Comments on: MYTH: 70% Retail Sales Rule http://www.thetruthaboutamway.com/myth-70-retail-sales-rule/ Get the Facts about Amway Global Fri, 27 Jan 2012 12:17:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: MYTH: It’s a pyramid if most products are bought by IBOs | The Truth About Amway http://www.thetruthaboutamway.com/myth-70-retail-sales-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-5212 MYTH: It’s a pyramid if most products are bought by IBOs | The Truth About Amway Thu, 18 Feb 2010 14:10:36 +0000 #comment-5212 [...] Self-described “MLM experts” (but in reality just anti-mlm zealots) such as Robert FitzPatrick of so-called “Pyramid Scheme Alert” repeat the “no retail sales” myth over and over. In recent times, FitzPatrick helped write a report on USANA by the so-called “Fraud Discovery Institute” which attacked USANA on the same basis. Len Clements of MarketWave Inc does a brilliant job of debunking that myth here and here. FitzPatrick even claims that in the definitive FTC vs Amway case in the 1970’s the court ruled that “At least 70% of product must be sold at retail to consumers who are not also Amway distributors.”(source). Eric Janssen of QuixtarBlog gives the same claim a “sticky” post on his site, and “lawdawg” of the now defunct “lawblawg” also repeated it – yet another Amway myth doing the rounds of the Internet Echo Chamber. The problem is, this is a complete fabrication on the part of critics - the court never said any such thing, something I addressed in MYTH: 70% Retail Sales Rule. [...] [...] Self-described “MLM experts” (but in reality just anti-mlm zealots) such as Robert FitzPatrick of so-called “Pyramid Scheme Alert” repeat the “no retail sales” myth over and over. In recent times, FitzPatrick helped write a report on USANA by the so-called “Fraud Discovery Institute” which attacked USANA on the same basis. Len Clements of MarketWave Inc does a brilliant job of debunking that myth here and here. FitzPatrick even claims that in the definitive FTC vs Amway case in the 1970’s the court ruled that “At least 70% of product must be sold at retail to consumers who are not also Amway distributors.”(source). Eric Janssen of QuixtarBlog gives the same claim a “sticky” post on his site, and “lawdawg” of the now defunct “lawblawg” also repeated it – yet another Amway myth doing the rounds of the Internet Echo Chamber. The problem is, this is a complete fabrication on the part of critics – the court never said any such thing, something I addressed in MYTH: 70% Retail Sales Rule. [...]

]]> By: The Internet War Against Amway Part II | The Truth About Amway http://www.thetruthaboutamway.com/myth-70-retail-sales-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-3645 The Internet War Against Amway Part II | The Truth About Amway Tue, 24 Feb 2009 15:45:43 +0000 #comment-3645 [...] even remotely accurate about the FTC findings and the “70% rule”. I recommend you read MYTH: 70% Retail Sales Rule for an explanation of this piece of dishonesty, a common one spread by members of the anti-amway [...] [...] even remotely accurate about the FTC findings and the “70% rule”. I recommend you read MYTH: 70% Retail Sales Rule for an explanation of this piece of dishonesty, a common one spread by members of the anti-amway [...]

]]> By: TWS http://www.thetruthaboutamway.com/myth-70-retail-sales-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-1150 TWS Thu, 18 Sep 2008 17:45:18 +0000 #comment-1150 "the 70% rule serves two purposes. The main purpose, as is evident from the above, is to deter inventory loading - ie ending up with a garage full of unsold soap! The secondary purpose is to “encourage retail sales to consumers“ It is also designed to keep individuals from "buying into" a certain level. If an IBO had a 4000 pv business, they couldn't buy 3500pv personally to hit 7500pv (platinum). Their personal consumption would obviously exceed the 30% that is allowed. “the 70% rule serves two purposes. The main purpose, as is evident from the above, is to deter inventory loading – ie ending up with a garage full of unsold soap! The secondary purpose is to “encourage retail sales to consumers“

It is also designed to keep individuals from “buying into” a certain level. If an IBO had a 4000 pv business, they couldn’t buy 3500pv personally to hit 7500pv (platinum). Their personal consumption would obviously exceed the 30% that is allowed.

]]> By: ibofightback http://www.thetruthaboutamway.com/myth-70-retail-sales-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-356 ibofightback Sun, 24 Aug 2008 18:20:00 +0000 #comment-356 Rob, The member/client volume rule has always existed in Quixtar and is in the Compendium. It's a separate issue to the 70% rule. Your upline was unfortunately promoting deceit with the idea that <i>"most of our IBOs meet requirement by doing at least 50PV personally each month and then reporting that volume as member/client volume."</i> That clearly does not fulfil the member/client volume rule, it's promoting fraud. Rob,

The member/client volume rule has always existed in Quixtar and is in the Compendium. It’s a separate issue to the 70% rule.

Your upline was unfortunately promoting deceit with the idea that

“most of our IBOs meet requirement by doing at least 50PV personally each month and then reporting that volume as member/client volume.”

That clearly does not fulfil the member/client volume rule, it’s promoting fraud.

]]> By: Rob http://www.thetruthaboutamway.com/myth-70-retail-sales-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-351 Rob Sun, 24 Aug 2008 17:00:31 +0000 #comment-351 I remember a couple of years back when I had four downline IBOs. I was encouraging them to get their orders in before the end of the month so as to allow for the various bonuses that would be sent to them by Quixtar. My own purchases were slim, not quite meeting the 3% rule. I thought that if I took the time to encourage my downline to get those last minute needs in before the end of the month that the PV would increase. I was in shock when I received a note a few weeks later from Q telling me that my bonus was paid to my upline Emerald. When I emailed my upline to find out about this, I was told: ------------ February 17, 2006 ----------- I'm answering this quickly without researching it; but I will give you some general information. The Corporation has a relatively new rule called the "Member Client Volume Requirement". It says that every IBO will be paid a bonus on his personal volume; however, to receive a bonus on downline volume, the member-client volume requirement must be met. The rule is pretty simple. Each month you are required to sell to members or clients....or they can shop for themselves if they are registered. The required minimum amount of the sales is 50PV or $100 or 10 individual sales. The sales can be auto-captured by the corporation as with members/clients who are registered with Quixtar and do volume during the month; or it can be self-reported. It is important to keep track of this yourself. When your downline volume puts you in a higher PV bracket, the requirement must be met in order for you to be paid on the downline volume. So most of our IBOs meet requirement by doing at least 50PV personally each month and then reporting that volume as member/client volume. Reporting can be done at the time of the order or after the fact on the site, just so it's done during the month. When the requirement is not met and there is downline bonus earned, it passes to the first upline qualified Platinum...in your case, me. Then, if proof of meeting the requirement is provided to the upline, the bonus would be paid by the upline. Is that as clear as mud? ------------------------------------------------- Obviously, this had a negative impact on future behavior. It also happened to all four of my downline, who later quit the business. I haven't built it since this issue surfaced. Yet, I continue to seek retail customers on my own, there's more recognition with retail sales - heck, I keep all the profit from a sale. I don't need discouraging bonus's based on some kind of rule that discourages my downline. I remember a couple of years back when I had four downline IBOs. I was encouraging them to get their orders in before the end of the month so as to allow for the various bonuses that would be sent to them by Quixtar. My own purchases were slim, not quite meeting the 3% rule. I thought that if I took the time to encourage my downline to get those last minute needs in before the end of the month that the PV would increase.

I was in shock when I received a note a few weeks later from Q telling me that my bonus was paid to my upline Emerald. When I emailed my upline to find out about this, I was told:

———— February 17, 2006 ———–
I’m answering this quickly without researching it; but I will give you some general information.
The Corporation has a relatively new rule called the “Member Client Volume Requirement”. It says that every IBO will be paid a bonus on his personal volume; however, to receive a bonus on downline volume, the member-client volume requirement must be met.
The rule is pretty simple. Each month you are required to sell to members or clients….or they can shop for themselves if they are registered. The required minimum amount of the sales is 50PV or $100 or 10 individual sales. The sales can be auto-captured by the corporation as with members/clients who are registered with Quixtar and do volume during the month; or it can be self-reported.
It is important to keep track of this yourself. When your downline volume puts you in a higher PV bracket, the requirement must be met in order for you to be paid on the downline volume.
So most of our IBOs meet requirement by doing at least 50PV personally each month and then reporting that volume as member/client volume. Reporting can be done at the time of the order or after the fact on the site, just so it’s done during the month.
When the requirement is not met and there is downline bonus earned, it passes to the first upline qualified Platinum…in your case, me. Then, if proof of meeting the requirement is provided to the upline, the bonus would be paid by the upline.

Is that as clear as mud?

————————————————-

Obviously, this had a negative impact on future behavior. It also happened to all four of my downline, who later quit the business. I haven’t built it since this issue surfaced.

Yet, I continue to seek retail customers on my own, there’s more recognition with retail sales – heck, I keep all the profit from a sale. I don’t need discouraging bonus’s based on some kind of rule that discourages my downline.

]]>