The other
day I was asked to review the multi level marketing (MLM) company Qivana. Anyone
that follows my blog knows I try to provide nothing but facts, and support my
views with viable links. Whether products work or do not work, is not the focal
point of the review. I look at the company, and base my review primarily on
their own material. I do look at the products offered and the science provided
by the company to support such claims, but I do not tell you whether the
products work or not. I also will give a brief review of the company business
model. So let’s take a look at the Qivana website shall we!
I did a
quick search on Google and found two prospective websites. The first one is the
official Qivana LLC website. It was the top search in Google,
but I assure you, their official website is not very informative. If you are
interested in learning about the products or the business you are going to be
leaving the website with many questions. The company tells you a little bit
about some of their product line such as the Core System, MetaboliQ System, Prime
System, and the Skinshift System. Unfortunately they do not tell you what
ingredients are in each product or how much each of the products cost. If you were looking
to join the company you have a couple of options. You can click on the contact link
which provides a phone number and a couple of emails or you can click on the social
media link. Seriously, what company does not provide a brief history? I had to
check out the Facebook link just to find out that the company
opened their doors in 2009. Unfortunately, the website does not do a very good
job of providing viable information to support any claims regarding their products
either.
For
instance, if you look at the Chore System under products you will learn that
the company uses some ground breaking direct dissolve technology. The company
claims the following, and I quote:
“Qivana
forged the way to improve normal digestion, immune defense, and nutrient
absorption with the revolutionary QORE Probiotic, which was introduced long before the
current market craze.”
They provide
the same type of information for all the rest of the products. Unfortunately
they do not provide ingredients or links to research validating claims made
within the website. That is when I decided to check out the link that showed up
second on the Google search page.
So I clicked
on the Qivana Products.com link and it brought me to another website that
appears to be associated with Qivana. Although I have to admit I am a little
bit confused as to why the WebPages have been separated. If I relied primarily
on the first website I probably would not even consider joining due to the lack
of information. On a good note, this website does seem to be much more
informative. So let’s take a look at the products and the research that
supports any claims that are being made.
I decided to
take a look at Prime Edge first. It seems as though this product is supposed to
restore Nitric Oxide and improve blood flow. The company claims that all other
similar products on the market use amino acid L-arginine to boost Nitric Oxide
and that it is not the most effective means of doing so. According to the
company, Prime uses all available pathways not just L—arginine. The company
seems to think they are the only ones to create nitrogen-oxide in the mouth by
using some type of quick dissolving podwer. Apparently the powder begins
creating Nitric Oxide immediately.
Unfortunately, that is all the information
provided. I noticed the company offered a video so I thought I would be better
off watching that. After watching the video I realize the product is actually
called Prime Nitric Oxide Activator. It is also a very expensive product as it
retails at $80 for 30 packs. If my math is correct, each packet is worth around
$2.60. But if it works, it might not be so bad depending on how often the
product has to be used to be effective. I think now would be a good time to
look at the product ingredients.
I see that
the company utilizes fructose instead of Advocare’s favorite, sucralose. This
might be an opinion, but processed fructose seems to be better than sucralose
based on the available research pertaining to humans and sucralose. Along with
the fructose the product also includes processed vitamin C, B12, and a bunch of
plant based ingredients. According to the product brochure, the product should
be taken twice a day for 90 days, and once a day after just for maintenance. Seriously,
there are many people that take Probiotic on a regular basis to increase
healthy gut flora. Even Advocare uses a type of Probiotic coupled with the
Herbal Cleanse. I also like to use Probiotic myself. Like I said, I am not here
to tell you whether the product works, but I do like to verify whether or not
the company can satisfactorily validate their claims of efficacy through viable
research.
Although I
am pleased that the company provides research regarding the importance of maintaining Nitric Oxide levels, I believe they fall seriously short on providing viable
research. They are starting to look similar to Advocare. Although the research
clearly supports the need to maintain Nitric Oxide level especially in adults
40 and older, the research does not support efficacy claims. None of the
research provided has anything to do with the testing of any Qivana products. If I am wrong please provide the research and I will read it and retract my opinion.
When a product is thrown together with a bunch of other products, tests are
done to ensure that the products are safe and effective for their intended use.
I am sorry to say that the research provided for the Prime product just does
not prove anything along those lines. None of the information provided gives
any indication that the company performed their own test using their own
products on animals or humans. Some of the research used to support their
claims was released after the company started selling their products.
I went
through many of the other products and although they claim to use natural
ingredients, they do not provide any viable research directly related to the
products. Meaning, none of the research had anything to do with the products.
No research related to product testing is provided on either website.
Unfortunately, that is the same thing Advocare does. They tell you that the
product is safe for its intended use, and provides no viable research to
support such a claim. Better yet, neither one of the companies provide third
party research that thoroughly tests each product. Listen, I am not telling you
that the products do not work. As a matter of fact, if I had to choose a
company, I definitely would select Qivana just because they do not use
sucralose. Well, let us take a look at the business model, maybe things will
get better.
I have to
admit that I am a little bit concerned about the marketing plan used by Qivana.
As I started reading about the company their binary compensation plan and
marketing plan started to resemble the MLM company Vemma. Anyone that is
familiar with Vemma knows the company was forced to close their doors by the
FTC in 2015. The following is what Qivana believes makes their compensation
plan different, and I quote:
· “Qivana Independent business owners
(IBO) are paid weekly.
· Qivana encourages a team building approach.
· Qivana never flushes earned volume*.
· Qivana allows you to get paid on unlimited
binary tree depth.
