Is Amway A Scam?

[icerat]

I understand. I was trying to dumb it down. But also, anyone I am piggy-backing on will face the same situation I am describing. At some level a sale must occur, even if it's to a distributor who uses the product. I thought it was more generous to assume retail sales right off.

I'd argue it's easier to find a few people who want to earn a part-time income than it is to operate a full-time sales business, or at least the latter is easier if you do the first as well.

I am not a good candidate for Amway under this scenario and income level.

Neither am I.

Is my aversion to face-to-face sales common?

yup, of course as wowbagger pointed out earlier sales is necessary in every business. Most people have an aversion to "hard selling", though as Professor King put it in the video I linked to earlier, network marketing works more along the "sharing selling" model.

 

[icerat]

I'm talking about the exact opposite of a hard sell. If the system was sooo good, it wouldn't need one.

You mean "if the system was sooo good and sooo simple" that you could present it all in a half hour presentation, then you wouldn't need a hard sell.

Yup, your right. It's not that good and that simple.

If you find something that is, let me know

First of all: It's not like any other business. You already mentioned that there are rules and restrictions involved that most other businesses don't have.

Many other businesses have the kind of restrictions we're talking about. Franchising is the obvious one. It's quite popular, perhaps you haven't encountered it.

For example: If I was going to start an "independent business", I would probably think to myself "Oh good, I get to advertise and market the business, to my heart's content!"

I already gave examples of the same phrase being used in franchising. Apparently you haven't heard of it.

But, that's NOT what happens. Advertising is restricted in this MLM, and the reasons why need to be carefully explained and understood. It is NOT an intuitive concept.

Personally I find a company wanting to have control over the use of it's brands quite intuitive. You apparently see differently.

We DID move on past the myth. My point is that it is a little like a casino in one way: MOST people lose something. Time or some money. But, they certainly don't come out ahead, most of the time.

If I'm investigating a business, I don't consider the time spent in due diligence a waste of time.

You apparently do.

MOST PEOPLE IN AMWAY FAIL.

Only if you arbitrarily decide that someone investigating a business and deciding not to do it is a failure, or someone deciding they just want to buy products and doing so are failures.

I don't agree with that interpretation of "failure", though I'm aware that's how MLM critics like yourself interpret it.

I think we can just agree we have different definitions of "failure" and move on.

 

[aggle-rithm]

I asked you how you knew people you encountered where with Amway, and you said it was because of the gibbering etc.

No, I said it was in spite of the gibbering.

My statement about your beliefs logically follows from the statements you have made.

Perhaps it follows from the statement you believe I made.

 

[Wowbagger]

You mean "if the system was sooo good and sooo simple" that you could present it all in a half hour presentation, then you wouldn't need a hard sell.

Where did this "half-hour" come from? I certainly didn't suggest any specific time frame. I am assuming a half-hour is the length of typical Amway spiel?

And, I certainly never suggested a "hard sell". I don't know where that came from.

Deflecting criticism by turning your opponents' clear wording into word salad is mighty low road to take. Are you sure you want to go down there?

Yup, your right. It's not that good and that simple.

Sounds oddly like something I've never heard an Amway sales rep ever say, before.

Many other businesses have the kind of restrictions we're talking about. Franchising is the obvious one. It's quite popular, perhaps you haven't encountered it.

So, Amway is really just a franchise business, then?

A franchise with an MLM structure. And, weirdly, a franchise that people are afraid to name in their sales pitch.

Okay, it's a strange franchise operation. But, if that's what it is, then that's what it is. I hope more IBOs sell it like that, because otherwise their pitch won't be accurate or honest.

Personally I find a company wanting to have control over the use of it's brands quite intuitive. You apparently see differently.

I see the folks selling Amway labeled as "Independent Business Owners". That implies that I run the business independently. I don't see Amway being called a "franchise", at least not outside of this thread.

But, even so: Franchises are also non-intuitive. The terms have to be gone over, until well understood by the franchisee. Because a lot of them don't come very naturally.

There is nothing inherently wrong with a non-intuitive business model. My point in bringing that up, is this: Amway is NOT sold as a non-intuitive concept, that needs special attention to understand.

It is being sold as something "anyone" can understand and succeed in.

It is being sold as something that is "simple" (if not "easy"), and yet is not simple. It has complications that need to be studied and understood.

