'FL / MLM' Thread 3

[Eyespying]

Continuing the valuable discussion of 'Forever Living' and other 'MLM/commercial' cults.

ambler21 -You might be interested to read the two concluding sections of a long and involved article cataloging the many connections between the Bush Adminstration, 'Blackwater' and 'Amway.'

You should also be aware that President Bush appointed Tmithy Muris (one of 'Amway's' own attorneys), as Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission. During Muris' reign at the FTC, various other 'MLM' defenders were appointed to key-posts, and no investigations of 'MLM' rackets were pursued.

www.dailykos.com/story/2007/10/22/400840/-Bush-Authoritarianism-Blackwater-Amway-GOP-Pt-3

www.dailykos.com/story/2007/10/29/403806/-Bush-Authoritarianism-Blackwater-Amway-GOP-Part-4

Another dark figure hovering in the 'Amway/MLM' tragicomedy, has been Doug Wead.

mlmtheamericandreammadenightmare.blogspot.fr/2014/03/doug-wead-patrick-buisson-blackmailers.html

Thanks for the links Eyespying. Lots of threads to follow within the articles. The talk of privatisation in the first links make me immediately think of the, currently vastly underreported, Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP, nothing like a boring name to slip through dangerous legislation eh?).
I was interested to read that the Blackwater staff are essentially treated like the 'Independent Business Owners' within MLM. Kept at a convenient distance from the company hierarchy and, of course, completely expendable and susceptible to the MLM churn rates.
I found a section after one of your blog entries entitled 'A common-sense approach to cultism', is this the full essay? A very succinct and well thought through piece.

ambler- I have spoken to quite a number of journalists who investigated 'Blackwater.' I quickly concluded that the only rational explanation of the company was that it had itself been an expendable corporate-front for US intelligence agencies - resembling an organized crime group in that 'Blackwater' was deliberately constructed to a classic hermetic pattern so that neither its expendable (and largely-ignorant) soldiers, nor their shadowy bosses and under-bosses, could be held fully to account in a court of law.

Persons under contract to 'Blackwater' working as 'security contractors/guards' in countries like Iraq ostensibly occupied a legal no-man's land. Although they were armed, and fulfilled essentially the same function as US soldiers with a hierarchy of command, and were ultimately employed, and given their orders, by senior agents/members of the US government with their salaries paid by US tax-payers, de facto Blackwater soldiers were not legally defined in their contracts as soldiers and, therefore, not subject to US military law. Similarly, they were not subject to the laws of countries like Iraq.

However, some Blackwater de facto soldiers were finally held to account for their crimes under title 18, section 3238 of the US code, a statute under which those who commit offenses outside the jurisdiction of any state or district, including “upon the high seas”, can be brought to justice in the home district of the offenders or the District of Columbia.

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/apr/13/former-blackwater-guards-sentencing-baghdad-massacre

ambler 21 - Yes, the full essay, 'A common-sense approach cultism,' appears several times on my Blog.

I intitially began to write it in order to predict the reality-denying reaction of many people when confronted with the full-truth about cultism.

ambler It's interesting to note that without the determined efforts of senior members of the current US administration (particularly, vice President Biden), the recent case against the 'Blackwater' de facto soldiers, would never have come to trial.

ambler21 - At the risk of being labelled a 'conspiracy theorist,' more than 10 years ago, US television journalists were claiming that the 'Amway' racket was 'under FBI investigation.' These claims, turned out to be complete bollocks, for the simple reason that a flock of useful idiots (i.e. senior US politicians) had had, and still did have, their snouts deep in the stinking 'Amway' trough.

At that time, I was sent a copy of the article below, along with a request for my opinion of it. I replied that the author had forgotten to point out that he'd only listed some the 'Amway' political bribes (disguised as 'speaking fees' and 'campaign donations') which have been publicly declared. Self-evidently these (and other hidden) acts of corruption (which comprise countless unlawful payments to US legislators deriving from related-serious frauds and intended to block investigation of the same serious frauds) also form part of pattern of ongoing major racketeering activity (as defined by the US federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organisations Act, 1970) streching back decades.

www.corporatenarc.com/quixtarscam2.php

Former Amway insider, Eric Scheibeler, has written a must read new book called "Merchants of Deception." This one time member of the Amway motivational cult has turned whistleblower and FBI witness and boy does he have some tales to tell.

