I told
myself that I was not going to write about Advocare anymore, and I said that
for a couple of reasons. The most important reason directly relates to my
family. I know my brother has generously expressed his approval of sharing my
feelings about Advocare with the world, and I appreciate him trying to make it
easy on me. But unfortunately it doesn’t. I respect and love all my family
members, and their drive to succeed in all they do. Even with their approval it
is difficult to be on the other side of something they believe in.
The other reason
I told myself to stop writing is because I feel like nobody is listening. I
tell the same true story over and over again about a company that has promoted
a disingenuous market plan. You know the story, the one where distributors fail
only if they do not follow the marketing plan to its end. I have shown people
the truth using viable links that the marketing plan does not work. I have
provided proof that the market plan leads to market saturation for 99% every
year, but people keep selling the same bull crap year in and year out. The only
people that win are the 1% to 3% and Advocare. My opinion does not mean
anything to anyone. But I give you facts, not opinion. Everything found on this
blog is based on truth. It may not always be perfectly written, but it is the
truth. Why do you think Advocare has not tried to threaten me with a lawsuit?
Nothing on my blog is false or misleading. It is all based on facts and supported
with viable proof. So why am I writing this article? I guess there is always
hope that people that have been taken by this company will step forward and
tell the truth. Let Advocare file a lawsuit against you, and fight them based
on first amendment rights. What company has the right to place a clause in a
contract preventing you from telling the truth about misleading marketing plan?
That is why I am writing this, among other reasons.
I watched
the ESPN video interview of Advocare
and it made me sick. I believe Mina Kimes and Tom Farrey were asking Allison
Levy the right questions, but allowed her to circumvent the truth without rebuttal
questions. Why? Tom asked Allison if “she thought Advocare was using athletes to
buy credibility that may not be there”. It was a great question in my opinion. What
he was asking her was is Advocare trying to create a false association between the
athlete’s success, and the product. She said absolutely not and went on some
tangent about how Advocare is a 20 year business and how they are very proud of
their product. Allison, he asked you if the product is what made Drew play so
damn good. The answer was no! Drew was breaking records at Purdue
way before he was introduced to Advocare. According to Drew, he did not start
taking Advocare until 2002 when he started playing for the San Diego Chargers. Let
me guess, it was Advocare that healed his shoulder and allowed him to win big
games.
The next
question he asked Allison was “what percent of your top 3% earners are new to
that 3%, versus those folks that have been there awhile”? Allison replied
saying that “people that are in the 3% work very hard to build their Advocare
business. Some do it quickly because they are an entrepreneur and they
recognize Advocare has a great product to sell, and they spend a lot of time
and effort doing so”. Once again, she completely avoids the question. Seems
like a simple question to me Allison. How many each year are new to the 3%? I
mean, the number does not really change from year to year. Every year only 1-3%
earned money out of the less than 200,000 distributors that received a check
from Advocare. That number has not changed in 20 years. Every year Allison,
only 1 to 3% earn money. That has been the same for over 20 years. How many of
those in the 3% last year also were in the year before? That is what he was
asking you Allison. Easy question and you did everything you can to circumvent
it. I think he knows that someone that just joined could possible make it to
the 3% level, but how many actually stay there?
Then he
finishes his portion of the interview with bringing attention to the Federal
Trade Commission. He asked if Advocare was a pyramid scheme. Of course she said
no, and went on to tell Tom how Advocare is a direct sales industry with
products. She said it was an alternative channel to sell Advocare. Last time I
checked it was the only channel. But I am not going to waste your time with the
redundant bull crap on how they provide training to distributors and how sales
are to customers (end users). Most of us are well aware that distributor and
customer can mean the same thing in Advocare. Then Mina Kime’s steps in to ask
some questions.
Mina starts
out by asking Allison if Advocare is a Christian company, and of course she replied
with a big no. Then Allison goes on to say that the first principle is honor
God through faith, family, and friends. She does end saying that they do have
religious distributors and that Advocare does not have restrictions like that.
Like what? Just say you do not discriminate against religious people. Allison
said the aforementioned even though I offered actual proof (case
law) that proves Advocare told Danny McDaniel that he could no longer
preach at Advocare meetings. Once again Advocare is saying that we accept all
types of people, even religious ones, but prevent them from incorporating it
into their business. We are not your employer, but yet we can tell you not to
do things, such as preach at your own meetings.