Some of the best businesses are non-intuitive: They can make a killing in a market very few people would ever think about.
But, those same businesses would emphasize that non-intuitive nature, if they were honest.

A complicated business that largely sells itself as "simple" is not being honest.

Even if those complications are "no more than a franchise". They still need to be laid out.

Understand what I am saying?

Do you understand why Amway has the scammy reputation that it does?

If I'm investigating a business, I don't consider the time spent in due diligence a waste of time.

You apparently do.

WHEN DID I EVER SAY THAT?!!

The nerve of you to claim that I would think "time spent in due diligence a waste of time", after I had just told you about the importance of due diligence!!!

Is that your new tactic, now? Claim your opponent said the exact opposite of what they just said, and attack that Mirror-Universe-inspired strawman?!!

I don't agree with that interpretation of "failure", though I'm aware that's how MLM critics like yourself interpret it.

We established that over 50% of IBOs either don't make money or, in some cases, lose money.

You can interpret that anyway you want to.

I still wonder why Amway would continue to allow numbers so poor, if they were trying to make themselves look like a legit company.

 

[icerat]

No, I said it was in spite of the gibbering.

Ok, well let start again. You said -

everyone I've come across who sells Amway behaves as if they're in a cult

I want to know how you know if someone you come across "sells Amway" or not. If you met me at say, TAM, apart from this thread how would you know if I was an Amway IBO or not?

 

[icerat]

Where did this "half-hour" come from? I certainly didn't suggest any specific time frame. I am assuming a half-hour is the length of typical Amway spiel?

Thereabouts.

And, I certainly never suggested a "hard sell". I don't know where that came from.

Because I'm suggesting people take their time in researching if it's something for them, you think it all needs to be in the half-hour "spiel" or it can't be good.

Deflecting criticism by turning your opponents' clear wording into word salad is mighty low road to take. Are you sure you want to go down there?

I'm just responding to what you're writing, if I'm misinterpreting it, then my apologies, it's not intended. Perhaps you could be clearer?

Sounds oddly like something I've never heard an Amway sales rep ever say, before.

What percentage of the 20 million+ registered Amway reps from over the past decade have you encountered?

So, Amway is really just a franchise business, then?

Actually I personally believe the US Federal law on what defines a franchise has recently changed and would now include Amway, yes. However state laws (and laws elsewhere) differ, so Amway would say no.

A franchise with an MLM structure. And, weirdly, a franchise that people are afraid to name in their sales pitch.

Every Amway pitch I've ever seen included Amway (or Quixtar). I'm aware that not all have been, and TEAM in particular (which got kicked out) was notorious for doing that.

I see the folks selling Amway labeled as "Independent Business Owners". That implies that I run the business independently. I don't see Amway being called a "franchise", at least not outside of this thread.

So you believe when McDonald's markets their franchisees as "Independent" they are being deceptive or dishonest?

But, even so: Franchises are also non-intuitive.

As per our earlier disagreements over OS user interfaces on other threads, I consider "intuitive" to pretty much be "whatever you're used to".

Understand what I am saying?

I don't think the model is counter-intuitive or complex at all.

Do you understand why Amway has the scammy reputation that it does?

First of all, as per the UoW study, and other private studies I've seen, Amway's reputation isn't particularly "scammy". Even in the US, the majority have a positive or neutral view of the company. In Asia in particular it's reputation is quite good, as evidenced by the number of consumer awards they win there.

Which isn't to mean it doesn't have a poor reputation amongst a significant number of people. I went in to detail why I think that has happened in an earlier post.

WHEN DID I EVER SAY THAT?!!

You have numerous times said people are "losing time" (if not money) if they investigate the business and decide not to do it.

The nerve of you to claim that I would think "time spent in due diligence a waste of time", after I had just told you about the importance of due diligence!!!

Oh I know. That's the point. You're contradicting yourself.

I suspect the issue is this -

You think a decision to build an Amway business is made when you sign the membership form.

I think registering for membership form is an important, and early, part of due diligence.

I have another business (in development) where we are trying to match people with physical activities they enjoy. The idea is if they like doing something, and the people they are doing it with, then they are far more like to incorporate them in their lifestyles, and thus be healthier. We could get them to watch youtube videos, attend presentations, interview people who do they activities etc etc and get them to decide what they think is a good fit.