· Qivana rewards you for building
leaders. *Must remain active with a 4 week rolling volume of at least 50PV”
Did anyone
happen to notice the * at the end of never flushes earned volume. I guess the
word “never” really should be taken out because if your do not maintain the 50
PV (personal volume), I am going to guess your earned volume is going to get
flushed. Similar to Advocare, if you expect to earn income from Qivana you will
be required to become an IBO, and enroll at least one customer. I imagine you
can just purchase products and sell to customers, but if you want to make a
commission from the company you will have to get the customer to sign on. But
let me explain the similarities to Vemma and why I am concerned. The following
diagram is a Vemma compensation plan structure based on the same binary
structure used by Qivana.
The diagram
I provided was used by the FTC and can be found in the Stacie
Bosley declaration. That is what Vemma regarded as a binary compensation plan.
You can also watch this short YouTube video where the
young lady gives a brief explanation about the plan. The following diagram is
associated with Qivana.
As you can
see there really is no difference. Compensation is paid based on enrolling a
left leg and a right leg. If you watch this video, you will see
that Qivana also encourages you to help build your left and right leg teams for
them. Obviously there is a slight difference in the compensation payout, but
the end result is the same. IBO’s that do not have any intention of selling
products can still have legs put under them by you or other members of your
team and are called customers. Commissions are based on the signing of a new
customer and thus incentivize recruiting over selling the products. With that,
Qivana also encourages the use of auto-ship, and promotes a car bonus similar to Vemma. If you
want to read more about the FTC vs. Vemma case you can find it here. I really do not believe it is
necessary to go any further with the compensation plan as it is almost a shadow
of Vemma. The only thing missing is the deceptive advertising, maybe.
I really do
not see a problem with the products themselves. Americans consume similar
products on a regular basis that contain the same processed ingredients. I
guess the only problem I do have is that they are expensive. But so are many
other products we buy over the counter. I guess it would be nice if the company
would perform their own research or have third party research performed to
support their efficacy claims.
My biggest
concern would be with the marketing plan. Advocare promotes wide and deep, and incentivizes
recruiting over selling. Of course they all seem to refer to distributors or
IBO’s as customers. But the unfortunate truth is that I do not really see the
difference between any of them. Qivana
promotes recruiting to earn a commission and also incentivizes the promotion
of auto-ship, similar to Vemma. They also promote the binary compensation plan,
similar to Vemma. Although I did not do a complete and thorough evaluation of
the compensation plan, I did enough to raise concerns. Vemma used deception of
some sort, and some actions by Qivana or the lack thereof, have a similar
effect. Anyone that has decided to join would be hard pressed to find an income
disclosure statement. You will notice that many of the videos I provided
regarding Qivana did not include any type of income disclosure. Advocare and
every other MLM provide income disclosure statements. As a matter of fact, none
of the Qivana material provided offered information regarding earning
capabilities or statistics of past earnings. I am going to be honest with you,
there is something that is bothering me more than that.
I ask that
you watch this video
or just watch from 1:32. You will notice the guy in the video works for Qivana
and he is talking about the science behind Qivana. He directs your attention to
the 1998 Nobel Prize awarded to the scientist for their research on Nitric
Oxide. What he does not tell you is that nothing he is talking about is
related, technically.
He is
associating research pertaining to Nitric Oxide as if it has something to do
with the product Prime. The young man shows a picture of the Qivana Prime product
and then said the following; “this break through science discovery won the
Nobel Prize in 1998”. He is misleading the viewer into believing the product
won the Nobel Prize, and is a violation of FTC rules. Just about everything
that they put in writing is deceptive. Using unrelated research as if it had
something to do with Qivana products is deceptive. Just because research has showed
the benefits of Nitric Oxide, does not give product manufacturers the right to
make false misleading claims. Because Nitric Oxide is one of the ingredients
does not afford the company the right to make claims that the product is backed
by research. Anytime we start mixing products together, there is a concern.
That is why research is performed to test the efficacy of the products. So far,
I have not read one piece of research provided by Qivana that related to the
Qivana products.
I guess
there really is nothing else I can add. If you do not mind paying a lot for the
products then maybe Qivana is for you. But be warned, I would not doubt if the
Federal Trade Commission has their eyes on them already. Hell, I would not
doubt if they have their eyes on Advocare at this point. It is only going to be
a matter of time, and I believe that the FTC will begin to see complaints
regarding the false research claims, and the other deceptive practices.
Although this article is my opinion, I have provided sufficient proof that
Qivana does not provide research pertaining to the actual products. Qivana uses
deceptive advertising that has the potential to mislead people into believing
that the products have been tested by Qivana. I have also provided viable proof
that Qivana’s marketing plan is very similar to Vemma. The unfortunate truth is, they do not have to. They have a product that seems to be filled with processed ingredients, but from plant based sources. All the sugar seems to derive from fructose. I am not a nutritional expert, and the aforementioned is my opinion.
Please share
your thoughts, and let me know if I have anything wrong so I can make any
corrections, if applicable.
Qivana products are NOT natural. Cyanocobalamin and Folic Acid are NOT natural. Methylcobalamin and Folate are natural and are the B vitamins that should be in the product instead of these cheap synthetics. Also, high sugar content is not healthy. And the dairy used--many people and cultures cannot do dairy. Dairy is for newborns not adults, in any species. They keep stating their products are natural and they are NOT NATURAL at all.
ReplyDeleteThank you anonymous for sharing your thoughts. I did find the ingredients questionable, along with the research that seemed to be missing.
Delete