« Quixtar Leader Series - Priority | Main | Quixtar Leader Series - Seeing The Good »
June 15, 2005
Wal-Mart Is The New P&G
By QBlog in Quixtar
Pssst. Quixtar IBOs. Pass this on but don't say where you heard it ok?
Wal-Mart is the new Proctor & Gamble.
Comments
Imran,
Don't they call that "wal-cream"? At least quixtar doesn't call it "quix-cream" or "quix-tussin" or "quix-chips" All walmart does is buy the black and white generic crap and slap a walmart label on them. Oh, and they mark it up 30% to 60%.
Just having fun with you guys :-)
...except this is no false rumor.
When people come on here and complain about Quixtar's alleged abuses and business practices and therefore, state they will shop Wal-Mart instead, then that's showing ignorance of Wal-Mart's abuses, particularly of their strong-arm tactics.
Personally, I really don't care where anyone shops-- KMart, Sears, Costco, JCPenney, Safeway, etc. But with Wal-Mart I do have a problem with that - due to its sheer size and the resulting bullying tactics:
Driving manufacturing jobs overseas.
Driving down wages of its supplier's employees.
Driving away small independent businesses.
Driving down variety in the marketplace.
To name just a few.
There is a savings by shopping Wal-Mart. But at a cost much greater to us all.
This observation was not invented by an IBO.
Yo M & M and Mikey, I do shop at Quixtar as well. Some products. Still!
So I buy from Quixtar (Yuck yuck), Wal-mart, (Yuck-yuck) and live in the neighbor of US (Yuck yuck). I'm one yucky person yo ;)
And mikey, it was wal-nut, the nut. Thanks for not making fun of wal-but :D How about q-butt vs. wal-butt :D
PBS's Frontline did an interesting show on WalMart tonight.
Is WalMart Good for America?
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/
Does anybody still watch PBS?
M&M
"Driving manufacturing jobs overseas.
Driving down wages of its supplier's employees.
Driving away small independent businesses.
Driving down variety in the marketplace.
To name just a few."
I'd rather be driving (working for WM) than being driven by a Diamond.
Get with the times. FYI, Target does the same thing, Costco does the same thing, K-Mart/Sears does the same thing.......
Maybe we should get rid of malls (they take up too much space).
Maybe we should have government forced pricing, competition and a free market is over rated anyway.
Maybe we should free those suppliers from being "forced" to go over sees and selling to WM. I'm sure Target and all their other competitors will follow suit, it's only fair. Then everybody could have a little pow-wow and raise their prices artificially. We can all pay more so those poor suppliers who are being forced to take what WM gives them. Man they're practically slaves.
Here's a little clue. The market (the shoppers) will reward companies that are the best at what they do. Apparently WM is doing something right.
No, you are missing the point, JD. I stated before and I'll state again: It's not that Wal-Mart needs to go away. The danger lies in the size of the thing, with all the misuse of power as I have described. I'd love to see it exist in a free market along with all the other players where true competition can exist.
True, any one of those companies could also strong-arm their underlings (suppliers) if they got as big as Wal-Mart. Or they may not. We don't know. But we all know Wal-Mart has.
Show me, JD, where we have MORE variety in the marketplace because of Wal-Mart.
Show me where we have a net gain in manufacturing jobs in America because of Wal-Mart.
Here's yet another little clue: There are HUGE kingpins in Quixtar also. The market (IBOs) reward the systems that do it best. Apparently the kingpins are doing something right.
But does that make it right? Get my point?
Me thinks M & M is right, it's kinda paradox of capitalism. If a firm becomes too big, it somewhat effects the country. As it does what is good for the company, not necessarily the country. Since the company size is so big, some times those decisions effect the country big time. So if the government enforce certain laws, is it violating free enterprise?
Government had done so before.
http://tinyurl.com/bp7ts
Under the guise of “compassionate conservativism� the Republican Party touts free enterprise and capitalism in their rhetoric; yet ironically, find themselves having to bring the weight of government down on the heads of some very big corporations like Enron, Global Crossing, WorldCom, and a host of others.
David,
Damn! I missed the Frontline piece. They usually rerun it here a few days later. Had no clue that would be on and here we are talking about it --- coincidence?
Thanks for the post and everyone should check out the link, lots of good (well, not so good haha) info about Wal-Mart.
Here is paradox of capitaliztion:
http://tinyurl.com/7kfdd
There's something about the recent oil price shock that got me thinking. The United States is one of the most capitalistic countries in the world, yet it exploits cheaper labour costs from lesser capitalistic countries in order to boost its capitalistic nature.
Wal-mart does that, no?
I'm no business school grad, but all I can think of is that there should be limits. Equilibrium. I love cheap products but I can have a lot cheaper products smuggled.
Any ways, JD, you are an employee and getting good experience. If wal-mart came under (I don't see that in near future) you can always get a new job. You definitely won't go to prison ;)
If Quixtar get under, or some LOS are caught by feds, well, that's whole different thing.
I don't shop at Wal-Mart, but not because of business practices. I don't like crowding my fuill-sized sedan into their tiny parking spots in narrow rows. I don't like navigating a shopping cart through their narrow aisles that are packed full of other shoppers.
Give me Target any day for non-perishables. I shop mostly at Meijer for food items (excellent produce selection).
Driving manufacturing jobs overseas.
Driving down wages of its supplier's employees.
Driving away small independent businesses.
Driving down variety in the marketplace.
This isn't just Wal-Mart, this is any one of the major car, telecom, and/or computer chip makers or, well, basically anyone who makes anything in a competitive market
There is a trend in American manufacturing to cut payroll and/or move operations overseas. We saw it start with NAFTA and now we are seeing it in China and India, and in the near future, Africa.
It is a tough competitive world market today. There are a lot of hungry, underdeveloped nations ready to attack a very complacent US workforce.
Embot can't see the forest through the trees. Em, we've been through this before!
You can't say we haven't tried to educate the young lad...sigh.....
Medical diagnosis and accounting jobs are being outsourced to foreign countries via internet.
http://money.cnn.com/2003/12/30/pf/offshorejob/
I don't care for Wal-mart or many of its business practices either. I am a loyal Costco customer, however. Costco delivers bulk sized packages of household consumables (including perishable items) and durable goods at a _fraction_ of the prices offered by Quixtar. With my "executive membership," Costco pays me back a portion of my purchases when I shop there too. And Costco is also a pretty "socially responsible" company, taking strides to look after its employees in particular:
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_22/b3885011_mz001.htm
And let's not miss the red herring being attempted here. The fact is, Quixtar would still be a lousy busineess "opportunity" run by a combination of fools and crooks . . .
regardless of whether Wal-mart also sucks.
Thanks for the supplement Arby.
Embot just doesn't get it. That's on him.
Actually, we too, are missing QBlog's point.
AmQuix is always going to go after one company (P&G, Walmart, etc) in order to make themselves look better.
In both cases, it really hasn't worked.
I find it ironic that the A-Q "partner stores" are also outsourcing to foreign content.
Which makes the ambot's campaign even more incongruent than it was before!!!
I didn't think it was possible!
The difference between Wally World and the companies not yet as big as Wally World is that the smaller companies were not as quick to do what WM has done.
Wal Mart takes a very pragmatic approach to business. It's goal, it's ONLY goal is to get the price as low as possible for the consumer. Many people appreciate this.
Just because people shop at Wal Mart does not make them uninformed. It means they believe in what Wal Mart does, which is save them money.
Wal Mart has helped lower income people get a better bang for their buck, which may have raised their standard of living. It has also provided income to people in other countries, many of whom likely say a prayer of thanks every morning for having a job that pays what we would all consider to be crap. We are all very lucky to have what we have, and live where we live (Even us Canadians Imran!)
