Orrin Woodward Leadership Team

Amway vs. MonaVie Compensation Plans

Orrin Woodward — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 13:10:43 -0400

Why does a person start their "own" business? Wouldn't one of the top reasons be to make a profit through your persistent efforts? This to me is the main message I have repeatedly attempted to share with Amway/Quixtar while I was inside and now outside of their business model. For the efforts expended, Amway is the toughest MLM to build and you are rewarded the least for your efforts - in my opinion. I won't even go into the fact that Amway feels they "own" the LOS that are actually your friends and families! Hurting Inside has produced some very interesting numbers that I would like our math whizzes to verify. If the following numbers are accurate, then it tells me that the Amway model is struggling to maintain a competitive position in the open markets. No wonder they slid the non-competes and data management rules into the renewal processes without notification to all the IBO's. If you cannot compete in the open market then the next best thing is to build walls.

The next paragraph is a tongue in cheek response to the foolish behavior that I believe Amway is displaying.

East Germany built the Berlin Wall and other communist systems built walls because they could not compete in the open market. In my opinion, it looks like Amway felt they must do the same thing. How can Amway claim to have the best compensation plan while at the same time building and defending a wall to keep people in your business through fear and intimidation? Is this the plan that Dick Devos has for Michigan if he is elected Governor? Force all companies (except his beloved Amway) to focus in Michigan and force all the state residents to remain in Michigan whether they have an opportunity or not? Shouldn't it be the right of the state ~~residents~~ property to move wherever they can to get a job that pays the families bills? I can see Dick now as he announces his non-compete and family management rules for Michigan. You will need a passport to leave Michigan and must comply to not accept work for six months in any other state. If they really don't like you - they will call the governor of another state and threaten to sue the state for "feeding the beast" and taking Michigan's ~~employees~~ property. Ok, I feel better now for getting that off my chest!

Here is Hurting Inside's evaluation of the numbers. Please review and comment on any inaccuracies or further analysis that you can do. God Bless, Orrin Woodward

What I found even more interesting yet was the following quote from Quixtar/Amway:

"*The following are approximate percentages of Direct Fulfillment IBOs of record in North America who achieved the illustrated levels of success in the calendar year ending August 31, 2005: Diamond .0120%; Emerald .0320%; Q-12 Platinum .1683%."

Less than 1.000% of active IBOs achieve Q-12 Platinum in Quixtar?!?

Let's math this out... According to Quixtar's site as you pointed out above, there were greater than 370,000 IBOs who received a bonus.
This means there were only the following numbers:

Diamonds Averaging $146,995 -- .012% of 370k = 44.4
Emeralds Avg $72,241 -- .032% of 370k = 118.4
Platinum Avg $47,472 -- .1683% of 370k = 622.71

Now for the shocking (to some) facts from the IDS showing just how much more powerful MVs plan is.

MV Emerald Avg $151,630 -- 41 or <1%
(3 less MV Ems than Qx Dmds in 3 years versus 8 and making 4k more avg)

MV Ruby Avg $101,799 -- 79 or <1%
(39 less MV Rby than Qx Em in 3yr vs 8 and making 29.5k more avg)

MV Gold Avg $52,760 -- 225 or 1%
This is what I find the MOST AMAZING! Only 0.1683% of all active Quixtar IBOs are at the Q-12 Platinum, yet in MV a FULL 1% of active Distributors are at Gold!!! (comparable to Q12 Plat Income) Mona-Vie is doing so much better at helping the new guys make an income!
(MV Gold makes 5.2k more than Qx Plat)

I love these numbers!

P.S. There are (if my calculations are correct, this isn't a statement from Mona-Vie and simply calculations based on their Income Disclosure Statement)

Again, these are my calculations please refer to the IDS.

Mona-Vie has 106 Distributors at the Diamond level or above, or 0.2988% of Active Distributors. (Almost twice the percentage of just platinum in Quix)

When averaged together it seems these distributors at Diamond or above average $637,578 per year. (Which we know from the IDS that the basic Diamonds and Blue Diamonds are making less than, and the Black and above are making more.)

None-the-less, to have Distributors almost twice the percentage of $47k/yr Quix IBOs making 13.5 times the money is amazing!

Update: ~~Hurting~~ Healing Inside has commented an update to address the mathematics involved in his calculations. An excellent analysis and a slam dunk conclusion in my opinion. thanks, Orrin

Here is Healing's revised analysis.

