• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Is Amway A Scam?

C1REX is doing a slightly better job defending Amway than icerat had, demonstrating how different the corporation is run in different countries, and that it seems to be less scammy in the UK than the US.

I wonder how Sweden (where icerat lives, according to his profile) rates in all of this. Could it be possible they have similar laws as the UK, forcing it to be more open and less scammy? If so, perhaps icerat should leverage that in future debates. (Though, by doing so he would be conceding that it is still a scam in the US.)
 
C1REX is doing a slightly better job defending Amway than icerat had, demonstrating how different the corporation is run in different countries, and that it seems to be less scammy in the UK than the US.

I wonder how Sweden (where icerat lives, according to his profile) rates in all of this. Could it be possible they have similar laws as the UK, forcing it to be more open and less scammy? If so, perhaps icerat should leverage that in future debates. (Though, by doing so he would be conceding that it is still a scam in the US.)

I'm shocked he hasn't showed up. Must be on vacay or something.
 
So just to be clear you won't be spending any money on business support materials? For example seminars, CD's, books etc?

Everything is for free and must be free. All seminars are for free.
There is an option to buy some business materials but is super cheap and also available for free to download on amway UK website.

My leaders advised me to not spend any money on tools.
 
C1REX, thank you for posting, I really appreciate your honest contribution here. However, I disagree with some of your last post:

http://www.amway.co.uk/product/104696,world-of-opportunity-dvd#.Us1BSV7KyL0

Here we find all sorts of products guides and leaflets. Seems strange that a retailer have to pay for product information. In my experience they are always supplied free of charge from the manufacturer/wholesale business. Why? Because a manufacturer/whole sale business wants their products sold, so that they can continue to sell more to the retailer. If it don't sell, the retailer will order from someone else.

And in my opinion they are not "super cheap". Most of the brochures are 1 GBP for 10, and you need different brochures for every product/ product segment. And surely, you need more than 10 brochures in a business of any size?

And for pure business material, for example "World of opportunities" DVDs at GBP 7.
http://www.amway.co.uk/more-products/business-support#.Us1A9l7KyL0

This all adds up, this is obviously a vital part of the business.
 
Free brochures are not good for business. There is logic behind. I was also discouraged to give brochures for free to my customers to not lose money.

Making them for free means higher cost of running the business for the company. This cost could affect the product prices. The most obvious would be a situation when people order thousands to give away. My investment in all materials was about 10GBP and I believe it's worth it. Very high quality paper. Most of it you can print for free, however. It's optional.

I need to decide what is most cost effective for me. My decision.

The interesting part: there is NO PV points attached. It means your up-line makes no money when you buy the tools so they discourage doing so.
CD and DVD are available on amwaymedia.eu and sound cloud for free.
Nobody is allowed to use unofficial Amway materials.
 
Last edited:
Double post but hey.. I believe it may be interesting :)

My girlfriend is a huge fan of MLM in general and she believes it's the most ethical business model. She keeps telling me stories about successful people. In her opinion it's worth to be a good person in this business.

This is completely opposite to my believe from 2 years before. Amway has a catastrophic opinion in Poland. There is even a movie about Amway where is compared to a cult.

I was very sceptical about Amway because "everybody knows it's a scam".

It made me really confused and that's why I do lot of research and post here and few other forums with possibly open mind to learn.

The more I learn about MLM the more I believe that MLM is not a scam but can be used to scam people.
The Amway movie was not about Amway business model but Network 21 that was run like a cult. Now I see more facts clearly about TEAM, Network 21 and other unethical groups that use Amway for their own benefits.

My girlfriend was making a magazine for Akuna - a small MLM company that was bigger than Amway in Poland at some point. She was very impressed how ethical the company was.
At some point a new leader has joined Akuna. He was part of Network 21 in Amway.
He had an idea to make some secret meetings and to make CDs from that. He said that if they unite they can use the company and the company won't be able to touch them. Some leaders joined him and that was a beginning of big crisis in the company.


