You may want to expand the video to full page, then come back to read the commentary. Hit play, then while playing, expand to 'Full Screen' in the lower right corner. To return here from the Full Screen, hit 'Esc' at the upper left of your keyboard.
There is so much to say about this. It is potentially a big black eye on our industry unless you understand how it differs from what we do and put this video in its proper context.
First, let me get something out of the way. I was a part of a class action lawsuit in 1992 against NuSkin. As the video states, I was "garage qualified". NuSkin's model had a monetary threshold to qualify for executive bonuses. It is kind of embarrassing to think back on, but let me simply say, "been there, done that", to the tune of $3K a month. Whether I was a naive dreamer, or I was duped doesn't really matter now, just suffice it to say that I intimately and painfully understand the "voice" John Oliver is representing.
Second, let me say that I enjoy his humor, generally. And, although he denigrates Network Marketing in this piece, I can't say that I absolutely disagree with everything he says - especially for tangible, product-based MLM's.
So, how do we differ? First, our products are digital information products that are delivered over the internet. We don't inventory anything that does not exist on your computer hard drive. The value we create is in building people who build a business in a community of competence. This is a good thing.
Second, our compensation model does drive width and depth, but it is not completely analogous due to fundamental structural differences. We collect 100% of payments and do not have an over-ride component for uplines... there are more factors... not the least of which is that of the money we earn, the CEO does not receive a penny - ever. However, the money is not the point here. The point is what we do is different than what is described in this video.
It does get a bit dicey when splitting hairs about the notion of being a "pyramid scheme'". John Oliver does a pretty effective job of lampooning the idea of a pyramid and attempts to distinguish the accepted corporate pyramid from an MLM pyramid. He attempts to make the point that if you are selling products to retail customers it is probably a legitimate business. However, if you are only "moving product" through your network, it is probably a pyramid. We are a hybrid due to the fact that we are a subscription, no different than a financial newsletter.
Another hallmark of pyramid schemes is a guarantee of returns. We are required to not make income claims and discourage using potential earnings as a "carrot". We stress that you earn in direct correlation to the value you provide. Check this one off.
And, smack dab in the middle of all this are the real estate and insurance industries, using a closely allied compensation system. How do they get a free pass? And what about franchises? Or, the in-home sales home improvement industry?
We do business with self-selected people who participate in our community that is interconnected and interdependent - and who choose to invest their personal resources. This benefits those who participate under the umbrella of an agreed-upon business model. Our market consists of people who want to attain financial security. Instead of homes or life insurance, people have the option to choose something allied to what we do. We sell a system, a platform to earn money between informed and consenting adults.
Someone needs to explain how this is unreasonable and deserving of derision? In fact, I advocate that this is socially redeeming and worthy "work" due to the fact that we change peoples' finances, we impact lives, raise self-esteem and are relevant to a whole host of other positive attributes.
Can anyone do it, and will everyone be successful? We know the answer to this one. But the problem is not the business model. The problem is people's ability to adapt to and integrate change into their lives (first), and; having the aptitude to learn and apply new things i.e. execute and implement (second), then; teaching what they have learned to others to perpetuate a culture of competence. No, not everyone can do it, otherwise, everyone would be. Many people can not adapt to the change required. If people try and fail, they need to look no further than the mirror. It has nothing to do with the business model, other than it inherently relies on the transfer of skills and knowledge.
John Oliver is not really being unfair in this piece - but you need to understand, he is not talking about what we do. Take pride and understand that our mission is to help people in what has been described by our CEO as a "culture of assistance". What we do is worthy,
I will repeat this simple truth: what we do is worthy. John Oliver is talking about "the old" segment of our industry and to a degree, this segment legitimately warrants its comeuppance.
No comments:
Post a Comment