Amway TV ad

[cyborg]

Are you seriously claiming a business is only worthwhile if it can expect 100% of the population to be a customer?

I don't believe I made that claim.

I would need to have some expectation of what sort of numbers I could expect in order to decide whether it was actually worthwhile or not.

 

[Tex2]

What you expect depends on your personality, or lack thereof, as well as how willing you are to learn and apply what you learn. With Amway, you should also expect to be ripped off by the tool scam, unless you happen to be in the UK or another country that has made the tool scam illegal.

 

[icerat]

I don't believe I made that claim.

I would need to have some expectation of what sort of numbers I could expect in order to decide whether it was actually worthwhile or not.

That's a more reasonable position, though obviously, as with most businesses it's a point in time issue. When building a distribution network the "product" isn't really the #1 aspect, as it can be changed. Over the last 50 years, Amway went from being (product wise) a soap company, then a home shopping company, then became an internet shopping company, and is now a health & beauty company. Who knows what will go through the network in the next 50 years.

Still, at present the primary products are nutrition, and cosmetics and skincare. Those are enormous markets, with plenty of opportunity to increase both marketshare and increase market size.

 

[cyborg]

Still, at present the primary products are nutrition, and cosmetics and skincare. Those are enormous markets, with plenty of opportunity to increase both marketshare and increase market size.

Which takes us back to the previous discussions on the efficacy of nutrional products et al.

When building a distribution network the "product" isn't really the #1 aspect, as it can be changed.

So why talk about them at all then?

 

[Almo]

I don't care about the quote function, you aren't worth the extra effort.

But it's REALLY hard to read your posts that don't use it. I tend to skip them since I don't want to fight to make out what you're quoting and what you're saying. If you do use it, more people will take the time to read what you say. It's more for other readers than for the person you are quoting.

 

[Tex2]

Which takes us back to the previous discussions on the efficacy of nutrional products et al.



So why talk about them at all then?

Although this is not my statement, I have noticed you seem to enjoy running in circles. My answer addressed your statement. Nutrition is a HUGE and growing market (at least it was before the economy tanked), and there is plenty of existing and new discoveries happening all the time that reinforce what Amway has promoted for decades. However, if YOU are not willing to LEARN and APPLY what you learn, you're back to square one, or the beginning of the circle, your pick.

So why talk about them at all then? ---- Because they are #2 or #3, and an integral piece of the discussion.

But it's REALLY hard to read your posts that don't use it. ---- Poor widdle Almo, can I have a pity party for you? LOL

I tend to skip them since I don't want to fight to make out what you're quoting and what you're saying. ---- Good, you'll save yourself some time.

If you do use it, more people will take the time to read what you say. It's more for other readers than for the person you are quoting. ---- I have a better idea, make a phone call! LOL

 

[icerat]

Which takes us back to the previous discussions on the efficacy of nutrional products et al.

No it doesn't, because no matter what your view on the efficacy of a product, from a business perspective it's market demand that matters. Doesn't matter if you have a pill that makes you live to 200 if nobody will buy it, and it doesn't really matter if you have a pill that does nothing if people want to buy it.

So why talk about them at all then?

Are you really going to resort to such silly questions?

 

[Porkchopjim]

Things always seem to get a little quiet when I ask this question of Insider/IceRat:

Why are there EXPLICIT rules requiring sales to NON-IBOs?

But, no worries – let's have fun with numbers!

Again, a lie. Half of people who join Amway never buy the products in the first place, they are never customers, and they do not renew. Of the other half, no more than 13% pursue the business. Much of the rest (74%) continue to purchase products. (source: Orrin Woodward et al v. Quixtar, Inc.). Furthermore, of people who don't even renew their memberships, 25% remain as customers.

Wow! And with your assertion that IBOs do NOT hyperconsume Amway products (or just give them away or throw them out...all the same to you)...and they most CERTAINLY do not buy products just to make some sort of 'performance goal' to feed the pyramid...

...you'd expect - all things being the same with the normal churn of MLM owners – that Amway would have experienced at LEAST 25% growth every year...as those customers/former owners would have no reason to change their buying habits just because they left the business. Let's not pretend that the difference is made up of paying, retail customers. Because you can't. THAT demand wouldn't go away, either.