I agree with what you are saying too, Big M. It's not all rainbows and lollipops, but at the end of the day, what really is?
Many people, at first blush, are un-nerved by WM and what it represents. People should realize that WM is merely a relfection of the current American psyche; "more for less", "I don't want to do that menial task", and "damn the details".
And "Rocket" brought up a very good point: WM and similar entities pump money into under-developed areas. Is providing someone wiith an income that had previously had none "exploitation"? Not in my book.
All of this represents change, the only true constant in our universe. The challenge is to use change to one's best advantage...
Mike
I will chime in here because this is a topic that fascinates me.
I am an idealist and in fact a reactionary; my ideas will never happen, and I know it, but I still like them.
I believe the demise of capitalism began with corporation laws. Whose idea was it to create a business entity as a "person" separate and unlinked to a real person?
It all stems from there. If there were no "corporations", only private businesses owned by individuals, I think many of these problems you've been discussing would be solved - they wouldn't exist.
Personal responsibility is gone. The corporation is like the evil AI machine in a sci-fi movie. Only looking out for its own survival with no soul.
OTOH, I'm not afraid of a global economy, either. I'm not afraid of jobs leaving
America and going overseas. We are highly educated people. We should use our brains more. There will never be a lack of new ideas, or a lack of need in the world for them. It's ok if manufacturing leaves America. Technology demands that we continually adapt, and God created us with the ability to adapt and change rapidly; so CHANGE. Find something else to do. Use your brain.
I say that to every American, not anyone here in particular.
I'm not afraid of change, are you?
Dorothy, the word corporation is simply a legal term used to protect the individual business owner (when I say ibo, I mean the real ones not the fake AmQuix ones).
So your depiction of 'corporation' as bad and 'private business' as good is a HUGE misnomer.
I just wanted to clarify so you can 'use your brain' more effectively.
It is strange that you didn't mention that God has given us the heart to work together, yet so much of this world is still divided....any thoughts on that ???
The principle underlying the legal corporation is "limited liability." In exchange for certain regulations of corporate activity, investors are allowed to protect themselves from personal liability in excess of the amount of their investment in a corporation.
Two problems:
(1) Because the corporation is not a person-in-fact it is not subject to any normative principles other than those imposed by law and those that are sufficiently tied to the corporation's advantage in the marketplace.
(2) Both of those limitations on corporate conduct can be manipulated. With regard to legal limitations, well-placed funds can aid whole industries in blurring the line between government regulators and the industries they regulate. And key donations to certain parties and candidates can drastically hold back the law when a corporation is engage in some form of malfeasance. Take a look at the ever blurring relationship that has developed between the FDA and pharmaceutical industry, where the FDA commonly relies on the opinions of industry "consultants" in determining whether a drug should be approved, recalled, etc.
With regard to marketplace limitations on corporate conduct, the potential competitive disadvantage of corporate misconduct can be ameliorated by controlling information. So long as the cost of information control doesn't exceed the pecuniary incentive for the conduct, the market will not act as a check on corporate conduct.
Thanks lawdawg, I knew it was just a matter of time...
Another good example (as you stated in item 2) would be corporate valuation. Independent consultants are hired to value the company--however, in order to retain the contract many consultants feel the need to overvalue the company's worth.
In any case, it is not the corporation acting unjustly, as it is a person (or people) acting unjustly.
So, Dorothy's anaology is not correct.
Great discussion! I'm really impressed with the level of rational thinking and inteligent comments. This is how free thinking, smart business people talk. I'm sure the Ambots are scratching their heads...."but, but, PV, BV, upline, downline, crossline, diamond, ruby, emerald, blah, blah, blah." This is what we mean by no "tapespeak".
Good point Jonas Dad; I wonder if the ambots will weigh in here?
Do they (the ambots) have any thoughts outside of justifying their "business" decisions?
Rocket said:
"The difference between Wally World and the companies not yet as big as Wally World is that the smaller companies were not as quick to do what WM has done."
Actually, WalMart did what companies like Sears, Meijers and K-Mart did, only they did it out in rural Arkansas instead of in the cities and suburbs. As they grew, they stayed in the rural areas, keeping to the smaller town centers. By covering the markets everyone else was ignoring (or serving minimally), they were able to grab a major advantages the other companies overlooked.
That's why, when WalMart and K-Mart finally duked it out, WalMart won. They had the ability to outlast K-Mart. (and don't worry about K-Mart/Sears, JD; I think the ownership will sell off the land assets, grant themselves massive payouts and leave the market to your company). And now they're the 900 pound gorilla, able to change entire areas just by announcements.
The US government has actually come to the conclusion that Wal-Mart is too important to let fail. To me, that shows how big Wal-Mart has become, and the depth of the changes it has caused.
Of course, what amazes me about Wal-Mart is that they're always thinking. And not just on lowering prices: Recently I rode with a friend and his wife to a Wal-Mart and watched as he parallel(???) parked his minivan near the front of the building. Turns out the local store changed what would have been fourteen regular parking spaces into four handicapped van parking space with no need for backing into or out of it!
He once hated Wal-Mart. He now loves the place.
I don't like Wal-mart...but I respect it. Greatly.
DF and JD,
You want some tapespeak- here it is:
"when you recommend your family and friends to wally world and costo, do they give you any kind of referral fee for doing so? Heck, do they even send you a thank you card?"
Maybe if wally world or costco offered an affiliate program I just might like them better. :-) Granted there is nothing wrong with people shopping at either store if your on a tight budget or in a hurry. Heck I have been to wally world three times this week for supplies. Oops did I say that? :-X
Don't let my upline know please! ;-)
well df I haven't found very much compelling commentary from you guys to really comment. All I hear is generalized statements like, it's a competitive world, we need to adjust, blah, blah, blah.
.
You have not addressed the specific problems stated in the Frontline report either from the broadcast or the web-site info, nor address any of the concerns I stated such as less variety products being made or the downward spiral in wages in our economy. Costco and JCPenney don’t cause these things. It’s unique to a bullying Wal-Mart.
To say this is a “ambot� vs. critics is erroneous. I know IBOs who love WM and anti-Q. people who detest it. I don’t like buying anything from China whether Quixtar, Costco, or anyone else sells it for that matter. Try to consider the human rights and environmental issues over there for once, df. Or are you so enamored by saving a buck that nothing else matters, that the bottom line in your MBA mentality IS the monetary bottom line, that you’ve become a whore??
To those who say its a great place for the disadvantaged to shop, I say: To impose a consumption mindset on the poor is not a very moral thing to do! That’s what the proliferation of these monstrosities are geared for. Get the poorer classes to shop and shop, hey it’s cheaper right? You can and should spend whatever you have---here at Wal-Mart! Everyday!!! No matter if all the money is going to China. Like I said shopping Wal-mart is cheap but extracts a very high cost out of the economy. Watch how the downward spiral creates a larger and larger underclass due to lower wages. Our middle class is shrinking with the MBA df types soaking up the riches. You did say you vacationed in Fiji or somewhere? Oh that’s right I guess you are creating some sort of “value� along the way. Uh huh.
Good point lawdawg, shop Costco, they are responsible corporate citizens. However, your statement, “The fact is, Quixtar would still be a lousy business "opportunity" run by a combination of fools and crooks . . .� proves my point that you won’t shop Quixtar for that reason. No matter how good the products they manufacture might be or how competitively priced some of them are. Right?
Michael,
shame on you. I am really telling on you now!
Em
p.s. just go to Target next time ok?
and Don, Wal-Mart was able to grow as great as they did by carrying a lot of American made goods. Things changed when Sam Walton died.
I don't think Dorothy is wrong in her analogy of corporations as soul-less zombies.