In the book, Scheibeler exposes an Enron sized fraud with the Amway and Quixtar scam raking In billions of dollars annually, and the billionaire founding families being the largest soft money contributors to the GOP, with funds that have been generated from what may turn out to be one of the largest consumer fraud scandals in history, perpetrated by the world's largest multi-level marketing company (MLM).

Merchants of Deception exposes the company's deceptive marketing of phony business opportunities and other secret scams by Amway's top promoters to sell so-called success tools to unsuspecting recruits all over the world. It also contains first hand accounts of the Kingpin's fraudulent recruitment practices that have led to an endless stream of lawsuits.

NBCs Dateline smuggled hidden cameras into recruitment meetings in order to document the company's deceptive claims and promises, and to expose its multi-million dollar 'secret' business.

The expose verified the common allegation made in numerous consumer lawsuits, that the company is merely a front for a hidden pyramid business based on selling books, tapes, and registrations to seminars and rallies to new recruits, with nearly all participants losing money.

According to Dateline, the FBI and the IRS are conducting investigations into the scheme.

Amway's billionaire founders, Rich DeVos and Jay VanAndel, have been the largest soft money contributors to the GOP on and off for the past 20 years. Together, DeVos and VanAndel gave $4,000,000 to a 527, just 45 days prior to the last election.

Scheibeler's book reveals how GOP donations and corporate promotion have resulted in a trade off for political protection and tax reduction benefits for the MLM. His web site provides a goldmine of documentation to back up his claims, including audiotapes.

Scheibeler tells how some members of the GOP have been paid as much as $100,000 for a single promotional appearance at an Amway seminar. The list of high-paid Republican speakers who have appeared at rallies over the years, reads like a list of who's who in the GOP. It includes former Presidents George Bush, Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford and former Vice Presidents Bob Dole and Dan Quayle, along with other GOP heavyweights like Gingrich, Oliver North, Senator Rick Santorum and even the latest SE Regional Chairman for the Bush-Cheney '04 campaign, Ralph Reed.

Scheibeler reveals just how much Republican law makers have given back to Amway in return for the large speaking fees and contributions, which includes tax breaks and a blanket of immunity from investigations into the company's illegal business practices. In hindsight, it is more than evident that the money bought a whole lot of regulatory protection for the Amway and Quixtar scam.

Merchant's of Deception provides a good example of how the racket works in the case of Newt Gingrich. His speaking fees are reported to be in the $50,000 range. The books explains how, after accepting speaking fees, Gingrich arranged a reported last- minute modification in a comprehensive tax bill that allegedly provided a $283 million tax break to just one company, of course the company is Amway.

One report called the tax break a $283 million payoff. "The payoff for Amway was not in the original House or Senate version of the tax bill. House Speaker Newt Gingrich intervened at the last minute to help get the special tax break inserted in the bill."

Currently, the bosses of the 'Herbalife' racket still have access to piles of cash to buy their own flock of useful idiots (including former senior US regulators). At first glance, the origin of 'Herbalife's' working-capital is quite suprising, given the fact that it's no secret that the 'Herbalife' racket remains under investigation by multiple agencies of law enforcement in the USA (with access to a growing mountain of evidence gathered by a major hedge fund).

Again, at first glance, it seems difficult to believe that any banker (unless he/she was corrupt, and/or stupid, and/or nuts, and/or blind drunk, and/or the target of blackmail, or privvy to inside information) I would be so reckless as to keep lending billions of $ of his/her clients' money to another client whose 'business' is so widely-suspected of being a massive fraud.

The truth is that the bosses of numerous financial institutions have also had, and still have, their snouts deep in the stinking 'MLM' trough. Thus, it's not in the financial interests of bankers to allow any part of the overall phenomenon of 'MLM income opportunity' racketeering to go down. That's why bankers have continued to support the 'Herbalife' racket.

seekingalpha.com/article/3657136-why-isnt-herbalife-paying-off-its-credit-card

mlmtheamericandreammadenightmare.blogspot.fr/2015/02/herbalife-hlf-shame-on-pamela-jones.html

After receiving a number of comments on my Blog referring to 'Tropic Skin Care' as, 'Britain's home-grown 'MLM,' I thought it was high-time that I posted an article.

mlmtheamericandreammadenightmare.blogspot.fr/2015/11/alan-sugars-tropic-skin-care-very.html

I've hear of Tropic. Is that the one that Alan Sugar is involved with? Or am I getting mixed up?

