Quixtar Archive
February 4, 2008
New Event Rule posted
Posted by Truth
Over at the Ada-Tudes blog there has been a post about Quixtar's new rule which will allow sales of products at events. Of course as with just about everything in Amway or Quixtar there are restrictions. Here is what was posted as the "pending" rule for event sales:
4.3.3 Event Sales: The display and sale of health, beauty and sports nutrition products by IBOs only at temporary (no more than 10 days) health and beauty shows and certain kinds of sporting events (e.g.: bike race, marathon, 3-on-3 basketball tournament) are permitted. The following information must be received by the Corporation, in writing, 30 days prior to the event, to allow sufficient time to grant approval.
4.3.3.1. A written description of the type of event (including date of event).
4.3.3.2. Name of the specific product(s) to be displayed and sold.
4.3.3.3. A list of specific literature to be used at the booth or for handouts. Any privately produced material for handouts or display must be sent with the booth request for approval.
4.3.3.4. A signed statement from the Platinum or above IBO accepting responsibility for booth activity and include a list of all names of IBOs staffing the booth.
4.3.3.5 A post-event accounting of total volume sold must be provided to the Corporation by the Platinum if the volume sold is part of the qualifying volume for Silver Producer or above for purposes of verifying 70% Rule compliance.
I think the new rule is great and all since I always thought it was completely stupid to allow a booth to be set up at events but no sales were allowed to be made. But, I still don't understand why they need to restrict the sales. I can understand that the health and beauty products along with XS will most likely be the best products to use at an event. But what about having a booth at a festival with a jewelry display?
I also don't agree with IBOs not being allowed to secure a permanent booth somewhere. It was clear in the article that sporting events were allowed but only temporary ones like a tournament or a race of some sort. Personally I don't see the problem with an IBO securing a permanent spot at a concession stand at football or baseball events, or perhaps a permanent booth where other products can be sold. In every other area of business it's a snooze or lose world, so for those IBOs that do what it takes to secure other areas to sell their products should be allowed to do so.
January 22, 2008
Price vs. Value
Posted by Truth
There has been quite a fuss lately over the prices of Quixtar products. Of course this has always been an issue, but has been put more in focus lately because of the whole Quixtar v. TEAM mess. The simple arguments are that Amway/Quixtar prices are too high, and of course the common theme for the defense is that the value of the product justifies the high prices.
Personally I can see both sides of this debate. I don't necessarily agree 100% with either side in this debate, but I think both sides make some pretty valid points. I was over on the Ada-Tudes blog and was reading the post by Ray Alexander titled "Not Wal-Mart and Never Want to Be". While reading this post and many of the comments that were left I got to thinking about a seminar I attended with my wife when she was an owner of a vacuum sales office.
After leaving Quixtar my wife started selling vacuums to make some extra money. Well she became quite good at it and eventually was asked to open her own office and manage dealers. She has since closed up her office and moved on to other things, but I will always remember this one speaker at a seminar that she invited me to go along to. I would also like to point out as a side note that this seminar was 100% free, even the lunch they provided.
The feature speaker was the vice-president of the company who manufactured the vacuums. He talked about selling value instead of a vacuum. That was a big topic since the dealers were selling a vacuum that costed $1800. His example showed that throughout the demonstration of the product you were building value, and the objective was to build more then $1800 worth of value before the demonstration was over. If a salesperson could do that they would meet less resistance from the customer when it came time to close the sale. In a nutshell he was saying to show the customer why the product is worth the price.
To demonstrate what he meant he pulled out a $100 bill and asked who would be willing to give him $10 for his $100 bill. Obviously everyone in the room would do what they had to in order to give him $10 for $100. That pretty much drove the point home. If a salesperson could build up $3000 worth of value in the product, closing the sale at $1800 was going to be easier.
So if you have read this far you are probably asking what this has to do with Quixtar. Well, can Quixtar products be built up in their value enough to be sold at their current prices? I mean let's face it, just telling a customer that the value of your product is superior isn't really going to get you far. Would retailing numbers look better if IBOs were better informed about the products so that they could build the value in them? Sometimes I think that is what Amway/Quixtar is trying to do with all the training that they are releasing via the web. So I see two sides to this entire argument and I guess it comes down to one question. Are the prices too high, or are IBOs just not able to build the value in the product before they try and sell it?
January 19, 2008
Couldn't do any worse
Posted by Truth
Over on the Ada-tudes blog there was an article by Todd Krause which seemed to address some comments made on an earlier article he wrote about Quixtar sales. Anyway I found it a bit funny that he was addressing those who made statements to the effect that the corporation does not have the credibility to tell IBOs how to sell or build Quixtar/Amway businesses. Todd Krause agreed with the statements saying it was not their intention to go around IBO leaders.
Well in my opinion the corporation is doing more to teach IBOs how to sell a product then IBO leaders are. IBO leaders are concentrating on teaching IBOs how to sell a "system". One look at the numbers that only 3.4% of all Quixtar sales were sold to actual customers tells you how good the IBO leaders have been at teaching selling techniques. So I don't think the IBOs should concern themselves so much with where the teaching is coming from, 3.4% isn't exactly a high bar that has been set.
January 15, 2008
Retailing in Quixtar Part 3 (10, 50, 100)
Posted by Truth
For the final part of the Retailing in Quixtar series I am going to address the Quixtar rule that states an IBO must make at least one sale to 10 different people, sell 50PV worth of product, or sell $100 worth of product in order to get downline bonuses. This rule was referred to as the ten customer rule in the FTC v. Amway decision and here is what was written about it in the decision:
74. Amway's 'tencustomer' rule provides that distributors may not receive a performance bonus unless they prove a sale to each of ten different retail customers during each month. (RX 331, pp. 1B and 17B) The Direct Distributors have the primary responsibility for enforcing the tencustomer rule in their own group. (S. Bryant, Tr. 406162) The tencustomer rule was started by Amway about 1970. Prior to that, there was a 25 sales rule which required the distributor to make 25 retail sales a month without regard to the number of customers. (S. Bryant, Tr. 408586) The tencustomer rule is enforced by Amway and the Direct Distributors.
Rule Changes?
Now I will admit I don't know the whole history of this rule so I can only assume things have changed since the FTC v. Amway decision. One of the changes that I know of is that the website keeps track of these numbers when orders by customers are placed. This of course is a change that came with the new modern direct fulfillment as opposed to ordering and picking up from upline. But as far as the rule goes in addition to having one sale to ten different customers, an IBO can sell 50PV worth of products or $100 worth of product to get downline bonuses.
Can it be enforced?
As I pointed out in Part 2 of this series however there is a big difference between making a rule and enforcing it. I think what should matter here is not so much that a rule is in place but that it is actually being enforced, and works. The question should be does it truly encourage retailing as it says it does. Personally I remember many people talking about how they would simply purchase 50PV worth of product, check the option that they were buying it for a customer and they took care of it.
Sadly, in my opinion this is another rule that cannot be enforced and it is no wonder that there was only 3.4% of sales to actual customers. Personally I don't think there is really anyway Quixtar can make any rule that would "encourage" retail sales. If they wanted to encourage retail sales, they need to start making it more appealing to IBOs. The problem is that sponsoring new IBOs has been seen as the more appealing way to make money.
Thankfully Quixtar has at least started to look at ways to make retailing products more appealing and most important more profitable for IBOs. Also, there are signs of another step in the right direction with the new rule that allows sales at events. In the end however I don't think the concept of retailing products will be the most appealing to IBOs until Quixtar makes their prices more competitive, and I am talking about the retail price, not the wholesale. You can preach on quality until you are blue in the face and in the end that will only carry you so far.
January 7, 2008
Retailing in Quixtar Part 2 (70% Rule)
Posted by Truth
Perhaps one of the most discussed rules in Amway/Quixtar is the 70% rule. Often it is referred to as the focus of the FTC v. Amway case from 1979. Often times however this rule is misunderstood. So with first things being first we need to understand the 70% rule. Currently the Quixtar rule referencing the 70% rule states:
4.18. Seventy Percent Rule: An IBO must sell, at a commercially reasonable price, at least 70% of the total amount of products he or she purchased during a given month in order to receive the Performance Bonus or recognition due on all the products purchased; if the IBO fails to sell at least 70%, then such IBO may be paid that percentage of Performance Bonus measured by the amount of products that can be shown to have been actually sold, rather than the amount of products purchased, and recognized accordingly. For purposes of this Rule, products used for personal or family consumption or given out as samples are also considered as part of the sales volume.
However, this is not always how the rule was worded, and when you read how the rule was wrote before one can certainly understand why someone would think that an IBO needed to sell 70% of their volume before getting a bonus. Here is how the rule used to be worded:
4.18. Seventy Percent Rule: An IBO must sell at least 70% of the total amount of products pur-chased during a given month in order to receive the Performance Bonus or recognition due on all the products purchased; if the IBO fails to sell at least 70%, then such IBO may be paid that percentage of Performance Bonus measured by the amount of products actually sold, rather than the amount of products purchased, and recognized accordingly.
