Will Herbalife survive the next few years?
In the wake of the FTC’s $200 million dollar fine issued to Herbalife, the biggest question is whether the company will be viable with a new retail-orientated business model.
With Herbalife’s previous compensation plan primarily paying affiliates to recruit new affiliates, perhaps the best indicator is a look at how that was going for the business.
As revealed via the FTC’s complaint against Herbalife, here’s how the business fared under a recruitment-driven business model.
Herbalife represent, expressly or by implication, that Herbalife Distributors are likely to earn substantial income, including significant full-time or part-time income, from pursuing a retail-based business opportunity.
In reality, however, Herbalife’s program does not offer participants a viable retail-based business opportunity.
The retail sale of Herbalife product is not profitable or is so insufficiently profitable that any retail sales tend only to mitigate the costs to participate in the Herbalife business opportunity.
The overwhelming majority of Herbalife Distributors who pursue the business opportunity make little or no money, and a substantial percentage lose money.
The overwhelming majority of Herbalife Distributors who pursue the business opportunity do not make anything approaching full-time or even part-time minimum wage because the promised retail sales to customers simply are not there.
The overwhelming majority of Herbalife Distributors who pursue the business opportunity make little or no money from retail sales.
Half of Distributors whom Herbalife designate as “Sales Leaders” average less than $5 per month in net profit from retail alone, and half of these Distributors lose money.
In light of their poor financial results, many Distributors either stop
buying product or leave the organization altogether, resulting in a high turnover rate.In 2014 nearly 60% of first-time Sales Leaders did not purchase sufficient product to requalify as Sales Leaders.
Retention for non-Sales Leaders, many of whom are pursuing the
business opportunity, is even worse.An analysis of Defendants’ data shows that the majority of Distributors stop ordering Herbalife products within their first year, and nearly 50% of the entire Herbalife U.S. Distributor base quits in any given year.
Roughly half of all Herbalife Distributors at any given time are in their first 12 months of membership, and roughly 40% of the volume of Herbalife products
sold by Defendants each year is sold to participants in their first year.During 2009–13, an annual average of approximately 242,000 new
Distributors signed up in the United States.On average, 89% of those newlyrecruited Distributors, however, simply replaced U.S. Distributors who left that same year, with an annual average of approximately 216,000 Distributors leaving during this time period.
Now bear in mind, the above is the current status of Herbalife with recruitment commissions and no retail sales volume qualifiers.
Today’s FTC settlement agreement sees Herbalife affiliates required to derive at least 66% of their monthly sales volume from retail sales.
And not bullshit “I purchased the product as an affiliate and then gave it to friends and family” retail sales, but “tracked and verified” retail sales.
Unless Herbalife affiliates are selling product to actual retail customers, they aren’t getting paid.
If you thought retention rates in Herbalife were shocking under the recruitment compensation plan, how do you think they’ll be with affiliates forced to make retail sales?
Also what impact will the 66% retail sales volume requirements have on Herbalife top earners? Will there even be any left to parade about at the next Herbalife event?
All of this, in my opinion, spells disaster for Herbalife in the long-term.
Affiliates were already leaving in droves… because they couldn’t make retail sales and/or recruit new affiliates to cover their losses.
Now that commissions require 66% retail sales volume each month, who’s going to stick around?
As evidenced by the lack of retail sales in the previous compensation plan, Herbalife’s products as is don’t appear to be viable at a retail level.
This is going to require a massive shake up of Herbalife’s product offering, from the products themselves to how much Herbalife are charging.
To compete effectively at a retail level, it’s likely the price of Herbalife products will have to be reduced. This will correspond with an overall reduction of commissions paid to affiliates who do manage to qualify.
With the “overwhelming majority” of Herbalife affiliates currently not making part-time minimum wage, reduced commissions is going to make that achievement all the more difficult.
The metric to keep an eye on in the future is Herbalife’s revenue.
The first few reports over the coming months might misleading show growth (as with Vemma, the MLM industry might temporarily rally around Herbalife to generate artificial retail sales).
After that however, Herbalife’s overall sales revenue will be a fraction of what it was before. That’s going to be a huge hit to the company’s bottom line and seriously question the long-term viability of Herbalife going forward.
