibility in my eyes. I personally try not to seek out negative information about the business because I have spent enough time actually engaged in the process of building the business to know what it is for me and why I am building it. - What is your primary criticism of the "Internet Critics?"
I find that most of the conversation, be it positive or negative, on the web is not offered with thoughtfulness. What seems to be missing is the intention of actually communicating different perceptions of the business and the opportunity. I personally don't like to offer criticism (even when the opportunity to criticize critcs arises). I only offer my perception - one that has been gained through 9 months of engaging in a process of learning and building a business powered by Quixtar.
I guess my personal pet peeve is those who criticize the personal development and training system (books, tapes, functions) without ever participating in it for any length of time or without participating with an open attitude and a willingness to learn and grow. My personal participation in the Team5K personal development system has produced dramatic improvements in my life both in building a business powered by Quixtar and in all other aspects as well. - What is the single biggest misconception about IBOs that you'd
like to dispel?
I often hear IBOs referred to as brain-washed. I guess I would like to offer the insight that all of us be us IBOs, or non-IBOs, are influenced by the media that we choose to engage in everday. I would like to humbly offer the statement that IBOs who are actively building the business make the choice to expose themselves to information and media geared at creating a success mindset - not just financially but in their faith, family, friendships, and fitness. At least our particular team, Team5K is focused on helping people live better lives with greater choices using a business vehicle powered by Quixtar. We are not perfect but we are building a team of people who are looking to serve others through this business and we are constantly seeking to improve our effectiveness at using this business vehicle to create greater levels of personal freedom for everyone who wants to participate.
September 21, 2004
? I first heard about Quixtar...
By QBlog in Quixtar Chatter
? I first heard about Quixtar...
"Steve told me that he needed to sign up one more person to accomplish his goal"
- Pyramid Schemes
By QBlog in Quixtar Chatter
- Pyramid Schemes
"I was approached at Barnes & Noble by a moron selling (Quixtar)"
? PBlog - No. 1 Passport Info Source
By QBlog in Quixtar Chatter
? PBlog - No. 1 Passport Info Source
"I am a broke jounalist that hopes to hit the big time with Pblog"
+ Socrates & Team of Destiny
By QBlog in Quixtar Chatter
+ Socrates & Team of Destiny
"Team of Destiny says 'pursue virtue and the money will follow'"
Orrin Woodward Web Bloopers II
By QBlog in TEAM
I've been passively following the strange events at Orrin Woodward's personal Web site since at least January of this year. It's been quite interesting to observe. Wish I had some popcorn to munch while I watch his schizophrenic site split personalities like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.
To Hide or Not To Hide?
The central focus of the Orrin Woodward Web site drama is a series of articles authored by Woodward and published on his site for the world to read. After publishing the articles late last year, Woodward's site began a strange and bizarre Shakespearean-styled drama I refer to as, "To Hide or Not To Hide?"
The History
To quickly explain the details of this "drama" I'll lay out a brief timeline for you to follow:
Late 2003 - Orrin Woodward publishes some articles on his Web site, orrinwoodward.com.
January 19, 2004 - Orrin Woodward hides the articles from the public, putting them behind a password script. However, they had already been cached by Google.
February 7, 2004 - Woodward's articles were still behind a password script but his images were not. Four of those images were graphics demonstrating how the Team of Destiny tool money functioned. After my post on the matter, the images were moved.
March 18, 2004 - Woodward's Web site is nicely redesigned. However, articles are still hidden.
July 26, 2004 - Woodward begins blogging. Curiously his blog content, unlike his personal Web site, is open to the public.
August 10, 2004 - The Orrin Woodward articles were made public once again, nearly eight months later. There was much rejoicing.
August 21, 2004 - The Orrin Woodward articles were once again squirreled away into password protection. The rejoicing ends.
I've heard rumors that there's a certain casino in Vegas that is taking bets on whether or not the Orrin Woodward articles will be made public again. The oddsmakers have given 20-1 odds. I can't confirm this rumor but I may have to fit a trip to Vegas into my holiday schedule ;o)
Where Can I Find the Articles?