Some supporters argue that this always included sales to downline, but that is not outlined in the rule so that was clearly speculation on their part. Besides, now that Quixtar is mostly direct fullfillment I don't see how you sell to your downline since everyone supposedly buys from themselves and teaches others to do the same. I have yet to be shown how you can purchase one item from yourself and your upline at the same time. With product pickup I can see how sales to downlines apply, but with direct fullfillment I see the 70% rule applying to personal circle volume only.
In reading the decision on the FTC v. Amway case I have to agree with the supporters that the 70% rule was recognized as a way to prevent inventory loading. I know the wording talks about sales, but it also states clearly what the rule was put in place to prevent:
The '70 percent rule' provides that '[every] distributor must sell at wholesale and/or retail at least 70% of the total amount of products he bought during a given month in order to receive the Performance Bonus due on all products bought . . ..' This rule prevents the accumulation of inventory at any level.
With the modern day direct fullfillment I have to agree again with the supporters that if an IBO is consuming their purchases or giving away samples that those acts do prevent inventory loading and therefore are in compliance with the 70% rule. The only problem with this rule is I don't see how Quixtar can possibly enforce it without some pretty extreme measures.
How do you know that an IBO actually consumed all of what they purchased that month? Short of doing home inspections it is impossible to know. In addition to that what is the difference between buying a ton of product to make a pin level and stocking it up in your house, and buying a ton of product to make a pin level and giving it away as samples. The way I see it they are the same thing. Once again short of home inspections by Quixtar this rule cannot possibly be enforced.
In the end the 70% rule simply cannot be enforced and is only on the books for the benefit of Quixtar so they can say they are in compliance with the FTC decision. I will say any IBO out there who is purchasing product just to make a pin level is crazy, but I wouldn't put it past anyone to do, or worse someone to "advise" their downline to do. To make it worse there is nothing Quixtar would be able to do about it. It seems the 70% rule is a perfect example that making a rule and enforcing a rule are two completely different things.
January 2, 2008
Retailing in Quixtar Part 1 (3.4%)
Posted by Truth
I wanted to write a post about how the enforcement of the Amway/Quixtar retailing rules were a joke but found that stepping into that realm only seemed to open more doors to more issues. So in the interest of trying to keep the posts on this as brief as possible I decided to break it up into three parts.
In part 1 I will discuss the number 3.4% which is the number I got from the California lawsuit transcript. Just to give some background, DJ Poyfair, who is the counsel for the Plantiffs (Orrin Woodward, etc), was making a point about how the high prices were not justified by the high quality of the products and had this to say:
This network marketing company has outside sales of 3.4% of outside. That’s if you accept their definition of what constitutes outside retail sales.
Now, Poyfair was referring to the 70% rule from FTC v. Amway when bringing this up, and was trying to imply that the FTC said IBOs should be selling 70% of the products that they buy. I write this only to include proper context, I will save the 70% rule for Part 2.
The first thing that came to mind when I saw that only 3.4% of sales in Quixtar were outside sales, is that this is no real surprise. I don't think anyone could honestly say they expected such a number to be any higher. I think it speaks volumes to the fact that the focus is on sponsoring and very little focus has been placed on actually selling a product to a customer.
With those kinds of numbers I don't see how this can be taken seriously as a business. I have said it before that if IBOs had the numbers to show they were really a business, they wouldn't have to have rehearsed answers when showing the buisness plan. Try flashing the 3.4% next time you show the plan and I bet the person across the table gets up and leaves in about 3.4 seconds.
Of course as with any other fact that comes out about Amway/Quixtar there is a supporter there to try and put spin and sugar on it to make it sound better. The spin/sugar this time is that this number is only concluded by using the definition Quixtar uses for an outside sale. Ironically, that is the same definition that many would assume it is, a sale to an actual customer, not an IBO. The argument is that many people who are IBOs simply buy the products and don't sponsor or sell to others, therefore making them actually customers.
On the surface this seems valid and if one were to count those purchases as sales to customers the number would certainly rise. But, I see it as just another example of what is wrong with this business. Why should someone have to sign up as a business owner just so they can get a good price? Doesn't it make more sense to have your prices competitive in the first place so that you can make retail profit on top of your PV check? What other business model does someone have to sign-up as a business owner just to get good prices?
Frankly I think IBOs should be a bit peeved with Quixtar over the prices and compensation plan. Ty Tribble many times has showed examples of other MLM companies that have much better compensation plans as well as better prices on their products. Sitting on 3.4% Quixtar looks more like a Wholesale buyer's club then it does a business.
December 23, 2007
Retailing apparently adds legitimacy.
Posted by Truth
You will have to forgive me for writing articles about posts from other blogs that you may have already read quite a while ago. I was out of the loop for quite some time while chasing down some of my ambitions. But since being back writing for this blog I have gotten back into the practice of reading other blogs about Quixtar and most of the time I find something that I like to post here and comment about. Today was no different as I started reading some of the past stories from the True IBO Stories blog. In a story from June of this year Joe and Christie Ison of Arkansas after having been in Quixtar for four years decided to become a strong retailing group and made an interesting discovery.
Retailing adds legitimacy, we've found. Quixtar has been the leader in making sure we are all FTC compliant, but we've discovered that going beyond the minimums creates even more growth. Keep up the good work on retail training (like the new Ribbon online training) for IBOs! (emphasis mine)
Who knew? Now first of all I would like to give kudos to Joe and Christie for looking to a focus on retailing as a way to increase their profits rather then just sponsoring. All too often I would see groups do a big push on sponsoring as a way to show success and retailing to customers was that pesky thing Quixtar wanted you to do, and most times ways were found to get around that.
I am not surprised that they found more growth through an increase in retailing. I mean it only makes sense that the more you are retailing to actual customers rather then just each other the more you look like a "legitimate" business, and the more interest you will create. They don't have to answer questions with questions when prospects ask how much they are making or what kind of success the group has had. They don't need to spin tales about this one guy in this one group who went super diamond platinum in a month even though he was skeptical. They don't need letters from the FTC to show how selling to each other is really selling products. They have all they need and that is numbers that make them look like a real business selling real products to real customers.
I have said it before and this story just helps confirm that what makes the most sense is what works the best. Focus your business on retailing first and the sponsoring of new IBOs will take care of itself. I would imagine Joe and Christie have what I would bet a majority of groups don't have in Quixtar and that is a group that as a whole makes a profit and not just those at the top.
December 22, 2007
Four Elements for a legal Quixtar
Posted by Truth
Today I was surfing some of the past articles over on the Quixtar Ada-Tudes blog for some interesting reading. As I figured I came across an article that caught my attention. Gary VanderVen who is Quixtar's director of Business Conduct and Rules wrote an article titled "What makes Quixtar Legal". In this article he describes that there is no such thing as a legal pyramid scheme, and since they say Quixtar is legal, it is not a pyramid scheme.
He then goes on to list "four key elements" that makes the Quixtar compensation plan "legal and a model of integrity". I found these four elements interesting because there are three of them that I mostly agree with, and one that I don't think tells the whole story.
1. Sales-based compensation. Compensation in the Quixtar Plan is based on sales of products and services to consumers. An IBO who sponsors other IBOs earns income based on his own sales and on sales made by the IBOs he sponsors. Quixtar has various rules to assure that compensation is based on product sales.
This would be fine if it really was a plan that pays for sales made by an IBO and on sales made by IBOs he/she sponsors. Unfortunately for Quixtar and Mr. VanderVen this is not reality at all. The reality is that Quixtar IBOs are selling to the IBOs that they sponsor. Some would argue that IBO purchases count as sales, I disagree but will save that argument for another article.
My main issue is that no one has clearly shown me another business that simply makes sales to other businesses that sell the same products. Does that even make sense? Doesn't for me. One would think that if you own a business that sells many different types of products, you would have a certain minor "element" to your business I like to call customers. The only customers I ever see in this business is IBOs as customers of Quixtar. As far as I am concerned that is not a business at all. At best what you have is a wholesale buying club.
December 21, 2007
Would lower prices get you back?
Posted by Truth
With all the talk about the Amway/Quixtar prices, especially with all the legal issues surrounding that very subject, would it matter to you if the prices were lowered to be competitive? Let's say that Quixtar does lower the prices of their products so that they are more competitive and so IBOs can actually sell a product at retail and make a profit. Would this be of interest to anyone who has never been or was an IBO? Would you entertain the thought of signing up again to sell products, or would it not be worth it?