Whether that’s reflected in Herbalife’s share-price remains to be seen. Whereas I’ve completely ignored Herbalife’s share-price up to now, it might actually be worth paying attention to six months to a year from now.
Despite the reality of being forced to apply a retail orientated compensation plan to an affiliate-base that has consistently failed to generate significant retail sales for decades, Herbalife management remain upbeat about the future.
In a press-release issued shortly after the FTC’s settlement announcement, Herbalife CEO Michael Johnson declared;
The terms of the settlement in no way change our business model as a direct selling company but simply build upon current procedures.
The settlement is an acknowledgment that our business model is sound and underscores our confidence in our ability to move forward successfully, otherwise we would not have agreed to these terms.
Personally I’m starting to think a major problem with Herbalife might be its current executive management.
Denial as a business strategy hasn’t worked out so far. Continuing to remain in denial will just result in more of the same.
So what is the dollar amount people earned per recruit into the business?
How much would they need to sell under the new comp plan to get the same income?
Depends on their total monthly business volume. More volume = higher commission rate.
Herbalife have yet to implement the new compensation plan (they have 10 months), so it’s not possible to calculate at this stage.
Oz, I think you’re slightly unfair. Herbalife’s management has really done a great job keeping the company afloat and routinely beating expectations under pretty tough conditions.
I don’t think they can continue anything like they have in terms of success, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they didn’t have another rabbit or two on their hat. At the least, I’ll expect four more good quarterly reports where they imply these changes are implemented.
So with like 99% going broke and membership just balancing out and not really growing.
You call that a great job for who? Did we both read the same thing here?
@Jesse
Via operation of a pyramid scheme. That’s nothing to commend them about.
Problem is what they implement won’t gel with their current affiliate-base, who are used to making money on recruitment.
The concept of retail sales is alien to Herbalife’s top earners, which will ultimately bottom-out the company when mandatory change is enforced.
@Oz
It is clear the FTC stopped short of defining Herbalife a pyramid scheme for whatever reason and clearly could have. It is incorrect to call them as such. That matter is legally closed, Herbalife is not a pyramid scheme as legally defined.
Jesse is completely correct. Whether you like HLF’s business model or not, their executive management has done an excellent job in maintaining value in the company and continuing operations against many fronts with many powerful enemies (Ackerman, US Govt).
I agree it remains interesting to see how HLF does over the next year or so, but it is silly to be so sure of the company will “bottom-out” when it has done the exact opposite so far in face of difficult challenges.
My guess is only about 15-20% of Herbalife’s retail sales are in the US (the FTC restrictions only affect the US market).
Amway is a $10B company not because of its sales and affiliates in its home US market but because of their dominance in China. My guess is Herbalife will do more than just survive. Feel free to root against them, but I wouldn’t recommend betting any real money on that.
@Aaong
Did you read the complaint? They defined Herbalife as a product-based pyramid scheme about a dozen times.
Enemies? Yo, up until the moment they change their business model, Herbalife is/was a pyramid scheme.
“Enemies” makes you sound likea cultist. Please don’t bring that garbage here.
For decades the business has been built on recruitment. Now they can’t do that in the US of course it’s going to bottom-out (we’ll get to watch that in their annual statements).
Amway isn’t a publicly-traded company. Herbalife use the same compensation plan globally and so they currently operate as a pyramid scheme world-wide.
If the US business tanks the company is sustaining itself only by continuing to operate as a scam globally.
If this is to be the apex of the MLM industry, we’ve got problems.
@ Oz
This is absolutely incorrect. The US neither officially classified Herbalife as a pyramid scheme nor shut its business down, actions the US Government has no problems doing if they see fit (see Vemma).
Enemies is the correct term, at least when referring to Ackerman. If the semantics bother you, I’ll use ‘foe’ or ‘adversary’. Let me know. Feel free to suggest other less offending terms.
Again, your comments are absolutely incorrect. Herbalife cannot and does not use the same operating model worldwide since the US model is illegal in a number of countries (China, Western Europe, etc.).