I know some of you hate mysteries and are now dying to know what's so special about the Orrin Woodward articles and I always aim to please. If you haven't yet read them, you're in luck. Archive.org has a copy of them on its Web site. Here are the articles, begin your rejoicing.
Orrin Woodward Web Bloopers was filmed before a live audience.
September 20, 2004
Monday Reader Mail: 13
By QBlog in Reader Mail
Today's Reader Mail raises a question that's been lingering in my mind for quite a while. "Are there any Quixtar Diamonds?" Wait, let me explain before you answer, "of course you moron!" What these emails, and others, are wondering is if there are any Quixtar Diamonds who've reached the Diamond level solely within Quixtar? In other words, is there a guy (or couple) who joined up with Quixtar after September 1999 (when Quixtar.com launched) who was not previously an Amway Distributor? There's this from "jeremiah"
name: jeremiahAnd this from "Hyrum"
date: September 4, 2004message: just wondering, has any one in quixtar, or the associated groups (ie. world wide dream builders) made there millions or at least there 50,000's in the last 5 years, and not as an amway ibo who switched to quixtar?
thanks so much for your response,
jeremiah
name: Hyrum JOthers, like Dave Stone, have been asking this question but I honestly don't know the answer and I doubt Quixtar would specifically mention whether a new Diamond was a pure Quixtar Diamond or not. I'm sure there have been many Quixtar Diamonds but I'm relying on you readers to supply their names. Can anyone provide the names of any purely Quixtar (never involved with Amway) Diamonds? Thanks so much.
date: September 17, 2004message: ...is there any information on how many people have gone Diamond since 2000. Everywere I look, it's the same old Diamond that were there before Quixtar.
? QuixStar Entertainment
By QBlog in Quixtar Chatter
? QuixStar Entertainment
"When only the finest in interactive entertainment will do..."
September 19, 2004
- Do us all a favor and shut up!
By QBlog in Quixtar Chatter
- Do us all a favor and shut up!
"The Amway-created lie that P&G gives money to the Satanist Church"
QBlog Proverb
By QBlog in
Cookies taste better when shared.
So, share a cookie with someone today.
This post brought to you by the American Cookie Bakers Association
September 18, 2004
Somebody Wants QuixtarBLOG
By QBlog in
Guess what happened in Bingham Farms, Michigan on June 23, 2004? Well, if you guessed "nothing," you'd be wrong. On that beatiful Wednesday someone at Quixtar Investments, Inc. was busy registering domain names. And what domain names were they registering? Well, all of them.
Ok, not ALL of them but virtually every domain name for "quixtarblog" other than the dot com version, which I happen to own (quixtarblog.com). That's right, as of June 23, 2004 Quixtar owns (from InterNIC):
And why did Quixtar buy ALL those domain names? I can't say for sure, but I have a really good idea. I also believe that it's no coincidence that a week later Fred Harteis's blog was first to appear on the scene (and quickly followed by MANY other blogs) as part of Quixtar's new Web Initiative. And not long after that (on August 3) Quixtar Investments registers RealQuixtarBlog.com and the former BlogHarbor version moves to the Quixtar controlled servers.
I just have one question, and it's possibly rhetorical. Before I started this blog, did ANYONE in Quixtar (IBOs, Quixtar Executives, Ken McDonald, IBOAI board members, etc.) have a clue about blogs?
September 17, 2004
Blogging 101 - Page Layout
By QBlog in Blogging 101
The Page Layout debate has raged within the Web design community for years.
One side prefers the fluid (or liquid, floating, variable, flexible, stretchy, elastic, resizable, expandable, etc.) layout where the content on a Web page expands to fit the browser. Most of the fluid layout advocates argue that fluid layouts enable a Web page to exploit the space available on higher resolution monitors.
The other side prefers a fixed width (or static) layout arguing that Web usability guidelines demand such width restrictions on text. They concede that fixed width sites often "waste" unused space (on hi-res monitors) but believe that the usability advantages make up for the waste.
I don't seek to end the Page Layout debate as it relates to ALL Web sites but I will try to educate and share my opinions about this debate as it relates specifically to BLOGS.
Fixed of Fluid?