Personally I don't believe I would sign up ever again, but I can't say I wouldn't be tempted if the prices were lowered to be competitive with what people are already paying. I just don't know if the lower prices would be worth it even if it was just to sell products. Frankly, I have been very disappointed with Quixtar's flexing of their corporate muscles with this whole TEAM matter. Don't get me wrong, this does not mean I am siding with TEAM (they have gotten quite stupid in their own right) but if Quixtar has admitted to knowing how high their prices were all this time it doesn't seem they really care for the IBO like they say. It's one thing to put out a feel good commercial, it's another to take action.
December 11, 2007
Judge Rules against Quixtar
Posted by Truth
In a bit of a late article that I just got in my Google Alerts, a judge ruled against Quixtar in their contempt complaint against former distributors. Apparently ex-distributors were prohibited from using their Quixtar networks for other businesses, and Quixtar claimed that they had violated that order. The judge ruled against Quixtar saying they did not have enough evidence to back that claim. The judge however did leave it open for an arbitrator to decide later if Quixtar is entitled to any damages.
There is also a bit about the Amway UK case. I found it interesting that the "self-imposed" reform efforts that Amway did was not enough to get the government to drop their case. The trial started on the 26th of Nov. I liked how the article describes what claims were made against Amway UK:
Government investigators reportedly found people misrepresenting the business, making false claims, downplaying the Amway name, signing up new distributors and making it sound like they didn't need to sell products to make money
Wonder if any of that is going on in Quixtar US?
September 2, 2007
They're Taking Notice
Posted by QBlog
PRWeek has an interesting article about Quixtar and IBOs using the Web to spar.
...Ashton Partners has been hired to represent a group of 15 distributors in a lawsuit against Quixtar, the American Amway operations. Ashton Partners, which has a practice dedicated to litigation support, has been brought on board to provide strategic communications counsel, drive media relations and outreach, and manage the plaintiff’s Web site, www.freetheibo.com.
“Ashton Partners, like other media consultants with whom we deal, are essential to the overall management of the litigation, much more now than in years past because of the power of the [Internet],” said Poyfair.
Quixtar has struck back with entries on their own blog, http://media.alticorblogs.com, taking an aggressive tone in touting a recent ruling in their favor by a Michigan court...
I hope you readers are following this because it seems like a real fascinating MLM Soap Opera (pun intended).
May 27, 2007
A Sprinkle of Negative
Posted by Truth
Around a week ago I wrote a piece about the first story that was posted over at the True IBO Stories blog in the Opportunity Zone. Of course I saw it as a bad start since the author of the story was calling his friends "broke", critical people "losers", and apparently left his wife out of the loop on his decision.
Well this past Monday Nick Katsarelas, who is the one who posts the stories on the blog, responded to Insider's comment, and my article about his decision to leave the terminology in place. You can go over to the blog to see his comment in full. I do have one little excerpt from his comment that I would like to respond to:
When I edited the Spiro's story, I left in the passage you referenced because I felt it bolstered Steve's explanation of how he doggedly pursued the business opportunity. He did what many people do when they don't want to be deterred from a goal: He surrounded himself with positive people who supported his pursuit.
I of course appreciate seeing Nick respond, giving certainly a better understanding of why it was left in and his thinking. My response to this is not necessarily addressed directly to Nick, but rather as a general response to those who hold the ideal that in order to achieve a goal you need to keep away from the naysayers.
On one hand I agree that being around a bunch of negative people all the time while you are pursuing a goal is no fun at all. It's hard enough to achieve your goal, you certainly don't need constant hammering in your ear about why you shouldn't or can't do it. However, on the other hand this concept can be taken too far in my opinion and having a little negative around just might actually come to benefit you if you know how to handle it.
After leaving Quixtar my desire to own and operate my own business didn't go away I just focused it towards something that I had a passion for. Unlike how I was taught in Quixtar however I never blocked out the negative, or ignored it. Heck in some cases I actually went looking for it. What I knew, is that no matter what anyone had to say about the business that I was pursuing, I was going to do it anyway. That is what happens when you get involved in something you have a passion for. If you are truly passionate about what you do, negative shouldn't be a factor.
What I had found out though is that I actually learned many good things from the negative that I would hear and read about. I learned about some of the challenges that were potentially ahead, I learned about the mistakes of others, and was able to see ways to improve on or avoid the issue all together. Negative even from those who tried to discourage me was a learning experience because I asked the key question of WHY? "It's too hard to break into that industry." "WHY?" etc. The other negative that I just thought was silly I was able to laugh at and thank the person for their concern about me.
So I started thinking at that point why was negative such a taboo in Quixtar? So what if your new downline reads Scott Larsen's site? So what if they see the Dateline special tommorow on You Tube? Who cares if their friends tell them about their brother's, friend's, daughter's, mother's, uncle's, cat's, bird who signed up and lost all their money? It's going to happen eventually so wouldn't you rather they see it now and decide they want nothing to do with it, instead of later after you invested your time into them?
I am afraid the comments made in that first IBO story do not explain how someone doggedly pursued a business opportunity. As far as I am concerned it explained how someone made a decision based upon half the information, and most certainly missed out on some good information that more then likely could have made him more profitable, and at a faster rate.
If you are an IBO the first question you need to ask yourself is are you passionate about what you are doing. If the answer is no, then you need to ask yourself if you are passionate enough about what you are using Quixtar to get that you are willing to put up with it. If the answer is no then you need to quit and find something you are passionate about. I promise you, there is something out there you can make good money at that you have a passion for.
Finally, don't ignore or try to avoid negative. Now use some common sense and understand that I am not saying only associate with negative folks. Associate with all people, and don't be afraid of their opinions. Only those that are weak in their convictions will try and eliminate negative opinions, those who are passionate about what they are doing will listen, see if there is something to be learned, and move on.
May 20, 2007
Bad Start for True IBO Stories
Posted by Truth
I checked out the True IBO Stories blog today since I had heard they posted their first story. Overall it's not a bad story about how a couple got started in the Quixtar business. What I find sad is that the first story comes from an IBO who sees his friends and those on the internet who have different opinions as "broke" and "losers". Now I don't care if this guy made his decision by only viewing one side of the story, to each their own. But I don't think IBOs really think about what they are saying sometimes.
What kind of friend would belittle his other friends in such a manner as this IBO did? If all of your friends are broke and their opinion is worth nothing to you, then are they really your friends, or does that mean that your friendship is simply that shallow?
Now by saying he didn't check with a "loser on the web" I will assume I fall into that category since every other IBO who likes to use the word "loser" usually lumps me into that category. Now if you don't want to do your full research on this business before getting started that is up to you. I however recommend that anyone looking into this business get the story from all sides and make your decision based upon that. I still cannot understand why anyone would advise anyone any differently. Are you that easily influenced by the thoughts and opinions of others that you need to keep yourself blind to them? Somehow I am thinking you may want to give going into business for yourself some second thoughts if that is the case.
If you come to find that Quixtar is something you truly enjoy doing, you should not have any issue with hearing or reading another's opinion on the topic. But maybe, just maybe, by educating yourself on the image of your business you will learn how you can operate in a more successful fashion. Contrary to what IBO leaders say they have not done all the work for you. There is always more to be learned and new situations to adapt to in business and any business leader that tries to tell you otherwise isn't worth their salt, and certainly isn't worth paying money to listen to.
But in conclusion I leave you with some words from one of the men who started it all, Rich DeVos! I would suggest that Quixtar blogs review these words taken from the Directly speaking tapes, the emphasis is mine:
I hear that very often. "There's winners and losers. Are you a winner? Are you a loser?" Almost insulting people who don't sign up. You even got bad terminology. "We're the winners. Over here are the losers in life." They're not losers. They may have a richer, fuller life than those of you that got fancy cars and new clothes or big rings have got. You know, they -- Life is not geared by materialism. You do not decide who's a winner or a loser. There's too -- Life is too complicated for that. We must make sure we always speak of everybody being a winner, even though they may have different goals. My plea here is that when you have a program, you make sure you have people on there who are making $100.00 and thrilled with it, as well as those who make more. Present it as a plan so that everybody can realize their goal, whatever it is.
-Rich DeVos "Directly Speaking I"
You know, when you became a Direct, we offered you a chance to be free and independent; and then I read your mail, and I find out you've lost your freedom. And all we want to do is give it back to you, to be as big or as small in Amway as you want to, to make as much or as little as you like in the Amway Plan by working it, and to go to whichever meetings you want to, and to feel comfortable to stay home if you don't want to, without being branded a loser. Winners go to the meetings; losers stay home. Would you help me get rid of such terminology?
There are no losers in Amway. There are people who choose not to do it; but who are you to tell some teacher that chooses to spend the rest of his life as a dedicated teacher that he's a loser? Who are you to tell a truck driver that chooses to spend more of his time doing things other than Amway, and maybe just drivin' his truck, that he's a loser? Whoever gave you a license to brand people? This business was designed to make everybody a winner, to do as much or as little as they wanted to; and if they chose to do nothing, to make them feel better for having had the experience. We only have winners in this business; and then we have some other winners who choose not to do the business. They just might be bigger winners in life than some of you that have branded them losers. I stand in awe of all people, and I hope you do, too.