I have to say I'm enjoying reading merchants of deception. I'm only up to Eric becoming pearl, but I feel angry for how much work he was putting in (time, energy, being away from his young family) and was only making about $2k a month when he thought he would be earning $100k a year by that point.

rayofhope Alan Sugar has been fronting 'Tropic Skin Care' in exactly the same way that Donald Trump once fronted 'ACN.'

As in the case of 'Trump' and 'ACN,' it's difficult to know exactly how much Sugar knows himself or who else might be lurking behind 'Tropic Skin Care'.

The fact that both Sugar and Trump have presented 'The Apprentice' is more than interesting.

Trump used the 'Apprentice' and the 'Celebrity Apprentice' to commit fraud in the USA for the 'ACN' bosses, whereas Alan Sugar initially only used the 'Apprentice' to promote Susan Ma who went on (ostensibly) to instigate 'Tropic Skin Care.'

Obviously, Susan Ma hasn't dreamed up 'Tropic Skin Care' all by herself as she has claimed.

Eric Scheibeler's $2K per month payments from 'Amway' did not represent a net-profit. Overall, Eric lost approximately $100k of his own money during his 10 years of de facto 'MLM' slavery. His 'Downline' believed him to be a millionaire.

rayofhope - Whilst watching the 'Tropic Skin Care' propaganda video do you also see how, once 'MLM' racketeers have deceived a vulnerable person like Caroline Joy into making a public declaration of faith in the life-transforming nature of the 'MLM business,' it becomes almost impossible for such persons to face the ego-destroying truth?

Caroline Joy evidently believes so deeply in the Troic Skin Care' fairy story, that her self-steem and related psychological function has become temporarily dependent on it.

MN members might be interested to read this recent propaganda message sent by the President of the so-called 'US Direct Selling Association' to the 31 members of the US Congress who have been co-opted by 'MLM' racketeers.

This propaganda seeks to character-assassinate Robert FitzPatrick (and his associates) by completely misrepresenting his published analysis of 'MLM' as form of closed-market swindle, or pyramid scheme, disguised as 'direct selling.'

Like myself, Robert FitzPatrick is in no way opposed to traditional direct selling.

Predictably, my name is not mentioned in this recent propaganda, because Joseph Mariano (and the 'MLM' racketeers whom he represents) evidently don't want to draw attention to my work.

_

www.dsa.org/news/individual-press-release/letter-from-dsa-president-joseph-n.-mariano-to-direct-selling-caucus

Letter from DSA President Joseph N. Mariano to Direct Selling Caucus
October 30, 2015
Members of the Direct Selling Caucus:

The night before last, a single mother of two, who got divorced and went bankrupt eight years ago, tearfully told me direct selling had changed her life, pulling her and her family back from the brink of disaster. Her story isn’t so unique among members of our community. In fact, more than 500 direct selling consultants representing 20 companies, 32 states and the District of Columbia were here in Washington, D.C. this week to share with you and other members of Congress compelling, personal stories about how direct selling has improved their lives.

Recently, you received a letter and may have also noticed an op-ed in The Hill newspaper from Robert FitzPatrick representing a group calling itself the International Coalition of Consumer Advocates (ICCA). These communications contained a substantial amount of misinformation about direct selling. I am writing on behalf of the DSA, our nearly 200 member companies and the more than 18 million Americans who are involved in and benefit from the direct selling channel to set the record straight.

To our knowledge, ICCA is an extremely loose affiliation of long-time direct selling opponents with FitzPatrick at the helm. His well-documented agenda of fear mongering and lack of credibility on direct selling issues has remained constant for years. Ironically, FitzPatrick claims that ICCA does not lobby or profit financially from its work, even though its members routinely attack direct selling in forums designed to aide investors, such as Seeking Alpha. If consumer protection was truly at the heart of ICCA, it would attempt to reach the general public where it actually resides, not where investment pros go for insight into billion-dollar decisions. Furthermore, FitzPatrick is critical of short sellers, which he says harm the public interest, yet it is he and his ICCA cohorts who are partially responsible for aiding the irresponsible tactics of Pershing Square.

