'eyes statement is not based on fact - he knows this as he does not have the overall figures for every MLM company out there - he has based it on one or two that were researched. Coupled with a deep seated hatred or maybe desire to expose 90% is a high figure - but base this on what? - For every person that drops out or does not make it - there are more starting each day - no different when you say - for every people that leaves this mortal earth - 2 children are born - there is churn in many things'
This response is a standard scripted 'MLM' blanket denial from persons pretending moral and intellectual authority, but who clearly possess neither. The statement offers zero evidence in support of it, and typically seeks to denigrate me personally by falsely portraying me as someone who is non-rational and motivated by hatred. These transparent tactics are identifying charactersitics of a cult.
There are currently approximately 1400 so-called 'MLM' companies registered in the USA. No one could be expected to hold data on all of them. However, individual data is not required to deduce that they all conform to essentially the same 'Amway' pattern i.e. peddling the crackpot pseudo-economic theory that endless-chain recruitment + endless payments by the recruits = endless profits for the recruits. In reality, there have been many 'MLM' front companies forced to make disclosures of their annual hidden churn/loss rates in the course of court cases and regulatory investigations down the years. What is clear, is that in every single case, 'MLM' annual churn rates are always more than 60% and have been into the 90s of % and that only an insignificant minority of 'MLM' recruits ever remain for more than 5 years. By simple extrapolation, this means that the when you take into account all the adherents of any particular 'MLM' group since its instigation, the overall hidden churn/loss rates have been effectively 100%. No 'MLM' racketeer has ever volutarily made this key-information available to the public, or regulators, in an easy to understand format, because no one would want to join any so-called 'income opportunity' where effectively no contributing participants have ever received an overall net-income.
This is why my opening common-sense question remains, and will remain, unanswered other than with a stream of predictable 'MLM' BS, babble and white noise.
My follow up common-sense questions will be met with the same predictable tactics.