Or if they think something looks interesting we could encourage them to give it a try and decide if it's for them.

We're doing the latter, obviously. Trying the activity is a key part of the due diligence before making a decision.

Same approach with Amway.

I still wonder why Amway would continue to allow numbers so poor, if they were trying to make themselves look like a legit company.

Amway's owners prefer to be open to anyone and allow people to decide for themselves.

That, and the respect of respected people matters more to them than a handful of mostly anonymous internet critics who use and abuse statistics.

The dogs bark but the caravan moves on.

 

[Wowbagger]

Because I'm suggesting people take their time in researching if it's something for them, you think it all needs to be in the half-hour "spiel" or it can't be good.

When did I ever say "all needs to be in the half-hour 'spiel' or it can't be good".

What I said was basically:

If you DON'T sell Amway ACCURATELY, that is a bad thing.

I don't care if the spiel takes a half-hour or two hours or whatever. Within the time given, Amway sellers should be obligated to portray the company accurately. That includes making sure they understand all the warts involved.

What percentage of the 20 million+ registered Amway reps from over the past decade have you encountered?

I only went to one sales pitch (which didn't even mention Amway until the very end), so far. But, I am reading up on others, with their high-pressure tactics and glossy brochures...

...and this is supposed to be a perfectly legit business?

Actually I personally believe the US Federal law on what defines a franchise has recently changed and would now include Amway, yes. However state laws (and laws elsewhere) differ, so Amway would say no.

And, yet, it's "no more complicated" than any other business...

So you believe when McDonald's markets their franchisees as "Independent" they are being deceptive or dishonest?

I believe McDonald's puts in a great effort to make sure their franchisees understand the limits (including advertisements), and are in a position that makes them likely to succeed... BEFORE the franchisee goes into business.

As per our earlier disagreements over OS user interfaces on other threads, I consider "intuitive" to pretty much be "whatever you're used to".

There are, in fact, certain innate biases and values most normally developed humans have within the physiology of their brains.

The details of the neuroscience and psychology are not necessarily important to weigh-in on what is generally intuitive or not. A talent in marketing sorta innately covers this, at a high-grain level.

But, I can say with scientific certainty that: "Intuitive" is not merely "whatever you're used to".

Read "The Blank Slate" by Steven Pinker, for more details. It's a very good book for explaining the general concepts of what is "intuitive" or not, in general human populations.

(P.S. In those other threads you are referring to: I was able to demonstrate exactly why "intuitive" is not "whatever you are used to" in operating system design. I spelled out specific flaws in Windows 8 that make it non-intuitive for most types of users, and why. You seemed to have forgotten that part.)

I don't think the model is counter-intuitive or complex at all.

Then why does this thread need to be two years old, to unravel only a portion of it?

Why couldn't you clearly define the merits of Amway, when asked about them directly?

Why do most people going into it fail to make any money, even if they went into it thinking they have what it takes?

Why all the seminars and video tapes and such being sold to advise people?

There is NOTHING WRONG with being "counter-intuitive" or "complex".

But, denying such complexities, and failing to realize how much of the system needs explaining IS wrong.

Claiming it is just as matter of this: "Buy stuff in volume (calculated monthly), earn a discount, sell in smaller volumes, pocket difference." is demonstrably wrong. I had to remind you that there is an MLM structure involved, after you said that.

You have numerous times said people are "losing time" (if not money) if they investigate the business and decide not to do it.

I am not counting the time investigating the business as "losing time". I think there is a misunderstanding, here.

But, I think the bigger issue is that I doubt the system is being sold accurately.

You think a decision to build an Amway business is made when you sign the membership form.

I think registering for membership form is an important, and early, part of due diligence.

So, you sign a contract BEFORE you decide to go into business with them?!

Or if they think something looks interesting we could encourage them to give it a try and decide if it's for them.

So: A whole bunch of people can be sold on Amway, sign the forms, and then don't do much. And, you can weasel out of that by saying "They gave it a try and decided it wasn't for them."

And this happens to more than 50% of member sign-ups, and you don't see anything suspicious about that?!

That, and the respect of respected people matters more to them than a handful of mostly anonymous internet critics who use and abuse statistics.

Appealing to authority, eh? You should try to avoid blatant fallacies as much as possible, in your arguments.

If Amway is to be sold on its own merits, communicate those merits better. You should not need to resort to testimonials to do so.