For instance, affiliate networks are limited in China (to 6 people, I believe). MLM businesses in China cannot build a business based on recruitment. It is why Amway has opened over 300 storefronts in China and consumers have the ability to buy products for the identical price either from affiliates or from brick-and-mortar stores.
Amway did not do this by choice by some stroke of genus insight, they were forced to so in order to do business there and it now has become an important part of their worldwide business strategy. The opening of their first European storefront in Germany this year is an example.
Similar to Amway (which is the apex of the industry btw), if Herbalife is able to increase their presence in China, a big if since Amway has an almost monopoly-type dominance there, then Herbalife will do more than just survive.
The US business model will be largely unchanged, but just a smaller part of their overall business. Another way to look at HLF is that their business is a certain size in spite of their relatively small presence in Asia.
If they manage to tap into that market like they have been planning, they will be a growth story.
But they described a pyramid scheme in the Herbalife complaint
Not using the label is a hollow victory when the complaint uses the definition of a pyramid scheme to describe Herbalife’s business model again and again and again.
And they weren’t fined and ordered to restructure they’re business model for nothing, they were ordered to do so because they were a pyramid scheme.
The FTC complaint is basically: “Quack quack quack, guess what animal?”
People in denial such as yourself are running around telling people it’s an elephant.
Regardless of superficial differences, it is highly unlikely Herbalife’s global operations have any significant retail sales activity taking place.
This makes it a product-based pyramid scheme the world over.
And this is proof you haven’t even read the settlement agreement. Stop wasting my time.
‘technically’ speaking, you are correct. the FTC did not charge ‘pyramid scheme’ or move the court to halt herbalife. as things stand, herbalife has neither been proved to be a pyramid scheme and neither is it absolved of being a pyramid scheme.
ackman precisely said that herbalife was a pyramid scheme which would be shut down and its stock would go to zero, so technically he is 100% wrong in his allegation.
the FTC complaint is also just that, a complaint which has unproved allegations. they did not move the court to prove their allegations and neither did herbalife disprove their allegations in court. so, the complaint does not have any legal value as such.
the only important document is the permanent injunction that the FTC and herbalife have agreed to.
herbalife’s argument was that its business model was legit, and it created the impression that they would get by with a fine and some wrist slapping.
but, the wrist slapping turned out to be a punch in the head. herbalife can probably do very well in other countries, maintain its bottomline and keep it stock value up, but that was not it’s argument. herbalife was wrong that its business model was fully legit.
technically herbalife won, but morally it lost. it may be some sort of victory, but not one worth celebrating.
More importantly, once they cut out recruitment commissions and top affiliates, who have been profiting on recruitment commissions for years, abandon ship… Herbalife will lose.
That’s the long-term play the FTC have made.
Anytime an MLM company has made significant changes to a comp plan a bunch of top leaders jump ship (see Vemma). A few loyalists remain before eventually giving up when realize the gravy train has dried up.
Herbalife in the US isn’t going to be any different when these changes are implemented.
The only reason die-hards are still optimistic is because Herbalife haven’t implemented the changes yet.
Technically correct, but you’re ignoring the elephant in the room.
This case is a landmark case, just like how FTC vs. Amway (1979) defined the entire MLM industry. Officially, Amway was not classified as a pyramid scheme either… BECAUSE IT CONSENTED TO THE CHANGES… Just like Herbalife did now.
It is NO LONGER THE COMPANY IT WAS. Its business model has been OVERHAULED. Whether it is viable remains to be seen.
probably in response to all the speculation about the FTC/herbalife injunction and how deep the wound is, alan hoffman, executive vice president, global corporate affairs, issued a statement yesterday:
the terms of the settlement appear to be very tough, so i wonder how herbalife ‘understands’ these terms. cant wait to see how herbalife implements these changes!
there is a difference in the amway and herbalife cases.
amway was not found to be a pyramid by the court, and this decision created a precedent, which was legally applicable to other MLM.
herbalife has been settled via an injunction ratified by the court, it does not establish precedent which is applicable to other MLM.
