You are here: Home / Archives for Amway
by on February 9, 2011 19 Comments

USA Today Reports on MLM: point for point response

Photo by @w3inc via Flickr

Over the past year, USA Today has taken a special interest with the MLM model. They’ve published a number of articles skeptical of the MLM model and usually reference examples from Fortune Hi Tech Marketing. Recently, they published an article titled “Many in multilevel marketing sales find it hard to earn much.” The article focuses on some legitimate concerns with the MLM model and I address them point for point below. However, it’s not entirely fair to focus on the challenges facing the model without mentioning the positives. When done right, direct sales offers people with an unmatched opportunity to change their finances. There’s a low-cost of entry, people can represent exciting brands and unique items, they can sell those products for profit and they can build large sales teams and earn override commissions on downline performance. If the product is marketable and the compensation plan fair, it gives the average person a chance to change their life. Is it tough to make it in the MLM space? Absolutely. It’s damn hard to make it in sales and it’s damn hard to achieve anything significant in life. Are there companies out there exploiting the model and harming people? Yep. It’s why I sued a company last year. But the fact of a few bad apples should not impugn the entire MLM space. In reality, it’s challenging to win in any endeavor, including business. In the MLM space, it takes strong sales skills (which can be developed) and a lot of work.

Comments about the article

The picture

In the image of the victims in the article, there’s a VHS tape. Who in the world still sells VHS tapes!? This initially made me wonder how recent the couple was involved with Amway. And then I continued to read and discovered that they quit the business in 2000! Seriously!? If the author was trying to make a point about Amway by talking about “victims,” it would have been a lot better to get some quotes from a more recent example.

Pokorny echo

The article reiterates some of the same points discussed in the past about the Pokorny class action lawsuit. Amway has already taken a beating on these very issues and most of the issues referenced in the article have already been addressed by Amway. The article references tool companies, which was the main point of contention in the Pokorny class action case. Gerald Nehra, another MLM attorney and one I hold in high esteem, was quoted in the article. The article states:

The sale of training materials has to be a “very small” part of distributors’ businesses, or “people will focus more on that aspect of the business than on the aspect of selling products to customers,” says Gerry Nehra, a Michigan attorney representing multilevel marketing companies and former director of the legal division of Amway from 1982-91. Nehra, who would not comment on Amway specifically, says that when selling training materials becomes the focus, the business becomes “overly dependent” on recruiting more representatives, which raises questions about whether a company is a pyramid scheme.

It was a good summary by Nehra. When the vast majority of funds are made via tool sales, the economic pressure forces people to focus almost exclusively on recruitment (who need more training), which lead to sustainability issues and cultural problems within the organization. It’s a large issue being dealt with by multiple companies in the space right now. But this is old news.

Likelihood of Success

The article states:

Even proponents of multilevel marketing say the cases and probes underscore one of the growing problems in the industry: It can be very difficult, if not impossible, for most individuals to make a lot of money through the direct sale of products to consumers. And big money is what recruiters often allude to in their pitches.

“Ease of earning an income” is never a factor when determining if a company is a pyramid scheme or not. One of the greatest things about the industry: ease of entry. One of the worst things about the industry: ease of entry. Because it’s so cheap and easy to join a MLM, the vast majority of participants do nothing and never earn an income. It’s not because the model is unfair, it’s largely because the vast majority of participants DO NOTHING, which skews the income averages down. The issue referenced in the article centers on one thing: managing the expectations of prospects before they join. This highlights the importance of using a good income disclosure to make sure the prospect is fully informed of the data before making a decision.

Price competitiveness

The article states:

With the growth of discounters including Walmart and retail websites, few people need to buy toiletries, detergent or vitamins from a friend or neighbor, especially with the higher prices charged so all the commissions can be paid. Making money by recruiting more people, selling them training materials and persuading them to buy products can become the only way to make much money at some of the companies.