I know that there is lots of MLM sceptics here and I know I may be wrong defending MLM.
However, I really believe that the blame should be pointed more precisely at those unethical people - not the business model in general.
 
Last edited:
It looks like Amway in the UK is now on the up and up, but again, changes were made only after Amway was threatened with being kicked out. And yes, Amway conveniently distances themselves from the bad behavior of their IBO's because they are independent. But I see it bit differently. These IBO's represent Amway and sell Amway products. If they are using Amway to scam people, then Amway is culpable too. If not, try looking up the Amway Pokorny settlement in the US where Amway coughed up over 100 million for the bad behavior of some IBO's.

If you're a parent, you cannot control everything your kids do, but you are certainly responsible for them and that's how I see it with Amway. Amway is no victim in this.
 
The informations you share with us suggest that unethical behaviour of IBOs (ABO in UK) cost Amway lots of money.
I agree that Amway takes the responsibility but it's difficult to admit that Amway benefits from that.
I can only guess why they don't ban unofficial tools in USA. Maybe the US law is on the way to do so?

My guess is that USA allows people to produce and sell any business materials and no company can take this right from anybody.

I'm sure there is lots of very unethical people in Amway. Even in UK, China, Japan and any other country. I'm also sure that there is plenty of amazing leaders that will do their best to help others. Probably that is the main reason why the opinions are so extreme on both sides.

Choosing the right leader is crucial in any MLM. You're choosing your mentor and potentially a very good friend. The top earners in any legitimate MLM company had to help other people get rich first. That's how it works.
 
However, I really believe that the blame should be pointed more precisely at those unethical people - not the business model in general.

I actually think the business model is poor. Not so much for Amway, but for the distributors. That's why your experiences will be so interesting to hear.

I also think the "tools scam" was a way for people to make the money they thought would come from Amway and the MLM structure, but wasn't.
 
I'm flattered that somebody is interested about my experience. I'm more than happy to share but it may take 2 years or more to have any results (or not).

I see MLM as an opportunity. That's it. It requires a lot of work and it may be beneficial.
There are more difficult fields to succeed, however. Photography or running a website are good examples. Very small percentage of people is able to do it full time. Lots of people lose money on training, tools and equipment and only a small fraction get rich.
 
I'm flattered that somebody is interested about my experience. I'm more than happy to share but it may take 2 years or more to have any results (or not).

I see MLM as an opportunity. That's it. It requires a lot of work and it may be beneficial.
There are more difficult fields to succeed, however. Photography or running a website are good examples. Very small percentage of people is able to do it full time. Lots of people lose money on training, tools and equipment and only a small fraction get rich.

Thanks for sharing and being open about your experience. Just curious though, if you don't mind. Are you hoping to build a large group of people and try to make serious bank, or are you just hoping to make an extra $300 or $500 a month?
 
Both.

I hope to reach an extra 200GBP a month. This will let me to have a bit of extra time for Amway business and reach 300GBP. Then I will have a bit more time and make another step.
Cold prospecting is something that freaks me out at the moment. Stressful but also exciting. Way out of my comfort zone.
I've learnt how to do public presentations so this is fun for me.

I've heard that trying MLM rises your social skills and self confidence dramatically.
I'm looking forward to that. :)
 
This discussion over Amway has been amusing but it kind of misses the point. According to Amway, Amway has no future.

explain?

Has anyone bothered to read the Amway corporate reports? Amway is touting growth in Malay. When you have to brag about getting into the Malay market, you've got a serious problem.

They've been in the Malay market for many many years. They're publicly listed there and required by law to publish annual reports.

Amway also brags about opening actual brick and mortar stores. Finally, Amway is having to address online sales.

They did that years ago. In North America they're the #1 ranked internet website in health & beauty, their core line products.

Yes, all of those things add up to a declining profit market for the Amway associates. So, multi-level marketing is in decline.

How do you come to that conclusion? Their top 10 markets all growing, and highest sales ever in 2012.

No normal business gets much revenue from employee sales.

independent contractors are not employees, and sales to independent contracters in any industry are a normal part of revenue

If Amway gets even 5% of revenue from new associates and seminars, that would be suspicious. If they got 10%, that would be a scam. Higher than this is more like cult status.