 

[icerat]

I only went to one sales pitch (which didn't even mention Amway until the very end), so far. But, I am reading up on others, with their high-pressure tactics and glossy brochures...

Any particular reason you're not reading up on the ones without "high-pressure tactics and glossy brochures"?

I believe McDonald's puts in a great effort to make sure their franchisees understand the limits (including advertisements), and are in a position that makes them likely to succeed... BEFORE the franchisee goes into business.

And what's the "failure" rate, using your definitions? How many people who think about starting a McDonald's franchise actually run profitable franchises?

A talent in marketing sorta innately covers this, at a high-grain level.

According to the now quite extensive research in the area of "success", how much if it is determined by "innate talent"?

According to 53+ years experience with tens of millions of IBOs around the world, how much of "success" in Amway is determined by "innate marketing talent"?

Read "The Blank Slate" by Steven Pinker, for more details. It's a very good book for explaining the general concepts of what is "intuitive" or not, in general human populations.

I've read a few Pinker books, downloading that to my kindle account as we speak, thanks for the recommendation. A decade old though I note, so has possibly missed most of the research in success.

Then why does this thread need to be two years old, to unravel only a portion of it?

Primarily because quite a few people insist on ignoring what I write and ignoring the evidence I post or link to in support.

As evidenced by the parts in your last post I haven't bothered responding (again) to ...

But, I think the bigger issue is that I doubt the system is being sold accurately.

Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. It's not a monolithic enterprise, as I keep trying to point out ....

So, you sign a contract BEFORE you decide to go into business with them?!

A contract that gives you certain rights, but no obligations if you elect not to utilise those rights. A contract which you can rip up and walk away from at any time.

So: A whole bunch of people can be sold on Amway, sign the forms, and then don't do much. And, you can weasel out of that by saying "They gave it a try and decided it wasn't for them."

Why do you consider reporting reality to be a "weasel out"?

And this happens to more than 50% of member sign-ups, and you don't see anything suspicious about that?!

What do you see suspicious about it?

Appealing to authority, eh? You should try to avoid blatant fallacies as much as possible, in your arguments.

There's nothing "blatantly fallacious" about argument from authority. It's a perfectly legitimate approach for inductive reasoning. It's fallacious in deductive reasoning or when the authorities are not in fact authorities. I'd note you cited Steven Pinker earlier. Should I pull you up for it?

 

[Wowbagger]

Any particular reason you're not reading up on the ones without "high-pressure tactics and glossy brochures"?

Too many people are writing about the high-pressure ones. Maybe they are the minority? If so, Amway still has a horrible PR problem on their hands.

And what's the "failure" rate, using your definitions?

Most people who sign up as IBOs don't make any money, and some lose some money. Less than 50% make money. (And of that, only a smaller percentage make a LOT of money.)

That's a fairly high failure rate. Though, it does sound nicer, when you put it in the context of "they decided it wasn't for them".

How many people who think about starting a McDonald's franchise actually run profitable franchises?

I don't have the numbers, but McDonalds failures are very rare, apparently.

And, the corporation will scrutinize you, before they let you sign the forms. YOU must PROVE to THEM that you have handled businesses properly in the past, have a good credit rating, and don't need even to borrow money to start a franchise. (Actually, you are allowed to borrow some money, but I think a large portion must come from your own funds, and not be borrowed.)

They don't just let anyone in after a half-hour sales seminar.

According to 53+ years experience with tens of millions of IBOs around the world, how much of "success" in Amway is determined by "innate marketing talent"?

I only brought this up, because you claimed "intuitive" is really "what you are used to".

My counter-claim is that your definition is almost useless. A more effective definition would be: "That which you would not normally need to get used to."

In other words: Something that appeals to the innate (or "instinctual") aspects of the minds of normally developed humans.

Your question is irrelevant to that point. But, since you asked:

Amway's success is probably largely due to their IBOs banking on people NOT noticing all of the warts of the deal, before it's too late.

The IBOs could very well be appealing to people's innate desires and such. But, to the point of being exploitive. They might not be properly conveying the more complex, non-trivial, and non-intuitive aspects of the business to their perspective partners. And, that isn't very fair.

A decade old though I note, so has possibly missed most of the research in success.

Since it has been published, no research has refuted any of its important points.