-Rich DeVos "Directly Speaking II"
I must say I have always been puzzled by IBOs who claim to care about people, but clearly only care about those people who agree with everything they say and are interested in signing up as IBOs. They couldn't give a crap about anyone else, but somehow they see themselves as a "people person".
March 20, 2007
Leaving Quixtar
Posted by Truth
Beth Dornan had a very interesting post on her blog today. It was a good story about her St. Patrick's Day nicely transitioned into a topic about Quixtar and what they want to be clear on. Now I encourage you to go over and read the whole article, but in a nutshell Beth says Quixtar wants everyone to know what Quixtar is all about. Here is a quote from her article explaining this position:
"Our business is open to just about anyone but it isn't for everyone. Moving forward, we want IBOs who choose not to continue their businesses to do so because the business wasn't for them....not because it wasn't what they were led to believe it was. We want the sign at the door to be clear about what's inside."
Personally I think this is something that will be difficult for Quixtar to ensure since they basically have to trust that their IBOs are in fact making things clear about what is on the inside. So I would like to hear from those of you who are current IBOs or former IBOs. Were things made clear for you about what was on the inside, or did you find yourself involved in something else once you were in? Give some examples about what you were told, and what, if anything, was different once you were inside.
March 7, 2007
New Facts About Quixtar Site
Posted by Truth
Over at the Real Quixtar Blog, Kia (aka Robin Luymes), has reported that a new factsaboutquixtar.com site has launched. From what I understand this site has the same content that one would get if they were to purchase a Facts About Quixtar DVD. Robin explains the purpose of putting the material on a website with the following statement:
As with all tools we provide to IBOs, we want to provide them for free or cover our costs. We're excited to be able to now provide all of that content for free on the Web.
WOW! What a concept! Provide tools for free, or at cost. Anyways, the site contains eight videos and a PDF file with frequently asked questions. I must say I am disappointed in the content of many of the videos. While Robin says it is to help IBOs respond to "tough" questions about their business, most of the videos strike me as propaganda, and they even included everyone's favorite video of Rob Davidson.
Ironically, I just got done posting an article over at my Quixtar Inside Out blog about why IBOs should give their prospects straight answers. I can't say that I think the answers in those videos are straight, I actually feel many of the videos don't completely address the real issues at all.
I did find it interesting however in some of the videos the average time stated for Platinum was 4 years, and the average time for Diamond was 10 years. More confirmation of why I feel it is misleading to show a 2-5 year plan for Diamond. Anyway, head on over and take a look at the videos for yourself, and let me know what you think.
March 6, 2007
What to do with your friends.
Posted by Truth
I found an interesting article by Matthew Paulson who has decided to lay out how to deal with friends who are involved in Quixtar and other MLM "schemes". He apparently is not a big fan of Quixtar, and feels that IBOs who can't take no for an answer have a character flaw:
In the event that the person won’t take no for an answer, you can tell that they have a very serious character flaw. They are only interested in having you as a friend because you could hypothetically make them more money.
Anyway, take a look at his article for yourself and see what he has to say about dealing with friends in Quixtar.
March 1, 2007
Is Quixtar your passion?
Posted by Truth
I am almost finished reading "Chicken Soup for the Entrepreneur's Soul". It's a good book full of great stories. In some of the stories at the beginning there is a quote used that relates to the story. Two of the quotes that have caught my eye were by David Frost and Oprah Winfrey. They are as follows:
"Don't aim for success if you want it; just do what you love and believe in, and it will come naturally." -David Frost
"If you do work that you love, and the work fulfills you, the rest will come." -Oprah Winfrey
These quotes made me take pause and reflect when it comes to the Quixtar business. I can't say I really had the same passion for Quixtar as I do with my side businesss, and I wonder how many IBOs really have a passion for Quixtar. Do you think one can even be successful in Quixtar if being an IBO is not something they are passionate about?
Now I could be wrong here, but it has been my observation that many IBOs spend so much time focused on the success that they want to have, that success is the only thing they really have a passion for. So if you don't have a passion for building a Quixtar business, yet you want to be successful, wouldn't it make sense to look in the mirror, figure out what you are passionate about and go that direction, instead of wasting your time with something you don't really have a passion for?
January 5, 2007
Still Unknown
Posted by QBlog
Just a reality check for everyone out there — unlike Amway, Avon and Mary Kay the Quixtar business is a complete unknown. And the way most people not in "the biz" explain Quixtar to the ignorant is by saying "it used to be Amway."
So, why not change the name back to Amway? Isn't it about time?
December 25, 2006
"Very, Very Surprising"
Posted by QBlog
December 18, 2006
Quixtar Propaganda - Ignorant Critics
Posted by QBlog
Quixtar has its share of critics on the Internet. A quick Google search of the phrase "Quixtar Sucks" currently yields about 21,300 results. By comparison a search for "Amway Sucks" yields about 1,100 websites while a search for "Avon Sucks" returns about 333 results.
And while the results of such searches don't really prove anything they do provide a simple (albeit unscientific) way to explain Quixtar's motivation for creating a "Web Critics" page on one of its corporate PR sites. The page addresses some of the online criticisms and does so with a fairly reasoned and thoughtful approach.
Today, critics of anything, including a business opportunity with hundreds of thousands of human interactions every day, can share their opinions with a broad internet audience. Quixtar supports the right of critics to share their opinions, provided they are truthful and accurate.
That seems to be the way any corporation could be expected to respond to critics. Yet, there's a linked video that takes a somewhat different, more combative tone. Watch it and see what I mean.
Besides the fact that Rob Davidson, VP of Quixtar Sales & Marketing, comes off looking like a pompous ass, he states that "many of them (critics) have never been active" in Quixtar. He then wonders how the so-called critics can go on the Web and complain about Quixtar when they weren't active in the business.
Response
I have two responses to Rob (Pompous Ass) Davidson and Quixtar's propaganda film:
- One doesn't need to be active in Quixtar to complain about it. There are many complaints about Quixtar from people who were harassed at coffee shops, malls and by friends. Those people weren't active but sure are vocal. If Quixtar would like them to quit complaining then it might start by asking its IBOs to quit being so annoying.
- Those so-called critics often have more experience in Quixtar (or Amway) than the majority of Quixtar's current IBOs at any given time. Think about that for a moment. Right now the majority of enrolled Quixtar IBOs have less than two full years of experience as IBOs.
The point is that Rob Davidson is saying that many of Quixtar's critics are inexperienced whiners when the reality is that many of them have years of experience and know what they're talking about. And to illustrate that reality I'm publishing a list of "critics" along with their experience in Quixtar (or Amway).
Quixtar's "Inexperienced" Critics
- Doug Ginter - 2 years
- Jay Bhatia - 7 years
- Muhammad Imran Aziz - 1 year
- Deb Masselink - 11 years and then some
- Kemi Taylor - 1.5 years
- Lisa Umbach - 2.5 years
- Lindy Mack - 5 years
If you'd like to have your name added to this list please send me an email or post a comment and briefly explain how you'd qualify as a "Quixtar critic" to the likes of Rob Davidson.
As this list gets longer more people will see the absurdity of Rob Davidson's response. Maybe Quixtar would be better served by addressing the criticisms from its current and former IBOs instead of dismissing them as the complaints of the uninvolved.
November 10, 2006
The Plan: A Blast From The Past
Posted by David Robison
Everybody misses good ole Qblog when the rest of us, guest bloggers, post our thoughts, experiences and news about Quixtar here at Ye Olde Quixtar Blog. I miss him more than the rest of you, because I have to write something that stands up to his caliber of writing.
This week, I've decided not to match his caliber, but to repeat his caliber.
You may not know this, but when the man suggests to you to read his Archives, that there's some good stuff there; especially in the early days of this blog.
Even way back then, when Qblog was still a card-carrying member of Quixtar, he was making some excellent observations about the business.
How would Qblog show the Quixtar Plan?
"...Nope, there is no "one way" to show the plan but there are some tips and guidelines you are supposed to follow. Anyway, here's my criticisms of the plan but keep in mind I'm no expert and I know that the plan I'm being critical of works, I just can't figure out why or at least I think it could work even better:
1. It's too long. Shorten that plan up. 30 minutes is almost too long but should be the absolute maximum time. Not 1.5 - 2 hours.
2. Be honest and candid. When someone asks a question be ready with an answer that at least seems like you aren't trying to hide anything.
3. Don't ridicule 401ks or the stock market. You'll end up looking like a fool one day. You couldn't be so critical of those things 3 years ago and you won't be able to again one day. Why? Well, it's what everyone is striving for in Quixtar anyway. To be an investor.
4. Quit asking people if they've ever heard of Wal-Mart when you do the Wal-Mart part of the plan. Yes, everyone has heard of Wal-Mart. Everyone shops at Wal-Mart. Why not ask them if they've heard of food or air? Whatever.