I believe that most blogs (with few exceptions) should utilize a fixed width layout. The problem with a fluid layout is that on hi-res monitors, the content can s t r e t c h across the screen making the text harder to read, not easier.
I've linked an example page showing a fluid width above a fixed width block of text. Take a moment and look at this page. Be sure to maximize your browser (or make it fit the entire width of your monitor). Don't worry, I'll be here when you get back.
Ok, back already? Great. Now you should have clearly seen the difference between the two blocks of text (unless you have an old 640x480 resolution monitor). The variable width block is legible but much harder to read than the fixed width block below. Why is that? Well, when you stretch text out across a page like that, it's harder for the eye to follow and it's easier to get confused about which line you're reading and just makes more work for the reader. And readers are already struggling to read Web pages because "reading from computer screens is tiring for the eyes and about 25 percent slower than reading from paper" (Useit Alertbox)
And so, because most blogs are text-based, bloggers should try to format their blog layout to make it easier for readers to consume. There is not a specific width to use but the 300-500 pixel range seems to work best for most blogs.
The Caveat
Yes, there is a sort of middle ground called "concertina padding." This maintains some of the variable width elements while preventing text from spreading too far across a page. If you simply must have a variable width blog, I recommend using something like "concertina padding."
Why Blogs?
Some have asked me "why should blogs be fixed width and while search engines or Slashdot-styled news portals can get away with variable widths?" That's a good question. My best answer is that most blogs are meant to be read (though they are often scanned prior to reading) and while we like to keep those posts brief, we rarely restrict every post to a specific word count. By contrast, search results and news portals are designed to be scanned rather than read (a teaser style) and are usually limited to a set number of words for each entry.
Conclusion
I obviously advocate fixed width blogs. My blogging experience has shown me that text-heavy sites (like blogs) work best when some width constraints are in place. You may choose to disagree and my only response is that I believe it's ok to do what you feel is best with your blog layout as long as you can clearly explain WHY you've implemented a specific layout design. One of the first rules in art or literature is that it's ok to break or bend rules as long as you know that you're bending or breaking them and can explain why you're doing the bending or breaking.
Now go out there and Fix those Widths!
Blogging 101 publishes every Friday and the archives can be found by typing "Blogging 101" into the blog search. Tune in next Friday when Blogging 101 tackles the controversial topic of "blog comments - to enable or disable?"
- Advice on Amway
By QBlog in Quixtar Chatter
- Advice on Amway
"Amway runs what must be the longest running pyramid scheme"
September 16, 2004
IBOAI Revisionist History
By QBlog in IBOAI
Roger, from WhatAboutQuixtar.com, reveals some interesting information about the IBOAI (Indepdendent Business Owners Association International) Web site. Roger points out that the IBOAI History page was recently altered, changing references to "The Corporation" to read "The Quixtar Corporation." This is significant because the IBOAI history seems to imply that Quixtar was formed about 40 years ago.
Quote from the current IBOAI History page:
The Independent Business Owners Association International (IBOA International) puts the Independent Business Owners (IBOs) interests first. It was designed that way in 1959 and continues to operate that way today.Didn't Quixtar just celebrate its five year anniversary? Maybe those are dog years or something?Co-founders Rich DeVos and Jay Van Andel made it clear that the IBO was their first priority when they formed the American Way Association (AWA) several months before The Quixtar Corporation itself. IBOs had their own organization before they had a product to sell. (emphasis added)
The change is evident when reading the Archive.org copy of the IBOAI History (Dec. 4, 2003):
Co-founders Rich DeVos and Jay Van Andel made it clear that the IBO was their first priority when they formed the American Way Association (AWA) several months before The Corporation itself. IBOs had their own organization before they had a product to sell.It's easy to see the difference. The revised page indicates that Quixtar was formed years ago while the archived page implies that "The Corporation" is the AWA or Alticor but definitely not Quixtar.
I wonder if the History changes are somehow connected to the rumor that Fred Harteis and Billy Florence recently read 1984?
September 15, 2004
Quixtar Backbone Project - Entry One
By QBlog in Backbone Project
About This Project
The main goal of this project is to initiate a dialogue with regular,
hardworking IBOs by reaching out to what I refer to as the "Quixtar Backbone"
(project details). If you'd like to participate send an email
to quixtar@webraw.com
(and put "Quixtar Backbone" as the subject).
Entry Number One
Name: Sharon Schlesinger
Line of Sponsorship: N/A
Current qualifying pin level: 1500 and change. I guess I'm
a founder's 1000.
How long you’ve been in Quixtar/Amway contiguously: Since
February 2003
Professional or educational background: 20 years Sr VP in wall
street; 20 years as a retail business owner in New York & Los Angeles. My
husband has a business background including real estate, is retired and manages
our investments.
Additional comments or introductions you’d like to include about
yourself and your business: My husband and I are always looking for
additional income streams. Quixtar is simply that. It also represents a way
to introduce other people to the idea of business ownership for a very small
price.
The Five Questions
- What is your primary source for news?
L. A. Times, CNN - What business (besides Quixtar) do you most admire?
I admire small business based on creative ideas. - What is your primary criticism of the Quixtar Critics Web sites?
I find many of the critics are uninformed or slightly misinformed, or out of date with their information. Most of us go where others think the same as we do to reinforce our own belief system. So, some of the criticism sounds learned rather than experienced. I know what my agenda is, but I don't know what the agenda of the other bloggers is, or even what your agenda is for that matter. - How has this blog specifically helped your Quixtar business?
I have gotten some ideas for retailing a few of our products. I've picked up some solid answers to criticisms about Quixtar. I have heard about some strange experiences that some of the fellow bloggers report, and I am on the alert for such behaviors in my own organization. Overall, I understand the business in a fuller sense. - Will you encourage your children to work the Quixtar business when
they’re older?
Yes
Why?
I think the people in the business have many good attributes that I would like my children to emulate, specifically the integrity, work ethic and focus I see around me. I think they would learn discipline, organization and responsibility, good people skills, selling skills and public speaking skills. And of course, they would learn how to manage and grow a business. All of this would stand them in good stead in any other endeavors they would take on in life. I went into Quixtar because I feel it has a credible chance to be a player on the internet, it has a good backoffice system and an excellent fulfillment system. There are many exclusive products that have a valuable difference that are quite easy to retail. I believe Quixtar is making many right moves and will overcome much of its negative history.
When I search QUIXTAR...
By QBlog in
There's an interesting post from the Harteis International, Inc. blog (a Quixtar-related business) titled "When I search QUIXTAR on the Internet, I find some negative stuff. What's up with that?" What's up indeed.
The post makes some good points about questioning the accuracy and credibility of information on the Internet. However, I believe it also makes three misleading implications.
- The post begins saying, "The Internet is born to free speech and is still relatively unregulated, so it’s easy for anyone to post opinions, spread rumors, tell lies, or even build entire websites devoted to whatever topic is desired." Yes, this is true but how would regulation change that Internet landscape? We see opinions, rumors and lies on television and radio which is heavily regulated compared to the Internet and even print media. Regulation does not guarantee accuracy or increase credibility. If anything, it's the market that determines who is credible and who isn't, not some regulatory entity.
- The post continues to rightfully point out that "the Internet is a perfect media of negative 'information'" but seems to imply that such negative information is also inaccurate. Negative doesn't equal false, though I'm sure that's what 60 Minutes would like you to believe.
- The Harteis International blog is managed by a company that seeks to profit from "positive information" about Quixtar (and Fred Harteis) but is published by an anonymous blogger. This shouldn't impeach the blog's credibility but it should definitely raise some questions.
I agree with the post's conclusion which says to "be sure you have all the facts and are certain about the accuracy and credibility of the source of any information found on the Internet." Be sure indeed.
- Quick Scam
By QBlog in Quixtar Chatter
- Quick Scam
"Guys - this is a scam!"
September 14, 2004
The Trouble With Quixtar Revisited
By QBlog in
It was one year ago today that I began my reflective series called "The Trouble With Quixtar."
I thought it might be fun for me to take a few days to work out some of my issues with Quixtar right here, in this public space. Some posts may not make a lot of sense on their own but I hope that as a collection these posts will all tie together...I expected to quickly work out those issues but spent nearly nine months arriving at