In response to this and because I am trying to be truthful in my calculations, I will offer the following:

Quote from a dumb cartoon I watch, and probably shouldn't, and won't now that I'm finally enrolled and have work to do building my fiancé's freedom with her:
"[IBOFB,] your logic is flawless... but I'm transmitting a better idea." ;^)

A. 1 Week vs 12 Month
You have a bit of a point; however, I cannot tell you "how many MV distributors make Gold for the whole year." I simply don't know. It is more than likely not "significantly less than 100%" as MVDs tend to build their businesses based on Auto-Ship. I would say the Auto-Ship percentages are extremely high from what I have heard. (Orrin, is that true for your group? High Autoship Percentage?) This would mean that in all likelihood the majority of Golds are re qualifying every 4 week period. In fact if they are not they are more than likely moving up to Ruby.

If those assertions are not true then I have one other theory. I think the IDS numbers may be meant to reflect people qualifying at that level? Think about it, the IDS shows "Average Weekly Number of Distributors Paid at this Rank During 2007." The fact that it says "Average Weekly Number" flat out tells me that every week the number of Golds may vary slightly, but there are roughly 225 every week, and wouldn't it stand to reason that it is the same 225 people re qualifying as well as new Golds coming in as old ones move to Ruby from time to time? Lets test this theory shall we. The IDS shows 41 Emeralds EACH WEEK, yet the recognition site shows (I believe my count is correct, please verify) 208 Emeralds. That tells me that using the numbers from the IDS is a correct way to do the math which I have done, and it is assumed that roughly the weekly average means they are qualifying year round.

What, did you think they just picked their best week of the year and put that on the IDS? They aren't like your favorite MLM you know.

B. % Applied to *all distributors*
To be honest, I'm not sure what exactly you mean by this. I don't see where it says the percentages are of "all distributors" rather than just the ones that received a bonus during 2005. I thought those were the percentages for the "Active" EBOs (enslaved business owners) If not then let me recalculate, because I'm starting to see what you may be getting at... maybe.

370000 EBOs Active divided by 66% (%-of-Actives) = 560606 Total EBOs

.0120% of 560606 = 67.2 Diamond EBOs
.0320% of 560606 = 179.4 Emerald EBOs
.1683% of 560606 = 943.5 Platinum EBOs

So even if their percentages are of total IBOs and not of just active ones, (Doesn't sound like something they would do... it would be almost transparent... that isn't like them.) It is still a far cry from "halve the real # of Q* qualifiers."

I'm starting to see what people mean when they say SPIN.

Also don't get me started on percentage normalization. i.e. if MV and QX were to have the same number of active distributors, whether 370,000 or whatever is on the IDS, and the percentages were applied there, it would give some people heart attacks. Which is why I haven't done it. Think about it, 1% golds in MV versus .1683% platinums in Quixtar? even if both businesses only had 100k distribs, that would mean MV has 1000 people making 50k and QX would have 168 people making 50k.

Dallin Larsen of MonaVie - A Leader of Courage

Orrin Woodward — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 20:33:05 -0400

Today I am going to share why I believe Dallin Larsen is a Leader of Courage. There are many reasons why we could say this. Here is a short list of reasons why I could say that Dallin is a Leader of Courage.

1. Dallin Larsen has led MonaVie from zero to sales of MonaVie of over a billion in just over 3 years. MonaVie has a good shot of surpassing 1 billion in sales in 2008 alone! That is record growth in this industry that has never been done before by any company at any time. It takes courage to dream this big.

2. Dallin Larsen has created the best compensation plan for the distributors in the marketplace. Laurie and I personally have made more from MonaVie in 3 months than we did in our best 2 years combined in Quixtar. There is no comparison in compensation between the two companies. I have received 400k in bonuses, plus a weekly check in excess of the average Presidential Black Diamond checks disclosed in the MonaVie IDS. This does not include the free Mercedes Benz, free trips to (Zermatt, Orlando, 14 day Mediterranean cruise, Penthouse Suite in Atlantis), and jet credits on the MonaVie Hawker 1000. It takes courage to create compensation plans so generous.

3. I have witnessed over 60 individuals on our MonaVie team go emerald level or above. The average emerald income over 151k per year - this is more than the average diamond income when I was in Quixtar. It is much easier to go emerald in MonaVie (average of just over a year) than it was to go diamond in Quixtar (average of over 8 years). Mike McCormick, a lawyer from Texas went emerald in the MonaVie Team in under 4 months time and has never been in any networking business before. Mike is in the middle of numerous lawsuits defending many leaders against Quixtar and in his spare time went emerald! I believe our MonaVie Team can break 25 Black Diamonds and above in the next 12 months and that is a yearly average income of 1.474 million! It takes courage and character to create a business for the average person to produce unaverage results.