‘technically’ speaking, this injunction is limited to herbalife. ‘practically’ speaking, it is a ‘message’ from the FTC to the industry but not legally binding. herbalife, being the huge mammoth it is, did not fight this injunction, and this implies that smaller MLM better not fight this ‘message’ of the FTC either.
Here we go again, more hair splitting and nit picking from Anjalitroll.
well, what exactly are you saying LRM? is this herbalife injunction ‘legally’ binding on the MLM industry or not?
or is it just more blah blah from littleroundAss?
I’ll tell you what, Anjalitroll.
You go away and read Sun Tzus’ “The Art of War” a few times, then, maybe you’ll realize not everything requires “caselaw” or to be “legally binding” to be effective.
At a stretch, you might even stop filling up other peoples’ blogs with nonsensical hypotheticals.
The FTC now has Vemma and now Herbalife exactly where it wanted them and did it without protracted and costly legal maneuvering or having to set “legal” precedent, also a protracted and costly process.
Both Herbalife US and Vemmas’ future is now completely within their own hands.
“IF” they are operating within guidelines as they have been claiming for years,the FTC has done them a favour by clarifying those guidelines and neither of them has anything to worry about.
If not, well, they’ve been B/Sing all along, haven’t they ??
i’ll tell you what, littleroundass.
you go back and read my comment again. i have not said that this injunction has ‘no’ effect, but it does not have the effect of caselaw or precedent.
if you do not understand the difference between the reach of caselaw and a settlement, then it is probably because you’re sitting around reading Sun Tzus’ “The Art of War” all day long. expand your reading list a bit. choose diverse topics, i say.
^^ this is being penny wise, pound foolish IMO.
vemma and herbalife may have been put where there belong, and a ‘message’ may be out to the rest of the industry, but a ‘message’ does not have the weight of caselaw [btw, vemma is not resolved yet, herbalife is]
the MLM industry needs ‘legal’ clarifications on autoship [vemma] and self consumption [herbalife] which would be best served by developing caselaw, and not via settlements.
you don’t say!! i must thank you for filling up other peoples’ blogs with such deeply insightful wisdom.
i mean, you could’ve kept your blinding brilliance tucked away in the recesses of your littleroundass, but… 🙂
Speak Asia.
The DoJ will need to prove Zeek Rewards is a “ponzi”
Q.E.D.
hmmm
– so who’s the girl who caught one, no wait, TWO consecutive errors in a federal court order ?[not little roundman]
– so who’s the girl who said bell would have to prove ‘purposefully directed action’ for jurisdiction over foreign defendants? [not little roundman]
– so who’s the girl who rightly said the vemma injunction is not applicable to the whole industry? [not little roundman]
– so who’s the girl who’s correctly stating that the herbalife injunction is not binding on the whole industry? [not little roundman]
– i could go on, but i’m so damn modest 🙂
and btw, if the DOJ wants to prove zeek was a ‘fraud’ they’re very welcome, at least little roundman wont be able to flit around the internet claiming zeek was a ‘ponzi'[as explained under securities]. what is unproved is an allegation and nothing else, and what is not charged is not even an allegation.
and, and, and, even in herbalife the FTC has skirted the ‘pyramid’ argument, whether it was due to negotiation or for lack of pyramid ‘ammo’ is a separate question.
so, there is some ‘truth’ in the doubts i have raised. always better to question and think, i say. no point hanging around throwing hollow punches like LRM, i say.
QED
Keep it civil guys.
@ Oz
Again absolutely incorrect. Herbalife has a leadership position in Latin and South America, largely Brasil. It is a big part of their business and a big reason why HLF has increased product sales by almost double digits last year even in the face of the investigation.
Amway is trying to crack the HLF dominance of the Latin/South American nutrition market the same way HLF is trying to enter China and India.
Have you read those 14 key points from the Complaint against Herbalife?
behindmlm.com/companies/herbalife/14-key-points-from-the-ftcs-herbalife-complaint-and-conclusion/
Nothing in the factual allegations have been changed. FTC only dropped the label “pyramid scheme”, saying that Herbalife had all the characteristics of a pyramid scheme but the case has been settled.
FTC haven’t proved it in court, and Herbalife haven’t disproved it. But Herbalife have agreed to restructure its business model and to be supervised for seven years. It also paid for damages it had caused.
You added a lot of personal opinion yourself?
Why don’t you read the settlement? I haven’t read it myself, but I had a quick look at the press release from FTC a week ago.
Your idea:
The reality:
You will notice a lot of changes, but they will come gradually over 10 months or more. You can compare it to Vemma’s changes, but Vemma only had to have 51% retail sale to non-affiliates. Herbalife will need to have 67% sale to non-affiliates after 10 months.
@ M Norway
Seriously?? You are quoting someone’s opinion piece as factual, legal evidence?
If you read the actual ruling and not someone’s blog post, you’ll know that Herbalife violated four counts of the FTC Act: Unfair Practices, Income Misrepresentations, False or Unsubstantiated Claims of Income from Retail Sales, Means and Instrumentalities (or deceptive promotional material). “14 key points”, lol.
Don’t get me wrong, the FTC ruling is serious and significant. Among other things, it found that HLF “deceived consumers”, that their “compensation structure was unfair”. The FTC asserted that their promotional marketing materials used in recruitment were essentially fraudulent.
But understand this, the FTC found them (Ozedit: to be a pyramid scheme and in violation of the law. Made up story removed)
@ M Norway
You are arguing my point. The FTC is clear that it did not classify HLF as a pyramid scheme. (Ozedit: As per their complaint, yes they did. Alternate realty content removed.)
I have no idea what you’re talking about there. I gave you a link to a behindmlm article about 14 key points. It quotes directly from the Complaint against Herbalife. I also gave you a list of those 14 key points.
Nothing has really changed in the factual allegations. FTC only dropped the label “pyramid scheme”, it didn’t change the factual allegations.
It’s a settlement, not a ruling (nothing has been proven in court). The factual allegations haven’t been disputed by Herbalife. The settlement is based on those allegations.
Herbalife didn’t “clear its name and reputation”. It didn’t dispute anything. It only avoided the label “pyramid scheme”.
@ M Norway
To be factually accurate, the complaint (not the ruling as I earlier stated) accused Herbalife of four violations of the FTC Act. Still not 14.
@ M Norway
Omg. The 14 key points you state from behindmlm are someone’s interpretation and opinion of the FTC complaint. It was not from the FTC. The FTC will never state a company’s “attrition rates are horrendous”. That was someone’s opinion in a blog article.
Here is the FTC complaint: ftc.gov/system/files/documents/cases/160715herbalifecmpt.pdf
Pages 39-40 detail the four counts that HLF was accused to be in violation.
@ M Norway
I am seeing this same non-legal, incorrectly informed opinion elsewhere in this blog. The settlement is legally binding between the parties. It may not set legal precedent but it is an offical document with legal conclusions as if it did go to trial.
The allegations and some of the legal definitions of what HLF is and isn’t have been defined in the ruling including that HLF is not a pyramid scheme (they are defined as a MLM company in the ruling, which is legal business and not a pyramid scheme).
It is obvious that Herbalife did not clear its name and reputation to you. That is fine and your right.
However, this settlement and ruling did accomplish a number of things for Herbalife including freedom to operate and the understanding that is is a legal operation, albeit one that was in violation and with a number of practices is needs to fix.
It contains the normal “Defendants neither admit nor deny any of the allegations in the Complaint, except as specifically stated in this Order”. That’s what you normally will find in settlements.
If you want me to look at something specific then you must say so.
Vemma decided to dispute pyramid scheme allegations. Herbalife decided to settle without a fight, to avoid the same situation Vemma is in. But Herbalife got similar types of restrictions.
FTC classified Herbalife as a pyramid scheme too … in the Complaint. The Complaint is about the substance of the case, about all the alleged “wrong doing”. It will be seen as factual and true … as undisputed by Herbalife but neither admitted nor denied.
You’re probably correct. Oz have probably added some “personal colour” in his description. I guessed that he had quoted directly from the Complaint … like he usually does.
WTF? That 14 point article is 99.9% quoted from the FTC complaint.
Look, Herbalife is a pyramid scheme as described in the complaint. Get over it son.
You can’t be legal and in violaton of the law. Rekt.