At the heart of FitzPatrick’s other claims is a belief that direct selling is illegitimate and does not provide a broad-based income opportunity. ICCA members may not like companies that compensate participants for their sales and the sales of others within their organization, but that does not make the entire direct selling channel illegitimate. On the contrary, those involved in direct selling benefit by being able to purchase products at a discount, supplement their income, work when they want to, or, with substantial effort, build a bigger business.

Average earnings are routinely blown out of proportion by critics like ICCA members who fail to appreciate these many different motivations for becoming involved in direct selling. It’s a part-time pursuit for many; a smaller number put in the effort that is required to build a business and a sales organization that is capable of generating a sizable income.

FitzPatrick also fails to mention that everyone – DSA included – benefits when pyramid schemes are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. DSA and the Direct Selling Education Foundation (DSEF) enjoy a productive working relationship with regulators and law enforcement at the federal and state levels and set best-in class self-regulatory standards that challenge the entire channel to improve when it comes to ethics and consumer protection. In fact, DSA turns away a sizeable number of applicant companies each year because they do not meet the high standards set forth by our Code of Ethics, which has been in force since 1970 and was recently strengthened.

In the past 20 years, merely a handful of direct selling enterprises have been the subjects of government investigations, and the schemes cited by ICCA were not members of the DSA. The current investigation raised by ICCA is only starting to make its way through the courts. If it is determined that the company violated our Code of Ethics, we will not hesitate to take enforcement action that could include termination from the Association, in addition to any remedies prescribed by the courts.

It is unfortunate that a group of individuals professing to act in the public interest continues to confuse consumers by blindly associating a high-performing retail channel benefiting millions with illegitimate behavior. Plenty of government and non-profit consumer advocate organizations, such as the Better Business Bureau, offer resources that help people make prudent decisions about direct selling companies. Dismissing all of direct selling as illegitimate is not only irresponsible, it also fails to protect consumers.

In an economy that increasingly values opportunities for meaningful, independent work, this latest round of tirades against direct selling appear dated and out of touch. Please do not hesitate to contact me directly at 202-416-6419 or [email protected] if I can answer questions or address concerns raised by FitzPatrick this week.

Thank you again for your support of direct selling in the United States.

DSA and the Direct Selling Education Foundation (DSEF) enjoy a productive working relationship with regulators and law enforcement at the federal and state levels and set best-in class self-regulatory standards that challenge the entire channel to improve when it comes to ethics and consumer protection.
Kinda says it all.

ambler21 Mr. Mariano, the self-proclaimed, selfless champion of 'ethics' and 'consumer protection,' says:

I am writing on behalf of the DSA, our nearly 200 member companies and the more than 18 million Americans who are involved in and benefit from the direct selling channel to set the record straight.

Apropos of the 18 millions US citizens whom Moriano claims to be currently under contract to, and deriving benefit from, 'MLM' companies, notice how he doesn't explain that the majority of these persons will decline to renew their annual contracts during the next 12 months, or that over the past several decades, tens of millions of Americans have continued to be churned through so-called 'MLM income opportunities.'

In the UK, lying to, or withholding key-information from, people in order to take their money is defined as fraud (a form of theft). US federal laws identifying and prohibiting fraud, are essentially identical. Clearly Mr. Mariano's letter seeks to obstruct justice by hiding the results of fraud (in order to continue to commit the same fraud). Mr. Mariano's tightly-scripted jargon forms part of an overall pattern of ongoing major racketeering activity as defined by the US federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 1970.

Have common-sense limits been set on the number of 'NYR Consultants' operating in given areas?

I quickly realised this when wife start doing Avon, there's too many people within a friends facebook circle trying to sell the products, who are of similar income and dont generally have lots of money to spend on these products.

BreakingDad77 - In the past when members of the 'DSA' were traditional direct selling companies (i.e. with agents going door-to-door earning commission by regularly selling cheap and cheerful consumer goods for a profit directly to the general public) common-sense limits were set on the number of DSA member company agents operating in given areas (based on population - just like political constituencies). These limits were introduced , and strictly enforced, by the companies themselves in order to avoid counter-productive territorial disputes amongst agents and to ensure that participants all had a chance of finding sufficient customers to make a living.

For obvious reasons, 'MLM' racketeers have never set common-sense limits on the number of agents operating in given areas. In fact, active 'MLM' adherents believe that it is in their financial interests to try to recruit competitors (including their own friends, relatives and neighbours).

Obviously, so-called 'MLM' is the complete reverse of commercial common-sense.

As stated, MLMs exploit the sales force. Since MLMs make their money off salespeople/IBOs who use the products themselves, purchase test stock and packs. and pay to attend seminars and trainings, there is no reason not to recruit as many salespeople as possible. Each extra one is a revenue source and who cares if they never retail?
The perverse skills of MLMs are devoted to keeping the salespeople spending for as long as possible, in the face of all the evidence (and mounting debt) I've got many Amway tapes (bought for pennies secondhand) and they all stress the tools/cult push.

xenu1 In reality, so-called 'MLMs' comprise a so-called 'sales force' comprising so-called 'salespeople' who don't actually sell anything (except false hope).

I was told it was seen as a good thing that there were plenty of people in the local area doing Forever, as this brings brand awareness......

We're taught that we only need 20-30 customers per month spending on average £25. Before you join (when watching the presentations) this seems achievable as they push that you don't need to sell £1000's per month so you feel then that the pressure isn't there. It isn't until you're near the end of the month and you haven't reached your 4cc's (to be paid your team leading bonus you need a min of 4cc's) that you feel the pressure and can then end up having to buy stock you don't need in order to make up your 4cc's. Not every FBO will do this but I'm sure an awful lot do.

Of course if you're successful at recruiting (you get 2cc's per person who joins your team) then you don't need to worry so much at having 20-30 customers. (You do still have to put through 1cc of retail or personal use through your business) This is then what stops it being a pyramid scheme as you're still moving a physical product. But it's hard to recruit each month. I just found the pressure too much, clearly I'm a terrible sales person. I had a few customers but no where near 20 people.

A fellow mum from school has started doing the herbalife thing. I've unfollowed her on fb but she's invited me to some business launch event thing. Not sure how up front to be with her about what I think of it, or if I should just wish her luck but say it's not for me. She's not very well off so feel bad for dissing something she's trying to do to make money but it's such a pile of BS and tbh has affected my opinion of her. We're more acquaintances than friends I'd say.

rayofhope

What makes you think you were a 'terrible sales person?' (or were you being ironic?)

You had a few customers, but no where near 20.

• Were these (less than 20) 'customers,' people with whom you had existing relationships based on love and trust?

• (Assuming the answer to above question is 'yes') Do you think that these (less than 20) people would have bought FL products from you if they didn't already love, and/or trust, you and, thus, wanted to support you?

• Would you say that (in your case) you personally found it effectively impossible to make an overall net-profit by regularly retailing a significant quantitiy (by value) of FL products to the general public (based purely on value and demand)?

• Were you taught that in 'FLP,' you didn't actually need to retail anything, because the exact duplication of a plan of recruitment and self-consumption could enable anyone to achieve financial freedom within just a few years?

• Did you, therefore, continue to buy the effectively-unsaleable FL products in the expectation that by doing so and by recruiting others to do the same, etc. ad infinitum, you would eventually receive a future financial reward, provided you developed a 100% mindset and didn't quit?

• What would you now say is the universal, underlying identifying-characteristic of all Ponzi, and pyramid, schemes?

WhiffyBiffer Try directing your school mum friend to these videos of 'Herbalife' victims.

I had a mix of family, friends and customers from stalls (so people I didn't know) some had used the products before buying from another FBO's but had lost contact or found that they had stopped selling it so were looking for another FBO. I heard this a lot at stalls.

I was told to be using the products myself as why would anyone buy from me if I didn't use them and have experience of using them? Become the product. I was never taught not to retail anything. I was taught to always keep in touch with my customers, making sure they were happy. I didn't always achieve 4cc's, sometimes only 1-2cc. I used to drink the gel so that soon added up and then the rest of my cc's were from customers or the odd time I recruited. I was often told not to buy stock as that's one of the key points in their presentation, that we don't need to buy in lots of stock, just buy in as and when our customers needed it.

Thanks. I will just ask her if she's researched the company online and say she should be careful and send her the link. I wonder whether she'll want to hear it and whether our burgeoning friendship can survive this. Still it's the right thing to do isn't it