In fact, he expands on many of those ideas in part of his latest book, "The Better Angels of Our Nature", based on the more recent research.

But, of course, one should argue the arguments he makes. And, NOT on the fact that he is Steven Freakin' Pinker, or anything like that. Pretend it was written by a driveling religious lunatic, if you wish. Doesn't matter, as long as you focus on responding to the arguments he happens to make.

Primarily because quite a few people insist on ignoring what I write and ignoring the evidence I post or link to in support.

It took all this time for someone to even write about any merits Amway could stand on, on its own. (assuming such things exist)

If Amway wasn't non-intuitive, you could have banged out something like my summary in less than an hour, two years ago!

What do you see suspicious about it?

If I came up to you and said: "How would you like to join this company, where the success rate approaches nearly 100%", then you look up the actual data and see it is more like 20%, how would you react?
(NOTE: I am using 20% as a generic example. Amway's success rate might be different. The point is the discrepancy that exists, not the actual number.)

There's nothing "blatantly fallacious" about argument from authority. It's a perfectly legitimate approach for inductive reasoning.

If Amway's merits stood on their own, you wouldn't need to resort to it. "Legit usage" or not.

I'd note you cited Steven Pinker earlier. Should I pull you up for it?

Well, it's only a matter of historic detail that Steven Pinker happened to be the one to write the book. If it was written by someone else, with the same arguments and evidence, it wouldn't matter. Even if that person was known to be a raving religious lunatic, barking out of an insane asylum, for example.

Not even the credentials should matter.

I hope that when you read the book, you can respond to the quality of the arguments and evidence he is citing. And, that you can ignore the fact that it just happened to be written by.... some particular person... whatever his name was....

 

[icerat]

That's a fairly high failure rate.

Only because you have a fairly bizarre and arbitrary definition of "failure", which even includes people who achieve their goals.

And, the corporation will scrutinize you, before they let you sign the forms.

So more scrutiny, more restrictions - and more independent? Or have you just decided to ignore the reason why were talking about McDonalds and try and deflect off to something else?

Are McDonald's franchisees independent or not?

Amway's success is probably largely due to their IBOs banking on people NOT noticing all of the warts of the deal, before it's too late.

What in heck does that mean? "Before it's too late"? Nobody makes any money on people joining, it costs money to maintain and process databases of inactive people, and even then the vast majority of revenues comes from reorders.

So what is this "success" that "probably" relies on it not being "too late"?

The IBOs could very well be appealing to people's innate desires and such. But, to the point of being exploitive. They might not be properly conveying the more complex, non-trivial, and non-intuitive aspects of the business to their perspective partners. And, that isn't very fair.

So people are provided all the information they want, as long as they want to investigate it, and up to 6 months to investigate it as a "free" trial - and it's unfair and exploitive.

Right. Got it.

Since it has been published, no research has refuted any of its important points.

haven't read it yet, can't say

 

[Wowbagger]

Only because you have a fairly bizarre and arbitrary definition of "failure", which even includes people who achieve their goals.

I'm not including people who achieve their goals.

More than 50% either break-even or lose money. I don't think "breaking even" nor "losing money" was anyone's goals.

So more scrutiny, more restrictions - and more independent? Or have you just decided to ignore the reason why were talking about McDonalds and try and deflect off to something else?

The reason we were talking about McDonalds is because you brought up the comparison to franchises. But, upon closer inspection, that does not work out in Amway's favor.

Scrutiny and restrictions are OKAY. It's the lack of scrutiny and the lack of communicating complications that are NOT okay. Here's the comparison:

McDonalds cares about their reputation* enough that they don't let just anyone in.
(*Well, aside from the fact that their food is crappy, but the people who like to eat there don't seem to care.)

McDonalds goes over EVERY aspect of the contract, even the complications and restrictions, before anyone signs anything. Nothing is signed until McD knows that the franchisee knows what to expect every step of the way, warts and all.

Amway will have everyone they can get sign a contract, and recruit others to recruit others to sign more of them, without any such scrutiny, at all, what-so-ever.

Amway recruiters seem HIGHLY UNLIKLEY to convey the complications and restrictions adequately, before the papers are signed. This point is where I think scam-like territory comes in.

Are McDonald's franchisees independent or not?

Arguing about what is "independent" or not is really not the issue, here. I will agree that McDonalds franchises are not very much independent.

And, neither are Amway IBOs. The fact that "Independent" is in the name can be misleading. But, that's not really the most important point.

The more important point is that recruiters tend not to sell Amway accurately.

What in heck does that mean? "Before it's too late"?

IBO contracts are signed even before the IBO is given all the necessary information they need to make a properly informed decision on whether or not to become an IBO.

So people are provided all the information they want, as long as they want to investigate it, and up to 6 months to investigate it as a "free" trial - and it's unfair and exploitive.

That's not what's exploitive. Pay more attention to what I was talking about.

Amway recruiters are not properly conveying the more complex, non-trivial, and non-intuitive aspects of the business to their perspective partners.

They are banking on those perspective partners to fill in the blanks with naïve, simplified ideals based on their hopes and dreams and such.

It is only much later, apparently, that they realize those "blanks" should have been filled with details about the restrictions and complications and such, that need a heavy amount of text to explain properly.

THAT is exploitive.

 

[icerat]

I'm not including people who achieve their goals.

More than 50% either break-even or lose money. I don't think "breaking even" nor "losing money" was anyone's goals.

Stop spinning. If you register primarily to get products at the discount pricing, and successfully do so, you consider them a "failure"

The reason we were talking about McDonalds is because you brought up the comparison to franchises. But, upon closer inspection, that does not work out in Amway's favor.

So you're not going to address the issue behind why I raised McDonalds, because you apparently consider them dishonest for using the term "independent"?

Arguing about what is "independent" or not is really not the issue, here. I will agree that McDonalds franchises are not very much independent.

Right, so you think McDonald is being dishonest.

And, neither are Amway IBOs. The fact that "Independent" is in the name can be misleading. But, that's not really the most important point.

Then why did you harp on the "independent" bit so much?

IBO contracts are signed even before the IBO is given all the necessary information they need to make a properly informed decision on whether or not to become an IBO.

Kind of like needing to sign a non-disclosure agreement huh? How do you know if you want to disclose the information beforehand?

Anyone, you're either not being honest or are ignorant about this as well. McDonald's franchisees have to sign a contract before they go through much of the due diligence (such as 9 months working for them for free) before the final franchise process is completed.

Amway recruiters are not properly conveying the more complex, non-trivial, and non-intuitive aspects of the business to their perspective partners.

Rubbish, as I've already pointed out.

They are banking on those perspective partners to fill in the blanks with naïve, simplified ideals based on their hopes and dreams and such.

Again, rubbish. There's not even any motive to do so. You yourself think the approach makes Amway like bad, while simultaneously claiming Amway is exploiting people.

Ridiculous

THAT is exploitive.

Yeah, terribly exploitive.

Here, check this out, if it looks interesting give us a $50 deposit (nothing in some countries) give it a go, find as many skeletons as you like. Don't like it we'll give you your $50 back, as well as any money you might have spent on products or training.

That's just so damn exploitive!

You're being ridiculous, and really having to come up with contorted reasoning to try and fit reality in to your world view.

 

[marplots]

Let us revisit our thought problem.
We have determined a few parameters for our fictional Amway business with a goal of netting out at $12,000 a year.

1) 19 customers purchasing at a retail markup of 35%
2) Average retail purchase per customer of $150/month
3) Total retail sales volume of about $34,000 a year.

I do not know how realistic it is to actually get 19 customers at this purchase level, but have stated I do not think I am a good candidate to do so.

But what now happens when some of these customers realize they can buy at wholesale by becoming an IBO themselves? (This is one reason stated earlier as an incentive for signing up with Amway.)

In the worst case, all do so. My new question is this:
"If I am selling nothing at retail, how much volume in dollars does my downline have to do for me to make the same $12,000 yearly goal?"

In other words, if all my retail customers started buying wholesale, how does that change the landscape?

 

[Zelenius]

What in heck does that mean? "Before it's too late"? Nobody makes any money on people joining, it costs money to maintain and process databases of inactive people, and even then the vast majority of revenues comes from reorders.


haven't read it yet, can't say

So Amway is the real victim here! How could I not have realized this earlier? All those inactive people costing the company precious money, and there was no way to tell that they were going to be inactive! Amway recruiters, out of the goodness of their hearts couldn't stop themselves from signing up all these people who would eventually take advantage. The nerve of these people, exploiting poor little Amway like this!