In fact, lawdawg's well-phrased explanation serves to bolster the argument, IMO.
Just as many people post things on the internet they would never say in person (due to full liability - the reactions of family and friends, etc), the individual running a corporation may in fact be tempted to make decisions that he/she normally wouldn't due to the very "limited liability" he has been afforded.
Not to say limited liability is all bad. People may also decide to take calculated risks that they otherwise would not have taken, knowing that they do not stand to lose everything, and their success builds infrastructure.
But I think Dorothy had a valid point.
Michael:
The difference between your "referral" bonus and me recommending Costco is simple and underscores what you don't understand about marketplace dynamics. I refer people to Costco because I believe it will be beneficial to them. And it usually is. People who receive no referral bonus continue to shop at Costco and recommend to others that they shop there, even though they don't get paid. Why? Because it actually is a good value.
You refer people to Quixtar because it benefits you primarily. Do people shop there if they aren't getting a referral bonus? Amway/Quixtar's own data suggests that there are very few who buy who aren't also in the referral system. Moreover, Amway/Quixtar's own data demonstrates that once IBOs cease being IBOs, they also tend to stop buying products.
Why the difference? The market sees the value in the products and service of Costco and will shop there without an MLM scheme. When it comes to Quixtar, on the other hand, the market generally does not see the value unless they are also in the referral bonus scheme, as A/Q's data demonstrates. Thus, the vast majority of Quixtar's customers are its own so-called distributors.
CK:
Dorthy compared a corporation to an evil AI machine.
Lawdawg defined a corporation as a legal entity.
Where is the similarity? I don't see it.
This reminds me of the old firearms debate
Some people blame the GUN for killing, other people blame the INDIVIDUAL for killing.
Is it the corporation (legal entity) that is responsible for the outsourcing, corruption, and wrongdoingin the business world today,
or is it the Boad of Directors (people) running the corporation who are guilty?
Or you could think of it this way.....
Is it the corporation (legal entity) that is responsible for the creation of jobs, enviormental protection and fair trade, or is it the Board of Directors (people) running the corporation who should be praised?
A legal entity doesn't think, breathe or act. That's why stock holders organize under the shelter of a corporation. To limit the liability of their collective thoughts and/or actions.
So, in summary, it is the PEOPLE -- you and me -- that make this world what it is.
EM:
I (along with many others) would shop at Quixtar if we perceived value in the products comensurate with the price. For the most part, only IBOs perceive that value, which strongly suggests that they see that value only because of their participation or attempted participation in the "opportunity."
You are using a classic red herring again. There are criticisms of Quixtar that you are trying to deflect by attacking Wal-mart to change the subject. The obvious and simple point that you fail to grasp is that it doesn't matter to a discussion of whether Quixtar is a rotten business opportunity if Wal-mart is also a crooked corporation.
Your logical fallacy can be charted thusly:
A is X
Em argues that B is also X
Therefore, A isn't X
Let me replace the variables and you can see how absurd your argument is:
Quixtar is an underhanded company
Em argues that Wal-mart is also an underhanded company and, therefore, that somehow means that Quixtar is not an underhanded company.
Lawdawg:
You are on-point once again!
Quixtar is an underhanded company
Em argues that Wal-mart is also an underhanded company and, therefore, that somehow means that Quixtar is not an underhanded company.
Just as QBlog stated. Wal-Mart is the new P&G.
Embot and Mikebot, do you boys remember the days of old when the big A waged a similarly-flawed logic attack on P&G ???
If you don't learn from history, you are bound to repeat your mistakes.
Which is what the big Q is doing
RIGHT NOW!!!!!
Maybe QBlog can draw it out for you in one of his cartoons.......
df:
You are generally correct. Corporations do all kinds of things that individuals can't. They allow for a much greater pooling of investment capital to take on large risks no single person would attempt. They often create jobs, stimulate economic growth and finance innovation . . . in a perfect world there is very little wrong with them.
However, we do not live in a perfect world. The two features of the economy that govern corporate behavior are government regulation (law) and competition in the marketplace. When one or both of these systems break down, there can be incredibly big problems with corporations for the very same reasons corporations can be so valuable. When unchecked, corporations can wreak havoc on a massive scale as well.
Unfortunately, those two systems are breaking down. The regulatory agencies and our elected representatives are not seeing to it that the law continues to place proper limits on corporate behavior to protect the people or the long-term interests of the economy or the environment. Who is responsible for that? That's complicated. Certainly, the voters who don't pay careful attention to what is going on in their government are at fault. Also, the corporation's themselves and their political cronies who spend massive amounts of money to change the law in ways that greatly favor short-term corporate interests over the general good (or their own long-term financial interests).
The system to combat information control is also coming off the tracks. As Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart once explained, the Fourth Estate (the free press) serves a structural function in our constitutional scheme. Thomas Jefferson saw it as more important that government itself:
"The basis of our government being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter."
When the media is controlled by a small number of economically aligned interests, then the electorate's informed decision making process is threatened. And when the electorate is uninformed, democracy begins to break down. And while an informed public, vigilant against corporate malfeasance, may be a hindrance to short term profitability by acting as a check on corporate behavior, such an informed public is absolutely essential to long-term economic viability, stability and national security. But if you are a corporation, why not take the money and run? Especially since almost nobody is keeping an eye on you these days?
OK, 1st of all Qx is not waging a war on WM. I believe I was the first person to bring up WM recently and it was in the light of the number of lawsuit they're in.
People always try to put Qx in a negative light by saying they've had several complaints or lawsuits filed against them, and I simply put it in perspective and said "WM has a new lawsuit filed against them once every 2 hours!!" That's 12 new lawsuits a day! Almost 5000 last year alone.
I saw previews for the PBS show "Is Walmart Good for America" - but didn't catch the show. I'd love to see what it said.
I think WM is a good place to get cheap stuff, but they do have a lot of pull. I know toy stores were rallying together to strike exclusive deals with manufacturers to be able to compete. WM has definitely blown out small "mom & pop" shops all over, which is part of business. But they've also bullied many manufacturers. I know they've forced companies to stop selling products on their own website in order for WM to continue carrying them in the stores.
Actually I know a lot of people who use the products from Qx but aren't involved in the IBO plan. I know people who were formers IBOs, but now aren't building it, and either buy thru a friend who still is, or they just renew to have access to the products & get the discount and rebate. The exclusive products are some of the best!
I haven't said much before because I like watching the critbots argue amongst themselves. When we speak up then they turn on us.
Also the whole A=X, but B=X , so then A doesn't = X analogy is BS! All we're saying is you think A=X, how bout B=X or B=XX!
Again I was just putting thins in perspective with lawsuit/complaints. Qx = 1 complaint every 6 weeks (i think) WM 12 a DAY!!
Lawdawg:
I never said that we live in a perfect world -- not by a long shot.
I was just trying to show the difference between man and corporation (the latter being man-made).
Both are imperfect; and if you are gonna drop some Founding Fathers, I guess this would be appropriate:
I never expect to see a perfect work from imperfect man. -- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 85, 1788
Dorothy is ready to blame the corporation. I am ready to blame (or in some instances, praise) the PEOPLE that run the corporation.
Speaking of imperfection, Embot and Mikebot still can't correlate the campaign against P&G to Walmart.
The correlation is as simple as going online in 1999.....
What's interesting about the recent shift to targeting Wal-mart instead of P&G like they used to is what it says about the manner in which the corporation and AMOs understand themselves. P&G is a product manufacturer that MADE PRODUCTS to compete with many of the coreline products manufactured by Amway. Wal-mart, on the other hand, is a retailer that delivers products to the retail market at a fraction of the price that Quixtar does.