I’ve written about this in the past. The above paragraph is absolutely true. And it’s why most MLMs avoid selling cheap, commodity products. I think it’s safe to say that the vitamins at Wal Mart are not the best in the market. They’re targeting a different demographic and offering a different value proposition. The MLM space is designed to introduce unique products and services into the marketplace. The keyword is VALUE. If there’s legitimate demand for the product being sold at the price requested, and the margin is sufficient for the company to support a MLM compensation plan, the above quote about big box stores is irrelevant. However, if the product is UNmarketable and UNcompetitive with alternative products in the marketplace, then the company is relying on “opportunity driven demand” (i.e. the compensation plan) and the distributors are forced to focus almost exclusively on recruitment and internal consumption. It happens. But just because it happens does not mean it’s representative of the entire space. The above quote paints the entire MLM space with a broad brush. Smart companies are NOT trying to compete with Wal Mart. When it comes to cheap goods, Wal Mart has that space covered. But when it comes to premium products with incredible health benefits, great MLMs shine. I’ve written about this concept a year ago about the importance for MLM companies to constantly innovate. In order to avoid the market catching up and offering comparable items at cheaper prices, the MLM executive team needs to stay one step ahead of the curve to keep their distributors armed with marketable items.

Distribution system / Amway’s revenue increase

The article states:

Roland Whitsell, a former business professor who spent 40 years researching and teaching the pitfalls of multilevel marketing, says it’s little surprise Amway’s big growth is now outside of the U.S. He says the “direct selling” in multilevel marketing is needed in countries with “primitive distribution systems and limited choices in retail stores,” but its potential is “seriously limited” here.

Lieberman notes the company is “extremely successful in formerly communist countries and in developing countries.” Sales were also up last year in the U.S. by about 5%, he says.

Regarding Rolan Whitsell’s quote, he’s certainly entitled to his opinion. However, network marketing is not just about the physical distribution of product. Are there more efficient means of delivering goods in the market? Sure. It’s easy to place an order on Amazon.com and have it on your doorstep within a day. However, Rolan Whitsell is willfully ignoring one of the most valuable functions of a good MLM: engaged sales force telling the product story! Some products are so new, so far ahead of the curve, there needs to be a person-to-person interaction before a consumer will make a decision. I have a client that recently sold its product through Kohl’s, a popular retail outlet. They soon discovered that the product only sold well when it was demonstrated and sampled; hence, their entry into the direct sales space. Did they have a shipping problem before they started their MLM? No. They had a marketing problem, which is one of the benefits of leveraging the MLM model when selling unique products and services. Rolan’s quote completely ignores this important function. Wal Mart is not in the business of selling premium cookware, yet Pampered Chef is worth over $1,000,000,000. Selling is more important than shipping.

As for Amway’s report about a 5% increase in revenue, if they actually grew in 2010, they’ll be dramatically ahead of the curve. This is the first report I’ve seen about a company’s performance in 2010. I’ll report findings from the other companies as they’re published.

Cost of doing business

The article states:

Wittlich says he worked day and night on his Amway business and never made a profit. “Active” Amway distributors earn an average of just $115 a month, according to Amway’s latest disclosure statement. Just a quarter of 1% (0.26%) make more than $40,000 a year, which Amway attributes to the fact many work part time.

See my original comments about Wittlich. He quit the business 10 years ago! What insight could he possibly provide about Amway’s business model today? Also, see my comments about the greatest thing and the worst thing about direct selling companies: the ease of entry. The majority of people do nothing, which skews the numbers down.

More about tools

The article quotes Lou Abbott, author of MLM: the whole truth. The article states:

Abbott says nearly all multilevel marketing companies prohibit distributors from selling “tools.” When they are allowed, the products are supposed to be sold at cost. He notes $8 DVDs are a “profit center” when they cost “25 cents” to produce.

This is not entirely accurate, although I can see how Lou would reach this conclusion. It’s perfectly fine for tool companies to profit handsomely from the sale of tools. If there’s a market for the material, the creator can sell the items at whatever price the market will bear. The rub comes into play when there’s a financial opportunity associated with the selling of tools, which turns into a MLM on top of another MLM. And with the competing interests, the model with the stronger pay plan gets the most focus, which is usually tools.

Indicators for the future

The article states:

Stuart Singer, a partner at Boies Schiller & Flexner, one of the law firms that represent the class-action plaintiffs, hopes the Amway settlement, if approved by a judge, will have a beneficial effect on the industry.

“If Amway recognizes the need to transform their business, then I think the other companies that are involved in multilevel marketing will have to follow suit,” he says. “It’s just a matter of time.”

We can hope. The space will never “go mainstream” until the space gets serious about quality control. As an industry advocate once said, people are burying their faces in piles of money and they’re doing nothing to address the obvious problems. Until the bad companies are routinely weeded out, they’ll continue to burn through people at an alarming rate and create another generation of skeptical MLM participants. The solution lies in incentivizing on customer sales.