It's too bad there is no way to fix this problem of all these inactive people exploiting Amway's good will. But what can you expect when the people running Amway are near-saints, willing to give anyone a chance?

This really is one of the funniest things you've said in this entire thread. You really ought to consider stand up.

 

[aggle-rithm]

This really is one of the funniest things you've said in this entire thread. You really ought to consider stand up.

I don't know; his act is a little esoteric.

 

[Zelenius]

I don't know; his act is a little esoteric.

It's not a huge problem. The victimhood of Amway/MLM could be his niche.

 

[Wowbagger]

Stop spinning. If you register primarily to get products at the discount pricing, and successfully do so, you consider them a "failure"

When did I say that?!

If you care to read the history of this thread, you will see that I was using YOUR numbers to arrive at the fact that more than 50% either break-even or lose money, and THAT is what I am using as the basic failure rate.

A more accurate failure rate would be a survey to see how close anyone came to their money-making goals. But, since I don't have that data, I can still infer some serious issues from the more basic data YOU gave me.

You're the one trying to spin that as "Oh, they're only giving it a trial", and such like that.

So you're not going to address the issue behind why I raised McDonalds, because you apparently consider them dishonest for using the term "independent"?

You raised McDonalds for comparisons to franchises. I know that.

You're not addressing my point that McDonalds does it better. A LOT better.

Then why did you harp on the "independent" bit so much?

I wasn't harping on it. It was a minor point in all of this. You keep dragging it back into the discussion, because you must vehemently defend every line I write, apparently. And, I might add, in a straw-man form.

Anyone, you're either not being honest or are ignorant about this as well. McDonald's franchisees have to sign a contract before they go through much of the due diligence (such as 9 months working for them for free) before the final franchise process is completed.

Yeah, but BEFORE that contract is signed, it is gone over. A summary of the limits and complications are understood by the franchisee. That is the due diligence process.

The 9-months or whatever of schooling and training is really about getting used to the details of implementation.

Amway reps, on the other hand, often leave out almost anything and everything that is a "downside" to working for Amway, in their presentations, it seems.

Rubbish, as I've already pointed out.

The examples on this thread show otherwise. There are, apparently, quite a few Amway reps misrepresenting the system, and Amway doesn't seem to care.

You yourself think the approach makes Amway like bad, while simultaneously claiming Amway is exploiting people.

I think you are confusing two different subjects in our discussion.

I said Amway was non-intuitive. And I added that non-intuitive is NOT necessarily a bad thing. As long as the system is adequately disclosed to partners, the business can be as non-intuitive as you'd like.

You disagree that Amway is non-intuitive. But, I gave some examples of why it is, that you have not addressed, yet. (For example: Why would anyone assume they could not freely advertise their business?)

That has nothing to do with what you turned that line of discussion into. You eventually asked if Amway Corporation had intuition in how it sells its products to people. And, I agree that they probably do.

In fact: They developed that to a level I find exploitive, because it banks on hopes and dreams instead of the reality of the nature of the system.

McDonalds might also be non-intuitive and contain pages of restrictions, but the franchisee is informed about them beforehand.

Here, check this out, if it looks interesting give us a $50 deposit (nothing in some countries) give it a go, find as many skeletons as you like. Don't like it we'll give you your $50 back, as well as any money you might have spent on products or training.

This reminds me of the vanity press industry, a little bit. You can pay someone to publish your book, but since you paid up-front, and they have your money, they might not really be interested in doing so very much, and pump nothing into marketing.

In this case, you claim they could get a refund on money spent. If that is true, then they still wasted their time.

And, apparently, it is not always true. This thread had some examples where folks could not get their products bought back.

That's just so damn exploitive!

(Remember: The exploitive part is that the nature of the system is not disclosed before they initially sign up.)

You're being ridiculous, and really having to come up with contorted reasoning to try and fit reality in to your world view.

You still haven't told me why this is a good, legitimate system:

MOST people going in fail in some way. Yet, MOST salesmen will claim success is near 100%.

You haven't proven that isn't true. You haven't defended Amway on its own merits, very much, to help us see why the risks might be worth it.

 

[icerat]

When did I say that?!

Pretty much every post. They haven't made money, so they're a failure.

You're not addressing my point that McDonalds does it better. A LOT better.

You also give away 9 months of your life, $5000 deposit, potentially millions, and 20 years.

Amway reps, on the other hand, often leave out almost anything and everything that is a "downside" to working for Amway, in their presentations, it seems.

So you're back the "the presentation" being it for due diligence.

I saw a presentation scribbled on my kitchen table, then a formal presentation, read materials, listened to audios, attended several training sessions, asked questions, met more people. Then I signed the contract to get access to all the IBO stuff and start ordering products myself to test out the systems. I then attended several more training sessions, listened to and read lots more materials, met more people, asked more questions, talked to more people, asked more questions. etc etc etc

Then I decided to build an Amway business.

Sorry, wowbagger, you're clueless about this whole thing. Hardly anyone registers straight after seeing the initial presentation - and so what if they do? It's part of the due diligence process. There are no obligations to do anything.

Have you even read the contract?

In this case, you claim they could get a refund on money spent. If that is true, then they still wasted their time.

So you're back to claiming doing due diligience is wasting time!

Make your mind up. Though you'll undoubtedly whine again "when did I say that!"

And, apparently, it is not always true. This thread had some examples where folks could not get their products bought back.

No, it hasn't had a single one. It one case where I guy got given some stuff by someone who may or may not have even tried to return it.

I have returned lots of stuff. I've know many people who have returned stuff, in many different countries. I've had downline in many countries return stuff.

Never had a problem once. Not once.

You haven't proven that isn't true. You haven't defended Amway on its own merits, very much, to help us see why the risks might be worth it.

I'm too busy having to point out your BS.

 

[NewtonTrino]

The funny thing is that most people are attacking amway based on the business opportunity. This is really only scratching the surface of the level of scam that amway yes. Yes it's a pretty crappy business "opportunity" but even if it was a great business opportunity the cults that it's built around would still be nasty to deal with.

According to released figures a "diamond" level distributor would make around $150,000 a year in profit. Not a bad living (if it's true) but certainly not the millions that amway distributors promote as the expected outcome. The reason some of these kingpin distributors do make millions is through the selling of the motivational business which includes cd's, videos, books and of course seminars.

If you consider how many distributors some of these people have in their organization you can do some simple math on monetization outside of the amway products themselves. That's where the real scam is and that's where the top guys make the real money.

 

[icerat]

Why does it happen at all?

Why do people sell stuff on ebay? Seriously?

1) Amway is a money making, business opportunity.

Amway is a manufacturer
Amway is a direct selling firm
Amway is an internet retailer
Amway is a business opportunity

I got this idea from reading their website

The Amway home page has 5 splash screens. Four of them are about products the company manufactures and sells. One is about the business opportunity.

You ignored 80% of them.

Biased sampling perhaps?

and their magazine, both of which focus on business success, adding income and freeing oneself from the work-a-day world.

Amway regularly publishes the following -

• Achieve Magazine
• Business News
• BodyKey
• XS Nation
• The Power of You
• Optimal Health
• True Beauty
• Essential Home.

You ignored 87.5% of them, picked the one focused on recognizing business achievers and decided it was "their magazine" presumably because you didn't know about all the others.

Biased sampling perhaps?

2) But very few of those who sign on ever make what I would consider even a worthwhile second income. Business opportunity does not mean what I thought it meant.

what did you think it meant? I thought it meant it was a opportunity to run a business.

4) Amway has instituted policies and procedures to keep their operation above board. Except IBOs are independent and can sell "business building" materials, sponsor conferences and so on, outside if of Amway's control. They are also free to run their operations in as honorable or as scammy a way as they can get away with. Amway cannot police this.

False, and you've had this pointed out to you a few times. Since 2006/2007 Amway has implemented quite strong accreditation standards for anyone marketing products to their IBOs. IBOs who wish to use and promote these products to others in their groups will lose access to bonuses that can be in the tens of millions if the do not use accredited suppliers.

6) There are almost no restrictions on signing up new IBOs and no consideration for market saturation, business experience, or even a complete understanding of how the model is supposed to work. Amateurs are encouraged and signed up by other amateurs without even a background or credit check from Amway. This is part of their "hands off" policy, except,when the poo hits the fan, Amway can terminate the relationship unilaterally. The filter is post, not pre sign-up.

Yup, that's network marketing's biggest strength and biggest weakness. It's open for pretty much anyone. (though I'd disagree on potential market saturation - every business persons dream! - the refund policies are one consideration for that)