4. Dallin Larsen is the most dynamic speaker of any owner in the Networking Community Building industry. I had the personal privilege to hear Dallin and Karree Larsen speak in Columbus, Minneapolis, and Phoenix. All their talks were powerful and what impressed me immensely was their care for the distributors. The Larsen’s want people to win and it shows in the generous compensation plans and heartfelt talks. When the Larsen’s were not speaking, they were in the front row learning from the others speakers. This is another clear sign of the hunger level of the founders of MonaVie. It takes courage to stay hungry when you are the fastest growing MLM in the world.

These are certainly enough reasons to believe Dallin is a Leader of Courage, but here is THE reason I believe Dallin is a Leader of Courage. Dallin Larsen stared down the threats and intimidations hurled at him by Amway/Quixtar’s management and legal teams and did not flinch! I have copied word for word some of the paragraphs from MonaVie’s defensive declaratory action lawsuit against the Amway/Quixtar threats. Here are a few choice excerpts from the lawsuit.

21. During this same timeframe, Quixtar and Amway provided MonaVie a list of

approximately 31,000 distributors who they claimed were former distributors of Quixtar and/or Amway and members of a distributor organization known as “TEAM.”

22. Quixtar and Amway subsequently claimed to MonaVie that these approximately

31,000 “TEAM Leaders” were barred by written covenants of non-competition and nonsolicitation in favor of Quixtar and Amway, and that a significant number of them had enrolled with MonaVie in violation of these purported covenants.

23. For each of these purported TEAM Leaders that had enrolled with MonaVie,

Quixtar and Amway demanded that MonaVie terminate its distributor agreement with them.

24. At no time did Quixtar and Amway provide, nor have they ever provided,

MonaVie with any copies of written non-competition and non-solicitation agreements in Quixtar or Amway’s favor entered into between them and the approximately 31,000 TEAM Leaders.

25. In response to this demand, MonaVie questioned both the existence and

enforceability of Quixtar/Amway’ s non-competition and non-solicitation covenants, especially since the alleged TEAM Leaders were independent distributors spread across multiple states, and, more importantly, reiterated the express representation of each TEAM Leader that they did not enroll with MonaVie in violation of “any non-competition, non-solicitation, or confidentiality agreement entered into with Amway or any other organization or entity.”

26. Notwithstanding, on or about March 14, 2008, counsel for Quixtar and Amway

communicated to MonaVie that MonaVie was “feeding the beast” and, consequently, that it

intended to immediately file suit against MonaVie for tortious interference with contractual

relations unless MonaVie terminated each of the distributorships of the alleged TEAM Leaders.

Did you catch that? Amway/Quixtar called up to MonaVie and told them to not accept anyone who had ever associated with Team, even if they had sat out their 6 months! I disagreed with Amway/Quixtar’s right to “fire” me and others and expect us to not compete. Even so, we followed Quixtar’s guidelines under protest and couldn’t wait to start making a living doing the industry we love. What kind of company would “fire” you, sue you, and then have the audacity to attempt to “blackball” you from the entire industry? Dallin Larsen was threatened by Amway/Quixtar with a lawsuit if he accepted me after over 7 months of sitting out a 6 month non-compete. Dallin could have taken the easy path and said no to me and allegedly over 31,000 other distributors who only wanted a chance to compete after sitting out their 6 months. In my opinion, this sounds completely against the free enterprise and Christian principles espoused by the founder of Amway – Rich DeVos.

The most disturbing statement to me in the above lawsuit is Amway's Chief Legal Counsel's line to MonaVie's legal counsel - if MonaVie accepted any of the 31,000 distributors then MonaVie would be “feeding the beast.” How can a company like MonaVie that ensures all distributors follow any competitor's existing contractual obligations be feeding the beast? What kind of company's lawyer would call 31,000 people "the beast"? What did they do to deserve that epitaph? All they asked for was a business model that worked so they could chase their goals and dreams and have a reasonable expectation of achieving them if they did the work. People should have a right to leave a company and choose another path for their life without being threatened, sued and called "beast" by their former MLM.