Amway makes nothing on seminars and only a small percentage of revenue comes from new recruits. I think I showed the data earlier in this thread.

I attended an Amway seminar a long time ago. The main speaker tried to claim that you could make money just by selling the program without ever selling any product.

This is a clear and explicit violation of Amway's rules. Yes, particularly in the past there were groups that promoted this approach

This type of description is clearly a pyramid scheme. I wonder if speakers still talk this way.

It doesn't make it a pyramid scheme, but still a violation of amway rules and bad business.

If someone comes up with an idea for a business, they try it out and they fail at it, there's no one to blame but themselves. If I sell them on the idea of a business, knowing full well they are very likely to fail, I've scammed them.

What if they're very likely to succeed if they actually do the business you showed them?

I start to understand why Amway has so bad reputation in USA and some other countries.
It's very bad in Poland - my home country.
Too many unethical people involved. Counter productive in long term IMHO.

Exactly, as you've pointed out regularly it makes no sense for Amway to endorse unprofessional behaviour.

Poland was one of the early eastern european markets and suffered a little from the more unprofessional groups. It also suffered from a misleading TV "documentary" which got banned as defamatory.

It's fascinating how well Amway does in China, Japan and Korea. It looks like honour is important and profitable.

Amway Korea was actually shutdown and the executive thrown in jail, primarily as a result of misinformation being spread by competitors in the retail marketplace. It's now one of Korea's most respected international companies and one of Amway's top markets.

In UK you can't sponsor if you don't have 5 retail customers and pass an online test with all the info about average income. There is tons of warnings about telling people that it's easy or quick money.

There's been a lot of interesting experiments in the UK, some are working well, some not so well.

Difficult to comment on that as I'm not an expert. I don't know what Amway can legally do and how much money they make or lose because of that.

I believe they lose on damaged reputation. USA is huge but not the biggest market for Amway. I believe it would be financially beneficial for them if they could stop unethical behaviour amongst their IBOs.

It's hard for me to call Amway a scam if they lose money on that.

I know that Amway in China is a hybrid with lots of retail shops and limited number of sponsors. Seems like the most difficult way to distribute but works amazing.
New market and already few times bigger than in USA.

Actually not that different. US has about 23% the population of China and Amway US as about 20% the sales of China. The difference is even smaller if you consider "north america" vs china.

How a clean up in USA would cause a massive drop in sales?
You may be right but explain your logic, please.

This is actually history, not theory. Amway US kicked out a whole bunch of leaders about 6-7 years ago. A lot of their networks went with them and Amway US lost around a third of distributors and revenue. When t hey tried to do a similar thing in the early 80s, North America and North American leaders international teams was a much much larger percentage of their revenues and they were reportedly pretty much blackmailed by several top distributors, who had their groups withhold purchasing for a period as a show of power.

There have been very very very few reports of unethical behaviour since the 2007 purge, and the US is growing well and has recovered most of the lost sales. There are still reputation issues but mostly a hangover from earlier years rather than current activity.

Note that Joecool was an Amway distributor more than 15 years ago and pretty much refuses to acknowledge changes have made any difference.

Suspending few contracts would be about few thousands $$ less in sales. The whole structure would be unchanged - just 1 position taken away. Similar to taking an inactive IBO from the system.

Networks are built on leadership, distributors will often follow them rather than the company itself, particularly when they're a group (like TEAM) that was very much in to blind edification of their leaders. Amway initially only terminated a dozen or so Diamonds but many many others resigned in response.

One of the best things Amway ever did.

It's hard to believe that Amway in UK and USA is the same company.

In many ways Amway UK 15 years ago was even worse than Amway US 15 years ago. Both have changed.

Do you know how much they lost after the "TEAM" left and how quickly they recovered?

Some data came out in the various TEAM related lawsuits. Don't have it handy at present sorry.

How many MLM sales reps suffer significant Financial loss, compared to the overall 30 % of businesses losing money?