5. Don't tell me how much a Diamond or silver or whatever earns if, when I ask you how much you earn, you dodge the question. Be candid. If you're going to volunteer how much others in the business earn then tell everyone how much you earn. Because, ya know, you're standing right there and those diamonds aren't.
That's all I got now. Do this and you'll have a better plan...Or not."
These 5 suggestions stand the test of time; still good advice.
I would stress that today, if your plan was longer than 30 minutes, and you aren't getting interested questions, you are talking to much.
Always answer questions truthfully, there's no need to hide anything. If you don't have an answer; promise to get one.
Wal-mart is a retail store. Discuss the plan as it pertains to operating a Direct Sales business. Discuss THAT industry. Inform the prospect about the nature of Direct Sales and it's niche market.
Show the Plan and emphasize the income potential of the plan. Show the prospect how the plan works with retailing and recruiting. Any bravado about a Diamond's income is unnecessary.
Nope, there is no "one way" to show the plan, but you could do a lot worse than the "Qblog way"
November 8, 2006
DeVos Governor Race
Posted by Truth
With 11% of precincts reporting Fox News has called the race for Governor of Michigan for Jennifer Granholm, ending Dick DeVos's run for governor of the state.
How much impact do you think the "Amway factor" played in this race?
October 13, 2006
DeVos Video Contest
Posted by Truth
Looks like Dick DeVos is reaching out to the talented masses in the general population to come up with ads for his campaign. His campaign has said that they have decided to have a "Create Your Own DeVos for Governor Video Contest". An 80GB video Ipod is the prize that will be awarded to the one person who's ad gets selected. Of course there are rules and requirements in order to get your prize.
I found it a little funny that the DeVos campaign used this wording on their web page pitching the contest:
Dick DeVos knows Michigan is full of talented individuals and he wants to showcase your enthusiasm and ingenuity!
and then has this in the rules:
2. Eligibility: Residents of Michigan. Management, employees, contract employees, and families of Dick DeVos for Governor are prohibited from winning any prizes awarded by Dick DeVos for Governor.
But if you plan to get involved and do your own ad for the Governor hopeful, you had better get started quickly, the deadline according to the DeVos website is 11:59pm EST on 15 October.
Question for discussion:
What do you think is the reason DeVos for Governor came up with this idea? Is it purely just to get people involved, or is there something more?
UPDATE: The Devos for Governor website is now showing the winner and the runner-up campaign ads.
Again I love the disclaimer that is used:
"The content of these videos are the opinions of the entrants, and not necessarily the opinions of Dick DeVos for Governor."
Check them out and give your opinions.
October 3, 2006
Granholm, DeVos Debate in Michigan
Posted by QBlog
I don't live in Michigan so I honestly don't care who gets voted in as the next governor. As they say, I have no dog in this fight. However, since this blog is primarily about Quixtar and Dick DeVos once ran Amway (which later became Quixtar in North America), I'm posting an update on the gubernatorial debates tonight.
The AP reports that the candidates spent the debate "criticizing each other's ads, laying out what needs to be done to spur the economy and saying they would be the best leader for the state."
I didn't watch the debate so I have no opinion on how each candidate performed but bloggers seem to believe the Granholm decidedly defeated Dick DeVos.
- Dick DeVos is a bumbling buffoon
- Granholm Vs. Evil Devos Debate: Live Blogging
- DeVos- He's maybe not as stupid as Dubya
- Oh Man, did Granholm kick DeVos's ass tonight!
- Debate coverage - first wave
- The interview tonight with Dick DeVos and Govenor Granholm sounded way too much like kids bickering
- Technorati - Granholm DeVos Debate
Did you see the debate? If so, what are your thoughts? Who do you think won? Not sure, watch the debate and decide (streaming video).
September 30, 2006
Quixtar's National Ad Campaign
Posted by QBlog
The greatly anticipated Quixtar Ad Campaign has finally arrived. According to Quixtar (restricted access) the first Quixtar-specific television spots air October 1 on NBC during Sunday Night Football.
Some ads featuring Amway have already aired in Michigan in an apparent move to respond to criticisms that surfaced during the gubernatorial campaign of former Amway leader Dick DeVos.
More Quixtar ads are planned for the rest of the year (pdf) including some featuring Nutrilite, Quixtar's premiere product. Quixtar explains the ad campaign:
A multimillion-dollar ad campaign for Quixtar, Alticor, and Nutrilite has launched in the U.S. and Canada.
The goal of this expansive ad program is to generate excitement and pride in the Quixtar business opportunity and in the NUTRILITE brand. By creating and running its own ads, Quixtar will no longer allow its critics to define this business. Instead, Quixtar will tell its own story, in its own words, and on its own terms.
It's interesting that the primary motivation for Quixtar's ad campaign appears to be a reaction to "its critics." Quixtar is not only trying to tell "its own story" but is using a relaunched Quixtar Facts site to tell the story of some of its critics as well. I'll have an additional comment about that later.
But first, let's get a sneak peek at the ads. I've found four commercials and all of them are expertly crafted pieces of marketing. They exude the sort of image branding often aired during the Sunday morning talk shows for financial, health or agricultural companies. There's no real call to action, just some nice branding to make the viewer feel good about the business.
The Land of Will
This first ad mentions the critics in a roundabout way. The narrator says, "of course there will be doubters. Those who stumble upon a half-filled glass and think only of how thirsty they might be." Who are these doubters? Are they the folks that choose not to become Quixtar IBOs? Contrast those two lines from the commercial with the comments of Rich DeVos, Amway's Co-Founder, from his infamous Directly Speaking tapes:
There are no losers in Amway. There are people who choose not to do it; but who are you to tell some teacher that chooses to spend the rest of his life as a dedicated teacher that he's a loser? Who are you to tell a truck driver that chooses to spend more of his time doing things other than Amway, and maybe just drivin' his truck, that he's a loser? Whoever gave you a license to brand people?
So, who are these doubters? The commercial continues by explaining that the land of will is where the narrator lives, and that it is populated by over half a million others which clearly refers to Quixtar IBOs. So the "Land of Will" is those in Quixtar and the doubters are those outside of Quixtar?
Won't Becomes Will
This commercial is shorter and just talks about "won't" becoming "will." I like this ad much better than the first. It's optimistic and leaves out the ambiguous finger-pointing at those doubters.
Nutrilite - Plant Tour
This commercial kicks it in so many ways. I like it. No talking, just music, images and text. Very well done.
Nutrilite - Package
Another great looking commercial. I'm starting to think Quixtar should just stick to marketing its products and stop with the whole opportunity thing.
Final Comments
I like these commercials and I know that if I were an IBO I'd be excited about them. When my wife was involved with Quixtar I often wondered why the corporation didn't do any advertising. It was so difficult to explain the business to people sometimes and it seemed that just a little national brand awareness would go a long way towards helping her business. When I questioned her and her upline about the lack of advertising I was told that Quixtar doesn't advertise so it can put more money into the hands of its IBOs.
Hogwash. I don't know why Quixtar didn't regularly advertise but it certainly wasn't so it could give more money to IBOs. That's the same faulty logic that says building a new downtown arena will jeopardize the quality of education in public schools or that waging war in Iraq means the homeless aren't being fed. One is not connected to the other. Money put in one place doesn't mean it's pulled from another place.
Oh well, I guess Quixtar finally dropped the "money into IBO pockets" charade and decided to do what's right for its IBOs. Good for Quixtar.
And finally, I have to mention Quixtar's comments about Search Engine Marketing which are clearly a response to my exposure of their Web Reputation Task Force. There's absolutely nothing wrong with Search Engine Marketing and Search Engine Optimization. In my current position I spend over half a million dollars a year doing exactly what Quixtar claims to be doing. Businesses must be aware of search engines and work to be ranked as favorably as possible.
However, there are two types of search engine marketing techniques — white hat and black hat. For a time, Quixtar was doing a bit of black hat SEO. I exposed this, reported it to Google and on February 6, 2005, their site dropped off the first page result of Google for searching the word "Quixtar." That was the "Oh Crap" moment when Quixtar realized that such black hat tactics had to stop immediately. And they did.
Soon after, Quixtar started following Google's best practices and at the end of May, 2005, Mark Glaser asked Peter Norvig, director of search quality at Google, about Quixtar's drop from the first page of results. Within days of Glaser's interview Quixtar returned to its rightful spot at Google.
So, I'm not complaining about SEO or SEM. All I did was point out some black hat tactics employed by Quixtar. They got slapped and straightened up their act and as far as I can see, are now wearing white hats in the SEO/SEM arena.
September 24, 2006
Spotted in Michigan
Posted by QBlog
Promotions
Posted by Preston
Worldwide DreamBuilders has a new promotion for Quixtar available on its site: Free shipping to new IBOs and their clients.
It is interesting to note that at the bottom there is a section describing "Standards of Conduct"
World Wide Dreambuilders IBOs have been offered the opportunity to participate in this program because of the high standards of ethics that have been maintained by this organization for many years. This program is being offered to incentivize volume outside of the existing IBO base. As a condition of participation, World Wide Group has agreed to extensive monitoring of this program by Quixtar to ensure that there is no order manipulation to achieve free freight for anyone other than Clients or IBOs less then 90 days in the business. Any existing IBOs who violate Rules or guidelines of the new IBO or Client free shipping test program are subject to Rules sanctions up to and including termination. - (Emphasis added)
I wonder how often Quixtar chooses to do such monitoring. Surely if they have the ability to peak into the inner workings of an organization like WWDB to extensively monitor it they ought to be able to keep a look out for the "bad apples" like my former upline who do not represent the best (or most as some IBOs would say) of Quixtar, could they not?
August 29, 2006
What if?
Posted by Truth
What if there was no Quixtar Blog? What if there was no amquix.info? What if there was no MLM Survivor's club? What if the many sites and blogs about Quixtar/Amway did not exist?
Quixtar has been making quite a few changes lately and for the most part I think many advocates and critics agree that it is for the betterment of the Quixtar opportunity. Sure there will always be those advocates who still want to call the critics losers, and some critics who won't applaud anything the corporation does. But, for those of us that just want to see the abuse by uplines come to an end, I think we agree that the corporation has finally taken some bold steps and frankly that is the crowd I am writing to in this article.
After seeing the post Qblog did concerning the new advertisement campaign by Quixtar I couldn't help but wonder whether Quixtar would have taken any of these steps if blogs and sites like this one never existed. Would Quixtar have implemented their accreditation program if there was no stories on the internet of people being abused by their upline?
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say that I can prove Quixtar made these moves because of the sites and blogs on the internet, but the circumstantial evidence is pretty compelling. Obviously the blogs and sites on the Internet were having some sort of impact hence the reason Quixtar decided to launch their own "Web Reputation Task Force". That of course didn't work out to well for them in the end, but I think you would have to be crazy if you thought that would be the end of it.
So tell us what you think. Would Quixtar still have taken the steps they have taken recently if the "critical" sites and blogs didn't exist? Should IBOs who are praising Quixtar for the new programs they have implemented be giving some credit to the "critics" for having a role in bringing about some of this change? I mean let's be honest, there wasn't exactly a movement by "plugged in" IBOs to tell others about the abuses. At any rate, I now leave this to the readers to discuss and debate.
August 27, 2006
Quixtar To Launch Ad Campaign
Posted by QBlog
From Quixtar.com:
National ad campaign for Quixtar to launch in September
Ads to run on TV and in newspapers, magazines
A multimillion-dollar campaign for Quixtar will soon blanket the U.S. and Canada with print and TV ads.
The goal of this expansive ad program is to generate excitement and pride in the Quixtar business opportunity and in the Nutrilite® brand. By creating and running its own ads, Quixtar will no longer allow its critics to define this business. Instead, Quixtar will tell its own story, in its own words, and on its own terms.
The campaign will kick off in late September with full-page newspaper ads in USA Today that address Quixtar's foundations and the success of Alticor, its parent company. The ads will be followed by a three-month campaign blitz for Nutrilite in Newsweek magazine, beginning in October.
During the last week of September, TV spots for Quixtar and Nutrilite will begin airing on CBS, NBC, ABC, and Fox, as well as on cable networks like The Learning Channel (TLC) and FoodTV. The ads are also slated to appear on shows like the "Country Music Awards," "Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade," "Sunday Night Football on NBC," "Trading Spaces," and "30 Minute Meals with Rachael Ray."
This media plan is subject to change, so keep coming back to What's New for updates on dates, times, and specific shows.
First reported by Dave, this marks a new strategy for a business that still claims that it "doesn’t advertise, instead channeling those dollars to Independent Business Owners who generate sales at Quixtar.com."
Interesting.
August 10, 2006
Alticor Going Overboard for Dick DeVos?
Posted by QBlog
I just received an email from Scott Larsen who runs the AmQuix.info website. The email addresses a recent entry Larsen posted on his "What's New" page that directed attention to a Grand Rapids Press article from July 14, 2006. The referenced article ran under the headline "Alticor leaders cheated investors, suit says" and it describes a lawsuit involving Alticor, former President Dick DeVos and $1 billion.
Larsen's original entry simply ran with the description, "Old news becomes news again for Dick DeVos running for governor in Michigan." (see Google cache screenshot). The email Larsen forwarded me was from Alticor's wonderfully competent lawyer James R. Sobieraj of Brinks, Hofer, Gilson & Lione (a firm that I've had experience with in the past) and its threatening tone demands Larsen's compliance within 24 hours.
What's laughable is the assumptions Sobieraj makes about Larsen's intentions and lack of understanding of the First Amendment. All Larsen did was post a link to an article. He's under absolutely NO obligation to post any follow-up links or offer any clarification. Sure, it might be nice if he had followed up with an update when new information surfaced about the suit but nowhere in the Constitution does it demand that Larsen take any such action. What Larsen posted is true and even provides a method for readers to easily find out more information. Notice that Sobieraj's email doesn't specifically threaten legal action. It only implies such action but there's no clear "Do this or we'll sue you" phrasing because Sobieraj knows he doesn't have a bit of legal ground to stand on in this situation. It's a classic lawyer tactic.
Here's the email. Don't read while drinking milk or soda because you'll surely squirt it out your nose from laughing at Amway's Alticor's top lawyer.
jsobieraj@brinkshofer.com
To: scott.larsen@juno.com
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 18:49:33 -0500
Subject: RE: Alticor Inc.
Dear Mr. Larsen:
We serve as outside counsel for Alticor Inc. We have reviewed the July 14, 2006 posting you placed on your website entitled "Old news becomes news again for Dick DeVos running for governor in Michigan." Your hotlink for this posting redirects one to a web page on mlive.com, which contains the July 14th story from the Grand Rapids Press entitled, "Alticor leaders cheated investors, suit say." Unfortunately, once again, you seem to have deliberately omitted information which would completely change the conclusions made by someone visiting your site.
The title and text of this article suggests that this lawsuit against Alticor has merit. I am sure that you posted this article on your web site because you believe that it reflects negatively on Alticor. However, it is surprising that you, as someone who holds himself out as a careful and thorough researcher of Alticor, have not posted the July 22 Grand Rapids Press story about the lawsuit. That story, entitled "State appeals court sides with Alticor," reports how the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled in Alticor's favor in a matter of days. This article also is available on mlive.com, and I have reproduced the text of the article below for your convenience. We can only conclude that you deliberately omitted this story because it reflects favorably on Alticor.
If you had researched this case with any diligence or sense of fairness, you also would have learned that the recent Court of Appeals decision was the fifth dismissal in a row for this lawsuit. It has been tossed out of federal court, two state courts and two appellate courts. If Alticor had pursued such a futile course of litigation, I am sure that you would have been extremely critical of them. Why is it that you are not even-handed in your analysis or criticism of Alticor's opponents?
This is the latest of a series of incidents in which it has been demonstrated that you have made postings without conducting a fair and reasonable investigation of the facts. Why do you want to continue deceiving your readers with misleading, incomplete and inaccurate statements about Alticor?
Please take immediate action to correct your website's misleading impression of the Wardrop lawsuit.
We look forward to receiving your response and evidence of your steps to correct your website within 24 hours.
Sincerely,
James R. Sobieraj
BRINKS HOFER GILSON & LIONE
455 N. Cityfront Plaza Drive
NBC Tower - Suite 3600
Chicago, IL 60611
Ph.: 312-321-4226
Fx.: 312-321-4299
E-Mail: jrs@usebrinks.com
Web Site: www.usebrinks.com
Why The Laughter?
The result of Sobieraj's email is that Larsen has revised his entry to include a link to the more recent Grand Rapids Press article. That's great. Now readers of his site have handy links to the original article and the update. Yet I can't stop laughing. Do you know why? I'll explain.
The First Amendment allows us to be biased. People may not like that but it's our right to be as biased and unfair in our coverage of public figures and corporate entities as we desire. As long as that coverage is true (and sometimes when it isn't) our speech is protected. There's absolutely nothing obligating us to be fair and balanced and communicate all sides of any given issue.
It's that very freedom that allows companies like Alticor and Quixtar to publish reams and reams of rosy reports and testimonials without sharing less rosy reports and complaints. No law requires Alticor, Quixtar or Dick DeVos to publish criticism or unfavorable reports in publications they control. It's their right to be biased. That's the American Way!
Yet what is very un-American is the way Sobieraj uses threatening language to try to force Larsen to remove the bias from his site. If Larsen wants to be biased, that's his right. If Sobieraj wants to eradicate bias from the Internet then maybe he should start with Quixtar.com. If I were Larsen I'd remove the link to the most recent update just to piss off Alticor. Give a metaphorical middle finger to Sobieraj for stooping to such tactics. But I'm not Larsen so I'll just settle for letting the world know the tactics Alticor is employing while I laugh and laugh.
There's one other reason I'm laughing. Sobieraj is basically functioning as a very, very expensive PR manager.
What Others Are Saying About This Post
- Michigan Liberal: Alticor lawyers lean on AmQuix critic
- Liberal Values: DeVos Goons Try To Silence Web Site
- MLM Facts: Eric Janssen supports unethical behaviour?
- Daily Kos: Alticor lawyers lean on AmQuix critic
Favorite comment on Daily Kos:
By middleroad
It amazes me that the Alticor lawyers actually took the time to threaten Larson. I did laugh out loud when I read the letter. Once again, the "man" is trying to stomp on the little guy. This only reflects how Dick DeVos will "lead" Michigan into oblivion. DeVos's solution of, if you can't fix it, eliminate it, will not bode well with Michigan voters.
What's your favorite comment from another blog?
August 1, 2006
Quixtar Accreditation
Posted by QBlog
In June, 2006, a Quixtar BLOG Forum member reported that Quixtar was planning to implement an accreditation program. Posting under the username "anonymous coward," the apparent insider explained that "Quixtar is in the midst of a 'Reputation' campaign" to address several issues affecting IBOs.
One phase of the campaign was dubbed the "PDAP initiative" which stands for Professional Development Accreditation Program. Here's what "anonymous coward" had to say:
Quixtar/Amway has for quite some time agreed with the general population that the Kingpins are crooks and out to scam everyone with their support systems, thus ruining the reputation of the actual business opportunity which is fundamentally the sale of products and the recruiting of other sales reps to sell products...
...Enter Jim Payne. The new Sherriff in town. I like this guy... he's got spunk. Quixtar develops (in cooperation with get this... the IBOA board) this long list of what they believe are impossible to attain goals for the Kingpins to accomplish including contracts spelling out compensation guidelines, submission of all materials created to Quixtar legal department for approval or denial, random phone interviews asking questions like: Are you aware that you are not required to participate in any paid education program? and Has it been made known to you that your leadership will make money from the support materials you buy from them? You know fun stuff the Kingpins absolutely hate with every fiber of their being...
...Quixtar is tickled pink. They’re hoping that this “poopy storm” they’ve stirred up will force the Kingpins hands and make them submit to the Accreditation process, thus giving Quixtar the reigns they’ve felt they needed to help get a handle on this reputation problem.
The report of the PDAP initiative was consistent with rumors I'd been hearing from Quixtar insiders for quite some time. Today "anonymous coward" alerted Forum members to the new Quixtar website titled "Quixtar Accreditation."
The Quixtar Accreditation site describes itself as recognizing "professional development programs that are standard-bearers, setting an example for others to follow." From the Whois report, it looks like Quixtar's been planning this for more than a year (site registered February 10, 2005). And a hint from the blog of Quixtar's Director of Communications in April, 2005, seems to further corroborate the lengthy gestation period for this program.
Yet the Quixtar Accreditation site looks oddly rushed and incomplete. The design and layout is very 1998 and the site map link doesn't work.
eFinity and Team5K
Anyway, check out the site and see what this new chapter in Quixtar's story means for you and your Line of Affiliation. As you poke around you may notice that the only accredited LOA is a group known as eFinity. Never heard of them? Neither have I but "anonymous coward" describes them as a company run "by a trio of 30 somethings" who convinced several "groups of different LOAs to band together and be supported by their 'new philosophy' which is essentially all about selling products."
The Quixtar Accreditation site describes eFinity as a "support system whose core principles are centered on an effort to help any Independent Business Owner (IBO) build a strong and profitable Quixtar Business." If you visit the official eFinity website you'll notice that it lists several countries to choose from suggesting an operation extending beyond U.S. borders.
And while eFinity is currently the only listed LOA I've received reports that Chuck Goetschel's Team5K will be announcing its accreditation sometime very soon.
Comments
So what should you think about this accreditation? Here are a couple of comments lifted from the Quixtar BLOG Forum:
rara
I think this is a great step in the right direction. Kudos to Quixtar, and I hope that the spirit of the accreditation document (or whatever it is) is followed, and that some LOS's don't try to hide this from their IBOs.
insider
to me, the biggest things are -
(a) politics and religion specifically "banned" from the business seminars
(b) transparency in the PDP compensation.
I encourage you to pore over the site and post your favorite items in the comments below. From what I've seen it's a big step in the right direction for Jim Payne and Quixtar. I like it.
Here are some items from the IBO Communications Platform (pdf) that I find extremely interesting (I bolded some portions):
A business setting/communication is not an appropriate environment for preaching religious doctrine, political causes, or other issues of such a personal nature.
When sharing his personal story during a business meeting, a speaker may make reference to the importance of his religious belief in building his business. However, the comments should be brief, and the speaker must explain that such comments are his personal belief.
Unacceptable: References to the abortion issue outside of worship services.
Prospects and IBOs must be clear about the roles of Quixtar, IBOs, LOSs/LOAs, and the IBOAI.
IBOs must not imply or communicate to Prospects and IBOs the following kinds of statements, which are misleading and inaccurate, “There are more millionaires in this business than any other.”
July 12, 2006
Scobleizing Quixtar
Posted by QBlog
Adding a few comments of my own to the recent Scobleizing of Quixtar that Drew pointed out in his "Link To Your Enemies?" post.
Robert Scoble understands the Web and why blogging is important. He built his reputation as being the one guy at Microsoft who "gets the Web" and then he left Redmond to join PodTech.net, a podcasting outfit that also "gets it."
Recently he's been posting about putting a human face on corporate giants like Dell and Quixtar. Dell joins the bloggy Web highlights the computer manufacturer's entry into the blogging realm and adds and interesting comment about Quixtar:
Link to your enemies. It takes away their karmic power.
I told Quixtar to link to everyone who says that Quixtar sucks. There are QUITE A FEW!
Why do that? Well, it takes away our power to poke at your negative spots if you openly admit them. That turns throwing rocks through your front window into a boring exercise.
Embrace The Critics
Scoble is absolutely, dead-on right. I've been preaching the same thing on this blog for nearly four years. It's why I link to and try to engage my critics. Embracing them strips them of their power and creates a level playing field where the value of the content is determined by its merits, not by perception.
Scoble goes on to explain that the next Web is the human Web which is a "bloggy Web. A Web with real people talking about real stuff on it." He apparently met with some Quixtar tech folks who admitted that they'd been "misled by a SEO firm" that told them to employ "Scientology-like tactics" against their critics as one commenter put it.
Misled indeed. What's really curious is the response by Robin Luymes (bless his Canadian heart), Quixtar's Manager of Public Relations. You can see that he's really, really trying to "get it" but he just can't hang up his corporate PR hat long enough to finish his comment.
Some people, friends and foes alike, have opined that our “Web Initiative Strategy” (not our term, by the way) is purely about drowning out the opposition. Frankly, if that were our goal, we would simply open up the floodgates to several hundred thousand IBOs to create web content and share their positive experiences. We are exploring ways to provide more opportunities for our IBOs to share their experiences, since right now our critics have much freer rein to share their opinions than do our own representatives.
Web Reputation Task Force
Actually, Quixtar's internal term for their Web strategy was "Web Reputation Task Force." I think "Web Initiative" sounds less... uh... gay. But if Luymes wants to quibble about the origin of terms, I'm fine with using WRTF. And if opening those IBO floodgates were an option, I say open those bad boys up. Bring on the "several hundred thousand IBOs" to post their happy blogs.
Oh, but that's not part of Quixtar's goals is it? Nope. What is Quixtar's goal? It's not immediately clear but what is clear is that there's NOTHING preventing IBOs from starting and maintaining their own blogs. How long has Dave's blog been running? A long damn time in Web years. And he's not alone.
Making Strides
I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that Quixtar is making strides to improve its Web image. I think ditching that horrible SEO consultant was a great move towards the Web that Scoble describes. I've seen Quixtar get smarter about how it approaches its critics and those I've talked to on the inside are seeing a slow and steady cultural shift towards openness. They've still got a long way to go but I have confidence that eventually (and maybe with the help of this blog) Quixtar will get there.
UPDATE:
I just want to clarify why I believe Scoble is right. The first thesis of the cluetrain manifesto is "Markets are conversations." This is as true today as it was when Chris Locke, Doc Searls and David Weinberger wrote it a few years ago. Basically Scoble is just repeating this truth and framing it in the context of blogging.
Blogging is a conversation. And if markets are conversations then Quixtar would benefit from entering that market as a participant, not a behemoth trying to control it. The moment a participant tries to control a conversation the communication becomes a lecture. A long, boring lecture with Power Point slides and bad coffee.
