Clarification to Transformation Post
Thursday, July 05, 2007  by Jim Payne
Category: , , , ,

In my haste to celebrate the 4th of July, I realize some of my post on Business Transformation requires some clarification:

RE: Ruby Bonus--- the $$ amount is correct but the difference is in the %. The statement should read ... Providing an additional 2% in bonus payments at 10,000PV and an additional 4% at 12,500 and 15,000PV to compensate those IBOs that exceed the minimums. For those not familiar with PV/BV, these bonuses should be in the $550, $1,400, and $ 1,700 range. For those familiar with PV/BV, that means a Ruby bonus should be in excess of $2,500 monthly.

Sorry for any confusion I might have caused.


Comments

Tex said:
July 6, 2007 10:00 AM | #

The transformation post didn't include any mention of tool profits, yet this appears to be the major issue in the UK and Russia, as well as on many other blog discussions, not to mention the overall reputation of the business.

The tool profit issse is what is driving the business model, and I don't see how these "tweaks" in bonuses and shipping charges will make much of an impact on their own.

Please comment on whether there are active and serious discussions regarding tool profit and, if true, when you expect to announce changes in this area.

Ben said:
July 8, 2007 6:21 PM | #

I'm sorry Jim, can you please clarify the % difference at the 12,500 and 15,000 PV levels? Are they both an additional 4%?

Editor's Note posted by Katie Pearsall:
Yes, as stated in the post, 12,500 and 15,000 are an additional 4%.

Eric S said:
July 8, 2007 6:51 PM | #

Tex,

Maybe Jim didn't mention it because the topic was QBI.  We all have heard repeatedly what your topic is.  If adding appx. $70M in incentives is your idea of a "tweak" that allows you license to bring up your one topic I think I would rather hear from Jim and others with fresh ideas.  This is a lot of money in anybody's book and is THE topic.

ProudIBO said:
July 9, 2007 12:29 AM | #

Tex, you need to spend less time on these blogs and more time reading recomended books from the system in order to better YOUR life.  So you had a bad experience, boo hoo. Move on! We will be # 1, you better believe, thanks to a great corp. and a great LOS. All other IBOS out there keep up the great work.

Chuck Lia said:
July 9, 2007 10:07 AM | #

Tex is right on the money with his post.  Is the company ever going to truly deal with this dynamic or just lend lip service to it by being "transparent" in allowing discussion of the topic in these online blogs?  

Allow me to post one example of how the tool side can be abused.  We advise our new IBOs that the purchase of tools is "optional" per company policy.  However, virtually all tool systems have a component in their various level recognition awards below Platinum that REQUIRES the IBO to be on the system if that IBO wants to be recognized in front of his/her group.  That component is usually called being "CORE" and one of its requirements is being on the system.  So if that IBO wants to be recognized at a function in front of his/her group being on the system is hardly "optional".  Any requirement for recognition within the LOA that includes a system purchase requirement of any kind is inappropriate if we truly mean the purchase of tools is optional.

The company's complete silence on the tool issue on each of these blogs is beginning to speak volumes.  Perhaps all these blog discussions are really nothing more than fools errands, ad nauseum.

Chuck Lia said:
July 9, 2007 10:15 AM | #

Eric,

The reason behind Tex's comment is simply that despite hundreds -- hundreds -- of negative posts on the tool issue, there has not been a single -- a single -- post by anyone at the company regarding the tool issue.  No one is saying that $70 million is not significant, it is, but it still does not deal with the white elephant in the room.  The internet is not going to allow the company to push this issue under the rug and the lack of consistency regarding the tool issue in the company worldwide is hypocritical.  We all are interested in new ideas from new faces, but many of us are also interested in making sure that old issues and ideas that have created incredible changes and negative publicity for the company are dealt with as well.  