That must be a stealth 25% growth...given that a couple of years ago they were even with inflation and did so well last year that they didn't even bother reporting North American numbers at all.

Or, your own numbers just bit you in the Amway again. Funny how that happens when you're busy convincing people that you're not 'misrepresenting' things.

Maybe we could find someone with some actual experience with Amway as a measurable source of income? Insider/IceRat doesn't have that – he's into defending the business, not proving that the shiny Amway magazines of wealth and comfort speak the truth. Tex is still about $40K in the hole.

 

[oggiesnr]

Even though Amway exists in the UK (and nearly lost their courtccase) I suspect our nearest equivilent is Kleeneze. I know one member who's been in it for years (over thirty) and has done very well by it, she and her husband have built the network and sit back and take the money.

At a local level, every few months we get a catalogue, every time it's a different name as the agent. Suggests to me that the pyramid is fairly full and the people at the bottom can't make a go of it. As in all pyramids the earlier adopters get the cream.

Steve

 

[Tex2]

No it doesn't, because no matter what your view on the efficacy of a product, from a business perspective it's market demand that matters. Doesn't matter if you have a pill that makes you live to 200 if nobody will buy it, and it doesn't really matter if you have a pill that does nothing if people want to buy it. ---- Not over the long term.



Are you really going to resort to such silly questions?

Of course, it's an attept to cover up his ignorance, just like accusing me of having various mental disorders is an attempt to cover up the tool scam.

 

[Tex2]

Things always seem to get a little quiet when I ask this question of Insider/IceRat:




But, no worries – let's have fun with numbers! ---- icerat/ibofb/insider gets quiet whenever tool scam questions are asked as well. I've answered the question several times, do you recall the answer?



Wow! And with your assertion that IBOs do NOT hyperconsume Amway products (or just give them away or throw them out...all the same to you)...and they most CERTAINLY do not buy products just to make some sort of 'performance goal' to feed the pyramid... ---- Many IBOs do hyperconsume. Many do buy to meet a performance goal.

...you'd expect - all things being the same with the normal churn of MLM owners – that Amway would have experienced at LEAST 25% growth every year...as those customers/former owners would have no reason to change their buying habits just because they left the business. Let's not pretend that the difference is made up of paying, retail customers. Because you can't. THAT demand wouldn't go away, either. ---- There aren't that many new IBOs. I've had customers that have bought once, a couple of times, and some have ordered for years.

That must be a stealth 25% growth...given that a couple of years ago they were even with inflation and did so well last year that they didn't even bother reporting North American numbers at all. ---- See above. The numbers weren't reported last year for the first time ever, as far as I know, while several foreign countries with high growth ARE reported. Quite non-transparent.

Or, your own numbers just bit you in the Amway again. Funny how that happens when you're busy convincing people that you're not 'misrepresenting' things. ---- His life is based on misrepresenting things, at least he's consistent.

Maybe we could find someone with some actual experience with Amway as a measurable source of income? Insider/IceRat doesn't have that – he's into defending the business, not proving that the shiny Amway magazines of wealth and comfort speak the truth. Tex is still about $40K in the hole.

Really? How would you know?

 

[Tex2]

Even though Amway exists in the UK (and nearly lost their courtccase) I suspect our nearest equivilent is Kleeneze. I know one member who's been in it for years (over thirty) and has done very well by it, she and her husband have built the network and sit back and take the money.

At a local level, every few months we get a catalogue, every time it's a different name as the agent. Suggests to me that the pyramid is fairly full and the people at the bottom can't make a go of it. As in all pyramids the earlier adopters get the cream.

Steve

Or perhaps it's a random occurrence. Or perhaps they "sign up" to distribute the catalog to your home, hoping you'll either wake up and buy something or die, and a different person can buy and/or get involved. There's a guy on ibofb's site that got involved in Kleeneze just a year or two ago and claims to be doing quite well. So much for your "earlier adopters get the cream" BS.

 

[icerat]

Even though Amway exists in the UK (and nearly lost their courtccase) I suspect our nearest equivilent is Kleeneze. I know one member who's been in it for years (over thirty) and has done very well by it, she and her husband have built the network and sit back and take the money.