And Scoble's point about the human Web is right on. Have you ever had a conversation with a person wearing a mask? It's a little disconcerting. It's much more natural to converse with a human face and hear that face speaking naturally.
Why is it so hard for Quixtar to simply join the conversation? They have nothing to lose and everything to gain. If Quixtar really wants to neuter its critics then joining them in the conversation, embracing them as opposed to trying to control them, is the best way to accomplish that task. Or maybe Quixtar needs its critics to be a potent force on the Web? After all, critics with power to provide a handy scapegoat when business is down.
July 11, 2006
Link To Your Enemies?
Posted by Truth
According to a blog run by Robert Scoble, Quixtar technical staff has been talking to him about their website because "people aren’t engaging with their company the way they want." According to Robert Quixtar needs something on their homepage that he would be willing to link to, and some real human beings. Now that article was interesting, but what was even more interesting was the previous article he wrote.
In his article "Dell joins the bloggy web" he writes that he told Quixtar they should link to everyone who says they suck. Why would Robert tell Quixtar such a thing? Here is his answer:
Well, it takes away our power to poke at your negative spots if you openly admit them. That turns throwing rocks through your front window into a boring exercise.
Could this be true? Do you think that if Quixtar was to link to all the critical blogs and sites that we would just get bored and give up? Would prospects look more favorably upon Quixtar if they link to the negative sites?
Interestingly enough this would be the exact opposite of the Web Initiative Strategy that just tries to drown out the other side. That concept hasn't worked out too well for them, so I suppose the old "if you can't beat 'em join 'em" strategy could be worth a try.
UPDATE:
My latest podcast deals with this issue and some other points about how the IBOs on the web are hiding behind the mask while the so-called "critics" seem to be much more open and accessible.
June 28, 2006
The Wrong Business
Posted by QBlog
I've said it before and after listening to Combden's message I think it's time to say it again:
If the success or failure of your business is determined by a few bloggers exercising their First Amendment rights then you're in the wrong business.
June 26, 2006
Quixtar Sales Tax
Posted by Xanadustc
A while back, I did a post where the issue of sales tax was brought up. There seems to be some controversy over this point, so I figured we might clear it up.
First, all this can be found on the Quixtar site if you have a password. What follows are a few things from the 26 page [PDF file] from Quixtar.
In summary, an IBO is charged sales tax on the retail price on products for the region you are in. If you sell an item to another tax jurisdiction, you are required to collect all the differing sales tax and send it to Quixtar with a Tax Adjustment form.
If you use an item yourself, you have the must fill out the form and get your difference back.
Some may suggest that this is optional, but the document clearly states on page one:
YOU MUST FILE A SALES TAX ADJUSTMENT FORM WHENEVER YOU SHIP OR DELIVER PRODUCTS TO A DIFFERENT TAXING LOCALITY AND/OR YOU SELL AT ADIFFERENT AMOUNT THAN SUGGESTED RETAIL.
The only exception listed regarding this rule is if a customer pays for the item with a credit card directly from the corporation, Quixtar will charge correctly based on the shipping address of the customer.
What kinds of sales are covered by this rule?
- Sales made to other states.
- Different local sales taxes in the same state.
- Retail sales not made at suggested retail.
- Products for personal use or demonstrations.
- A sale made after a change in sales tax if you purchased the product from Quixtar before the change took place.
Are you filling out proper paperwork for your business?
May 31, 2006
SLV - Consumer Protection
Posted by QBlog
Scott Larsen Videos (SLV) presents "Consumer Protection" where "Quixtar and Industry Leaders talk about consumer protections for tools."
Enjoy.
May 25, 2006
Interview with a Former Client
Posted by Xanadustc
For today, I figured that I would gather some thoughts from a friend of mine who was a regular customer when I was in Quixtar. We will call him Joe.
Xan: When did you first hear about Amway/Quixtar?
Joe: A long time ago, at least 1984. It was later that a friend of mine got involved, around 1988 I think.
Xan: Did he talk to you about Amway then?
Joe: No, we had pretty much gone our own ways, otherwise, I think he would have. He was involved with “Forum”, and he talked to me about that when we were still close. I did join the forum, so I was familiar with the brain-washing thing.
Xan: Was I only one who ever talked to you about Amway/Quixtar?
Joe: You were the first to mention “Quixtar”, otherwise, I was propositioned at least a dozen times.
Xan: Did you ever get involved?
Joe: Other than the purchase of products, no. I did go to a meeting with you to check it out. I heard stories from friends who had gone to meetings. No one really had anything good to say.
Xan: If you heard about these bad stories, why did you go to the meeting with me?
Joe: I had to satisfy my own curiosity rather than just go on hearsay.
Xan: What were your thoughts about the meeting?
Joe: There are so many, where to start? My assumption that it was a major form of mind control was validated: I saw that most of these people seemed to talk and act in almost identical manners. I was also disturbed to hear the God and Amway connection. I also grew weary of everyone asking me what I did for a living. I felt like getting a sign. I also thought it was very materialistic, particularly about the big estate a few people got to go look at. It was disturbing to see all the people salivating over cars, houses, pools, and other things. I am a recovering alcoholic for 15 years and really wanted a drink by the end of the night!
Xan: You bought products from me. What products?
Joe: You gave me a number of things to try: soaps, shampoo, toothpaste, toothbrush, coffee, energy drinks. It was energy drinks that I bought the most of.
Xan: How were the energy drinks price and quality compared to other energy drinks?
Joe: They were $0.30 more than others, but the quality was great with the grape and orange. I didn’t care for the tea.
Xan: How much did you buy in a month?
Joe: About $60 a month minimum.
Xan: What was it like having a friend who was a Quixtar devotee?
Joe: In a way, I felt forced to observe a fanatical devotion to something that was harmful.
Xan: What do you mean by harmful?
Joe: I knew these people got inside your head in a very big way, but realized I wasn’t the one who could get him out of it. Also, you wouldn’t have listened to me then. I do remember saying to you, “Seems a little bit fanatical”, and your reply was, “You have to fanatical when you own your own business.”
Xan: What was it like having a friend selling you products?
Joe: I didn’t like it at all. There were times when I hesitated knocking on your door because I figured it would end up costing me $30. There were also times I got the impression that was the only time you wanted to deal with me.
Xan: Any final thoughts?
Joe: I felt sorry for most of the people at the meeting because they were victims of a scam and they all appeared to be reaching; they viewed Quixtar as a financial life preserver to get out of their regular career. I also wonder how you can go through life viewing everyone you meet as a mark, a prospect. I was delighted when you left and if you recall, I said, “Welcome to the human race.”
May 23, 2006
Internet Retailer Goof?
Posted by QBlog
I was excited to learn from Internet Retailer that Quixtar was tops in April site performance. That's quite an accomplishment. Kudos to Quixtar.
But I did a silly thing after reading about Quixtar's dominance in April — I started thinking. I know, it's crazy but I just can't help myself. I noticed that the "Top 50 Performance Index" chart listed in the article didn't include any April dates. How is "Quixtar tops in April" if the measurement only includes data from March?
Very curious indeed. But wait, there's more!
Zappos Delivers Top Site Efficiency
A bit of searching unearthed an article dated April 5, 2006, about Zappos dominating site performance in March. The report included a graph with the same dates as the Quixtar report. Huh?
To The Source Batman
Ok, there was obviously something strange happening so I headed to the source of the Internet Retailer article — Gomez.com.
All I could find was a Retail GPI Benchmark for April which does show Quixtar at the top of the Success Rate Rating and in second place on the Response Time Rating. So Internet Retailer just got the dates on the charts mixed up, right? Well...
Notice anything odd about the Gomez chart? Look closely. See it? That's right. It doesn't exactly match any of the Internet Retailer charts. In fact, while Zappos is on both charts at Internet Retailer it's missing from the April chart at Gomez. Interesting.
Conclusion
So, now I'm supposed to tell you what conclusions to draw from this little blog post. Well, uh... isn't it obvious? Gomez is lying!
No, seriously I'm just pointing out some odd things at Internet Retailer. I've always been sort of suspicious of the publication because... well, it just seems hokey. That's just my opinion but I definitely get the feeling that something isn't quite right at Internet Retailer. Maybe it's just sloppy reporting that I'm picking up on? What do you think?
May 19, 2006
Larsen Gets Slammed
Posted by QBlog
The latest apology and retraction from Scott Larsen as presented by Quixtar's Independent Business Owner's Association.
Quixtar, Inc. has insisted that Scott Larsen and other Internet critics stop circulating false and misleading information that has the potential for harming the entire IBO world and, of course, Quixtar itself. Following is an exchange initiated by attorney James Sobieraj on behalf of Quixtar, Larsen's pretty abject apology, and a follow-up letter from Sobieraj, all of which make it perfectly clear that Mr. Larsen has been allowing his website to be used as a bulletin board for totally unverified and usually false information, regardless of the cons