Then Mina
tells her that 2.8% made money every year and that around 150,000 received a
check according to Advocare income disclosure chart. Mina asked, “Wouldn’t it
reason that they are pursuing the business if they received a check”? Allison
replied with absolutely not, because some of those could be selling casually to
a friend or a coworker, and are not trying to make significant money. Or they
are just looking to make a little extra cash. Basically she said the vast
majority buy in for the discount and enjoy the product. Or did they buy in because
they believed the bull crap about making money that is being duplicated by
other distributors. Well Mina, maybe you should have directed her attention to the
fact that there are over 400 thousand other distributors that did not earn a
check, and you should ask Allison wouldn’t it be more intuitive to assume those
distributors are the ones buying in for the discount. It is actually 442,167 according
to Advocare. According to
Allison, the 3% that find success is due to hard work, and the others are in it
for the discount or are not trying hard enough. I guess we could assume that
the others are just selling the product and not recruiting. That would lead to
other questions needing to be answered. To sum that up for you, just in case it
got a little confusing. There are 169,401 people that received a check, and of
those people 3% earn a profitable income. There are actually around 550
thousand distributors all together, but only 170 thousand or so earned money from
Advocare, and only 3% could live off the income. It is a little confusing. If
you go to the Advocare page I provided you can look at the charts for yourself.
Apparently they are calling distributors discount customers (More on that
later).
Tom asked
about the bullet proof shield and that was deflected as being a means to direct
questions back to Advocare. I know what the bullet proof shield is, and so does
she. The famous line to use is “Well, I don’t know about that but what I do
know is”. It is used when questions are asked about the business that neither
distributor nor Advocare can answer. Questions such as where can we find the
peer reviewed studies that prove Advocare is safe for its intended use, or the
years of testing for safety and effectiveness. Allison said that Advocare has a
plethora of information on their website and the bullet proof shield is to
ensure that distributors do not say anything that is misleading. I find it
interesting that Advocare can say misleading things, and add little disclaimers
on the bottom. But they do not want their distributors saying misleading
things. The last time I checked, Advocare offers no viable information on their
website about research.
Then I went
on to read Mina Kime’s article titled “Drew
Brees Has a Dream He’d Like to Sell You”. The first thing I would like to
say is that not only did I provide some information to Mina, but so did Advo-Truth
Facebook. Although I am not looking for any credit for offering information, I
thought she would at the least give Advo a little promotional spot light. Other
than that, the article was written very well as usual. There are some areas
that bothered me, and I thought maybe Mina would push some buttons a little bit
but she didn’t. For example, Allison avoids using the term MLM, and prefers direct
sales. The following is a quote from Mina’s article explaining why Allison
prefers to avoid using MLM: (I am assuming this is Allison’s reasoning)
“It's also less controversial. While
MLMs do rely on direct sales of products to customers, they also pay their
salespeople commissions based on their recruits' purchases and, in turn, on the
purchases of their recruits' recruits. These chains -- known as
"downlines" -- continue to grow as long as members sign new
salespeople, so some distributors can reap significant earnings without selling
much on their own. This innovation, which kept MLMs afloat as traditional
direct sellers fizzled out (remember encyclopedia salesmen?), also sent some
companies down a slippery legal slope. Because MLMs reward people for
recruiting others, they can run the risk of mutating into pyramid schemes --
illegal scams in which new members, who often make big initial buy-ins, are
constantly sought so their money can be funneled up to the original members”.
I am not
sure I understand what the difference is Allison. Just because we change the
shape of a car, and rename it to Ford, does not make it something other than a
car. Direct sales implies that distributors are selling to end users, and those
end users are not distributors. So let me break it down for you so that it is
easier to understand “Allison”.
Advocare MLM
Direct
Sales Y Y
Recruit
Others Y Y
Recruit’s
Pay Sign on Fee (Invest) Y Y
Earn from other
Recruit’s Sales Y Y
Recruits
Duplicate the process Y Y
Business
Structure is multilevel Y Y
Is that a
little clearer for you Allison? I hate to be the one to tell you that there are
no significant differences between MLM and direct sales. The only way anyone
can purchase an Advocare product is to sign on as a distributor, or buy
directly from a distributor. The grand illusion is that distributors that do
not earn a check are wholesale customers or discount customers. No Allison, I
do not believe that would be correct. They are distributors that are not
recruiting. Because they have not recruited anyone, they do not earn a check
from you. That in and of itself does not mean they are not selling to other
people, and possibly making a profit. It also does not make them a customer,
but I will get to that in a little bit. But for some reason Advocare has
elected not to share the sales stats for the 97 percent that do not make money
from Advocare. I believe it would be easy enough to provide based on their
purchases and proof of sales, especially now that they offer data regarding
retail customers. They have over 300,000 according to Advocare stats, also
included on the Advocare link. All distributors are required to show sales
receipts right? You do know that you are responsible to guard against product overloading?