99 % See http://pyramidschemealert.org/PSAMain/news/MythofIncomeReport.html

The 95% of small businesses "fail" data is not accurate, but neither is PSA's "analyses". It's based on lots of assumptions that are not based on reality, not to mention the idea that products purchased for personal use should be treated as a business expense, which is tax fraud.

I see that Amway USA has some seroius problems.

Take Joecool's and Newton's Trinos and others comments with a large grain of salt (I have them both on ignore these days). Their experiences were (a) quite some time ago and (b) limited in scope. Amway is a lot bigger than people realise!

It looks like there was a lot wrong about Amway - lots of holes that could be used to scam people. In that case by Network 21 and BWW.

Can't speak for BWW, but I can state from personal experience that N21 promotes ethical behaviour. Indeed they have essentially been the model Amway has used to reign in other groups. BERR dropped the case against them in the UK (BWW elected to close down rather than fight) and they continue to operate in the UK in partnership with affiliated distributors there.

C1REX is doing a slightly better job defending Amway than icerat had, demonstrating how different the corporation is run in different countries, and that it seems to be less scammy in the UK than the US.

I don't think he's pointed out anything I haven't already pointed out. As I said, in my knowledge Amway UK 15 years ago was worse than the (parts of) Amway US that many here seem to insist is universal and unchanged.

I actually have an Amway business in the UK, as well as Poland and the US, so I'm personally familiar with operations there.
 
Last edited:
Icerat mistakenly seems to think that people will succeed in Amway if they do as they're shown/told. The problem is that some of the vital steps suh as showing the plan and selling products (at least in the US) is next to impossible, How can you possible (for example) sell a $50 case of bottled water when you can get a case of water at WalMart for $5? How can you buy $80 multi vitamins (double x one month supply) when you can get a 3 month supply of multi vitamins at WalMart for $25? Apologists will say Amway has a cheaper multi vitamin, but upline pushes double x and double x is their flagship product. Amway does have some competitive products such as LOC, but overall, their prices are much higher.

Also, you cannot show the plan 15 times a month (for most people) because AMway has a lousy reputation in the US and people avoid you like the plague when you mention Amway. Even if you can show the plan that many times, people often will not sign up once they do their due diligence.
 
@icecrat - thank you for some very interesting facts.


Regarding the price of Double X. It's expensive but it doesn't mean it's not worth the price.
It's a fact that it contains concentrates from 16 organic plants what is very expensive to produce. So the ingredients may justify the price.

Is it effective? From my personal experience it's the only multivitamin I've ever tried that makes any difference. The biggest difference is in energy and clarity of my mind. This is fully subjective, however.


The only comparison I've found:
http://www.multivitaminguide.org/#


It seems that the price is more than justified.
Nobody pushes me to sell one, however.
 
I'd be a little skeptical of that site. The methodology they use is a little suspect. Past experience is these kind of sites are nearly always affiliated with whatever brand it is they pick as #1. In this case you'll note they have affiliate links selling all of the top 5.


I'm very skeptical as the Double X is compared there to synthetic vitamins.
That is the only comparison I've found.

For those who don't know Double X is a combination of organic vitamins and synthetic ones. Both synthetic and organic have pros and cons.


I really like the explanation from one of Nutrilite scientists:

Hi P.L.,
I’m a Senior Scientist at Nutrilite, and my comments here do not necessarily reflect those of my employer. I wanted to comment on an older post for which commenting was closed. It was a review of Nutrilite DOUBLE X, but my comments are also germane to this post about natural vitamins.I was struck by several things in your review of Double X and the comments it elicited over the almost two years since you first posted it. Much of the discussion revolves around your gauge of quality, which is whether a given multivitamin is “natural” or not. You are correct in stating that Double X is not all-natural. It contains both natural and synthetic nutrients. (But your listing of the Supplement Facts for Double X omits over half the ingredients actually listed.) Distributors who claim it is all-natural are betraying their misunderstanding of their own product and undermining their own as well as the brand’s credibility. I suspect that that’s where the confusion comes from – there’s so much talk about phytonutrients and plant concentrates in Double X that people assume it must be entirely made of plants. We use both natural and synthetic ingredients for several reasons, including cost, nutrient content, and manufacturability. An all-natural multisupplement, such as one you recommend elsewhere on your website, would provide very low levels of several essential nutrients. For example, I calculated that with the all-natural supplement that gets your thumbs up, the maximum dosage of nine tablets a day provides only 15 mcg of folic acid. The Daily Value for folic acid is 400 mcg. An “all-natural” supplement thus does a poor job of actually supplementing the diet with useful amounts of any nutrients – providing in this case less than 5% of the minimum amount of folate needed every day to stave off a deficiency disease. And so on for every nutrient in an “all-natural” multi: they’re there at such low levels you’d have to a meal of them to get a reasonable amount. And that’s just my point: there’s nothing wrong with “all-natural” vitamins and minerals. Here the best recommendation is: walk down to your local grocery store or farmer’s market and get yourself some fresh fruits and vegetables; better yet, supplement your diet with fruits and vegetables you grow yourself. But in some cases – opinions vary; for instance, you have apparently stopped taking Double X along with any other supplements – it is necessary to supplement even a very healthy diet in order to support optimal health goals rather than just avoid deficiency disease.
Don’t confuse the “natural” vs. “synthetic” issue with other questions such as contamination or heat-treatment during processing. It’s not true that “synthetic” vitamins are more prone to contamination with aluminium or anything else. On the contrary, quality control is much more demanding for a natural vitamin than for a synthetic. To paraphrase Gary Reineccius from his excellent article in Scientific American on the mistaken but commonly held belief that “natural flavors” are inherently better than synthetic flavors, Nature has no restrictions on using toxic chemicals, whereas the synthetic chemist does. Also, synthetic vitamins are not heat-treated; it’s plant concentrates that often must be gently heated to dehydrate them and reduce bulk and improve stability.
In your own list of recommended minerals you mention several synthetic forms (no proprietary chelated minerals would be considered natural, since they are manufactured in a laboratory), so your own definition of “natural” is unclear. Behind this whole confused and confusing notion of “natural” lies, in my opinion, an entirely legitimate worry, or quest: a worry that by popping pills down our throats we might be harming ourselves; and a quest for healthy living filled with vitality and energy. At Nutrilite we take the responsibility of making supplements that people take into their bodies seriously. “Natural” does not mean safe and pure any more than “synthetic” does. In either case – whether we’re working with synthetic or natural vitamins or natural plant concentrates – we have multiple quality controls in place that are unrivaled in the industry. You discount any information about our quality control available from Nutrilite or Amway, but Nutrilite products did pass the quality checks run by the independent ConsumerLabs.com, who also found that Nutrilite came out on top in a brand survey of consumer satisfaction.
As you know, Double X contains both natural and synthetic nutrients. For example, vitamin C is listed on the label as coming from both ascorbic acid (synthetic) and acerola (natural). It contains all-natural vitamin E (from d-Alpha Tocopheryl succinate), which is 1.4 times as bioavailable as synthetic vitamin E. It also contains synthetic folic acid, which is 1.6 times as bioavailable as natural folate. For vitamins and minerals the choice was made on a case-by-case basis to go for natural or synthetic form. To my mind, there are two key points of differentiation for Double X compared to other high-end multisupplements: (1) the quality control, from seed to finished product, and (2) the variety of plant concentrates. On top of this, it also provides high, optimal-health-supporting levels of vitamins and minerals.
With the latest generation of Double X (in the US and many other countries around the world), the formula contains plant concentrates from apple, rosemary, sage, and blueberry among many others – all of these were based from multi-stage bioassay screening designed (to simplify a little) around a single concept: variety. Variety is an intuitively healthy concept – we get that a healthy diet doesn’t mean high chronic consumption of any single healthy food. The very mental image of a healthy plateful features many different textures and colors: variety, because different plants provide different things are bodies need to stay healthy.
Focusing here on the plant ingredients, Double X has three kinds of variety built-in: (1) variety of ingredients; it doesn’t contain, say, high amounts of just two or three plant ingredients; it contains more than twenty. (2) Next, it also provides variety of action, meaning action in the body (as verified by bioassays, and also based on different phytonutrient class or family). Double X is not, for example, super-powered with “just” antioxidant power with an eye-popping ORAC number; rather, along with high antioxidant potency and a high ORAC number, it also provides different kinds of benefits; it provides bioassay-supported action against five types of free radicals; we’ve also included ingredients that are help the body detoxify itself or help protect and repair DNA, functions which have nothing or little to do with just antioxidant potential. (3) Finally, in Double X there’s also variety within individual plant ingredients. Take the acerola, for example: we could have aimed to produce a super-pure, super-concentrated acerola extract that provides only the single molecule ascorbic acid; instead, we like a rather “impure” natural acerola extract, that contains high amounts of ascorbic acid (vitamin C), along with a preponderance of other naturally-occuring flavonoids found in the fresh fruit. This is the “whole food” philosophy at the level of individual ingredients. Though in some cases plant concentrates provide highly-concentrated specific nutrients, none of these are so concentrated that they are completely divorced from the whole food they were extraced from; lutein, for example, extracted from marigold flowers, also contains other mixed carotenoids like zeaxanthin found in the whole fresh plant. Thus with those three kinds of variety is Double X meant to complement a healthy diet that is, yes, based on natural, unprocessed foods as far as possible. Double X is an examplar of the “Best of Nature. Best of Science” philosophy.