When P&G was "The Great Satan" (pun intended), it was indicative of Amway's view of itself as a product manufacturer. Now that Wal-mart is the enemy, it demonstrates a shift in the company's understanding of itself from product manufacturer to retail buyers' club.
Excellent point lawdawg. The correlation has been made....great pun too.
Embot, Mikebot, you boys payin' attention
over there???
Tony> I believe I was the first person to bring up WM recently and it was in the light of the number of lawsuit they're in.
Imran> Recently, yes. But you are not the first person to bring up that point, and I'm not the first person to answer it. Here is a great point by Jason's s inking in quixand blog.
IBOAI says:
"In today’s highly litigious society, lawsuits are not uncommon in business. Companies and organizations are continually involved in legal disputes. In fact, the larger and higher profile a business, like Quixtar the larger target it provides for attracting lawsuits, no matter how unjustified the lawsuit is."
Jason raised a good point:
"I'll agree that the larger a company, the more legal hassles one would have to contend with. But the thing that strikes me is that when I think about a similar company like a Wal-Mart, or a K-Mart, or even a McDonald's (I use them for comparison because Amway/Quixtar loves comparing their business model to that of Ray Kroc's), there is one glaring difference in the lawsuits filed against them.
They don't center around the same thing.
With companies like the ones I mention above you will hear about any number of things that the general public sues them over. Slippery floors, scalding beverages, discrimination, health issues, and the list goes on.
With Amway/Quixtar the lawsuits all seem to come back to two things: Tools and corruption."
Regarding ur data, 12 lawsuits in a day, well Wal-Mart doesn't enforce BSMAA does it? I'll be suing Kanti Gala / Vishal if I was not bound by BSMAA.
Tony>I haven't said much before because I like watching the critbots argue amongst themselves. When we speak up then they turn on us.
Imran> United we stand :) Seriously, think about it. I have asked some of co-workers, rather innocently, some IBO approached me, what do you think about Amway? All said, "It's a bit of a scam, stay away". And here are you. People either think it's best opportunity or a scam. Why so extreme views? Where's the common ground?
And of course, deflections are funny:
"Quixtar has lawsuits"
Oh yeah, Wal-Mart has too
[side stepping what are these lawsuits about]
"There is a some shocking info about Quixtar on internet"
Oh yeah, there is negative about your religion too on internet, quit that too
[side stepping what 'negative' exactly is]
"Isn't Quixtar a pyramid"
Oh yeah, your job is too.
[pyramid = money from bottom to top, business = money from out to in]
What about Diamonds and emeralds leaving Quixtar?
Well people pursue other ventures, what's the big deal?
[uh why exactly they left? And they did, can I now? no?]
Lawsuits matters to me iff (if and only if) they effects me. If I am thinking of pursuing Quixtar, and lawsuits are among distribution of money, then I'm concerned. Shouldn't you?
If I am a customer, even employee of Wal-Mart, do I really care if some one sued wal-mart for slipping in front of it or some other thing?
If I live in free country, I value my right to free speech. I'll be concerned if some one tries to suppress this freedom by SLAPP and other frivolous lawsuits. If Wal-Mart suppresses that right, I'll have a problem with them too! So far Jona's dad has not gone militant on us for criticizing Wal-Mart. And I really doubt he'll be! In fact he appreciate the good debate.
Quixtar is definitely not a cult eh!
df:
Dorothy's analogy of 'corporation' to an evil AI machine is not at all contradictory to what lawdawg has written.
Yes, there are indivduals behind the corporation (duh), but they do not suffer the corporate consequences as individuals, due to the very nature of incorporation - that it is a legal entity entitling it's shareholders to limited liability.
And in a perfect world, where none of these protected individuals acts with anything but the best of intentions, this is not a problem, and has, in fact, helped build our country to it's current level of unprecedented wealth - bigger risk, bigger reward.
But in the real world, as lawdawg also pointed out, the reality is that without the restraint implicit to an individual who stands the potential to lose everything due to bankruptcy, tort litigation, etc, many of the internal and external impetus on the indivdual to 'do the right thing' has been removed, leaving us only the marketplace itself to apply ecomic pressure to enforce morality, and the law to legislate morality.
In an increasingly 'must have' society, many are unwilling to apply such market pressure, assuming they are aware of corporate abuse, and we all know you really can't legislate morality.
'Don't they call that "wal-cream"? At least quixtar doesn't call it "quix-cream" or "quix-tussin" or "quix-chips"'
Actually, "Wal-[foobar]" for generic products (mostly drugs) is a Walgreen's thing, not a Wal-Mart thing (that I remember; I'm trying not to patronize Wal-Mart myself).
No, CK, the analogy doesn't stick. Sorry.
Did the entire Enron corporation face punishment? No, the select few directors who misbehaed did.
That is my point.
And another thing CK:
I disagree with your statement:
"...and we all know you really can't legislate morality."
When one (of the many) definitions of law is
"A code of principles based on morality, conscience, or nature. "
Granted, not all laws may be up to your level of personal morality, but it can be stated that the law will cover the lowest common denominator of a democracy's morality.
CK, is your last name Prahalad? If so, I love your books!
df>Granted, not all laws may be up to your level of personal morality, but it can be stated that the law will cover the lowest common denominator of a democracy's morality.
X>I agree. The problem with the general society here in USA is that we are in a morally pluralistic society, so there IS no lowest common denominator here. In such a system, it is anything goes. Survival of the fittest, Darwinian progression to eliminate those who can not fight the fight. I will assure you, those who live by this code will perish in the end.
"I will assure you, those who live by this code will perish in the end."
Isn't that also Darwinism also, Mr. X ???
Df,
No, because it is not our stregnth that will save us from oursleves.
X
df: "Did the entire Enron corporation face punishment? No, the select few directors who misbehaed did."
That's partly true. The conduct of its officers ran the company into bankruptcy, so, yes, Enron was punished in a way. But the misbehavior there was not corporate malfeasance anyway. It was fraud by certain officers in manipulating the books, self-dealing, and misleading investors. That's a little different than a corporate decision to shift to overseas labor, slash health benefits or lobby for the removal of environmental regulations that would prevent the company from emitting toxic heavy metals into the local groundwater.
Well, yes and no, X.
Darwinism only would apply to the physcial, not the afterlife....I think.
"...all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual's ability to compete, survive, and reproduce."
Really there's no talk of the hereafter in there. So we're both wrong!
Lawdawg, maybe you can find a better way to show that a corporation isn't a heartless AI machine (as Dorothy and CK see it).
X wrote:
The problem with the general society here in USA is that we are in a morally pluralistic society, so there IS no lowest common denominator here. In such a system, it is anything goes. Survival of the fittest, Darwinian progression to eliminate those who can not fight the fight. I will assure you, those who live by this code will perish in the end.
CK:
That's what I meant when I wrote that you can't legislate morality, df.
Also, please note lawdawg's explanation of the Enron debacle.
I believe the analogy, though perhaps exaggerated to make the point, is valid. No analogy is perfect.
No, df, I am not THAT CK, but you might appreciate that one of his books is entitled "The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid: Eradicating Poverty through Profits". Sounds like something the kingpins could twist to their advantage, yes?
Off topic, but what makes someone a "kingpin"? - I read on one site that there were like 20 kingpins. That sure is a lot - how can 20 guys be at the top of a pyramid? ;) So I guess Emeralds aren't kingpins? Or even most Diamonds, since there are A LOT more than just 20 Diamonds. There's like 800 not even counting couples (spouses). I guess I'm wondering what qualifies one as a so-called "kingpin"?
Well heck I don't even need to be a kingpin then. I'll just be happy as a little Diamond making $300,000 a year and no boss to report to.