Conclusion

In order to genuinely improve the space, it’s important to honestly acknowledge some of the challenges. The negative truth always stings more than the negative lies. While the USA Today article was clearly biased, she raises some valid concerns that can be easily addressed. What do you think about USA Today’s article? Do you disagree with any of my points above?

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: , , , ,
by on January 20, 2011 Leave a Comment

Amway / Pokorny class action settlement denied

Special thanks goes to IBOFIGHTBACK, author and owner of the pro-Amway website, The Truth About Amway, for providing the tip and sharing the below court decision.

UPDATE: Upon receiving information, the settlement was not technically “denied.” Although it was “not approved,” it does not equate to a denial. It appears that the settlement will eventually occur; however, the judge is demanding more information.

Recently, Amway settled a number of disputes. One of the settled lawsuits was the Pokorny class action case. The Pokorny case, in my opinion, was Amway’s largest problem. In November of 2010, Amway settled the Pokorny lawsuit. Terms of the settlement were basically as follows:

  • 90 day refund period for new registrants
  • Additional disclosures for prospects
  • Offer free training on product sales and ethical business practices
  • Maintain and enforce “quality controls” over tool companies
  • Lowering their prices by 5%
  • …..and a $34M cash fund for class members AND lawyer fees.

Plaintiffs’ counsel was to receive $20M of the cash fund. Remember, the cash fund was created to benefit the class members. And if you believe that, I’ve got some ocean property for sale in Arizona.

In the Ninth Circuit, the judge has to approve all class settlements. It actually makes sense. As explained by the judge in the quote below, the class members are never at the table to negotiate for themselves. If you read the entire order, which I would NOT recommend because it’s really boring, the judge cites his reasoning for denying the settlement attempt. He wants more information about the plaintiffs’ attorneys competency, which I thought was humorous. Plaintiffs’ counsel in this case is as high-profile as it gets. He also wants more information about the amount of tools the class participants would customarily purchase. He also wants to learn more about the size of the class.

Those questions will easily get answered in the briefing, as he requested. The most important part of the decision is quoted below. It’s about fairness. In summary, he does not seem thrilled that the attorneys are walking away with 2/3 of the cash pot while the remainder of the class, which could number into the tens of thousands, will receive some product coupons and a refund on their registrations (if they qualify). What do you think? Does the decision make sense? The entire decision can be found at the end of the article.

Key quote

The Ninth Circuit has warned that “there are real dangers in the negotiation of class action settlements of compromising the interests of class members,” because “[i]ncentives inherent in class-action settlements” can “result in a decree in which the rights of [class members, including the named plaintiffs] may not [be] given due regard by the negotiating parties.” Staton, 327 F.3d at 959 (internal quotation marks omitted). These incentives stem from the fact that “[t]he class members are not at the table; class counsel and counsel for the defendants are.” Id. This can “influence the result of the negotiations without any explicit expression or secret cabals,” and is why “district court review of class action settlements includes not only consideration of whether there was actual fraud, overreaching or collusion but, as well, substantive consideration of whether the terms of the decree are ‘fair, reasonable and adequate to all concerned.’” Id. at 950 (citing Officers for Justice v. Civil Serv. Comm’n of San Francisco, 688 F.2d 615, 625 (9th Cir. 1982)). Due in part to these dangers of “collusion between class counsel and the defendant,” the Ninth Circuit has adopted the rule of other circuits that “settlement approval that takes place prior to formal class certification requires a higher standard of fairness,” leading to “a more probing inquiry than may normally be required under Rule 23(e).” Hanlon, 150 F.3d at 1026.

The Court first notes that many of the hallmarks of collusive unfairness are present in this Settlement Agreement. Defendants agree to not oppose an attorneys’ fees motion by Plaintiffs’ counsel for as much as $20 million. If the Settlement and the contemplated motion for attorneys’ fees are approved, nearly two-thirds of the $35 million Cash Fund would be awarded to Plaintiffs’ counsel. The parties appear to justify the size of this proposed award by agreeing that the injunctive relief in the Settlement is valued by the class at $100 million. The Court has difficulty accepting this estimate as fact — the parties offer no evidence in support of this estimate, nor do they attempt to justify it through attorney declarations. Many of the Court’s criticisms of the parties’ motion for class certification also apply to the proposed settlement. For example, it is not clear that the settlement will fairly compensate all class members. . . .

End quote

Amway Pokorny Settlement Revisited

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: , ,
by on November 3, 2010 7 Comments

Amway Settles Multiple Disputes

The weather is cooler, the leaves are falling, the holidays are drawing near….peace is in the air. In the span of a few days, Amway has made two HUGE announcements about the settlements of pending lawsuits between itself and multiple parties. First, they announced the settlement between themselves and MonaVie, which was anticipated to be an epic battle between the MLM giants. Click Amway v. MonaVie to read the original complaint. In the lawsuit, Amway alleged MonaVie was using unfair marketing practices while raiding Amway’s downline.

In the same announcement, Amway announced a settlement with Orrin Woodward and TEAM. The Amway / Woodward / Team litigation has been insanely intense since August of 2007. I was there for the start and I’m certain there’s much relief on both sides as a result of the settlement. The Amway / Woodward litigation produced a cutting edge court opinion about the limits of First Amendment protection for anonymous bloggers that disparage a company. Click here for the opinion.

Second, Amway announced today of its settlement of the Pokorny class action lawsuit. News of this settlement is not really surprising given Amway’s loss over its arbitration provision back in April of 2010. This was a very contentious case and Amway’s exposure was substantial. Due to the size of this settlement, I anticipate more lawsuits like Pokorny will be filed against other MLMs that rely heavily on tool companies. It’s ok to work with tool companies; however, when the tail starts wagging the dog, it can lead to HUGE, Pokorny-like problems.

The past few years have been busy for Amway as they’ve made some efforts to clean up their house. They’ve lowered prices, implemented quality control standards for the tool companies, invested more in IBO training and….settled their lawsuits.

The real losers as a result of these settlements…..THE LAWYERS.

What do you think about this news of the settlements?

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: , , ,
by on October 20, 2010 6 Comments

MLM Training and the Importance of Competency


TRAINING…

it’s simultaneously the most important AND least talked about aspect in the direct selling industry. The relationships that develop between participants while building their businesses is the most important component that makes our industry special. And those relationships are solidified via training. It’s unique to the direct sales industry where sponsors are obligated to train and mentor their recruits about selling and team building. It’s through these deep relationships between participants that cultures and brands are built.

Some companies allow high level distributors to create training programs for their downlines. These are referred to as “tool companies.” I was baptized in the industry representing Orrin Woodward’s tool company, Team, when he was affiliated with Amway and subsequently MonaVie. These training programs are designed to offer plug-and-play solutions for new distributors…distributors are given the choice of plugging into the training program and receiving the tools necessary to build profitable businesses.

Standards

When companies allow distributors to create tool companies (not all of them do), there’s usually a qualification that needs to be met before they can begin promoting their program. The qualification is one that usually separates the professionals from the amateurs and it ensures that the best networkers, the networkers with real results (not theoretical), are the ones influencing the next generation of leaders. It makes sense to have high standards. When the value of a company’s brand lies in the hands of its distributors, they have a significant interest in ensuring their trainers are actually competent.

I’ve beaten up on MonaVie recently. When they led with a hand gun instead of a handshake and threatened a friend with a lawsuit, I was not impressed. Setting it aside, I want to highlight something they do really well: they only let highly qualified networkers run tool companies.

When Orrin Woodward transitioned over to MonaVie, we were never allowed to sell a single CD until after he reached the Black Diamond status. The bar was set, it was the same for everyone, and he had to jump over it like everyone else.

Lately, I’ve seen multiple tool companies pop up from distributors with minimal experience and small organizations….and their MLM companies allow it. These tool companies (which I will not reference by name) make the rookie mistakes of promising easy money. The pitch is always the same: “We’re going to use more social media….We don’t sell products….We just host conference calls….Just enroll three people and your business explodes….We just drive traffic to websites.” The end result is predictable: an inactive sales culture where the participants enroll with a lottery mentality and sit and wait for others to lead. True professionals in the space never make this mistake. They’re up front with the work requirements and they create duplicatable patterns that can be copied by anyone. When the rookies tell everyone “this is easy,” at some point boots need to hit the ground and when it’s time, they’re shocked that nothing happens.

Message for executives

When the value of your brand rests in the hand of your representatives, I would advise you only pass the megaphone to your most experienced sales reps. Simply because I’ve seen surgery on TV does not make me qualified to do the real thing. If you allow amateurs to create programs and hold themselves out as ambassadors of your company, you might develop a cancerous sales culture that could, and probably will, lead to hype, inappropriate product and income claims and trouble.

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: , ,
by on September 27, 2010 2 Comments

Presentation at Direct Selling Congress

I was invited by Ted Nuyten, founder of the prominent Business for Home website, to serve as a speaker at the inaugural Direct Selling Congress event in Amsterdam. What an honor! It was humbling to be surrounded by so many ambitious and talented networkers. Thank you, Ted, for the invitation. It was an outstanding day full of great content and fellowship.

Below is my presentation. I presented on ways companies can learn from Amway’s mistakes and subsequent adjustments. As the saying goes, the best teach is experience…and the best experience is always someone else’s! I hope you find it informative. Also, I’ve inserted some info below the video about some of the amazing people I met at the conference. Take care.

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: , ,
by on April 21, 2010 5 Comments

Amway loses appeal in class action case

Be careful….last time I posted a pleading it was a hoax ;) It appears that Amway is going to be required to litigate the California class action case in Federal District Court. This is significant because it means the facts obtained during discovery will be made publicly available.

This is a big case with large consequences for the entire network marketing industry. The case hinges on the definition of “retail sales” and relies on the premise that a company is required to rack up customer sales from nonparticipants. As you already know, I’m a big proponent in having hard rules that require customer sales. It’s what’s best for the industry.

Additionally, this case is about tool companies and their place in the network marketing industry. There’s a host of companies in the industry that allow its distributors to produce and sell tools to their distributors. With some of these companies, the participants receive the opportunity to share in the tool profits once certain performance milestones are achieved. This largely leads to a sales force where the lower level participants expend tremendous effort to move tools with the hopes of someday profiting from their efforts. Since the majority of the participants never reach the milestones (we have high attrition in this industry), it essentially amounts to a large, unpaid sales force. This issue will be litigated if the case proceeds.

The attorneys for the plaintiffs have a tough job ahead of them. Amway is literally undefeated in these types of cases and has escaped numerous near death experiences. The plaintiffs’ attorneys will need to certify the class, which I’m not sure has been done yet. Since they’ve sued multiple tool companies, Amway can argue that a lot of the class members had different experiences with Amway via their different associations amongst the tool companies. This might lend itself as a good argument against class certification.

If Amway litigates this case and loses, there would be an immediate impact on the entire industry. They’ll need to assume that the law in California requires external sales and demonstrate that those sales are present. My prediction: this case never sees a courtroom and the plaintiffs’ lawyers just won the lottery. But does it end here? If Amway settles, I can almost guarantee that some of the other larger network marketing companies will be sued with similar allegations. The Pokorny attorneys might target other companies. Who knows.

The crux of the Pokorny lawsuit can be gleaned from the two paragraphs below (taken from the Opinion below):

“Further, once a new recruit becomes an IBO, the recruit is instructed to purchase Quixtar products only for the new recruit’s personal use and to focus on recruiting and registering new IBOs, rather than to market and resell products to retail customers.

Second, Plaintiffs contend that Quixtar and its senior IBOs fraudulently induce junior IBOs to purchase BSM by telling them the BSM are necessary to the success of an IBO business and will help them realize tremendous wealth. But the main purpose of the BSM is actually to teach junior IBOs how to recruit and register new IBOs, not to assist IBOs in conducting their own successful Quixtar business. Although this business model leads to great profits for Quixtar and its most senior IBOs, Plaintiffs allege it results in significant losses to junior IBOs”

Stay tuned on this one. It’s heating up.

Pokorny et al vs. Amway, re. arbitration

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: , ,
by on March 1, 2010 9 Comments

Seven Reasons Why Amway Should Support House Bill 2843

As I’ve written about before, Tennessee’s anti-pyramid bill (House Bill 2843) is a proposed statute designed to help clarify the differences between legitimate companies and pyramid schemes. The bill requires that some form of a “condition precedent” of external sales be made before distributors can cash in on their downline volume. Translated in English, it seeks to codify one of the Amway safeguards where distributors would be required to make some sort of retail sale before they can benefit from their recruits’ volume. Please note, the bill does not require a certain number of customers i.e. a “5 customer rule” nor does the bill require a set percentage to come from customers i.e. 50%…..the bill simply has a sales requirement.

I can think of seven good reasons why Amway, the godfather in the direct sales industry, the founder of the Amway safeguards and the defender of the business model, would really benefit from the passing of this bill:

7: They’ll never have to listen to their leaders whine again about what the other companies are doing

I can only imagine what some of their people are saying. “But over at XYZ JUMBO JAVA, they force their distributors to spend $500 a month on products…why can’t we do that?” Instead of losing leaders to companies with fly-by-night compensation plans only to watch them go out of business within a few years, Amway can answer by saying “Because it’s illegal and we actually care about consumers.”

6: They’ve got over 700 patents

It’s important for a MLM company to instill a culture of innovation on the corporate level. In Amway’s case, they own and control over 700 patents! When you control the intellectual property, it’s easier to offer unique items that are un-rippoffable (I’m trademarking that work). Recently, Amway has lowered their prices and launched an aggressive marketing campaign to help their distributors make these external sales. When a MLM company sells commodity items i.e. generic supplements, it’s near impossible for distributors to compete in the marketplace on price, which means they’ll be forced to sell the compensation plan and rely on the opportunity to inflate demand for the product. With a staute like House Bill 2843, un-innovative companies would quickly disappear because their distributors would be unable to meet the sales requirements.

5: When run properly, their pay plan actually rewards selling over recruiting.

If compensation plans were like dresses, Amway’s pay plan is for Amish women. It’s old fashioned, conservative and boring. But they’ve survived over 50 years with it and when run properly, there’s really nothing that fosters a merchandising culture better than a unilevel pay plan. Although the other MLM pay plans are not illegal per se, it could be argued that some of the new age pay plans really incentivive recruiting to the detriment of accruing external sales. With a statute that requires some form of selling each month, Amway would not have to re-train its sales force. When an Amway leader asks “why can’t we do a binary / unilevel variation with a 2-up hybrid forced matrix oopty oop?” Amway can say “Because we’re in the sales and marketing business and the binary / unilevel variation with a 2-up hybrid forced matrix oopty oop is not conducive to accruing sales.”

4: It would help protect their greatest asset: their people

It’s been said that Amway provides the rest of the MLM industry with fresh meat (leaders). Amway has been developing its leadership base for over 50 years. The leadership base is sophisticated and they’re a prime target for many-a-startup-MLMs. If you look at the roots of a lot of MLM companies out there, there’s certainly traces of Amway leaders embedded in the roots of those companies. Understandably, it’s a company’s responsibility to keep its sales force happy. But when Direct Sales Association, with Amway’s complicit support, is an advocate for keeping the laws in the industry ambiguous, they’re only providing a blanket of protection for illegitimate players to thrive and inevitably raid their downline.

3: The rising tide lifts all boats

The reputation of the industry needs fixin’. Perception is shaped by behavior and behavior is shaped by leadership. Until the leaders in the direct sales industry get on the same page with respect to the problems, the negative perception will never improve. Understandably, some leaders prefer the ambiguity and that’s fine for them, bad for consumers and bad for the industry.

2: It’s consistent with their recent efforts to transform their sales culture

As I’ve written about in the past, Amway has recently survived some near-death experiences. And those near-death experiences all dealt with their heavy emphasis on opportunity driven demand and recruitment. In response to those occurrences, Amway has dropped some of their prices, gotten better at monitoring the quality of the message and launched an aggressive marketing campaign to create some brand awareness for its products, which create a more fertile environment for its distributors to make sales. By supporting a bill that requires “some” selling, it would further validate their decisions to change course.

1: They’ve already got the rule!

What did you think I’d say? This is the easiest one. Amway already has a retail sales rule wherein their distributors are required to make some external sales before they’re eligible for bonuses. This retail sales rule was pivotal in their survival against the FTC in 1979. And a variation of this rule was pivotal in their survival in the UK. If the past is a good indicator of the future, it would be wise for Amway to lean on this rule and prevent this issue from arising again. I’m not sure of how many more close encounters it can survive.

DISCLOSURE: a former client, Orrin Woodward, argued that Amway failed to enforce its retail sales rule and I think we made a good run at proving it although ultimately, it was unsuccessful. This along with several other occurrences seem to have woken Amway up to the realities of the industry.

What do you think?

I’ve heard some people say that legislation is not the best way. What are some of your proposed solutions? Oh, and please be sure to hit the “subscribe” button below. I don’t want you to miss any updates. Thanks.

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: , , , ,