Chuck

Editor's Note posted by Katie Pearsall:
Actually, we have posted about this issue. Please see The 'T' Word as well as numerous posts on Inside Quixtar and Real Quixtar Blog.

rdknyvr said:
July 9, 2007 10:30 AM | #

Eric,

Good point in your post -- $70M is very significant. But I always thought that a key aspect of "the American way" was freedom of speech. Was it Voltaire or one of the Founders that said, to the effect, "I may disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it." While Tex may be irritating to some at times, he and others are keeping an appropriate focus on a key issue that I believe is front of mind for Alticor, and that they will resolve at a time of their choosing. Tex's posts are short and civil, so I have no complaint about it. One can always skip over his posts if one doesn't want to read them. I'm happy that I've been able to make points here that challenge aspects of Alticor's plans, and be heard, and it's a testament to their openness that they are welcoming all points of view, including mine and Tex's and others -- and as often as we want to make them.

Tex, by analogy, when you're rebuilding or restoring a car engine, or remodelling a home, there is an appropriate sequence in which actions are planned and implemented. Jim and his crew are doing a great job and when the 18-24 month process is complete, they will look golden.

With appreciation,

Tex said:
July 9, 2007 11:50 AM | #

Eric,

I realize $70M is a lot of money when it is in one place, but I also believe it is a drop in the bucket when compared to the tool profits.

You spread $70M around among hundreds of Diamonds, thousands of Emeralds, 10's of thousands of Platinums, throw in some free shipping and increased PV, and it gets thin pretty quick.  

You only think the $70M is THE topic.

Tex said:
July 9, 2007 8:09 PM | #

ProudIBO,

You need to mind your own business.

I have read and enjoyed reading well over 100 books on the book list, most of them purchased at full retail price from my upline, who makes about 50% markup on these books, many of which can be purchased for pennies on the dollar online, checked out for free at your local library, or downloaded for free from the internet.

I think they need to get a healthy dose of honesty, which is sorely lacking.

If it was ONLY me who has had a bad experience, it would be whining.

Since the vast majority of IBO's also have a bad experience, there appears to be plenty of blame left over to be shared with the upline, for lying about the primary source of their income.

Eric S said:
July 10, 2007 11:56 AM | #

QBI IS the issue on this string. The breakdown of $120M (appx $70M is new) addresses needs at all levels and does so impressively. Take the 6% Ruby bonus and it means a well balanced Ruby should be making well over $100K. Now were talking. I realize my issues are not everyone's issues but your issue Tex is also not mine. I look at value. If the tool has no value I don't buy it and our system recognizes people based on their Quixtar achievement not system achievement.

This QBI has value so I will embrace it as it significantly impacts income at all levels.

Chuck Lia said:
July 10, 2007 3:43 PM | #

Any particular reason why my response last night to Katie's editor comments wasn't posted?  Shall I send it to you again or do the simple facts of the post make you too uncomfortable to post it?  If so, let me know so I don't waste anymore of my time.  

BTW, the primary point I was trying to make on my initial post on 7/9 at 10:15am was that Jim Payne has posted to START a "Tool" blog thread, but that no one from the company, Jim included, has yet responded to specific questions and comments regarding tools made by IBOs and others on the "Tool" thread or any other OZ blog.  Why the silence?  Are you saying transparency is only a reality when you welcome the topic being discussed?

Here's an idea.  Open a blog thread titled "Questions for Rich DeVos".  Perhaps he'd be willing to answer a few questions and give us his current take on a number of these issues and topics, including the tool issue.  Heck, you could post them on YouTube.  Who knows?  It might be interesting.

Chuck

Editor's Note posted by Katie Pearsall:
The reason we didn't publish the comment referenced above is because we found it to be redundant of a comment by the same author submitted July 9 at 10:07, which we did publish. We apologize for not emailing  immediately to let Chuck Lia know that we were not publishing and why, but it does take time for the editors to moderate comments and we unfortunately allowed just over 24 hours to lapse without contacting him.

Tex said:
July 10, 2007 4:59 PM | #

Eric,

The QBI enhancements are the "carrot" and reduced tool profits are the "stick".

Amway presented the carrot, soon it will be time to use the stick.

I suggest they continue to walk softly, and both carry and use the big stick.

I couldn't care less if you don't want to engage in the tool profit issue, just as I don't care if you "believe" in gravity or not. Both effect you the same, whether you "believe" in them or not, one your business and the other your physical world.

Many people can't articulate the specifics of what they don't like about the Amway business, but this doesn't help the reputation, does it?

Josh said:
July 11, 2007 1:01 PM | #

Although I stand in disagreement  often with Chuck Lia and Tex.  I also would like to know why Jim, or any of the other authors of these have selective responses.

Especially where the hot topics are concerned.  Perhaps you are afraid to enter the Tex spin zone, I know I got sick of that.  However, there are plenty of others that have concerns and thoughts that I believe are ligitimate.  

So again the question is, Why are there no responses to issues brought up that just go around in circles?

Anyone, anyone...Bueller?

Eric S said:
July 12, 2007 1:15 AM | #

Tex,

Your paraphrase of Teddy Roosevelt is revealing. He was a great man but he ran a gov't not a company that markets its products and opportunity through Independant Business Owners. I buy and sell products from Quixtar the items whose value meets or exceeds what I pay. I don't care how much profit Alticor or the owners make. I buy BSMs and attend functions using the same criteria.  Whether the DeVos' have a jet fleet or an upline has an auto fleet, both acquired from income of my purchases, is not a concern. Did I derive value that met or exceeded the cost is my concern.

I read some blogs that speak of monopolistic practices but that makes no sense. If their upline is stupid enough to try to force an IBO into an activety they do not wish to partcipate in there are numerous sources on the web with business building techniques.Unlike the days of the oil monopolies Quixtar's rules allow them to start their own training system if they or you think they can offer something of more value to their downline, go for it.

Profit is not the answer. Who decides what the appropriate regulatory amount is? You? Me? Where does it stop? What group gets to determine what is acceptable and what is not? Why wouldn't we then apply the same concept to XS?

We don't need another regulatory body that will be self perpetuating.if you don't get value from what they are selling don't buy. That's your stick.

Tex said:
July 12, 2007 12:04 PM | #

Eric S,

TR may have run a government, but that doesn't mean his quote has zero meaning in the business world.

The major difference with Amway and your upline is when you show the marketing plan, you describe a business model (Amway), but probably do not describe the real business model (Amway plus tools). The tool profits come out of most IBOs' pockets and directly into the Platinum and above pockets, and are not shared with the rest of the MLM organization. The high markup on tools produces extraordinary profits not discussed while showing the plan. Amway's relationship with IBO's is as an independent contractor, while our upline commonly refers to us as "teammates" and "business partners". Don't you find it interesting we know far more about the business model with our independent contractor relationship than our teammate and business partner relationship? Have you listened to the 1983 "Directly Speaking" recordings, where Rich DeVos had a major issue with the excessive tool profit issue, which has NEVER been addressed in this country (although the UK and Russia are apparently in front of our FTC on this issue, perhaps we will catch up, as we should have long ago, either by the corporation or governmental action).  

I don't think the government or Amway should dictate the proper profit, I think the market (IBO's) should, by disclosing the tool profits and allowing the IBO's to either keep paying the same abusive prices, or demanding a reasonable profit. It's call free enterprise and supply and demand. Why would you NOT demand how much profit your upline is making from your tool purchases, as they are supposed to be our teammates and business partners, after all?

But if the blog pressure or Amway can't force them to do this, I am okay with the regulators stepping in and requiring them to do so, but only as a last resort.

Chuck Lia said:
July 17, 2007 11:00 AM | #

Josh,

Some of us who are discussing the tool issue are not doing so just to create an argument.  I for one honestly believe this is an issue that the company will have to deal with or the company will be forced by outside pressure (FTC, etc.) to deal with, with all the accompanying negative press and internet fallout.  I am convinced that tools can be provided to all IBOs at far lower cost than they are today.  For example, in my LOS/system the business presentation overview booklet use to show the business costs $6 each.  The IBO doing 15 plans a month and leaving just that one brochure with the prospect would be spending/investing $90 a month just on that one tool to build his business.  Now add CEP, meetings, follow-up packs and expenses can get to a number that some, if not many, IBOs may not be able to afford.  Today's mp3 technology allows putting 30+ thirty minute talks on one mp3 CD.  It would be very easy for any tool system to put all the training talks required for the new IBO to get his business started on one mp3 CD, rather than on having to buy a "bundle" that costs well over $200.  If, in fact, the real goal is to help the new IBO build the Q/A business, why wouldn't a sponsor or leader want to get the info out at the most minimal cost possible to the new IBO/partner/teammate?  I think you know the answer.  

I'll be honest, I've grown weary of the tool issue.  I believe the dynamics are so simple to understand I can't fathom that people can't understand the ethical dilemma and conflict of interest that exists on this issue.  In California a few years ago they restricted doctors from sending lab specimens to labs in which the doctor had an ownership interest because they discovered that the prices charged for those lab tests referred by those doctors were higher than those charged by the majority of labs in which the doctors did not have an ownership.  The obvious challenge was that there was a conflict of interest in which the patient's interests were not respected.  Those doctor's patients didn't know about the higher prices being charged at the doctor's lab or that their doctors had an ownership interest in the lab, hence the patient was paying higher prices that they had to to cover charges beyond the "reasonable and customary" level the insurance companies normally paid.  The comparison with the IBO/system relationship is quite similar.  Requiring the IBO to be on CEP and involved with the system to be recognized for group PV and IBO growth pressures the IBO to be on the system, even if those tools could EASILY be provided at much lower cost.  For the new IBO to not know from the first day that most of the cost of his purchased tool is going to pay royalties to his new business partners/leaders/teammates is deceptive.  It is a pure and simple conflict of interest unless -- UNLESS -- there is full disclosure of all aspects of the system/IBO relationship, which includes how all money in the tool system is disbursed.  Once that relational dynamic has been dealt with I will have nothing further to say about tools.  That is my issue with the tools.

Chuck

Tex said:
July 17, 2007 11:00 PM | #

Chuck,

BINGO.

George said:
July 19, 2007 11:08 AM | #

My two cents on the tool issues being discussed…

I have seen our organization go from promoting a Standing Order Tape (SOT) system when it was $7 per tape (about $45 per month) to reducing the cost of the tapes to $2.50 and creating a "Premier Membership" for $50/month.  Up until the transition, all you heard from stage and training seminars was that you have to be on SOT to get the information.  I heard it over and over again and I even taught it to my down-line.  Now don't get me wrong, there is value in some of the tapes.  However, when there was a switchover to the Premier Membership… you no longer heard how you need to be on SOT… it was now that you need to be on Premier Membership which doesn't include the Standing Order tapes.  Why the shift in focus to the product where the money is at?  Did the SOT become less valuable all the sudden?

Our organization has been plagued with tools that are of sub-par nature yet a premium price for many years.  There are countless examples of that and I know our organization is not alone.  For example, there are two main parts of the $50 Premier Membership; 1) having your own personal shopping webpage (which again was a sub-par design and replaceable with Quixtar’s free sites) and 2) an integrated training section.  The training site hasn't been updated with any sizeable improvements in about a year and a half and the shopping site is the same design it was when it rolled out with some very minor tweaks.  At $50 per business per month… that's millions every year.  Why not put profit from the tools back into the system to make it better?  

For me the issue isn't just that the organizations make money on tools, the issue lies in the organization's inability to provide quality tools that are worth the money you pay.  I would gladly pay $50 per month for something that I could be proud to use and that worked.  By far this is the largest problem we face with the new young sharp person we bring into our business.  They see the low quality of the tools, read the negative about how the bigger pins make the majority of their money from tools (which they do) and when you try to sell them on the tool system… they doubt your character/motives and they're gone.

I believe that the higher ups at Quixtar are very aware of this issue and I believe their silence in these matters shouldn't be taken as they aren't doing something about it.  They know the tool systems are a huge contributor to their decline in growth and I believe there will be some pretty phenomenal changes take place during this transformation.  If you have noticed over the last couple years, they are slowly taking away the benefits to the LOA’s memberships, like our Premier Membership, by offering replacement tools at no cost – such as personal websites, offline ordering system and the upcoming training area.  Outside of all that, because of technology today, everything you currently get for training and tools through your LOA is replaceable by a FREE system if you look hard enough.  And I do mean everything.

Josh said:
July 19, 2007 4:46 PM | #

Value, value, value, value.

It is and always will be about the VALUE one receives from what one buys.  Is it worth the cost to an individual.

I do agree that disclosure about BSMs should be a mandate to new prospects (I currently do this).  Not however to the extent many want.  It is not necessary IMO.

Tex said:
July 19, 2007 7:10 PM | #

George,

Exactly.

It is up to US to keep the facts in the forefront of the discussions and the pressure on the corp and our upline to ensure real and substantial changes are made, I am concerned if we let up, it will go back to the "old way". I have put far too much time and effort into this NOT to follow through and ensure the changes occur.

Tex said:
July 21, 2007 1:09 AM | #

Josh,

To what extent do you disclose tool profits?

Josh said:
July 23, 2007 11:48 AM | #

Tex,

I have said to the extent I disclose on other posts.  If you want clarification go to Kia' blog  The Adam Smith.

There should be a post there soon, that I responded to Chuck.

Tex said:
July 23, 2007 1:31 PM | #

Josh,

In other words, you don't tell them Emeralds and above make more,and typically several times more,  from tools than Amway. Don't you think this is something a future or current "teammate" or "business partner", would expect from you? I do, or you wouldn't be my "teammate" or "business partner".    

Josh said:
July 23, 2007 6:21 PM | #

Tex,

I honestly feel that you do not read anyone's posts.  Or you read them and have zero retention of what you read.

The following is an exerpt from that blog.  READ IT, RETAIN IT, so I don't have to REPEAT IT.

1) I mention the potential of income from our training system during a open meeting or one on one.  I do not mention specific numbers, because it is not important at this time and may lead to confusion of the Q* opportunity.

2) Down the road or even in a follow up if they bring up tools and profits...I will give them the averages as were told to me  (at Platinum--with a certain type of structured business) and at Diamond.

All the while, nearly overemphasizing the fact people that earn that money have done so through a successful Q* business first!!

As for your terms here is another exerpt of another blog, you have read and have not retained.

Training and motivating an IBO or salesmen in other industries, does not consitute partnership by any stretch of the imagination.  Teammate has no bearing on financial obligations.  You are simply part of a group of people.

As for rabid insistence of these terms, in your opinion, also include the corp.

READ IT, RETAIN IT, so I do not have to REPEAT IT

Peace

Tex said:
July 24, 2007 9:51 AM | #

Josh,

I honestly feel that you do not read my posts. Or you read them and have zero retention of what you read.

The following is a response to your blog excerpt (note corrected spelling). READ IT, RETAIN IT, so I don't have to REPEAT IT.

1. You mention the potential of income from your training system during an (corrected use of "a" vs. "an") open meeting or one on one and do not mention specific numbers, for at least 2 reasons. First, you don't have a clue what your upline makes, because they haven't told/shown you the whole story. Secondly, if you told them, they wouldn't walk away from you...they would RUN! You don't think it is important for a prospect or IBO to know the true business model, ESPECIALLY during a business overview? You are being nothing short of evasive and dishonest, in my opinion, and have actually ADDED to the the confusion of the Amway opportunity.

2. How nice of you to tell them your second hand tool profit information, IF they ask about it. What percentage of them ask? For those who don't ask, what do they tell their new prospects when they ask? Your method doesn't sound very duplicatable to me, Josh. What are the numbers you tell them when they do ask?

All the while, properly emphasizing the fact people that earn that money have done so through a successful Amway business first, but only if they ask? Read what you wrote again, slowly. Do you realize how the words of Rich DeVos are echoing through your learned response, "How much are you going to take, BEFORE they make?"

As for your terms here is another response to another excerpt (spelling corrected, again), you have read and have not retained.

Training and motivating an IBO or salesmen in other industries isn't the same relationship our upline claims with us. I have never seen a company claiming the same "teammate" and "business partner" mentality that is strongly emphasized as it is with this business. The "us against the world", "we are your true family", etc., kind of talk. Teammate has every bearing on financial obligations, or you're not considered a teammate. I know, I went off standing order and have been TOTALLY ignored for over 2 years, PROVING what I am saying with action (or in this case, inaction).

As for rabid insistence of these terms, Amway has ALWAYS treated me as an independent contractor, in a very professional business manner.

READ IT, RETAIN IT, so I do not have to REPEAT IT.

Peace will come with change. Not before.

I know you are hoping to "cash in" on the tool system, after spending a lot of money over a long period of time, feeding into it. However, as the song says, "Times, they are a changin'", you will NOT have the opportunity to profit from the tool systems as your upline has, so accept it and move on.    

Editor's Note by Anna Bryce:

Ok, gentleman, you've made your points and it's clear where you each stand. Let's move along and not subject Ada-tudes readers to more back-and-forth or they will no longer have the desire to read and retain anything on this blog!

Tex said:
July 24, 2007 2:11 PM | #

Anna,

This is the nature of blogs.

You could help by stating what the facts are, placing the facts in an easy to find location, and referencing folks to those facts when the topic is being bantered about.

Otherwise, the conversation tends to wander around, I have seen that on many blogs. Will you consider doing this?

Bridgett said:
July 24, 2007 3:49 PM | #

Anna,

Do you think women conduct themselves in the manner in which these boys seem to operate?

Perhaps we can get a blog purely devoted to women--without it having to be a frilly beauty blog?

This banter IS getting rather boring.

Josh said:
July 24, 2007 11:09 PM | #

Anna,

My fault, I will use my time to respond to other topics.  Especially since what I said in the last post being true.

It is much like politics with regards to Tex and myself.  No amount words, "proof", will sway either of us.

So again, I am sorry for subjecting others to this needless (at this point) debate.

Tex said:
July 27, 2007 8:25 AM | #

Bridgett,

Women are usually much more subtle, complex, and devious, guys generally get issues out in the open, in my experience. We are actually quite simple.

Josh,

The discussion isn't like politics for me, it could be more like finding out the facts and making decisions. I could be swayed by the facts quite easily.

I am not sorry for staying on the major issue affecting the viability and reputation of this business, and will continue to promote meaningful change until it happens.

Josh said:
July 27, 2007 10:49 AM | #

Tex,

That is the problem, when facts are presented to you you ignore them.  Even if it is from a personal experience such as mine.  When actual numbers are given and what people can expect, you simply ignore the answer and move on to more redundant bantering.  All the while forgetting what was written before, and then returning to the same questions.

I think that is what Anna and the rest are getting tired of.

ibofightback said:
July 29, 2007 1:14 PM | #

George, (July 19). If the "premium membership" you are offered is sub-par, then the simple option is to not subscribe isn't it?

If a product isn't value for money, don't buy it. Pretty simple I would have thought

George said:
July 30, 2007 2:43 AM | #

Hi ibofightback-

I couldn't agree with you more.  I don't, nor does any of my group, subscribe to the "premier membership."  However, with doing that, it also causes you to not be able to plug into any of your upline's teachings since all their teaching is based around the sub-par system they promote.  Which is OK for us since we've created our own training system that is superior and totally free, but for the average IBO out there, they are stuck with a sub-par system or nothing.  Doesn't seem right to me especially since I've seen that old school system push many people away from the business.  In the last year I've also seen so many veteran IBO's (even platinums) become discouraged to the verge of quitting because the tool organizations do not take advantage of technological advances to allow you to grow like this opportunity was designed to.  And they can't because with these technological advances, their ability to create a "value" for their tool system decreases dramatically which ultimately decreases their ability to profit.  

For example, if you were to do a meeting or training session (be it a live meeting or conference call) and recorded it.  How hard would it be to post that on a website that anyone in your downline, anywhere in the world, could access for free?  If your ultimate goal is to grow your Quixtar business, wouldn't it make sense to get the tools to your people at the least cost, in this case free, vs. charging them money for a CD?

Or, instead of training your new guy 500 miles away by driving there, wouldn't it be more efficient with your time and money to be able to do a video conference for free with them? Or to do a free three way video conference with them and their new guy to help them get a leg started?

Or to use a free conference calling system to connect with your entire organization and you or your upline do a training session where all the participants can be at home in the PJs if they wanted to?

I could go on and on with this but the point is, technology today will allow you to build your business without any overhead costs.  Even communication systems like our CommuniKate system are obsolete and can be replaced for free.  But again, most people are unaware of these things or don't have the ability to put something that works together for their group.  Wouldn't it be nice if our training organizations would do something like that for everyone so we didn’t have to?  After all don’t they always say they want to see us on the beaches of the world with them?  Then why not give us the tools to allow us to get there?

Tex said:
July 30, 2007 2:09 PM | #

George,

As you know, the answer to all of your questions for ibofb and Josh is too much money is being made on the tools to do as you suggest.

Technology has created these capabilities, and technology (the internet, specifically) has exposed the problems.

Now all we have to do is keep "pushing", and the rock WILL move.

I am encouraged you have created your own tool system. Care to give us the highlights, in the event we can use some of your ideas?

We are also creating a tool system, and have purchased well over 10,000 tapes/CD's, hundreds of books, contacting materials, follow through materials, etc., for pennies on the dollar.

We are using the upline's open system, and conduct monthly training, and also use the upline's monthly seminars 3-4 times a year. We don't go to major functions, as they are too expensive and make too much money for the upline without them being honest about it.

What are the basic building blocks of your system?

George said:
July 31, 2007 11:43 AM | #

Tex-

I'd like to see everyone enjoy a free training system someday which is why I'm here pushing for it.  Will it happen?  Maybe, but that is ultimately going to be up to Quixtar.  As for the specifics of our system, sorry, I can't share those details outside of our organization.  All I can say is think outside the box.

While your intentions are good with your system, think bigger and broader.  Your check out system will work great locally, but how do you easily and cheaply get your materials in the hands of people across the country?  And more importantly, how do you plug your people into a system (seminars and CDs) where you basically say, "listen to these guys on how to build your business, but oh by the way, they're really crooks so don't buy into the system."  That causes major confusion and discontinuity in an organization.  That’s something we struggled with for years, thus why we started creating our own system a couple years ago.  

IBOs need to get very creative, grasp the entrepreneurial spirit and be open to change (we are in a business aren't we?) vs. wait for someone else to fix the issues.  Just because someone tells you “this is the best way to build your business” or “this is the only way” – challenge them.  The worst thing you can do is buy so deeply into a system or group that you stop looking around for other better training options.

Tex said:
July 31, 2007 9:53 PM | #

George,

I don't mind paying for the training, I know it costs time and money to put it together. I just don't want the insane profits that are currently being made, then the implied message is all/most of the profit is from the product business, when it is really from the tool business.

I can understand your hesitation to reveal details, I didn't for several months either, until I had a strategy and a "critical mass" of materials put together.  

We are working on the long distance expense side of things, but folks like TEAM put together local teams prior to spreading out more, so I think we can manage this for the short to mid term. I like what Brad Doyle has done with iteamusa.com.

As far as the confusion issue, why not tell them the truth about the tool profits, then prove your prices are MUCH lower, which proves their overhead will not be excessive and your tool profits aren't, either?

Josh said:
August 1, 2007 1:56 AM | #

George,

Just to answer some of your thoughts.  Quixtar will not be able to run a consistent system for all IBOs around the world.  There will always need to be a system to streamline things.

That being said, my LOA, in my opinion has embraced new technology.  Examples are Direct fulfillment of materials (no old-school style ordering), use of a weboffice that has MP3s and streaming video from functions.  It really is great.  And yes of course if they can get it cheaper, then I am all for it.  Since they just set up all this in the past year and a half, I imagine the cost is quite large.

Anyway, I appreicate your posts.

Regards,

ibofightback said:
August 1, 2007 3:47 PM | #

George,

We indeed do many of the things you ask "why not do this?". As I've mentioned anywhere, I think part of the solution to the problem is for systems to be more transparent and public about what they offer so that IBOs and indeed LOSs can compare options better. As happens now, some groups will swap to a different LOA. I don't think new IBOs will so much (or even should in most cases) but the very transparency should drive more competition, improving offerings and lowering prices.

YankeeIBO said:
August 5, 2007 10:20 PM | #

I agree that the systems need to be understood by all IBO's looking for a way to grow their business. I also understand the general feelings against crosslining--but the systems who discourage the practice are missing the point.

It is a known fact that everyone does not achieve the same results the same way--that's why we have so many diet plans. There is no "one size fits all". Everyone learns differently, has different talents and desires, and differing success thresholds. What I mean by this is that everyone has different expectations and tolerances regarding how much time and effort it should take to achieve their first level of success (like losing the first five pounds or getting their first profitable customer who isn't related). Most of us are  only willing to spend so much time outside our comfort zone--fighting our own natural inclinations--in order to achieve our goals. If the methods taught by a particular system are not a match for an IBO's natural talents and tendencies, they are more likely to quit, or operate at a lower level of achievement in that system.

Think of it like this--if you were told you had to wear an itchy sweater (methods that did not fit your personality and made you feel uncomfortable) every time you were prospecting or conducting business, what level of success would you have to have before you didn't mind wearing that sweater? Would you stick it out long enough to get there? What if someone else showed you a way to build your business while wearing your robe and slippers (staying with what you know and are good at)? Wouldn't you be more likely to be successful duplicating that technique?

Although this is a very loose analogy, the point is that a system training with one method is going to lose IBO's who might be more successful with another method. And who loses if that happens?

APS said:
August 22, 2007 9:24 AM | #

Jim

Besides the name change back to A - what other business changes will be forthcoming

Leave a Comment

(required) 
(required) 

First and last names are encouraged in keeping with the spirit of transparency and openness in which Opportunity Zone was created.

(optional)
(required- never displayed) 
 
Comments policy: Please note that comments are moderated. All comments are welcome as long as they are on topic, respectful, and do not advertise competing products or businesses. We reserve the right to remove without warning any and all offensive, unlawful, defamatory, or libelous comments, as well as any personal attacks or offensive language.
  • Home
    • Opportunity Zone

    Subscriptions

    How to subscribe
  • About

    • Disclaimer

    The authors of this blog are Quixtar employees. The opinions expressed here are not necessarily reviewed in advance by anyone but the individual authors. These opinions do not necessarily reflect the view of Quixtar or any other person or company.

    Search

    Go

    Archives