You know, every Diamond once got recognized as a new 1000PV'er. But then they worked their way to 7500, and Ruby, Emerald, and Diamond. So are CEOs "kingpins"? Is working your way to the top make you a kingpin? Just curious.
Gotcha CK, thanks for the clarification.
Still amazed that no ambots have really waded into this one: Profitability, accountability, morality, and Darwinism -- one would think it would be 'compelling' enough for their higher minds!
Oops, nevermind -- Tonybot just answered my question.
Ambots can take part in this discussion. They don't have the mental capacity.
But Tonybot did a great job of diverting the discussion....nice try pal....
Perhaps Tony is actually asking us people a real question. I'll diverge. I love chasing rabbits from time to time, but PLEASE, everyone else, keep on the same topic. I am not educated in corporate policy and find this interesting.
Tony,
One is considered a Kingpin when they are (normally) EDC or above and and have incorperated into mutliple entities including, but not limited to, their own BSM distribution channels. Check the small fine print on your SOT and you will find they are copyrighted by different corperations. Your FED tapes are normally AMI, Dave Tayors are 'Taylor Enterprise' (rare to find these, he is my upline, I had two tapes of his), John Crowe's are Crowe Marketing, etc.
"Lawdawg, maybe you can find a better way to show that a corporation isn't a heartless AI machine (as Dorothy and CK see it)."
A corporation, at the end of the day, is run by people-in-fact making decisions. Those decisions are, however, first and foremost determined by the obligations these people have to their board of directors and shareholders, and that means decisions are based on increasing the value of the shares and dividends.
In short, increased profitability drives corporate policy making because the officers of a corporation owe a fiduciary duty to the shareholders to protect and increase the shareholders' investment. That does not mean that individual officers cannot make a decision based on their own moral reasons. It does mean that the decisionmakers have to be able in good faith to demonstrate that the decision is also in the best interests of the shareholders regardless of the moral implications.
IN EFFECT, it is hard for a corporate officer to justify a decision based on morals or ethics if the conduct is profitable and not prohibited by law. With most of the things we are talking about, moral decisionmaking isn't always possible if it impacts corporate profitability.
Thus, our system is supposed to have certain, carefully and studiously applied _legal_ checks on corporate conduct - because it must be understood that moral decision making does not play a central role in corporate policy. Short of that, the only check on corporate conduct is public knowledge of the corporate malfeasance and its potential effect on the corporation's position in the market.
Well Joe M is an EDC almost Double Diamond, but I guess he's not a kingpin, he doesn't have his own BSM - he uses BWW. Although he does have tape/CD series with his initials eg: JM28, or JM56. But they're still BWW cd's. Does that count?
I guess the point I was trying to make is "kingpin" is kind of a subjective term. Some people are refering to Diaminds as Kingpins, others only the Crowns and above.
Personally I think the use of the term is inappropriate, because of the blatant negative connotation. You guys use this term trying to relate them as mobsters, etc. Shady practice!
I still find it mind-boggling that most critbots' biggest gripe with the business is the tools. Which you don't have to take part in if you don't want to! Michael here isn't on SOT or going to functions, and he's almost a Platinum. Which is probably rare... which I guess would support the argument that these tools and functions HELP you. I would agree with that. But its up to each individual IBO. I have no problem with either approach. I have guys on my team doing both. I work with all.
Actually dfbot, I've made a few comments on this topic! Where you been? Sorry I haven't made more, don't feel compelled to argue about WM. Like I said I like watching the critbots duke it out. Hey Qblog, how bout another blog about the war, or GW, or abortion, or progressive tax brackets, etc!? I love those!
Tony
Ironically, I believe "kingpin" came from the "Blakely Report", which does compare the diamonds to mobster gang leaders, using similar shady tactics.
So Tony, it is a negative term. If you haven't figured it out, we think Quixtar and all involved are "negative"
df - in reference to your comment asking lawdawg to 'show us' that the analogy of a corporation to the AI machine is faulty:
So far, every one of his explanation and clarification offered has only served to bolster my opinion.
I'm not sure how you are perceiving that anything he worte so far contradicts that.
Changing the subject again.
Today on CNN.com there is an article about a guy who won the lottery jackpot. He called all his family to meet him for the announcement. His family thought he was announcing a terminal illness, marriage engagement, or multilevel marketing scheme. Hahaha. Here's the qoute...
"Duke said he told his father and sister about the jackpot but the rest of his family was unaware until Sunday, when he asked them to meet him in Sun Valley. He said they had assumed he was going to reveal a terminal illness, multilevel marketing scheme or a wedding engagement."
Just think, the reputation these MLMs have, right there with terminal illness. Think of all the poor families that have had to face the dreaded scheme meeting. You'd think these people would realize what they're doing, have some self-pride, and leave people alone. Get out! Get a life!
CK:
The AI analogy is a gross exaggeration. You already owned up to it and I agreed with you. I thought it was done.
It just goes back to the "Guns don't kill people, PEOPLE kill people" analogy"
The corporation, like the gun, is simply a tool used for (no pun intended) execution.
At the end of the day, it is the gunowner/stockholder that takes the real action, and hopefully, responsibility.
Maybe I am taking the AI analogy too literally? Or maybe Dorothy did?
My whole point is that Dorothy has to look past the 'big business' monkier to see that it still (as it always has) boils down to personal responsibility.
df says: "Quixtar is an underhanded company
Em argues that Wal-mart is also an underhanded company and, therefore, that somehow means that Quixtar is not an underhanded company."
No, that's not my point. In fact I could say for the sake of argument that Q is also underhanded. My question then is: why do you reject Alticor produced products in a customer role because you hold a negative view of the business plan? You know, WWG has had price comparison sheets showing most core-line products are competitive even at the retail level. Would you now become a customer if this could be effectively demonstrated to you? (Your comments about the lack of extensive sales to the general marketplace is really one about marketing, not so much about value. After all, JCPenney and others are still in business and doing very well, though their price point is significantly above Wal-Mart's.). Or, because you had a negative experience viewing the plan, you don't want anything to do with it, even as a customer? My question boils down to: Why then shop at Wal-Mart? That's hypocrisy if you do. You are judging one company and then going to another, which is much worse in my opinion. I'm not trying to attempt to justify Q because of what Wal-Mart does. On the contrary, any corporation operating in an underhanded way needs to clean up its act.
"What's interesting about the recent shift to targeting Wal-mart instead of P&G"
No lawdawg, IBOs and A/Q are not targeting Wal-Mart. It's not any scheme, it is my strong personal opinion and I know a lot of Q people who don't really care one way or the other. It's not spoken of in any way at functions, etc.
And where do you get this incorrect idea of A/Q targeting P&G? Do you want to elaborate and back that up--this "official" campaign you claim occurred? Or should all the failed lawsuits P&G attempted against Amway be demonstration enough and put an end to your misstatements and attempts at your spreading skewed information? Maybe you need to do a little research on P&G before you talk about it any more. I'll recommend you read Soap Opera by Alecia Swasy, a reporter for the Wall Street Journal. It will be an real eye opener for you. You too df, read it. Just for the sake of seeing how corporations often act.
Embot:
I have more experience in my left nut than you have in your entire lifetime of dealing with businesses. Don't think you can school me on anything?
I am well aware that there are abuses in business today -- it still doesn't make it right for your company to do what it is doing!
If you want to see how your 'sister' company targeted P&G, go ahead and google it. The satanism aspect of the claim should both shock and appaul you -- remember, these are your 'business associates' making these claims.
And where do you get off trying to quote me as saying "Quixtar is an underhanded company." ? Show me that quote!
Sit down young pup.
M & M, I might buy some products from Quixtar if they give me some value. I have been a core, a hard core for a year. I have presented and argued the products. If customer don't buy them, it's not only because of fame.
And no, none of them are better than the ones out there. Very few, say LOC or SA8 Tablets are, but I'm not going to pay shipping and wait 3 days. Also, Tide is much improved now. Quixtar keep increasing prices much faster than rest of the market. My 2 year old cart is much expensive now :o
"Lawdawg:
You are on-point once again!
Quixtar is an underhanded company"
What shocks and appalls ME is your ignorance, not to mention your spelling, and the fact you are full of yourself with your blather.
If you want to take on this losing argument df, go right ahead. P&G NEVER won a claim against Amway, despite all the lawyers and money they had over a company far smaller.
If you don't shut up soon, I am going to quote you passages from that book.
and that includes you, Imran (Tide user!)
Tony / Emminem
Do you believe that at some point you will gain a passive income from Quixtar?
Do you believe that anyone has a passive income from Quixtar?
The Diamonds seem to have schedules that are jammed. Do they do this by choice?
Has anyone even heard tell of someone who makes enormous coin from Quixtar by sitting on their arse (after having done the 10-10-10 thing of course!)
I bet nobody gives this question an honest answer.
Embot:
GO ahead and quote away!!!
I am not defending wallyworld.
What I am saying is that attacking another company is in no way the right way to promote your pyramid...er, business.
Your 'model t' tried it with P&G in the 80s and 90s and then your 'mustang' is trying to do it now in the internet/ecommerce age.
-df's left nut
Em:
Wow! You're an angry little man. It seems that all you can contribute to the discussion are personal attacks and misquotes.
Well . . . Thumper . . . if you can't say something nice . . . don't say anything at all.
Yeah, Embot is an angry little man.
I can't blame him -- he is losing money hand over fist and he is now losing a debate to my left nut.
Could you image what would happen if I brought my right nut into this debate???
Yeah, I've noticed with a couple of regulars (including Em) when the conversation gets interesting and begins to touch on anything that can't be addressed with tapespeak, it goes over their heads. They then try to change the topic to something that they can spew tapespeak about. Failing that, they just start hurling insults.
They're a classy bunch and represent their company well.
The buzzard,
that's a good question and yes I can give you an honest answer.
I don't know which LOS/System you may be refering to, but in WWG diamonds do not need to have a "jammed schedule." However, those who do have this work habit generally do it out of wanting to grow there business larger. It's more of a personality trait and having that work ethic for so long. But some diamonds really have a light schedule. And some keep a medium schedule. It all depends.
And yes, there are some who may want to keep from falling out of qualification.
I also know Emeralds in this system and others who are totally out of circulation. They have long, stable lines and yes, they are making very good coin. Am talking Quixtar income here, not tools.
df:
One quick note about your analogy:
"It just goes back to the "Guns don't kill people, PEOPLE kill people" analogy""
Let us not forget that it's much easier to kill people with guns than with knives, or with your bare hands. Knives and Bare Hands require close contact with the person you're trying to kill (or mad skills with knife throwing); Guns only require some accuracy with your aim as you shoot.
Same with people's decisions: Sure you and I could move into a town and try to change things to our advantage, but a Walton family member placing their store within fifteen miles of that town will drown out any changes I could possibly make-and with a mere announcement about a ground-breaking.
So I'm not about to let off corporations with the mantra of "personal responsibility." Corporations can cancel out personal effort, and with but a flick of a wrist.
(let's not forget: people in rural areas want Wal-Marts in their areas for a good reason: it gives them the one-stop convenience that those of us in cities have long taken for granted. That's the missing factor, and gave Wal-Mart power when it was only in Arkansas, Missouri and Mississippi.)
Lawdawg,
"personal attacks" ?? You guys seem to be the experts at that. Not only that, you are arrogant and full of yourself, just like df. I am not impressed. Get off your high-horse. You act like your s--- doesn't stink. You got a dog in this fight (so to speak) or are you being paid for this? Who do you work for?
Tapespeak? Give me some... You can't. I don't do that. Sorry bud.
Is this how you guys act when you've been caught at your own game? Deflect and accuse me of anger and making personal attacks.
Mr. MBA was so livid he couldn't even spell appall. Your friend can't even remember what he said and now you accuse me of hating on you? Give me a break. Your conversation was getting "interesting"? Your conversation was getting long-winded and boring. What? Do you own these boards? Sorry, next time, I'll try to quote Shakespeare. Do you two IM each other all the time also? Well don't bother this weekend I think he's going to Bora Bora with his cheapo Rolex.
I expected better out of you, but I am not surprised.
emminemm,
I found the discussion between DF, CK, and LawDawg interesting - neither long winded nor boring.
Between you and Tony ham-and-egging it on vapid Quixtar bullcrap, and an intelligent discussion of corporate governance and responsibility... I'll take smart people, spelling errors duly noted.
I like corporations for the protection I get, and for the tax benefits. If I could get away with sole proprietorship, I would- because it's cheaper. Even cheaper would be an all-cash business with no taxes, but... probably not an option.
IMO, individuals can only hide behind the corporate stucture so far, just as they can hide behind personal wealth, or fame, or influential family. For almost all, there are eventual limits to this protection. Large, wealthy organisations, be they corporations, trusts, or even governments, are potentially the problem - not the label "big corporations." And that is the unavoidable reality of life as we know it. A natural tendency towards domination is built into humankind, spanning from individual relationships to group dynamics. Deal with it.
I believe that the quote is: "Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely"
-Lord Acton
M&M> "Well don't bother this weekend I think he's going to Bora Bora with his cheapo Rolex."
Huh???
Thumper:
I see you still don't have anything intelligent to contribute to this discussion of corporate governance, policy and ethics.
Too bad. Maybe we could talk about the great partnership that exists between Quixtar and IBM and Microsoft? Would that help take the edge off?
BTW, LawDawg-
I was hoping for a comment from you on my last post on your blog regarding retail sales. I keep checking back, but there's nothing.
Maybe we can continue the discussion. Unlike M&M and Michael, I like highbrow theoretical discussions where thoughtfulness, reason and logic are required.
Correction: Tony, not Michael.
LawDawg wrote:
"Too bad. Maybe we could talk about the great partnership that exists between Quixtar and IBM and Microsoft? Would that help take the edge off?"
No, that's not fair.
Not until we discuss the partnership that I had with minute-maid corp. when I was a 6 year old kid with my lemonade stand on the street corner :-)
Today, they even named a ballpark in Houston after that company (thanks to the Enron fiasco!).
"M&M> "Well don't bother this weekend I think he's going to Bora Bora with his cheapo Rolex."
Huh???"
because he was bragging once how he travels to only the high class destinations...Peter Island was so lowbrow and would never stoop to go there. BTW Peter Island was just ranked one of the top destinations in the Caribbean by Travel and Leisure. And yes he has a cheap Rolex. Oh well.
You don't like me butting in? Too bad K, Sr. The were not talking about any specific examples about Wal-Mart at all, which is the subject of this thread after all. Then they misconstrued my point, which simply is, if you disagree with Q business practices and therefore take your business to WM, then you practice hypocrisy. I don't care if someone takes their business to Target or Costco if the nature of one company's (Q's) practices comes into question. Just don't take it to someplace WORSE. Was that so hard to understand everybody?
Actually, Em, I didn't say that you were butting in.
What I did say was:"Between you and Tony ham-and-egging it on vapid Quixtar bullcrap, and an intelligent discussion of corporate governance and responsibility... I'll take smart people, spelling errors duly noted".
If you consider that "butting in", well, I guess that you are the best judge regarding the value of your commentary... And I still find intelligent discussion more interesting.
Now that we've got that little bit of housecleaning out of the way... I think that any question regarding Quixtars' business practices are fair game. Observations and analysies here on the board are, after all, pretty much based upon opinions and personal experiences - with enough hard facts behind them to make them substantial opinions. Experiences are subjective, much like the three blind men touching the elephant (the one RP likes to talk about).
All I am saying is that it is a fair discussion to compare Q's practices against any other company in the business of product distribution, whether you "feel" that the other business is morally superior or inferior. You may reject the conclusions based on your perception of the companies' moral standing, but that opinion does not invalidate the discussion.
If you get my drift.
A really great question was posed earlier. It may have gotten lost in the noise:
"Do you believe that at some point you will gain a passive income from Quixtar?"
Responses?
The irony of this whole thread is that it goes to the whole core of the problem with Quixtar's hype. They dump on corporate America because they don't have the slightest clue how corporations work or what purpose corporations serve. And when you try to explain it, it goes over the IBOs' heads, and they start hurling insults.
Bottom line on corporations: corporations allow many people to pool their investment capital, time and talents to accomplish mutual business goals. Corporations involve people working together to reach common goals and sharing the risks of failure.
MLM is truly a poor man's substitute for a corporation. The difference is that a corporation has to have a good business idea, like a marketable product or service, at its core. Quixtar, the corporation, is a good business investment. Quixtar, the MLM "opportunity", is not.
Comprende?
Keith:
Sorry, I was in trial when you posted your last comment and forgot to go back and respond. I'll post something by the end of the week so we can continue our discussion.
LawDawg,
I hope that you were acquitted ;-)
I look forward to the discussion.
Keith:"I hope that you were acquitted ;-)"
I was. It's nice to be back home. Bubbles missed me terribly.
:>)
df> Could you image what would happen if I brought my right nut into this debate???
Well, when you pull it out of Keith Sr. mouth, go ahead and do that. ;) But I doubt your arguments will get any better. lawdawg could probably give you his last testicle but you'd still just be another broke critbot with little drive or perserverance.
Let's be honest, if you were an IBO, but now are not, its because you didn't find the right people. Don't tell me if you would have sponsored 1 in 3 people you talked to, and duplicated it, that you would have quit. You quit because you didn't get enough yes's for you to stay in.
But here's a question. Do you think that the last person to go Diamond has? Do you think that somewhere, right now, there's not a new guy that in 1-2 years will be Platinum. My personal sponsor, the guy who showed me the plan and registered me is 2 months from his $2500 Platinum bonus. He's been at 7500-9000pv for the last 3/4 months. And he's 22 years old!! Not even been in 3 years yet. Probably gonna be a Sapphire within the next 8 months. He made $3200 this month and in 2-3 more he'll have a $5000 month! Maybe you could have sponsored him. Maybe you could've sponsored someone like him.
Are there people who have a passive income from this? Have you seen the plan?? The answer is yes. Once you sponsor a handful of people, if they want to build it, you can't stop it from growing if you wanted to. You have 3 people build it to Platinum, you're an emerald rather that was your goal or not! You sponsor 9 people that take 20 years to go Diamond- you're a Crown Ambassador making a high 6, probably 7-8 figure income.
Do I plan on having a passive income oneday? Basicaly, but I'll say No, I plan on being active to some degree for a long time. But do I plan on putting 40 hours a week into it? No! I plan on oneday being able to walk away forever. But who can't take 12 days out of their year to talk at a few functions.
Probably at Diamond or EDC, most could walk away. Heck maybe even at Emerald - just auto-renew, set-up 100pv on Ditto, plug your team into your uplines functions, and you're good to go. But who wouldn't want to make a little extra. And for most, the money isn't the motivator, once you have a certain amount. They do it for a bigger cause. They want to help people. Plus they have fun being around the people. At the next function I go to, all those who qualified are playing in a baseball game the night before. Joe M has rented out Grier Stadium again, and whoever wants to come and watch can. The tickets only cost... Nothing!! ;) (http://www.extremefreedomteam.com)
So yea, even when I'm making a solid $300,000 a year, I'll still talk at functions. I may even still show the plan at meetings. Why, cause I can help alot more, and make a lot more. I'd be happy with $300,000/yr, but guys like Larry Winters give away $300,000 a year and have fun doing it! Larry said, "you guys think I'm so busy, let me tell you, I wear a suit and tie maybe 4-6 times a year. I'm usually wearing a t-shirt, shorts and deck shoes." Thats cause he make enough to not ever have to do anything else again. But he has a bigger cause and likes helping people.
Tony, I understand your burn to build the business - the scenarios that you lay out are seductive, to say the least! Who in their right mind wouldn't want to sponsor 9 people who go diamond - even if it took 20 years, it would be worth it to go Crown.
Now, ex-tools, I don't think it's really 8 figures (I've seen Dex's bonus checks), but it is a lot of money all the same. Now, granting that it takes tens of thousands of active distributors to create a Crownship, and given a 20 year retention residual of less than 10%, tell me: how many people do you have to go through to create that 20 year Crownship?
I'm not saying it's not possible, but how many Crowns does the world population support? 10? 50? 500?
Versus how many people are sold this "possible dream"? Probably a whole lot more than can ever even close to acheiving it - but many of those will throw a lot of other possible dreams away, seduced by the allure of easy (or granted, even not so easy) money.
And no matter how much you disagee about the "optional" tools program, those people will flat-out waste much or all of their potential retail/personal use profits on these useless (to them) tools and functions.
And your comment directed towards me regarding the testicles was just flat-out low class, and un-called for. I now know two things for sure:
You can take the trash out of the trailer... but you can't take the trailer out of the trash.
and
I know that I can't engage you in meaningful dialog when you feel threatened. You revert to stupidity.
I am glad someone agrees with myself that Tony is trailer trash.
Keith> Between you and Tony ham-and-egging it on vapid Quixtar bullcrap
Keith> Unlike M&M and [Tony], I like highbrow theoretical discussions where thoughtfulness, reason and logic are required.
Keith, don't act so gd innocent. I tried to be nice and civil long enough. I apologize that I sunk to the level of some of you on here, so don't act like WE started the trash-talk!
How bout you yell at df for even making the "my left nut" argument.
You can insult me all you want, and be skeptical all you want. How many Crown Ambassadors can there be, I don't know. But I know there's one in Korea who is 21 years old!!
You don't have to be a Crown to be well off in this. You can make good money at Emerald. Thats 3 Platinums. How many people does it take to be Platinum, well 25 couples at 300pv is 7500. You do the math.
I'm seeing it work, and this is no longer even meaningful debate. I've addressed every issue thrown out there from prices to tools, etc.
It might not work for you, but it WILL work for me. Because I made the decision it will work for me.
Maybe I'll post more later, but I got work to do.
My apologies again for low blow, but I was kinda caught up in the current of BS on here.
Some people WILL make a profit in a pyramid scheme. That's the whole concept: a few make a lot of money off the losses of the many.
That doesn't mean it isn't a pryamid scheme. And it doesn't mean it's a prudent thing on which to waste your time or money.
In the case of Amway/Quixtar, the business is in a state of constant collapse, with suckers like Tony and Michael replacing their upline's lost volume at the same rate people are quitting.
It's been that way for thrirty years. There are as many IBOs in the U.S. today as there was in 1972. So it isn't growing. There is no residual income. And the vast, vast majority of people who get involved will lose money.
Tony,
Above all else, the one thing that I am not is innocent.
I think that my observations are insulting to you because they point out the painfully obvious. We have heard (and made) all of the same declarations of success; we have spouted the same tapespeak - and most of us who contribute on the critbot side have lived what you now experience. Hence my use of the word vapid: boring, dull rehash of the same concepts that lured us in.
I used the term "highbrow" somewhat tounge-in-cheek (I'm a "tounge-in-cheek" kinda guy), here again referring to discussions demonstrating some kind of critical thought processes, and not just regurgitation of what we learned from our upline mentors. I know that WWDB/WWG discourages individual thought, so I understand the dynamics of why you do what you do.
You are being programmed for success.
Funny, though - when exactly have you tried to act "nice and civil"? I must have missed that contribution. Most of your posts have been anything but.
Lastly, df never placed HIS testicles into anyone elses orifices - only you did that.
Tongue. It's TONGUE, dammit.
Hope nobody ignores my post 'cause of the speeling :-)
Well now how damn ironic is that? Keith blasts me for being rude and "lowbrow", I actually apologize for the rude comment, and then he makes the same "low class" comment! Well welcome to the Lower Level Keith! I'm taking the elevator back up, but stay as long as you like, you'll find most of the critbots down here with you.
And actually for a very long time, my posts were very civil (sorry you missed those), with nothing but valid points, and arguments from my POV- I avoided name calling, I took the high road, but after repeated attacks and insults, I started getting a little more of a "push back" attitude.
Don't worry too much about the spelling error - only half-witted critbots blast people on that. And whatever you do don't point out that They ever made a typo - they really hate that!!
Point of fact:
What I did just say was that you VERBALLY placed df's testicle in my mouth (orifice).
df indelicately indicated his ability to win a logical argument with, I believe, one testicle tied behind his back.
That statement implied no physical contact between the aformentioned gonad and another person, only, I'm assuming, his own. It is, however, possible that through a testicular suspension device that said organ needed no physical contact, save for it's (hopeful) continuous bodily attachment.
But I digress.
You were the only contributor who VERBALLY indicated oral-testicular contact; I did not do so.
Therefore my observation.
Odd, though, the lack of your response to the salient portion of my contribution. Ironic? I think not.
keith> Lastly, df never placed HIS testicles into anyone elses orifices - only you did that.
you're interpretation is a bit of a stretch, but nice recovery.
Actually, I didn't comment on the rest because I have over and over; and I don't have time, just as you, to comment on everything that everyone says.
As I've stated over and over, calling it tapespeak is weak and pitiable. Just because you were unsuccessful at your whimsical attempt at entrepreneurship doesn't mean that others cannot succeed where you fell short.
keith> I used the term "highbrow" somewhat tounge-in-cheek... here again referring to discussions demonstrating some kind of critical thought processes, and not just regurgitation of what we learned from our upline mentors.
well see above for my view on tapespeak, but I believe your intent was to imply that I was "lowbrow" and incapable of logical discussion or critical thought processes, which is simply ficticious. I did not just blindly join the flock in the hopes of eternal riches, just as I do not shudder from the rants of critbots spouting mendacities. I too did research and came to my own conclusions. Just as I too can pull out my 10th grade vocab book and see who I can impress.
Take care Keith, and good luck trying to destroy peoples' dreams - maybe if enough critbots join together you can stop ALL people from becoming more than they are.
Tony,
No recovery needed on my part - I said what I said, I patiently led you through an explanation of its meaning... what more could you want? I believe that you simply misinterpreted my words, and continue to do so.
As far as your sophomoric statement regarding my "destroying peoples' dreams" simply by providing solid information along with a strong and well founded opinion... sorry. I think that Am/Quix has done more in the real world to destroy peoples' financial stability and faith in business than a misguided critbot like me ever has.
As to my "whimsical attempt at entrepreneurship", heck, I'm pretty happy with the results so far. If you'd ever like to compare balance sheets, cash flow statements and P&L's with me, just let me know. (BTW, that's called confidence, not arrogance). Now, if you were actually referring to my 4 and 1/2 years of MLM with Amway, you may want to understand that I made a business decision to leave my downline to my upline. The business neither met my financial needs nor did it make any sense to continue in business with "upline partners" who would lie to me. It was just a (good) business decision to end my involvement.
I again restate that it is my hope that every person exposed to Quixtar read this blog, along with ALL OTHER information available on the internet, before making a business decision. Use good judgement, be discerning, and then move forward with their decision knowing that they didn't make it based on hype and excitement alone.
Tony, where exactly do you find dream stealing in that?
Keith, I won't argue want you meant. I may have misinterpreted your statement of "only you did that" but I know thats how most of the others probably read it whether they admit it or not. But it doesn't matter.
And yes, I was refering to your mlm business not whatever you do now. That's fine that you made a business decision to leave your downline to your upline, since they were lieing to you. I'm very happy with my upline, so I've made the decision to stay. (I know a guy who quit after 1 year, left one IBO to his upline, now that IBO is at 8000 PV) hmm... threw away an $800 monthly bonus.
I'm all for people doing thorough research, not just reading what any joe shmoe writes hear. But over and over I hear people saying they found this site and then quit, or found the site and decided to tell their friend they couldn't go to the meeting for whatever reason.
The only good this blog does and shows us IBOs what BS some people are saying so we can combat it. And its also good to see what some LOS have done wrong and what we can do better.
As for basing a decision off what you read here, I hope the only decision made is to get more information from reliable sources!
But they'll always be those people that vote for a certain candidate because of something they heard while waiting at the bus stop.
(and don't act like just because you make one post where you seem unbiased and promote research, that you're not a dream stealer. I've read your stuff for 2-3 months now. You are anti-Qx. In your opinion if someone did research and decided to become an IBO, they made a mistake. They must not have done the "right" research. you say over and over that you did it and it didn't work - its a scam! That's a dream stealer - it didn't work for you! And you ought to know the difference.
Hi Tony,
Thanks for the reasoned response. I appreciate it.
I will admit to having posted harsh words about the Am/Quix business. It's an issue (one of many) that concerns me, and about which I have strong feelings.
I have in the past been an active business builder in Amway, and I do understand your frustrations - because the same frustrations came up, to a lesser degree, in 1995 to 1999 while I was building the business. People would talk to a buddy, or a co-worker, or a stranger at the bus stop, hear something negative, and quit. Or not follow through on a commitment that they made to me, like go to the next open... Or not take or return my phone calls.
So, yes, I understand your frustration - and I empathize. But knowing what I know now, and having experienced and seen what goes on at the high levels of the business (where tool money IS important) - I'm cynical. And jaded. And I would never encourage anyone whom I care about to spend time trying to build this business.
Yes, it may be that my ex-LOS is the only LOS that had (or still has) the abusive practices I have detailed in the past. Again, I'm cynical, so I don't think so. And I don't expect that to change until it absolutely must - the money is too great.
I know that you think that I harp on the tools, mostly because I do! But just because you think that I unfairly judge the entire program, based on my focus on the shadow tools pyramid does not make me wrong - it just makes me an individual with strong opinions who happens to disagree with you. I will argue the tools issue to death based on moral, ethical and especially legal principals. If a potential IBO reads that, does the research as to what it all means, and comes to a well thought out decision - I'm content. Even if they choose to pursue the business.
If you run your business the way that you say that you do - which I think is more in line with David R.- then at very least I see you as a potential force for change in the Quixtar business. Admittedly, a very small force, because you are up against a system run by people who don't want it to change - the money is too great.
If any of my ex-downline got to 8000pv under my upline, that's great for them. I couldn't continue to see them shelling out thousands of dollars per year on the system, on a hope and a prayer. Plus, just one leg at 8000PV doesn't really qualify me for anything, does it?
Oh, well, I didn't buy a mess of Microsoft at IPO, either. Too bad.
Maybe your problem is that you didn't use your tool business to your advantage. You complain about people quitting when they hear negative comments made by co-workers, etc. but maybe if your business was solidified with tool flow, your people would be strong enough not to fold under the pressures of mediocre society.
Ah! Their wal-but icecream is sure one devil! Satan-ly addictive!
Posted by: Imran Aziz | June 15, 2005 2:18 AM