You’re an attorney you should know that you cannot have your cake and eat it
too. Please allow me to explain Allison.
Advocare is
a company that only sells to people that has purchased a distributors kit. A
distributor that buys from you is not a customer, they are an independent
distributor. Because all distributors sign the same contract, they are all
distributors, regardless of their intent or yours. You do not know if they are
selling or just using the product and it really does not matter. It can be inferred
that you are selling the distributorship, with the idea that they will resell
the product. Not to mention there are definitions within federal law that
determines the final resolution. Please, allow me to explain further.
If you take
a look at the FDA
website you will notice that they have a definition for wholesale
distributor (discount customer). Here is a quote from the statute:
t) Wholesale distributor means any person (other than
the manufacturer or the initial importer) who distributes a device from the
original place of manufacture to the person who makes the final delivery or
sale of the device to the ultimate consumer or user.
There are
other definitions that are not federal but come to the same conclusion such as
the following from Google:
“Wholesaling, jobbing, or distributing is the sale of goods or
merchandise to retailers; to industrial, commercial, institutional, or other
professional business users; or to other wholesalers and related
subordinated services. In general, it is the sale of goods to anyone other than
a standard consumer.
I could
offer you a million more Allison but they all lead to the same conclusion. Your
wholesale distributor (discount customer) is a distributor that is expected to
sell to the end user, and is not a customer. I think I might find someone that
can calculate whether most of your profits are in fact from recruited
distributors, selling extra materials, and from so called training events and
not customers. That would put Advocare right in the pyramid scheme category.
Subtract the cost of manufacturing, and tell me how much you are actually
making off each distributor kit. Please do not tell me Advocare makes nothing
because that is not how business works. You make a little bit, recruiting
distributor makes a little bit, and so on and so on.
If you want
to hear Mina talk more about this subject you can listen to her here where
she is a guest on a radio show. I guess I expected her to be more aggressive,
but I also understand that she has to try and remain neutral. I understand
there are many people using this product that truly like it and may not be
selling it. But that is not what the company is about, nor do they know or care
about anything but themselves in my opinion. The facts support that theory. Let
me sum this whole thing up so we all can got on to something else.
Allison
tells us that Advocare is not a religious organization but yet tells Mina the
following:
" Levy says. That brand (advocare) aligns perfectly
with the quarterback's reputation: Family man. Philanthropist. Devout
Christian.”
How exactly does
he align perfectly when you claim Advocare is not a religious organization? The
only area you guys align is in the business department. You both are willing to
sell your souls to the devil for your own personal gain. If Advocare cared
about other people you would sell the product on the market. If Drew cared
about his fans he would not stand by the deceptive business model used by
Advocare. Yes, Advocare has a product people want, but that does not negate the
company’s responsibility, and the distributor’s responsibility to perform
business with integrity and honesty. To tell people that the product is safe
without actually performing meaningful test is not aligning with societal
beliefs. Listen Drew, and Allison, 3% every year make money. Please explain to
me why that number never seems to change.
If you
people want to keep buying the bull crap that someone is telling you or that
you are telling yourself, then so be it. If you bought a distributorship for a
20% discount from your friend, that is already getting a 20 percent discount,
or 40 percent, then he/she is not much of a friend, and did not buy in for the
discount. One of you could sign up for the program and both of you could pay
for it. Then you could both order from the one distributorship, if you are truly
buying in for the discount, because the commissions would not be the
motivation. Most of you are truly on hook line and sinker. You can keep telling
yourself that the product is great and you only bought in for the discount, but
you and I know that is not the truth. Of course, that does not apply to
everyone, as I realize some people truly do want the discount. The funny thing
is I see so many people walking around trying to sell the products and the
story to other people that supposedly just bought in for the discount.
I give Mina
credit, because this is a hard story to write. Speaking the truth about a
company that hides distributor sales behind words such as discount customer or
wholesale customer is deceptive not only to people that are joining to make
money, but is also deceiving our government into believing that distributors
are selling to discount customers. Everyone that joins Advocare signs a
distributor agreement, making them a distributor in fact, not a customer. In my
opinion, none of the sales to another distributor should count as a sale to the
end user. If the company cannot prove that the majority of the sales are to the
end user, then they should be shut down due to being a pyramid scheme just like
other MLM companies. You cannot circumvent the law by hiding behind false
customers. That is the fact.
Please share
your thoughts about the article, and I might actually edit it someday when I
get time. Thanks for reading and I hope people start talking because this
company has a product people want, but the business model is very deceptive and
the 1% of all distributors that are successful has been a trend for many years
and most likely will continue.
No comments:
Post a Comment