Dallin Larsen chose principles over preferences and that is why he is a Leader of Courage. MonaVie was sued by Amway just as Amway had threatened they would do. Amway sued the day after MonaVie filed the defensive suit against Quixtar to seek clarification of the Quixtar contract. I believe strongly in the principle that “right makes might” and MonaVie’s cause is right. I follow Dallin because he is following the same principles of honesty, character, integrity, courage, and servant leadership that I desire to follow in my life. Thank you Dallin for being a man of character! It has made a huge difference in at least 31,000 people’s lives who desired an opportunity to compete in free enterprise without threats and intimidation. Your courage has given them and many tens of thousand more an opportunity of a lifetime. I am forever indebted to your courage. I will thank you by growing the MonaVie Team and earning your respect and confidence! God Bless, Orrin Woodward

Amway Leadership Development and Trust II

Orrin Woodward — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 00:40:38 -0400

Here is Matt Franks - Leadership Consultant and son of former Quixtar diamond Terry Franks - wrapping up his excellent analysis on the Leadership Gap of the Amway managers. Matt's writing style is cogent, passionate and focused on the core issues that are creating dramatic drop in Amway/Quixtar North American sales. Matt has grown up with the Amway business and has seen the drastic changes in the style of leadership from the founders to the second generation. Enjoy the article. God Bless, Orrin Woodward

Orrin Woodward , (Here is Part 2.....It's a long one:)

I must say that I am very humbled that you shared my comments from my previous post to help serve others. For the readers that are consistent to this blog, for the new readers, or even for the A/Q fanatics: the reason I write is to add value to others. That is it! Not to gloat or to sound like the message, but I am merely passing on to the readers the thoughts that have been dwelling in my heart and mind. Why? I have said this before on a different post: I have learned from my mentors in life that God will only give to me what He knows will flow through me. So when I learn something I think might be valuable to others, my responsibility is to pass it on to them. It does me or no one any good to hoard thoughts. If my posts bring clarity to a confusing situation in at least one person’s life than it was worth every amount of time that I have invested to write the message. That is what communicators do. They try and take a complicated subjected and make it simple. Educators take something simple and make it complicated. (That is not a negative comment towards teachers because I have had many great ones!)

There has been a lot of corporate bullying, posturing, fear tactics, and lack of emotional intelligence (almost child-like) portrayed by A/Q over the past year or so (probably longer from what I have been learning) and their actions has made it tough to sift through their noise to find the principles they are violating. Bestselling author Andy Andrews in his book “The Traveler’s Gift” said this about violating principles: “Principles are at work whether you know them or not. Ignorance of a principle does not exempt you from the principle.” Just because someone or an organization’s leaders are incompetent does not mean they or the people following them won’t have to deal with the compounding consequences of consistently violating principles.

In the last article I listed my top 5 reasons why I believe A/Q is in a downward spiral from a sheer leadership perspective. Here they are again for your reference:

1. Confronting Reality

2. Incompetent Leadership (both corporate and field leaders)

3. Constructive Criticism

4. Irrelevant Business Model

5. Business Ownership vs. People Ownership

I was never in the A/Q boardroom, but I have been a serious leadership student for some time and the actions they are choosing is what all companies have practiced before they have fallen. If they don’t start paying attention to the seeds they are sowing, they will reap a harvest that will destroy the previous 50 or 60 years of sacrifice, legacy, and contributions of others.

To recap: we spent a ton of time on first two reasons: A/Q’s inability to confront reality and stated examples of both corporate and field leadership incompetence. There are plenty of additional examples I could give for both groups of “leaders”, but I want to get off the soapbox and get on with the other reasons. No name I mentioned or people I inferred was intended to be a personal attack because like all human beings; we all have our strengths and or weaknesses. The problem A/Q faces, along with all it’s people is that the individuals that are leading the organization both at a corporate level and some field “leaders” are VERY WEAK in leadership competence, which is killing the company and destroying people’s lives! They need to step down and go work on their strengths, because they are proving that leading others is not one of them!

Issue #3 - Constructive Criticism:

Constructive criticism or valuable feedback is an achilles heel to an organization. Bestselling author Ken Blanchard has said “feedback is the breakfast of champions.” Especially the feedback a corporation receives from the top producers within an organization. There are two types of criticism that any organization receives:

1. Criticism that condemns – people criticize you because they are jealous or envious of your position. Many times criticism that hurts normally has very weak factual basis that helps an organization because much the criticism is tied to an emotional feeling, not for logical business benefit.

2. Criticism that counts – people question systems, procedures, and policy’s to ensure the business is competitive. If they are not competitive than it is up to the leaders to make them competitive. Many times the criticism is not what an organization wants to hear, but it is something that requires them to fix. Especially if the criticism comes from people that have a vested interest in the organization succeeding.

Dr. Bruce Weinstein gives us exactly what I mean by “criticism that counts.” Here's how he describes the value of criticism: "The goal of true criticism is to help someone be the best they can be…When criticism is done appropriately, the person who has been criticized will understand what he or she has done wrong and will feel inspired to make a change for the better. Not only should we not avoid being criticized, we should embrace criticism because it is the only way we can continue to grow professionally and personally."

Picture this: for the past few years 8 of the top 1% of income earners within your organization have been stating problems and issues that need to be addressed in order to stay competitive in the market, but those issues for whatever reason have fallen on deaf ears. In fact, the issues and problems brought to the table were not self-serving propaganda, but rather serving responsibilities with win-win results for everyone associated with the company as the motive.

So how would an organization know if they were receiving “Criticism that Counts” instead of “Criticism that Condemns”? According to bestselling author John Maxwell you have to put criticism to the “acid test.”

“The acid test of criticism is made up of three questions:

1. Does the criticism have basis in fact?

2. Is the criticism offered constructively (in an effort to help)?

3. Does the critic have the insight and perspective to speak credibly?

When all three questions can be answered, "yes," then a leader should take the criticism seriously and weigh its meaning.” When leaders pay any cost to ward off constructive criticism, they sacrifice their best thoughts.

In the case of A/Q let’s answer each of the three questions shall we?

Does the criticism have basis in fact? – One of the criticisms the IBOAI board brought to the attention of the A/Q leadership was the price of products. Anyone that has been affiliated with A/Q for any amount of time probably has experienced the “sticker shock” of 90 percent of their products when they log on to their website or see their catalog. I did not say 100% because I am giving them the benefit of the doubt that not all partner store products are over-priced.

For purposes of an example let’s just examine one of A/Q’s product lines for men called Tolsom. Tolsom is a men’s skin care system. Let’s just compare their shaving crème and face wash with a well respected-high end brand like the Nivea for Men line. I am not comparing Tolsom with a basic product like Edge Shave Gel because Tolsom, in my mind, is better quality than Edge. However I would compare Nivea and Tolsom side by side any day of the week; let’s compare Quality with Quality!!

Price of Nivea for Men shave Gel is $6.92 (according to Amazon.com)

Price of Tolsom shave Gel is $12.45 (according to Quixtar.com)

Price for Nivea for Men face wash (pack of 4 bottles) is $20.57 (according to Amazon.com)

Price for Tolsom Face Wash (1 bottle) is $20.62 (according to Quixtar.com)

Now let’s let the readers decide………Does anyone think the 8 IBOAI leaders that were terminated for bringing up these issues had factual information for their criticism? I would venture to say yes. I am sure each one of you would agree with them as well.

Is the criticism offered constructively (in an effort to help)?- Based on the IBOAI’s suggestion of changing the price of products; do you think changing the prices of products would have made the product more attractive to purchase? In the A/Q business the more volume that is done, the more money the distributor makes. The more competitive the prices are, the more easier it is to sell the product. If the prices were priced more competitively do you think more volume would be done? Sure you would agree with that. If more volume is done do you think people would have a better opportunity to make money? Sure they would have a better chance to make money. Do you think raising this criticism was raised to help others, which would have provided a win-win result for all distributors? YES In fact you can read a memo that Orrin Woodward wrote to Doug Devos (Founder’s Son and President), in an effort to help spearhead the turnaround. Read the article online and you decide if the tone it was written in was.

So the “Question Behind the Question” as author John Miller would say: Why wouldn’t a company want to do that? Let that question simmer a while in your brain and I will address it when I get to the issue of “Irrelevant Business Opportunity” or you might already have your answer because of the issue regarding Incompetent Leadership.

Does the critic have the insight and perspective to speak credibly? - you would think that 8 people which represent some of the largest organizations in the entire A/Q business would give you credibility wouldn’t you. I mean, do you think the Chicago Bulls valued the insight of Michael Jordan when addressing what the team needed in order to build a championship caliber team? The people in the front office don’t play in the games with Jordan. So of course they wanted his perspective and most of the time implemented his criticisms and suggestions.

A/Q works the same way. You have your leaders and you have your managers. The leaders are the people that are getting the most results in the field. A/Q management is not in the field, so wouldn’t you think that it would be hard for them to have any idea what is going on? The closest any of the Devos or VanAndel kids got to the field was asking their Dad how their day at work was coming off their sail boat.

Orrin and Laurie Woodward had the fastest growing North American A/Q business from 2000 until they were terminated in 2007. They helped many people go diamond and emerald without many of them having an Amway foundation. I am not sure of their exact figures, but you can read about them in an article on Orrin’s blog. He knows his own numbers better than I do. All I know is that the numbers were way more than practically any other A/Q group in North America. So wouldn’t you think that he along with the other 7 IBOAI board members that were terminated had credibility to raise these issues? Of course they did!

Any competent leader or organization would listen and learn from this valuable criticism and leading the charge to making the necessary wrongs, right. However, that would be the case for a GREAT organization that is called for greatness, not the case for self serving organizations like A/Q. Why did I call A/Q a self-serving organization? Very simple! Bestselling author Ken Blanchard addresses this very issue when he discussed the problem with self-serving organizations and self-serving people. Here is an excerpt from a speech I heard him give about this very topic: “Self Serving organizations and people think they own everything; they own their home, their relationships, their job, and all their life they are trying to protect what they own. How can you tell if you are dealing with a driven person? Give them feedback and they kill the messenger. Why do they kill the messenger? Because they are self serving leaders that want to protect their position, and your feedback is acting like you don’t want them to lead.” Does that sound familiar?!

I don’t know if it is a pride reason, an ego reason, an incompetence reason, or an all of the above reason as to why they don’t listen to the people with the “sweat on their brow” to make the necessary changes. That is one issue that must be addressed. Because a business’s flexibility to change and adapt is directly tied to it’s realistic ability to compete. And as the facts and figures show (without A/Q’s spin) they are losing their ability to compete.

Not only did the corporate “leaders” turn their backs on the group of 8, they decided it would give them a competitive advantage to terminate them! Can you say incompetent!!!!!?

Issue #4 – Irrelevant Business Model

There are 3 parts in my mind that make this business very irrelevant to compete effectively in the 21st century:

1. Compensation Plan

2. Product Prices

3. Image of the Company

1. Compensation Plan

I am not a professional or intelligent MLM compensation plan guru at all so I do not have the credibility to discuss anything about how their pay plan works. However, I do have common sense. The only thing I do know is that many of the top distributors in other of the top MLM companies make a lot more than many of the top achievers in the A/Q business. All system income put aside because in the A/Q business you only make system money if you play the politics in the right way. It has very little to do with your performance. If you are one of the blessed ones then you receive system income. If not, you are stuck with your little PV check.

One of the other parts of A/Q’s compensation plan, and in my mind the most important, that makes it irrelevant is that it is very hard for the new person to make money, reasonable income, not $7 dollar checks. I have seen other MLM opportunities that structure their compensation plan so not only to the performers make money, but the new person can realistically make some pretty significant income in a manageable period of time. I am all for putting in effort and anyone that expects to make money without exerting any effort is ridiculous. I just want a compensation plan that rewards people enough to take an opportunity seriously.

If people have an opportunity to make money quicker, do you think they will be more or less motivated to invest more time, resources, and effort to build towards their vision? They will be more motivated.

Sure A/Q puts out spin that you have to sell products in order to make money quickly. Based on our product price comparison above, no one in their right mind or with a good conscious would sell those products. Maybe if you live amongst the most affluent in the world, but that would disqualify most of the people in their business. Not only do they want you to sell their overpriced products, but they then hamstring you with ridiculous product marketing rules and regulations that restrict your ability to sell. This leads me to my second part of what makes this business irrelevant.

2. Product Prices

You can’t sell products if they are not priced accordingly. You can manipulate others to buy your products though. Especially since the products A/Q wants their people to sell are products that people are already used to paying between 30%-60% less for at their local store of choice. (Walmart, Meijer, Kroger, etc..) I don’t want to spend a lot of time on this issue because I was thorough when I was describing the different prices between Tolsom and Nivea. My challenge for the realistic thinker is to honestly go to A/Q’s website and search for yourself. You will be shocked at what you will find compared with what you are used paying for almost the same products at your local store. How can you be competitive if you are not competitive? You can’t be.

Remember when I asked the question: Why wouldn’t a company want to change this? I bet you thought I was going to forget to bring this up……..Do me a favor and Google “Jay Factor + Amway” and share with me what you learned. It will blow your socks off of your feet. Once you understand what it means, you will know exactly why A/Q doesn’t want to lower their prices. I am not going to explain it because if I get one calculation wrong, I wouldn’t put it pass them to come after me for misrepresentation. Once you read about it and draw your own conclusion, you will further understand what I meant when I called A/Q a self-serving organization.

Listen, I am all for making money, and lots of it for the right reasons, but to make it on the broke backs of others in my belief is terrible. I guess that is the difference between manipulating someone versus motivating someone. When you manipulate others you move them for your own benefit, but when you motivate someone you move them for mutual advantage. After you read about this “Jay Factor” you tell me if A/Q distributors are being manipulated or motivated!

3. Image of the company

The image of A/Q as you all know is not very good to say the least. Anytime the word Amway is mentioned, people cringe and walk (if not run) away. How can anybody, in the 21st century, build a business like your and be proud of the image you have created. Common………We are in the information age, not the product –pick – up age! Information is plentiful and trust me there is plenty of information about A/Q all over the web that just adds to their poor image.

Other than having a poor compensation plan, high priced products, and a poor brand image this company is a good opportunity! I hope you see my sarcasm!

Issue #5 – Business Ownership vs. People Ownership

When I used to be in the A/Q business, it was pitched to me as a business that was mine. In fact, they even said I was an Independent Business Owner. After explaining all 5 of my issues with this company, you don’t have to be a genius to know that you are more like a DBO or a “Dependent Business Owner.” You are dependent because an A/Q affiliated field rep is dependent on A/Q’s incompetent decisions, incompetent leadership, irrelevant business model, and high product prices. Think about it: if you were independent, you are free from this debacle!! You set the pace and make the decisions for yourself.

The people ownership side is once you are in; you are their property. Read the court documents and you will find where they called everyday people like you and me “their property.” Let me explain. After I had registered in their business and without me knowing, they added in a clause into my auto-renewal that said I could not go and compete against them for 6 months, use any trade secrets, etc…. Here is the kicker; when you sign up for auto-renewal A/Q just charges your credit card and the only time you know it was done was when you got your credit card statement. Never once did I receive any notification that I was committing myself to be their property.

Let me give you a few of my opinions regarding this non-compete, trade secret junk!:

1. People like Orrin and the rest of team, or for that matter people that leave A/Q, don’t have to compete with you in order to beat you. Your leadership is doing a great job destroying the organization.

2. Trust me A/Q no one wants your trade secret. They are not valuable at all. You are proving that consistently. Think about it: who in their right mind would want anyone’s trade secrets that have been proven to fail year in and year out. Stop taking yourselves too seriously. You might think you’re good, but common, your numbers are dropping faster than you can get your next lawsuit out the door.

3. If I knew I was going to be called someone else’s property, never would have I signed up for this so-called opportunity. News flash to the A/Q managers: this is the USA not the USSR! We are free people to live a life of our priorities and responsibilities!

4. If people were unconscious when they “apparently agreed” to the Non-Compete doesn’t that make it void? Oh that’s right…..you are in the business of manipulation!

5. STOP THE HARRASSMENT AND LAWSUITS!! – how many more people have to be hurt or punished because they want to take their talents elsewhere and apply them to another opportunity or another venue in their life! If I want to lead my life, who has the authority to tell me or my wife that we have to accept our life? Nobody does! Especially two - faced families and gutless two-faced so called “leaders”!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If your opportunity was so good A/Q, people wouldn’t want to leave…..would they? Don’t force people into staying with your opportunity. Les Brown said “A man convinced his will is of the same opinion still!” Force yourselves to make your opportunity better and people won’t want to leave!! The buck has got to stop with you! Take responsibility for your failures and fix them or face the consequences when you are forced to close your doors!! Learn from these 5 issues and FIX WHAT YOU NEED TO FIX! Face the reality, get competent leadership steering the ship, accept constructive criticism, change your business model, and stop viewing people as property!

In Conclusion:

To all TEAM leaders and friends; thanks for meeting the needs of the hour! Orrin and Laurie, Chris and Terri, thank you so much for standing up for what is right and not wavering! All of us are better people because of the example you all set!

My prayer is that this post will land in the hands of someone that can put a stop to all this childish behavior that A/Q is exemplifying. This has been a very difficult post for me to write, not because it is not based on truth (it is 100% the truth), but because I have seen great men and women’s character come under fire from people that, based on the facts I presented to everyone, have no room to label anyone except themselves! I have never seen a company behave or carry itself like this, with the exception of Enron, WorldCom, and the other scandalous companies we have all heard about over the past few years.

God Bless,

Matt

Amway Australia Letter to IBOs

Orrin Woodward — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 14:16:36 -0400

David Steadson Fightback has accused me of aiding and abetting IBOs and former IBOs in their search for truth. I personally have never met nor talked with Trevor Chatham that I can remember so to accuse me of aiding and abetting him is silly. I received a personal comment from Anonymous Australian Transparency Guy that denies emphatically that he is Trevor or is working with Trevor. It would seem dangerous for Trevor to post on my blog if he has a court order against such postings. We all know how vindictive Amway can be for anyone who asks questions about their business. It would not seem beyond the realm of believability for an anonymous Australian in the know to state the facts and sift through the massive spin coming out of Amway lately. All the reader audience of this blog desires is for the plain truth to be shared without all the spin. For example, here is the latest communications from Amway Australia to the Australian IBOs according to Anonymous Australian Transparency Guy. Can anyone find any logical fallacies in the arguments in the memo below? The Anonymous Transparency author from Australia posted his comments on the Amway/Quixtar Sales comments, but I will not repost them here in order to refrain David Fightback from more accusations of aiding and abetting. Am I aiding and abetting David Fightback when I post his comments also? How can I aid and abet both pros and cons in a discussion? I thought this was the definition of a dialogue – a discussion of all the facts to determine the truth.

If anyone knows the facts and can discuss this post with an eye for the truth - please share your comments. I personally believe there is plenty of room in the MLM field for multiple competitors and I am disappointed by Amway’s constant attempt to downgrade competitors instead of fixing their own model. I would gladly leave Amway out of any discussions, but they continue to sue me and others who wish to be free to pursue our goals and dreams in a growing model. The coup de grace is that they recently sued MonaVie. Is Amway’s new slogan, “If you can’t beat them – sue them”? What kind of company sues their competitors who are beating them in the field of free enterprise and then proudly proclaims that they are the best opportunity? If they are the best, then they have nothing to worry about. If they are not the best, then no matter how many lawsuits, non-competes, or threats that Amway makes - it will not stop the flow of information and people to the better business opportunity in my opinion. Free enterprise works by allowing people to freely choose where and with whom they wish to do business. Rich DeVos taught this lesson many times in his Selling America talks. I believe the lesson did not pass onto the second generation based upon their anti-free enterprise actions. Here is the letter with no comments for Anonymous Australia Guy or David Fightback. God Bless, Orrin Woodward

This letter is from Amway CEO M. Coldwell: To Australian Ibos. June

WHY AMWAY IS THE BEST BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU

In an environment where copycat business and hollow investment and income

opportunities abound it's good sometimes to just remind yourselves why you joined

Amway. What are your dreams, your aspirations and what made you believe Amway was

the right business for you?

These are not rhetorical questions.

I'm prompted to write to you as a consequence of learning that a competitive organisation

has been targeting your line of sponsorship to build their business.

What does this mean? It means that certain IBOs have been persuaded to join this

competitive organisation and that they in turn have been prospecting for that organisation

within their group, possibly your group.

While this is disturbing it does happen from time

to time. As the biggest, best and brightest income opportunity in the world, Amway and

Amway IBOs will always be targeted by competitors who want to build their businesses

quickly.

We are used to these attacks and we stand by our plan, our products and you, the

people who make Amway the best in the business.

You are of course free to make whichever decision you would like in relation to your

future but as you consider your options I ask that you keep some important points in mind.

Amway has been in business since 1959. We stand ready to celebrate our 50th

Anniversary and we are akeady planning the next 50 years of business success.

'There are more than 3.5 million IBOs engaged with the Amway opportunity all

over the world.

Our collective sales continue to soar reaching US$7.2 billion during 2007, our

biggest year ever.

Amway has paid over US$27 billion in bonuses over the past 50 years. Add this

figure to the cost of incentive trips and other awards and rewards and the total

eclipses the combined payouts of other network marketing organisations.

We have over 700 patents already awarded and hundreds more pending, testimony

to both our past achievements and our investment in future product and brand

development.

Nutriway is the No. 1 vitamin and mineral supplement brand in the world. All

claims associated with our products have been approved in Australia by the

The TGA.

Amway only associates with the best. Rhonaldinho, the No. 1 footballer in the

world, 100 mere sprint champion, Asafa Powell, China's No. 1 hurdler Liu Xiano

and soon to be announced, an exciting new Nutriway sponsorship with someone

who many believe to be Australia's most popular athlete.

Consider all of this as and if you are ever approached by a competitive organisation

claiming to be 'just like Amway, only better'. Such organisations come and almost

invariably go.

Here are some questions to ask to help you determine whether an

organisation is likely to be around for the long term.

How many products do they have? The fewer the products, the less sustainable is

their business opportunity, especially if their product is easily duplicated by others.

Are their products approved by government regulatory authorities like the

Therapeutic Goods Administration in Australia? If they're not, then any claims

they make about the efficacy or consequences of consuming their product are

unapproved, unproven and probably false.

How long has this organisation been around? Any company can achieve results in

the short term but most organisations fail to go on and achieve those same results

in the medium or longer term.

Can the organisation be trusted? Who are the senior officers and what is their

background? People who have shown a lack honesty or integrity in their past

business dealings are likely to repeat those behaviours.

Is the company a member of the Direct Selling Association and therefore a

subscriber to the Association's Code of Practices signed to protect the image and

reputation of the industry?

If you're not comfortable with the answers to any of these questions then I urge you to

think long and hard before being tempted to any opportunity other than the Amway

opportunity, indisputably the biggest, best and brightest in the world.

Your future is in your hands. Amway, like no other organisation, stands ready to help you

achieve your goals and aspirations.

Best wishes,

Michial Coldwell

General Manager

Amway of Australia. New Zealand