It’s interesting that you start out your review of Double X by stating that you felt more energetic, or rather less energetic after you stopped. It’s something we hear a lot and something I feel too. “Optimal health” is a bit of an abstract concept and some supplements are taken on faith and hope – for example, I take supplements for my eyes (lutein and others) because of the scientific evidence – no hard proof, but associations between high consumptions of lutein in the diet and risk of macular degeneration. I don’t feel my eyesight getting stronger, though. With a supplement like Double X, it can be a little different – it doesn’t have to be only on faith. Many people do feel noticeably better when they take it, or, like you, only notice a difference when they stop.
Cheers,
Marc Lemay,
[email protected]
 
I'm very skeptical as the Double X is compared there to synthetic vitamins.
That is the only comparison I've found.

For those who don't know Double X is a combination of organic vitamins and synthetic ones. Both synthetic and organic have pros and cons.


I really like the explanation from one of Nutrilite scientists:

Of course a nutrilite scientist would be completely unbiased?

The question is whether there's any bonafide evidence that these vitamins are "better" based on independent unbiased sources.

And then is it worth the exorbitant price?
 
Of course a nutrilite scientist would be completely unbiased?

The question is whether there's any bonafide evidence that these vitamins are "better" based on independent unbiased sources.

And then is it worth the exorbitant price?

I haven't find any unbiased test.

I do feel better and my skin look better but I can't be sure if it's thanks to the vitamins or my belief that they work.

However, the high price is easy to explain - expensive ingredients.
Do they work? We can't tell but they are expensive.

There are actually 23 concentrates from different fruits, vegetables and plants.
How many multivitamins in Wal-Mart smell like herbs?

The list of concentrates:

Acerola Cherry
African Marigold
Alfalfa
Apple
Asparagus
Basil
Blueberry
Broccoli
Cranberry
Grape Skin
Grapefruit
Horseradish
Kale
Lemon
Mandarin
Oregano
Parsley
Plum
Pomegranate
Rosemary
Sage
Tomato
Watercress


This is the reason why Double X is more expensive.
 
I haven't find any unbiased test.

It's pretty much impossible to have any clinical testing that could be considered wholly unbiased in the nutrition area. Same in pharmaceuticals actually. Clinical trials are exorbitantly expensive. No wholly independent body is going to spend the money to test them. Next best alternative is independent labs, but they'll get funding from manufacturers.

When it comes to manufacturing quality - things like actually having in the bottle what's on the label - Nutrilite always does well. In one large study in Germany it was the only brand to pass all their tests.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom