FTC: “Herbalife’s business practices are disturbing”
One of the common questions we get here at BehindMLM whenever we call out a company that is not under investigation is that, if analysis of the business model reveals such blatant questions of legitimacy, how come regulators have not investigated the company.
Not being a regulator there’s no clear-cut way to answer this. Affiliates take full advantage of this and use a lack of regulatory investigation as a rubber stamp of legitimacy, with the more extreme examples even citing approval in the absence of action.
Naturally the idea that regulators haven’t stepped means nothing dodgy is going on is about as absurd as claiming murder is legal unless someone catches you. But the fact remains, the manner in which resources are allocated by regulators of the MLM industry are a mystery.
Here at BehindMLM i can report analysis and draw conclusions, but it is only a reactionary response readers get to regulatory action when it occurs. Predicting such action in a timely manner is nigh on impossible given the secrecy that surrounds such investigations.
Earlier this week Hispanic consumer groups and politicians who represent large Hispanic populations met with the FTC to discuss their concerns about Herbalife. At the heart of these concerns is the charge that Herbalife operates as a pyramid scheme and in particular, targets Hispanic communities that these consumer groups and politicians primarily represent.
The outcome?
The FTC slammed Herbalife’s business practices as “disturbing”. Apart from serving up the most damning commentary on Herbalife’s business practices yet from any US regulator, the FTC also revealed one of the primary challenges it faces in regulating the MLM industry.
It’s a question of resources.
The Federal Trade Commission told consumer activists Monday that it finds Herbalife’s practices “disturbing” and is “looking into” the company.
The activists met with top FTC consumer fraud officials, including Jessica Rich, the recently appointed director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection, they said.
“It’s a question of resources,” one activist at the meeting told The Post, saying the regulator feels it may be difficult to launch a probe into the company alone.
Whether that’s because of jurisdictional issues or sheer financial resources made available to the FTC versus the scale of an investigation and subsequent legal action against Herbalife is unclear. But what is clear is that the FTC do appear to be taking concerns raised about Herbalife’s business model seriously.
In the FTC’s recent shutdown of pyramid Fortune Hi-Tech Marketing, the Kentucky Attorney General convinced the FTC to join his case. The possibility that a state attorney general might help the FTC investigate Herbalife was suggested at the meeting.
FTC officials at the meeting were particularly bothered by the high percentage of Hispanic distributors — said by Herbalife to be 65 percent — the vast majority of whom lose money, said Brent Wilkes, the national executive director of the League of United Latin American Citizens.
“The FTC understands this is a problem and that Herbalife is taking advantage of the immigrant community,” said one activist there.
The FTC is also upset that Herbalife quit disclosing its distributor turnover rate, which it last said was 90 percent in 2005.
With Linda Sanchez, a congresswoman from California and Julissa Ferreras, a New York City councilwoman having both written to the FTC with formal complaints, the possibility for co-operation between the FTC and a state Attorney-General is definitely open.
Careful as always, the FTC stopped short of revealing a formal investigation was underway:
As expected, the regulator declined to tell attendees at an hour-long meeting whether it has launched a full-scale probe into the Los Angeles company.
Reading between the lines though, it makes little sense for the FTC to brand Herbalife’s business practices disturbing if they themselves haven’t begun their own investigation.
The comment about not being happy with Herbalife ceasing to report distributor turnover rate since 2005 was particularly interesting, as it is thus likely the FTC aren’t happy about other information being withheld by the company.
Every since Herbalife announced back in February that they were going to better track their alleged wholesale customers, I’ve been waiting for the company to do so.
To date nothing has been implemented as far as the business model goes though, with Herbalife instead releasing completely irrelevant commissioned survey results and withholding the survey data from public scrutiny.
No doubt the FTC are aware that Herbalife attempt to pass off affiliates who do not recruit as retail customers, whilst at the same time acknowledging that under the current business model there’s no way of proving this conclusively.
With no formal acknowledgement of an FTC investigation but the agency clearly showing concern, where we go from here I’m not entirely sure.
If past experience has taught me anything when it comes to MLM companies and regulators, like the rest of you I wake up one seemingly random morning and read about a company being shut down.
With an SEC investigation already confirmed into Herbalife and who knows what else is going on behind the scenes, it appears clear that day is drawing closer.
Ultimately retail revenue vs. that taken from affiliates will decide conclusively whether or not Herbalife are operating as a pyramid scheme.
The company has had ample time to clarify this point and introduce a wholesale customer class but instead choose to operate in the grey area of making claims about retail revenue that are unprovable due to the way they’ve set up their compensation plan.
To be perfectly honest Herbalife have had this coming for a long time and it’ll be interesting to see how things play out.
The New York Post did contact Herbalife for a response to the FTC’s criticism, but they “declined to comment”.
Pyramid scheme isn’t about retail sale vs sales to affiliates. That is only a “potential indicator”, and it will usually point out an existing problem if applied correctly.
It isn’t about sales REVENUE either. Revenue is the gross stream of money coming in from “trade like activities” (to separate it from financial activities like investments and banking).
We will need to limit the scope to some net type result rather than to a gross type, e.g. gross revenue minus “product OUT costs” minus “product IN costs”.
DISTRACTION?
But I believe Herbalife’s confusing business model only is a “distraction”, designed to draw attention away from from something. We will need to look at the IDEA behind it rather than the actual business model.
One of the ideas is to sell the income opportunity itself as a primary product = what they present to a prospective buyer and what they want the buyer to believe it is about.
* the typical marketing method (from the complaints) was about TV commercials selling an unnamed income opportunity, e.g. “order a video presentation for $10”.
SALES METHODS, TARGET GROUPS
I have already identified the sales methods to be about “foot in the door technique” and other similar methods, but I can probably use Wikipedia to identify it in more details.
It will filter out a lot of people if they have to PAY for information about an opportunity, without even knowing which company they’re contacting or what the opportunity is about. Those who order the video are clearly willing to PAY, and they are willing to accept methods that normally shouldn’t be accepted by a consumer.
Herbalife is clearly targeted towards inexperienced people if that type of sales methods is the common practice.
It’s about where the majority of retail is made. The FTC are very clearcut about this on their website. If you primarily sell to those you’ve recruited (affiliates) you’re in a pyramid scheme.
Ergo you need to have retail and it needs to be primarily where a company sources it’s revenue from.
Every pyramid scheme case I’ve seen has been about revenue and how it comes into the company (membership fees/affiliate product purchases). All the rest is just theory fluff.
one activist at the meeting told The Post,” the regulator feels it may be difficult to launch a probe into the company alone”
BOTTOMLINE.
the rest about being ‘disturbed’, ‘upset’ or ‘understanding this or that’ sounds like someone trying to soothe ruffled feathers,while politely saying NO .
now ackman will needle the hispanic leaders to take on state attorney generals on his behalf.
meanwhile herbalife have gone ahead and hired the services of ogilvy government relations
‘”Last week, Ogilvy Government Relations registered as a lobbyist for Herbalife, a further indication the company is amping up its efforts in Washington ”
ACT II has commenced and the scene now moves from the sleaze of the stock markets to the sleazier shadier world of politics ,and lets see who cronies up with whom .time to call out the favors !
…and inconsistent theory fluff at that.
@Hoss
Ditto whatever anjali was crapping on about too. She seems to be under the impression politics and the stock market matters if a pyramid scheme case is brought against an MLM company.
cute, but let me clarify;
once a case is registered in court, politics and stockmarkets will be left at the door of the court house.
BUT till such an event occurs it’s all about stockmarkets and politics and less about pyramid schemes.
Far from registering any pyramid scheme case in court the FTC has today, even refused to PROBE the company citing lack of resources.
So till that eventful day doesn’t come along, when FTC drags herbalife to court,you only got the stockmarket and the politics and peripheral drama it creates.
It is this drama which will decide whether the case goes to court or NOT .
Well politics may matter a great deal in determining whether or not there is full fledged investigation. It depends on how much momentum the activists can generate. If an enquiry is opened then politics will certainly shape and direct the focus of the investigation. And the interpretation of the statutes, the rules and the accounting methodology will be determined by individuals.
Herbal has a present stock market cap of over $5 Billion and enterprise value in excess of $7 Billion. It employs thousands. A negative finding in an investigation could result in the value going to $0…Out of Business. Politics has everything to do with how this plays out.
People will typically describe things like they SEE them, e.g. SpeakAsians blamed “Star News” for all the problems. If the first explanation they can find makes logical sense to them they won’t look for other explanations.
It gets even worse when the first explanation actually becomes “TRUE”, e.g. when it DID produce the expected outcome.
Politics never gets left at the door. Even a jury verdict is a quasi-political act and judges are subject to immense poitical pressure. Federal judges are political appointees, and even Supreme Court judges are only confirmed after a political process.
When we say left at the door we’re talking merits of the case.
You’re not seriously suggesting a “well this business model is clearly in violation of how we legally pyramid scheme but… poltics, y’know. Not guilty.”
Every complaint I’ve seen filed by the SEC/FTC against an MLM company has been solely on the merits of the business model and compensation plan. Why do you think I place such absolute emphasis on the two in my reviews?
What about BurnLounge?
It caused great frustration among MLM experts when the Judge used expressions like “For the purpose of this order” and “For the purpose of this analysis”, and simply didn’t analyse any sales.
BurnLounge was about the “Mogul” memberships. That part of the business was halted, while the music sale was allowed to continue. Existing retail sales or lack of retail sales didn’t affect the case, it was simply not included in the case other than as a part of an overview.
Because you have repeated them over and over again? 🙂
Yeah, isn’t that affiliate money into the system?
“Waah we have plenty of retail”
“alright then prove it, survive on retail”
Naturally they failed.
Having covered the industry for a half decade and personally shunning the term myself, I have absolutely no blanket respect for MLM industry “experts”.
And I’m going off memory here, wasn’t BurnLounge something about 3% retail or some such? BurnLounge happened prior to my current level of MLM industry coverage so I’m not intricately familiar with the case.
There’s a reason for that.
Two examples, if you look at court documents for both Zeek Rewards and TelexFree (or the news article quotes of court documents), you’ll see the exact same concerns I raised about the business models popping up from the regulators.
I wrote those reviews months before the regulators moved in.
I can appreciate the politics and blahblahblah but my interest is and always has been strictly the MLM side of things. That’s what I base my analysis of a company on and will continue to do so.
How the FTC kickstart an investigation into Herbalife doesn’t concern or interest me, only that they open one up as clearly Herbalife are running something dodgy. Them making up statistics and refusing to release information and/or change voluntarily change their business model to prove their claimed statistics only adds fuel to the fire.
“left at the door” means not brought into the courtroom. Surely you do not mean that the merits of the case are not brought into the courtroom. I certainly don’t and I do not believe Anjali meant that either.
The judge can only rule on what he sees. What he sees is to one degree or another influenced by politics and at this point there is no consensus.
Politics seeks advantage and if it can not be obtained then it seeks compromise. Since we are talking about $5 Billion in stock market valuation there is a lot of room to negotiate.
I have no doubt that you know the rules, but they were written people. They will be interpreted and enforced by people. People are by their very nature political animals.
I don’t want to make too much of this but Herbal has avoided the spotlight for a long time. Maybe its not completely by coincidence.
Exactly. It was about considerations from the affiliates themselves, for the right to participate in the more lucrative part of the opportunity than selling music, where they could earn commission simply by recruiting more “Mogul” members into the plan.
In short, it was about pyramid scheme laws rather than about MLM definitions, “the way the law describes it” rather than about the way we normally SEE it from our own perspective.
I don’t think FTC have a solid pyramid case. If you want them to investigate Herbalife you’ll need to give them another type of case, something that is solid enough to investigate and prosecute in court, something that doesn’t require too much resources. It will also need to be a solution to the “Hispanic issue” and to the “NCL issue”.
FTC didn’t have a solid case around Burnlounge either, despite the lack of retail revenue. BL lawyers basically argued that the various levels of membership (3 levels, with mogul option, making it 6 classes) with increasing amount of perks/benefits constitute self-consumption.
FTC was able to argue convincingly that BL’s witnesses overestimated the worth of the stuff included in the memberships, and affiliates are themselves encouraged to buy the highest end membership mainly to qualify their sponsor for the “sales goals” for payouts.
Basically, they are buying the memberships for the income opportunity, not the perks of membership, and that’s NOT self-consumption.
Herbalife’s problem ultimately comes down to “self-consumption” and its own refusal to separate the self-consumers from the affiliates. The self-consumers are definitely doing self-consumption, and the recruiters (organizers of “nutrition clubs”) are recruiting a bunch of these self-consumers, which seem to be legit sales, except they signed up ad distributors to get that 25% discount.
There is no doubt that Herbalife is in the gray area between MLM and pyramid scheme. How wide (or narrow) is that grey area is up to interpretation.
The main question here is, just how many of these recruiters (but failed recruit enough to get MLM commission) are out there, vs. those who genuinely joined as self-consumers? And that is an answer Herbalife has consistently tried to dodge, sidestep, etc.
In Herbalife’s current comp plan, if you don’t qualify for “supervisor” (make enough volume, I think it’s 1000 PV for 2 months?) you’re counted among the self-consumers as just a distributor (those who qualify via PV is called “supervisor” and qualifies for MLM commission and extra discount).
In other words, Herbalife don’t want to know how many genuine consumers of their products are out there. They can live fine on “estimates” extrapolated from polls, but not on genuine sales numbers. They don’t track those.
And one wonders why they don’t.
That gray area is where politics lives.
Herbalife’s compensation plan doesn’t work that way, other than in “constructed theories” where an experience salesman can “work his way up” through selling Herbalife products to retail customers.
Level 1 – 3 distributors do NOT receive anything from the compensation plan, neither sales commission nor recruitment based commission (e.g. commission from downline).
The typical method if they want to upgrade to Supervisor is to make a 4000 PV qualifying purchase in one month, or two 2500 PV qualifying purchases in two months (from memory).
Someone more familiar with Herbalife can probably fill in some details about upgrading methods.
The income opportunity starts at level 4 (Supervisor) in the compensation plan.
“How people see the problem IS the problem”. That’s the idea that has to be applied to this case, it will need to be described completely differently than normal way of thinking.
Complaint #153 in the article about Herbalife complaints contains a lot of details about the sales methods.
https://behindmlm.com/companies/analysis-of-ftcs-complaints-against-herbalife/
I believe her story reflects the reality, as one of the common methods to sell Herbalife opportunity. They are simply looking for people willing to believe what they’re being told, and willing to pay for different types of “upgrades”.
They are also willing to PAY for sales (rather than earning money from sales), e.g. adding $29.95 from own credit card to support a $9.95 DVD sale to a prospect.
There’s no wonder why FTC find Herbalife’s business practices “disturbing”, but currently it doesn’t have the type of case people are asking it to have. So it’s better to look for a different type of case, or a different type of solution to the same type of case.
The Verge has a story covering a lot of details about how Herbalife is set up as independent internet marketing companies, run by the upper level distributors.
http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/27/4099100/income-at-home-herbalife-scamworld-biz-opp
President Team and Chairman’s Club members are basically running their own individual “pyramid scheme” recruitment systems, where Herbalife only is a part of the opportunity. Other parts are website setup, lead sales and similar types of services, sold to inexperienced people responding to “Work at Home”, “Income from Home and similar types of advertising.
A few names / businesses:
Some of the pyramid schemes can be found in those business structures rather than in Herbalife itself. The recruitment system is there rather than in Herbaalife.
People are recruited to a business opportunity found on the internet or through other media, and will later be signed up for Herbalife.
The sales system typically goes like this:
* Order a $9.95 “How to run a Home Business”
+ sign up with name, address, telephone, credit card details
* Return it within 14 days, or pay $39.95 extra
+ Your contact details will be sold as leads to a “mentor”
* Buy a website, software, etc.
* Be signed up as Herbalife distributor for 4 x normal price
* Be encouraged to purchase all different types of “what you really need to become successful”, including upgrade to Supervisor.
The real pyramid schemes can be found at that level. Herbalife terminated some of them in March / April, in a cleanup operation. But it was probably about disguising it, e.g. remove too visible connections to the company itself.
EXPERIENCED PYRAMID SCHEME ORGANIZERS
A section copied from The Verge article, link posted in #21.
Link to Court Order, against Global Online Systems, Deborah Jane Stolz, and Marilyn Thom, 2004-11-23, from a Federal Court in Vancouver, Canada.
https://docs.google.com/a/theverge.com/file/d/0B_49u0KO_i-mcS1UWmpCRFBwQ2s/edit?usp=sharing&pli=1
Global Online Systems was a Herbalife distributor already in 2004, when it was fined a $150,000 CAD for running a pyramid scheme.
It looks like most of the top distributors actually are professional scammers, and it’s probably a requirement for having any success as a Herbalife distributor (or else you won’t fit into the “inner clubs”, because of wrong types of ideas).
And just to be fair, Herbalife themselves have told all affiliates to STOP USING those companies for lead generation. Actually, all except ONE.
I’m linking to Troy Dooly’s article on this, but the news is the same.
http://mlmhelpdesk.com/breaking-mlm-news-herbalife-eliminates-98-of-all-internet-marketing-lead-gen-companies/
FTC could probably have opened an investigation into Online Business Solutions rather than Herbalife itself = one of the Chairman’s Club members and the business operations he’s running inside and outside Herbalife.
“Income At Home” / Online Business Solutions is owned by Shawn Dahl. It’s clearly set up to earn money on recruiting income opportunity seekers in a chain. Products aren’t even mentioned, the company is simply not designed to sell any products or recruit any customers. Herbalife is completely hidden behind OBS, it’s selling OBS rather than Herbalife.
That was the company which dominated the complaints about pyramid scheme issues.
An investigation of OBS will involve Herbalife itself, but the case will be much more limited and less complicated. A pyramid scheme doesn’t need to follow the exact structure of one single company, it can be run inside a company or extend to more than one single company.
“Income At Home” is clearly about selling income opportunities, based both on their own products and Herbalife’s. And it’s mostly based on the opportunity to sell the opportunity in a chain recruitment system.
The people joining OBS are clearly participants, i.e. they pay consideration for potential financial gains that derives primarily from other participants being introduced to the plan. There won’t be the same problem identifying the 3 first levels of distributors, whether it’s about discount purchases or participants in an income opportunity.
FTC on it’s own, has not been interested in interfering with herbalife in the companies’ 30 odd years of existence. On ackmans instigation some pressure groups met FTC which gave them patient hearing and shooed them away.
FTC will not be bothered to investigate any subset company of a distributor, that will have to be left to individual complainants to take them to court. Seeing that herbalife has moved to cut itself off from such distributors shows they are taking voluntary measures to cleanse their systems, and this will earn them brownie points with the FTC.
Besides, online business systems is not a listed company is it? So they’re safe from greedyman ackman. Ackman will not be bothered to protect the hispanics who are cheated by online business systems as there’s nothing for him in it! his heart bleeds at the same rate that he can bleed the herbalife stock
It’s registered in Barbados as Centurion Media Group, but it’s primary markets seems to be USA and Canada.
FTC has the judicial powers to launch a probe. “Powers = duties”, within reasonable limits. It’s not about whether or not they are “interested”, but about whether or not a potential case fits within certain parameters and criterias.
Anthony Powell left Herbalife relatively immediately when Bill Ackman presented his case, only few weeks after the presentation. Other than that, Herbalife hasn’t “cut off any ties” to any of the others, it has only organized the system differently as a part of a defense strategy.
THE LOGIC
1. I have identified that FTC doesn’t have a solid case the way it has been defined until now, as a pyramid scheme case against Herbalife.
2. I have also identified WHERE in the structure a potential pyramid scheme can be found, and where the case is too vague.
3. Identifying OBS as a potential target is simply part of the same logic, limiting the scope to a specific part of the structure rather than to a general one.
It’s a clear direction in the logics, from a “too complicated to solve” problem to a solvable one.
THE IDEA
“The way people SEE the problem IS the problem”. I simply needed to redefine how to see it, to make it become solvable rather than too complicated to solve.
OBS and Shawn Dahl simply popped up as a new solution to it when I redefined how to see the problem. The company was mentioned in many of the most serious complaints, but I was actually looking for Anthony Powell rather than Shawn Dahl.
norway, this case is about ackman bringing herbalife stock down to zero. getting OBS investigated does not lead to shutdown of herbalife and so no one is going to pursue that path.
I cant see FTC getting up one morning and setting out to investiagte a company within the company of herbalife. i mean where’s the pressure on them ?
Anthony Powell left Herbalife relatively immediately when Bill Ackman presented his case, only few weeks after the presentation. Other than that, Herbalife hasn’t “cut off any ties” to any of the others, it has only organized the system differently as a part of a defense strategy.-norway
according to NYP;
FTC will probably follow its own rules, and act within its own resources and powers if it has a valid case. I’m not analysing this specifically for the FTC, I’m analysing it from a wider perspective than that.
Whether or not Herbalife really is involved in one or multiple pyramid schemes will be up to the correct authorities to investigate and decide.
There IS a serious problem in its business model, causing loss of money and time for most participants. I can clearly start from that perspective and analyse solutions to it.
STRATEGY
Online Business Systems clearly pointed itself out as being focused on recruitment rather than on sale of goods or services. It will probably be an easy case compared to many other cases.
It will involve Herbalife directly or indirectly, in that it has voluntarily accepted the solution and even promoted / rewarded the organizers for it. Herbalife has also made a substantial profit on it.
It’s easier to start with a case that clearly can be identified and limited, rather than a vague and complicated one.
If you start with an easy case, other similar cases may pop up during the investigation. I was initially looking for Anthony Powell when I searched for that type of solutions, but Shawn Dahl popped up with much more details in The Verge article.
THE IDEA
I believe FTC or other authorities successfully will be able to prosecute a pyramid scheme case against Shawn Dahl, Online Business Systems and other related entities. I believe a case like that will involve Herbalife directly or indirectly as a defendant with a very weak defense system.
I believe other similar cases will pop up inside Herbalife itself, among “Chairman’s Club” and “Founder’s Circle” members.
I believe a method like this largely will solve many of the different “issues”, e.g. NCL’s consumer protection issue, the hispanic issue, and other similar issues.
I believe a method like this will give a type of findings that easily can be “sold” to a general audience, and will meet very little resistance from different types of “communities” like DSA, ANMP and other organizations.
How involved Herbalife will be depends on findings during an investigation. I’m not adding any “constructed theories” other than that I believe it will be heavily involved.
It isn’t about that. The core issue is about whether or not Herbalife is running one or multiple pyramid schemes, targeting vulnerable groups of people and making a profit on it.
Nope, he’s the one who raised the public awareness recently, but that’s not what it’s about.
FTC don’t care about Ackman or hedge funds. It does care, however, about allegations of misconduct / pyramid scheme.
If FTC finds validity in Ackman’s charges, so be it.
I have explained my logics. I’m simply NOT focusing on FTC’s own motivation or lack of it. 🙂
1. I identified the current status of the case and where a pyramid scheme case against Herbalife itself probably will fail.
2. I have identified that the problem hasn’t been solved, there’s still a lot of needs for solutions.
3. Based on point 1, I have tried to analyse potential other types of solutions that actually will solve something. That’s a “work in progress”, I have only recently started to analyse it.
4. I will eventually be able to put it together as a PLAN or IDEA that potentially will generate the expected results. I will only draw up the main points in that idea so people can add their own ideas to it and make it work.
I’m currently at point 3, analysing the situation and looking for different types of solutions. I have actually just started at that point, and I will only cover examples. People will need to find the right solutions themselves and how to actually make it work in reality.
5. I will redefine some goals, making them become less Herbalife related and make them become more about solving the general problem. I don’t know exactly what that will be about, but I know I probably will do it.
“The general problem” isn’t limited to Herbalife or pyramid schemes, it’s about organized systems designed to target vulnerable groups of consumers by promising something they won’t be able to deliver. That description is much more flexible, a factor that is needed in this type of work.
I will not necessarily work logically “Point 1, point 2, etc.”. I will rather try to cover them as a whole.
norway if you are going to generalize SOOO broadly then i fear you will have to include all products that are sold via advertisement .
for instance organised systems [ cosmetic companies] designed to target vulnerable groups of customers [women are vulnerable when it comes to self image] by promising something they wont be able to deliver [ creams lotions and potions !] .
now who is going to decide whether hispanics who face financial struggles are more vulnerable than women who face self image or self esteem issues .both kinds of vulnerability can cause grievous damage to an individuals life .
so if we as a society want to protect hispanics from oversell why dont we want to protect the women from oversell by cosmetic companies .women being almost 50 % of the world population is larger group to protect ?
i wont even start with men and their cars ! do they all get that blonde bombshell as promised by the Ad 🙂
THE PERFECT TARGET
I was searching for “Anthony Powell” after reading some complaints, when Shawn Dahl popped up as a perfect target for an “alternative pyramid scheme case solution”. Since I’m only working with EXAMPLES here, I can use his involvment rather than searching for any of the others.
Herbalife terminated all the other lead generation systems shortly after Ackman presented his findings, so I don’t have many other examples to choose from.
SOME KEY FACTORS
The first factor is REALITY. I’m analysing “the perfect target” from a very specific perspective, and some points will probably need to be adjusted to meet the reality.
The second factor is INTENTIONS, e.g. “Will it actually solve something?”. Otherwise, the efforts will probably be a waste of time.
Failing to meet those key factors will make the idea flawed in itself.
THE HYPOTHETICAL EFFECT OF AN ACTION
When identifying a “perfect target” for an action, it’s normally wise to look out for different “side effects” deriving from that action, e.g. “How will the result affect other parts of the market?”
The logic in this post goes like this:
1. Identifying WHY that particular example popped up.
2. Identifying 2 simple “key factors”
3. Identifying a “be observant” factor
I will add ideas like that, but not necessarily follow ideas like that when analysing. I’m using a method similar to identifying different pieces in a puzzle = you know they belong there, but you don’t know exactly where and how they should be placed.
I’m simply identifying some pieces currently visible to me before I dive too deep into some other parts. In the next post I will try to analyse “the perfect target” itself, but starting from the “side effect” viewpoint presented in this post = “How will it affect other parts of the market if FTC successfully launches a probe into that part of the market?”.
This post will start from a point where FTC or other agencies already have launched a pyramid scheme case against Online Business Systems and related people and entities, i.e. “what other parts of the market will it affect?”
INCOMEATHOME.COM
The website’s primary marketing method is radio ads, “famous radio host xx is endorsing incomeathome”. That message is also repeated on the website, several times on nearly half of the pages.
A successful pyramid scheme case against Shawn Dahl will also affect those radio hosts. It will actually involve them in illegal activities = promoting a pyramid scheme and earning a profit on it.
Will that solve anything? Will the market become more fair and less predatory if a group of radio hosts are being fined for promoting a pyramid scheme, or if they eventually will receive a restraining order permanently prohibiting them from similar activities?
It will certainly clean up “something” in that market, but I’m not sure the problem actually will be solved.
People who want to check inomeathome.com themselves without having to fill out the different forms can use the search method “site:incomeathome.com“. Note that incomeathome is one of many websites, and I haven’t identified the others.
THE RADIO HOSTS
From incomeathome.com’s own website. The upper part of the list is probably the most important ones, the ones who generates most visitors and sales.
IMPORTANT
1. I’m using the method described in my previous post = “identifying different pieces in a puzzle”.
2. FTC will first need to investigate it and launch a case. I used a hypothetical scenario where that part already had been fixed.
WARNING
If people have some emotional connections to any of the material described here, they should probably file some objections or stop reading.
“Emotional connections” = e.g. “But Glen Beck is my favorite radio host. He’s not a part of the problem, he’s actually providing his audience with valuable information about different income opportunities.”
I’m not covering specific interests like that. 🙂
I’m a salesman, so I will also need to check how to sell an idea in a market, e.g. “will people be interested in the idea when they see it?” and “will they be satisfied with the results?”.
I’m talking about the END RESULTS here rather than about some initial results. A good idea will create some long term effects and some real results. Other ideas will only create some initial results and may potentially cause more harm than good.
REALITY CHECK
Is “the perfect target” described in my previous posts really a pyramid scheme, or can it be described differently and fit within some legitimate business types?
It’s selling the opportunity itself to the general public.
* It sells itself = income at home as a business opportunity
* it sells products / services, typically used for recruitment
* it sells the Herbalife opportunity
* it was selling leads = potential new participants
Any “perfect target” will need to fit CLEARLY into some definitions for “illegal activity”, and fit poorly into some other descriptions for “perfectly legitimate business idea”.
I will not analyse the details right now for whether it’s operating legally or illegally. It needs to be done, but it doesn’t need to be done by me right now.
“CHECKING THE POTENTIAL MARKET” METHODS
I’m using the ideas of a salesman here, identifying things as “markets”, “customers” and other similar expressions. It’s simply a METHOD to analyse something rather than a description of what things really are about.
It will give different types of answers, e.g. if you describe FTC as a “customer” rather than as a “regulatory authority” you may potentially be able to see something important.
Methods like that will normally cause confusion, but it’s actually a “think outside the box” method, used to find alternative answers to something or to find new solutions to an existing problem.
Identifying a market will typically be about “What can people potentially be interested in?” and similar types of questions. I haven’t identified those questions yet, only that I will use methods like that.
To clarify something logically …
1. I don’t believe Herbalife itself will fit easily inside the legal definitions for a pyramid scheme. Its business stucture is far too vague to be analysed rationally and make it fit inside legal definitions.
2. I believe Herbalife will fit inside the legal definitions for someone INVOLVED IN organizing MULTIPLE pyramid schemes. I’m simply trying to identify those sub structures rather than analysing the company as a whole, starting with the first I found.
3. Online Business Systems is only an EXAMPLE, but I might actually have been lucky in finding the best example at the first try.
4. I’m not specifically analysing pyramid scheme issues, it’s more similar to the “general problem” described in post #31.5.
5. I’m using plain and simple ideas as a foundation. It’s about typical ideas for a salesman, e.g. “Identify a problem or a need in a market, identify solutions to it, and try to deliver your solutions …” (without filling out the last details).
Anybody got a smoke?
The rational explanation for that was to make the description become more flexible, because I believe that method will be needed here and produce better results.
1. I have limited the area for where to look, to one specific structure.
2. I’m trying to expand other areas, so I can get more methods to choose from.
The question people want answered is *how much* guilty-ness is Herbalife? 🙂 And how much guilty-ness results in a conviction?
M_N is saying that Herbalife is 50% or more guilty, but it may fall short of the legal threshold for prosecution (they usually don’t hit the company until the company hits like 80 or 90% guilty)
There’s also the question how much “guilty-ness” does all those “lead generation companies” such as OBS and such add to Herbalife’s guilty-ness (or not).
OBS and their ilk recruit people, make money off of them (selling them “refundable business kits” which are nothing but teasers) then sell their names to Herbalife affiliates as “leads”.
IDENTIFYING THE POTENTIAL MARKET
I have already identied that I will use some “salesman specific metods”, e.g. analysing FTC as a “customer” rather than as a “regulatory authority”. It will follow the same idea as earlier = “identify the pieces currently visible to me, without making it become too complicated”.
Visible pieces:
Herbalife itself, plus sub structures
FTC, or other regulatory authorities
Bill Ackman
National Consumers League
Hispanic Federation
Congressional Rep. Linda Sanchez
NYC Councilwoman Julissa Ferraras
Some of them are concerned about Herbalife’s role as a potential pyramid scheme. Some of them have done much more research than I have done.
FTC
It can be described as “the regulatory authority that holds the powers to regulate certain types of trade activities, including prosecute violations”. I will not identify it more closely than that, it should normally be able to identify its own different roles and functions.
It can also be described from the viewpoint of people working there. Most people will prefer solutions they’re familiar with and are using on a daily basis, with methods inside their own “field of expertise”, solvable cases rather than unsolvable ones.
I won’t identify it in more details right now. Any solutions will both need to be designed for the organization itself and for the people working there.
In other words, for FTC to investigate something, the case presented to them will need to be identifiable within its own jurisdiction and “field of expertise”.
The case has to indicate it’s a solvable case rather than some vague one. And it needs to meet different criterias for e.g. importance. And they should preferrably believe they have found most of the solutions themselves.
I’m still at point 3 (post #31), simply identifying some different pieces in the puzzle when they become visible to me. I’m partly switching back and forth between different points.
But Herbalife will probably be found to have been “involved in” something. I don’t need to identify that exactly, and I don’t need to draw any conclusions either.
An addition to my previous post …
I’m working in a direction where I eventuslly will be able to describe an idea in a few simple sentences, without the complicated analysis parts.
Something like this (as an example):
“I believe a major part of the problem is about the marketing system itself, e.g. where radio hosts as Glen Beck simply is endorsing incomeathome.com as a solution to people’s needs, but where people actually are being recruited into a chain recruitment program where most of them are guaranteed to lose money”.
It can be followed up by some other statements, but I will probably get completely “burned out” if I continue analysing it today.
A SUMMARY
Most of my posts here have been based on the idea of “The way people SEE the problem IS the problem”. I have simply revisited some old material (the complaints), looked at them for other types of information than earlier and followed that trail. That’s the BASIC idea.
I have also added some ideas, typically about methods that have to be used. They have mostly been designed for helping ME communicate something in different directions, but they do also contain some “key factors” for how to identify what to do and how to do it.
MY CURRENT STATUS
1. I have identified where and why a case against Herbalife have failed to have the expected progress.
2. I have redefined the description to be about multiple pyramid scheme structures rather than one big one (trying to make the problem become more solvable).
3. I have identified one of those structures, the one I found via the complaints (NCL will be interested in that).
4. Missing: Identifying the Nutrition Club structure (Hispanic Federation and Julissa Ferraras will be interested in that)
5. I have vaguely identified SOME factors about authorities, e.g. what type of material they can be interested in. You can’t drown them in material.
6. Missing: The “reality check” in post #35. Someone will need to verify that there actually IS a pyramid scheme to be found there.
7. Missing: A short description of the potential case, simply to help people identify whether or not it’s a part of the other problem and if it can be a partial solution to it. Designed so it can be presented in a plain and simple way, so people can find out whether they are interested or not before drowning them in details.
I have mostly worked from an overview perspective without digging too deep into details, identifying a wider range of aspects to the case, e.g. identifying the different types of interests.
As far as I can see, I don’t need to dig too deep into details myself. “The Verge” has already done it, Bill Ackman has already done it. There should be more than enough details available somewhere on the internet.
WHERE DO IT GO FROM HERE?
* Bill Ackman will need to add something to it. I’m not a pyramid scheme expert, and he will need someone qualified to analyse the theory about multiple pyramid schemes and the facts that can be found.
* Some details need to be analysed, e.g. “Is OBS about chain recruitment or is it about centralized recruitment, where chain recruitment first will occur later when people are being introduced to Herbalife?”, and “Does OBS pay commissions for recruitment directly or indirectly?”.
In short, it needs to be correctly identified, but not in each and every detail.
* The idea needs to be made “sellable”. That’s typically about “Who can be interested?”, “How can I present it to them?” and similar types of questions. I’m not talking about specific types of commercial sale here, it’s rather about the process of making people accept something and want it (for some reason).
Woops, I just found out that Shawn Dahl has left Herbalife, and founded his own company “Nutrie” along with James Kirkpatrick (according to anonymous source). The news was released June 22.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/ace_shakes_life_SWAxcl0OcWNN5S2XslS6MP
I still believe Shawn Dahl will be the correct target, but he will only indirectly involve Herbalife itself.
Solving the problem has to be done on that level, in the organized systems where people are being recruited into opportunities. That problem has currently only been moved from Herbalife to Nutrie.
That Verge article you quoted also stated that OBS started pushing Vemma instead of Herbalife just as that article was posted online.
Makes you wonder which of the of the following scenario had happened:
* Dahl got a hint from Herbalife head to “get out so I don’t have to terminate you”
* Dahl saw “writing on the wall” and left before Herbalife can terminate his affiliateship
* Dahl always wanted to control his own MLM company and seized the chance to get out from under Herbalife
* any other more plausible scenarios?
*dahl is a rat who jumped ship as soon as there was trouble ?
* dahl made his money so what does he care ?
hot off the press;
read the article at:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/mattstroud/2013/07/22/ftc-bill-ackman-prosecute-herbalife/
I will normally check people’s OWN description …
“Handcuffed” is typically about strict rules. Herbalife has terminateed some of its most questionable recruitment methods, and that makes it difficult for the organizers in the different downlines. The new rules will harm their businesses more than they will harm Herbalife itself.
Ackman’s strategy has worked in some ways. He has created internal conflicts in the organization, e.g. Anthony Powell left Herbalife already in January, Shawn Dahl apparently left it in June. But that actually left Herbalife LESS vulnerable to pyramid scheme accusations.
Here’s a tips if anyone ever want to send anything to government agencies, e.g. FTC or SEC.
Google “FTC Organization Chart”, “FTC internal phone numbers” and other search methods that can help you get an overview for the organization, to help you identify WHERE in the organization your request will end up, how many people working there, how they’re organized and other basic info.
You can of course call them. My tips was only an example for the type of information you could search for on the internet.
Info like that should normally help you communicate things better, more naturally. It may also help you identify which types of information to send, or what type of answers you can expect from whom within which timeframe.
Promotional pyramid cases can be extremely difficult to prove, and time consuming to investigate and prosecute. A case must be valid and resolvable through all steps in the legal system, and it will need to fit within certain other parameters, too.
A part of the problem is the idea of “How people SEE a problem IS the problem”. If tested, a random number of different people will typically come up with different solutions for how to interprete things.
To get FTC to investigate something, you will first need to investigate how they SEE that type cases and the solutions they have to it. And you should also investigate how they SEE the same type of cases through each and every step of the legal system, all the way up to the highest authority (court) in the system.
Here’s one example for how to identify something correctly, using an example from EU UCP Directive (Unfair Commercial Practices Directive), found “higher up in the system” than the anti pyramid scheme rule itself.
Chapter 1.2 Definitions
It describes what “Consumer Protection” is meant to cover, the general type of business activity the specific rules found in lower levels of the hierarchy are meant to be about.
A case can look solid enough when viewed from the lower levels of the hierarchy, but it will be flawed if it doesn’t meet the higher level rules.
“BIGGER GROUP” LOGICAL RULE
“To identify a rule correctly, you must also identify its correct position in a hierarchy of rules.”
You can’t just look at pyramid schemes rules directly and try to find matching rules to your own case, and assume you have found the solution to something if you find enough matching criterias.
* Pyramid scheme rules will normally be placed inside the framework of “Consumer Protection rules”. A case will probably be flawed if it doesn’t meet the ideas that can be found there.
* “Consumer Protection rules” are probably placed inside another group higher up in the system.
* And so on, in a hierarchy of different rules and principles, in “logically ordered groups” with different ranks.
This was only an example. Pyramid scheme rules can be placed inside other frameworks than “Consumer Protection”, e.g. “gambling” or “fraudulent business practices”.
A case may actually find support higher up in the system and lead down a different path to a relatively similar conclusion as a flawed conclusion, but where the logic actually is correct all the way to the top.
A case may also fail because of lack of support higher up in the hierarchy of rules, e.g. a $2 per month pyramid scheme case may fail because it doesn’t reflect the basic ideas for “Consumer protection”, “consideration” or “financial gains”. Laws are about reality, not about constructed hypothetical ideas.
FUNDAMENTAL IDEAS
“Right view” is one of the primary factors in decision making. If we can’t identify things correctly then our ideas will probably not work very well. They may work, but that will be related to other factors than our own ideas.
My previous post was about the METHODS that can be used to over rule certain types of arguments, e.g. “the Law clearly states that anti pyramid scheme rules don’t apply to MLM companies that have some other rules in place, e.g. the Amway rules”.
You can over rule arguments like that by going one step up in the system, to the rules with a higher rank, and find that the higher rules won’t support your opponent’s arguments.
The higher rule will tell you that it isn’t about return policy or a 70% rule, but about the unfair trade practice itself, where a company is “using a commercial practice to appreciably impair the consumer’s ability to make an informed decision, thereby causing the consumer to take a transactional decision that he would not have taken otherwise”.
Lobby organizations like the DSA will try to add new rules to the existing ones, to give its members some protection against being prosecuted if they “have” certain rules. But most often those rules will only exist in a company’s written material rather than in reality.
It’s hard to prosecute something for deed they did in the past… Or perhaps not.
Frankly, Herbalife is so busy trying to “clean house” that only proves that Ackman was right… Herbalife WAS a pyramid scheme. It is now LESS of one, but how much less?
(post #21)
It’s difficult to find examples similar to Shawn Dahl among those others. Most of them have less aggressive marketing strategies, or they are simply not visible enough on the internet.
Any marketing organization set up in a similar way as Online Business Systems could have been a solution to the problem, the “How to find a case that meets the required criterias for being resolvable by FTC and in Court” problem.
A company doesn’t need to organize the pyramid scheme itself, it can fill other roles and still be part of a scheme. Herbalife clearly filled some parts of OBS’ business idea.
“ONE CLEAR CASE”
One clear case will normally be enough. A clear case is where company A organizes the scheme itself, and where company B is directly involved in a part of the illegal practice and makes a profit from it (e.g. radio stations promoting the illegal activity, or a company organizing a part of the illegal plan).
One clear case will give a good reason to check for other similar cases in the company involved in it, and from there the snowball will probably start to roll by itself.
It probably still is in other countries. They cleaned up primarily in the U.S., other countries were not even mentioned.
I checked South Africa, but the practice I found there was less aggressive. The trouble is that people are running their own companies, and it can be difficult to identify them. Shawn Dahl was found because he popped up with a lot of detailed info when I searched for Anthony Powell.
Uhh…I’m not taking sides, but Ackman has lost $350mil on this as of August 7th. Herbalife is winning on wall street.
Article was in the Wall Street Journal Titled “Billionaires Take Sides Over Herbalife”
Yeah but Wall Street and billionaires has nothing to do with the business model and compensation plan.
You can’t dismiss analysis of Herbalife’s business model and compensation plan based on what investors are doing on the stockmarket.
Is it interesting albeit petty at times to follow? Sure. Does it have anything to do with analysis of Herbalife on the MLM side of things? No.
Ah Oz you beat me to it! Not once does the article mention about the distributors or the company. The Herbalife discussion has simply become a battlefield for uber competitive billionaires to prove whose better, nothing more.
dan loeb has made tons of money off herbalife and ackman’s short , and cant stop being in good humor . he has published a joke on his profile, which goes :
“The New Herbalife Product – Herbalife Enema Administered By Uncle Carl ” 🙂
this tells us how men will always be boys at heart, and never outgrow toilet humor .
this also tells us how MLM’s will always be pyramids at heart ,and retail will never outgrow self consumption .
so do we want our men to stop being boys ? No !
as long as they have the potential to behave like men when it comes to the crunch – it’s fine .
so do we want our MLM’s to stop being pyramids ? No !
as long as the products have the potential to be retailed it shouldn’t matter much – it’s fine !
and this is exactly the message that is coming from the FTC and the stock market , herbalife has an okay product ,so leave it alone !
Frankly both sides are looking at Herbalife through tinted lenses.
Though you’ve identified your personal thoughts…
In other words, MLM will ALWAYS be a shady business forever on the edge of being illegal.
Glad we agree on something.
So why would any one want to get into this business, without knowing the dividing line between MLM and pyramid scheme?
If you don’t know where is the line, how would you know which side of the line you are?
And do you really rely on some billionaires to draw the line for you? Or do you trust your government instead?
Or perhaps you should just play in some other area where you don’t have to worry about such things?
‘shadiness’ is just a perceptional thing and i can agree that this industry has committed enough mistakes and deserves the tag as of now.
set tough ‘compliance’and ‘best practices’ standards, fine companies left right and center if they don’t tow the line, educate people about MLM and it’s possible pitfalls and let the industry settle into a honest place.
we need ‘reform and regulation’ not ‘moral proselytizing’. i don’t care a frig about the ‘ethics’ of MLM selling and the tired arguments about ‘true’ supply and demand.
if we want to be a society based on true supply and demand then all products should be sold in neutral packaging with a list of ingredients, and let the market decide the volume of sales.
the moment you sell a chocolate vanilla icecream to a child at double the market price, by adding a worthless plastic toy to it, and advertise this fact on the highest watched cartoon show, the line has been crossed.
the dividing line between MLM and pyramid schemes would be ‘intent’ ,’product retailability’ and a generous dollop of COMMON SENSE.
empirical 50 % rules cannot be followed, or enforced ‘practically’ so commonsense solutions are required.
oneman ackman’s motivated[by money] crusade, against herbalife took a fresh turn just recently . unable to pester the FTC into investigating the company , ackman has now trained his guns on none other than pricewaterhousecooper[PwC] , the newly appointed auditors for the company herbalife .the previous auditor KPMG had to bow out due to allegations of insider trading .
there is some talk amongst herbalife distributors that ,once PwC certifies the books of the company , the company would take out huge loans from banks, to buy back it’s shares at a premium and go private, by early next year .this would leave ackman tightly squeezed out of his ‘hot air’and his money .
ackmans ‘cautionary’ letter to PwC warning them of severe repercussions if they certify the companies accounts , in the event the company is proved to be a pyramid scheme, may cause delays, buying ackman time to bring more pressure for an investigation into the company .
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101026213
now , ackman also claims to have whistle-blowers under his wing, who will testify that the company is involved in large scale bribing in it’s international operations.
this is fast turning into a nail biting thriller and i hope somebody in hollywood is making notes !
in yet another sterling move , herbalife have appointed antonio villagairosa as senior advisor to CEO Johnson.
Villagairosa has been mayor of los angeles , he was a former chairman of the Democratic National Convention and former member of obama’s Economic Advisory Board.
the story behind this goes , that the US administration is a highly politicized animal especially in the current reign of obama .the inclusion of a hi fi democrat latino in the upper echelons of herbalife ,will send the RIGHT messages to SEC and FTC ,should they get fidgety .
http://www.forbes.com/sites/nathanvardi/2013/09/09/the-broadening-coalition-backing-herbalife-in-its-battle-with-bill-ackman/
meanwhile , stiritz, another stockmarket guru often called the ‘steve jobs’ of consumer products ,has put down personal hard cash for a 5% stake in herbalife .
this move has rumor mills abuzz that an tender offer is definitely on the make .borrowing a line from oz, ackman must definitely be shitting bricks about now .
Ugh, Herbalife can hire as many stooges as they want. The problem is with the business model.
Analysis of Herbalife is a straightforward affair if you leave the stock market theatrics at the door. The company fails to differentiate between its affiliates and retail customers, claiming retail customers are affiliates who haven’t recruited anyone.
They deliberately fail to differentiate between the two classes, and deserve to get nailed for it. Especially seeing as they firstly lied about it not being possible and then said they’d do it and then failed to do it entirely (instead releasing some BS poll nobody cared about).
There’s been a lot of talk in the industry about “getting rid of the grey”. Herbalife are trying to exist squarely in the grey and refuse to budge. It’s going to result in something sooner or later. Wasting money hiring randoms won’t change that.
Analysis of Herbalife is a straightforward affair if you leave the stock market theatrics at the door. The company fails to differentiate between its affiliates and retail customers, claiming retail customers are affiliates who haven’t recruited anyone.- oz
if analysis of herbalife was such a straightforward affair how would you explain the money market lining up behind herbalife?
how would you explain a ‘serious’ audit firm like PwC signing up to certify its accounts ?
i am sure these people must have done their due diligence, before making such publicly visible moves.
BTW some announcement about affiliates and retail customers is in the works though i expect you will not be satisfied with it .
distributors also claim that they sign up their retail customers as affiliates, so that they don’t wander off to make their purchases from someone else.
Please don’t waste my time trying to assert the legitimacy of company A via association with companies x, y and z. This is a common “legitimacy by association” argument put forth by shady scheme supporters.
Herbalife can’t and won’t come clean about their true retail percentage, it nails them as a pyramid scheme.
What distributors claim is irrelevant.
so you’re saying icahn,siritz,soros, loeb and even PwC are ALL shady scheme supporters ??
okeee , i can buy that 🙂
precisely what I said, nothing more nothing less.
This is exactly what I was talking about the other day. You replace what somebody said with your own waffle and then proceed to have a discussion against yourself.
So much easier to just throw it into the spam bin then waste my time with it.
1) It’s irrelevant, and a common “think of who supports this” argument. Legitimacy by association is not real legitimacy, just PR.
2) They believe that what Herbalife did, while shady, is not shady enough to get it shut down by FTC. Their logic is suspect. Many simply don’t like Ackman, some used faulty logic to convince themselves (post hoc justification), while others are merely bandwagon followers.