Amway did not "nearly lose" their court case. While a cursory reading of the initial judgement looked that way, the appeal judgement made it very clear it was not "close".

The result was much the same as FTC vs Amway - nothing wrong with the business model, but you really do need to monitor the field better.

At a local level, every few months we get a catalogue, every time it's a different name as the agent. Suggests to me that the pyramid is fairly full and the people at the bottom can't make a go of it. As in all pyramids the earlier adopters get the cream.

Right .... so it has a high turnover ratio, just like pretty much all other sales businesses, and it doesn't suggest to you that ... it's just like other sales businesses?

There's a lot of research on turnover in the direct sales, and sales, industry. Perhaps you should read some of it.

 

[oggiesnr]

There's a lot of research on turnover in the direct sales, and sales, industry. Perhaps you should read some of it.

Please don't patronise me, it's uncalled for.

I am well aware of turnover in many industries, I see it every week in what I do. In the dim and distant days when I worked in personnel, turnover was a key indicator we looked at, "Why are we losing people?". If the business model is successful AT ALL LEVELS I would not expect to see high turnover because people making money are happy people and who turns up the opportunity to make money? The fact that I see at a local level this high turnover makes me wonder about what's going on.

Steve

 

[icerat]

The fact that I see at a local level this high turnover makes me wonder about what's going on.

What's going on is they decided not to do it anymore, that's all. The barriers to entry are so low anyone can give it a go to see if it fits.

 

[Tex2]

Amway did not "nearly lose" their court case. While a cursory reading of the initial judgement looked that way, the appeal judgement made it very clear it was not "close". ---- Yes, they did. The judge said they were very nearly shut down. The main reason he didn't shut them down was because Amway took immediate and effective actions, including shutting down the tool scam, even though your hero Jim Dornan originally put out a letter implying all the problems were in Amway's court, which is blatantly FALSE, and why he had to withdraw the letter and write a new one. Whether the appeals judges looked at it differently is NOT the issue, the original judge was quite clear. Stop LYING.

The result was much the same as FTC vs Amway - nothing wrong with the business model, but you really do need to monitor the field better. ---- Reducing prices by up to 75%, requiring retailing volume prior to sponsoring, and shuting down the tool scam is not changing the business model? LIAR.

 

[Tex2]

Please don't patronise me, it's uncalled for.

I am well aware of turnover in many industries, I see it every week in what I do. In the dim and distant days when I worked in personnel, turnover was a key indicator we looked at, "Why are we losing people?". If the business model is successful AT ALL LEVELS I would not expect to see high turnover because people making money are happy people and who turns up the opportunity to make money? The fact that I see at a local level this high turnover makes me wonder about what's going on.

Steve

How do you know whether it's turnover? Perhaps more people are getting involved? Maybe YOU could have sponsored them all these years and be like the 30 year ones you mentioned, or the 1-2 year one I mentioned. You DO need to do some reading, and try learning some of it while you're reading.

 

[Almo]

Please don't patronise me, it's uncalled for.

I am well aware of turnover in many industries, I see it every week in what I do. In the dim and distant days when I worked in personnel, turnover was a key indicator we looked at, "Why are we losing people?". If the business model is successful AT ALL LEVELS I would not expect to see high turnover because people making money are happy people and who turns up the opportunity to make money? The fact that I see at a local level this high turnover makes me wonder about what's going on.

Steve

One notable video game company (Relic) has low turnover (3% yearly last I heard). Another notable game company has 25% turnover. This can be used to infer that one company is a better place to work for over long periods, for whatever reason.

I agree with Steve's statement in bold (which I bolded).

 

[Tex2]

Almo, how do you know whether it's turnover?

 

[icerat]

One notable video game company (Relic) has low turnover (3% yearly last I heard). Another notable game company has 25% turnover. This can be used to infer that one company is a better place to work for over long periods, for whatever reason.

I agree with Steve's statement in bold (which I bolded).

So I say what I said before, if you're interested go and read the research on direct sales turnover. No need to wonder.

Actually Steve, I just dug up one paper I have on file, Wotruba et.al. (2005), Differences in Turnover Predictors between Multilevel and Single Level Direct Selling Organizations, and they found turnover in MLM is significantly less than in traditional sales.

That should make you wonder too ....