Page 3 of 3

Re: Quixtar v. Monavie

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 9:41 pm
by GoldandSilverEagles
Demosthenes wrote:
GoldandSilverEagles wrote:What if i told you I was an undercover agent for an agency within the (blank) government, and I've been sent here to observe a few select members as they interact here on Quatloos, individuals that will remain nameless as well as their usernames......Would you believe me?
You impersonating a government regulator now, GaSE?
And you still wouldn't believe me even if I elected to tell you the whole story sweetie. lol

One possesses a wonderful position when others' don't know exactly what to believe...lol

Re: Quixtar v. Monavie

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 10:04 pm
by Arthur Rubin
GoldandSilverEagles wrote:And you still wouldn't believe me even if I elected to tell you the whole story sweetie. lol
Actually, I don't believe that any organized group would want you to be associated with them. Of course, that leaves political parties as potential "handlers"....

Re: Quixtar v. Monavie

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 10:11 pm
by Demosthenes
GoldandSilverEagles wrote:
Demosthenes wrote:
GoldandSilverEagles wrote:What if i told you I was an undercover agent for an agency within the (blank) government, and I've been sent here to observe a few select members as they interact here on Quatloos, individuals that will remain nameless as well as their usernames......Would you believe me?
You impersonating a government regulator now, GaSE?
And you still wouldn't believe me even if I elected to tell you the whole story sweetie. lol

One possesses a wonderful position when others' don't know exactly what to believe...lol
Whatever you say, Chris.

Re: Quixtar v. Monavie

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 10:35 pm
by GoldandSilverEagles
Demosthenes wrote: You impersonating a government regulator now, GaSE?
And you still wouldn't believe me even if I elected to tell you the whole story sweetie. lol

One possesses a wonderful position when others' don't know exactly what to believe...lol
Demosthenes wrote:Whatever you say, Chris.
Thanks for the great laugh 2day! ~ LOL...

Re: Verifying Scammers' Income

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 1:12 pm
by wserra
Our old buddies at USANA have been kind enough to contribute to this discussion.

With USANA, as with all MLMs, recruiting new suck^H^H^H^H distributors is the Holy Grail. The boys on top of the pyramid have, of course, found additional ways to profit from this activity, in the form of "training". (Personally, I want to know where the Castle Anthrax is. Mmm, Carol Cleveland. But I digress.)

Sometimes, these guys will publish recruiting props on their websites. USANA, for example, touts a chart they prepared as "a great way to illustrate what a prospect can reasonably expect to earn in his or her USANA business". (Emphasis supplied.) From this phrase, USANA certainly wants the reader to believe that the chart shows the average distributor's prospects. After all, the chart is entitled "North American Average Total Earnings". Right?

Man, would that be wrong. You see, in MLM-land "average total earnings" doesn't mean "average total earnings". It means, "let's take the top 2% and claim it's the average". Don't believe me? Well. look at the smallest print on the entire page, footnote 2 to the chart: "To be considered in a rank’s earnings, Associates must have earned checks at a median rank for at least 16 weeks". So the only distributors included in the "average total earnings" are those getting a check at least about one week in three. What percentage do that, you might ask. Well, they don't tell you. Down at the bottom however, in print almost as small, they do tell you this: "Those earning as little as one check a month equal approximately 3% of all Associates". So only 3% get at least 12 checks per year. Since they don't tell you how many get 16 checks, 2% is probably generous.

So USANA tells its distributors to pass out a chart to prospects, representing that it shows what they "can reasonably expect to earn". In fact, even assuming USANA accurately reports the numbers, it reflects what one in fifty "can reasonably expect to earn" - and then it's the bottom figure. If you told a recruit that his/her odds of making the modest "Director" income ($32K) or above was 1 in 300, how many would sign up?

Finally, of course, these earnings numbers don't take expenses into account. Given expenses, it seems likely that only a tiny percentage of distributors make anything at all. I thus suggest the following chart that more accurately shows what a prospective USANA distributor "can reasonably expect to earn":

$0.00

Re: Verifying Scammers' Income

Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2009 3:51 pm
by Thule
Speaking of unverified claims....

http://www.businessforhome.org/mlm-500-top-earners/

That aside, I'm sure the 99,9 % of Monavie-distributors that makes less than $ 100 a week is happy to see that the Harts supposedly makes close to 10 millions a year.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/150499/page/1

Re: Verifying Scammers' Income

Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 3:19 am
by GoldandSilverEagles
Thule wrote:Speaking of unverified claims....

http://www.businessforhome.org/mlm-500-top-earners/

That aside, I'm sure the 99,9 % of Monavie-distributors that makes less than $ 100 a week is happy to see that the Harts supposedly makes close to 10 millions a year.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/150499/page/1
Any entity that claims Brig and Lita Hart are making more through Monavie than Dexter Yager, Bill Britt, Jim Janz, or Jim Dornan are making through Amway Global has got rocks in their head. :roll:

Re: Verifying Scammers' Income

Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 8:28 am
by Thule
GoldandSilverEagles wrote: Any entity that claims Brig and Lita Hart are making more through Monavie than Dexter Yager, Bill Britt, Jim Janz, or Jim Dornan are making through Amway Global has got rocks in their head. :roll:
Wasn't there a rather nasty breakup between the Harts and Amway?

Re: Verifying Scammers' Income

Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 4:31 pm
by GoldandSilverEagles
Thule wrote:
GoldandSilverEagles wrote: Any entity that claims Brig and Lita Hart are making more through Monavie than Dexter Yager, Bill Britt, Jim Janz, or Jim Dornan are making through Amway Global has got rocks in their head. :roll:
Wasn't there a rather nasty breakup between the Harts and Amway?
I believe there was, however, I have heard two different stories so I don't know what to believe.

I have seen a suit where he and his wife were the sole plaintiffs against Amway and a handful of distributors, and I've seen quite another suit where he and a handful of distributors were suing Amway.

I have not seen the outcome of either case, so I cannot factual comment on them.

Re: Verifying Scammers' Income

Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 8:12 pm
by Doc Bunkum
Here's an interesting site that lists the estimated earnings of the top 100 distributors in the country "based on Internet research, earnings claims from conventions, downline, upline, crossline information, direct selling magazines and through our reporters".

Million-Dollar Distributorships

Not to be overlooked is the disclaimer at the page bottom:

*Disclaimer: "These figures should not be considered as guarantees of actual earnings or profits."

Disclaimer aside, some obvious questions come to mind about how accurate these figures actually are and how they were derived.