If Herbalife was legal and had no problems with their business model, they were free to take the FTC to court.
They didn’t, because they were/are operating as a pyramid scheme.
Trouble is, in Herbalife “product sales” = only affiliates are buying.
That’s why it’s a pyramid scheme. Having a “leadership position” is neither here nor there.
If Herbalife was mostly recruitment in the US, you can bet it’s mostly recruitment globally.
I did, everything in green on that article is quoted directly from the FTC complaint. I only added the headings and one sentence (not quoted in green).
@Aaong
Feel free to explain how the following, quoted directly from the FTC complaint, doesn’t describe Herbalife as a pyramid scheme:
Herbalife was also fined for harm to consumers, certainly not the result of a legal business model.
If you want to live in an alternate reality, that’s fine. Do it elsewhere. You can address the above in your next comment. Anything else will be marked as spam.
@ Oz
You are wholly incorrect. (Ozedit: Alternate realty that ignores the facts removed.)
@ Oz
There are a number of details in the investigation on why the FTC did not/could not classify HLF as a pyramid scheme. One reason is actually in the quote you provided.
As you cited, HLF’s compensation program did not solely reward based on recruitment. It incentivized recruitment by providing recruitment rewards but it was not the only way distributors made money. They were also rewarded based on retail sales.
As you also quote, some of the big distributors were primarily, but not solely, rewarded based on recruitment.
Unlike companies like New Life, Vemma, etc. a HLF distributor’s income was not entirely or almost entirely provided by recruitment. It did not meet the burden or companies declared to operate an illegal enterprise (i.e., pyramid scheme).
By defining Herbalife over and over again as a pyramid scheme, they classified it as one. They just didn’t use the label.
When recruitment is the primary source of revenue, everything else is pseudo-compliance. That’s how pyramid scheme regulation works.
And the problem was, like in all pyramid schemes, there was next to no retail activity taking place. So again, outside of paying affiliates to recruit new affiliates, everything else in Herbalife’s compensation plan was pseudo-compliance.
Yet that’s exactly what the FTC’s complaint states:
You don’t need to be paying solely on recruitment to be a pyramid scheme, recruitment commissions just needs to be how the majority of your affiliates are earning the majority of their commissions (this is consistent with the Vemma action, which was 5% retail or some small percentage from memory).
@ Oz
(Ozedit: The FTC complaint is not “my opinion”. Alternate reality that ignores the FTC complaint removed.)
Mate look, we’re here to discuss the FTC complaint. If you want to pass off the complaint and discussion around it as opinion, that’s fine – but you’re making up an alternate reality that departs from the facts as presented in the complaint.
We stick to the facts here, anything else is irrelevant.
The FTC complaint clearly states Herbalife affiliates primarily earned commissions on the recruitment of new affiliates. Thus far you’ve failed to explain how that’s not a pyramid scheme.
Instead you’re crapping on about it being “an opinion” and then pushing alternate reality discussion points that have nothing to do with the FTC’s complaint or its content.
I have a question about the “big picture” view of this decision:
We know the FTC is slow to move against pyramid schemes in general.
In my opinion, with “product driven pyramid schemes” like Vemma and Herbalife, it takes a lot of consumer complaints or massive media coverage before they act.
For example, with Vemma it took complaints from the parents of the college students to get the FTC to investigate.
Source: ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2015/08/ftc-acts-halt-vemma-alleged-pyramid-scheme”
Herbalife was more obvious. Would Herbalife have come into the cross hairs of the FTC without all of the publicity from short seller Bill Ackman?
Video update: bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-20/ackman-said-to-maintain-bet-against-herbalife-after-ftc-deal
So, the question is simple.
Were Vemma & Herbalife the FIRST OF MANY MLM companies that will also face FTC scrutiny or were they just a victim of circumstances?
Are these decisions from the FTC a shot across the bow for the entire MLM industry?
Is the “Upfront Buy-In with Autoship” MLM Model dead in the water?
That’s hard to call. Only the FTC know and they don’t discuss the internals of investigations.
It always was because it lends itself to a focus on affiliate recruitment, which in MLM equates to a pyramid scheme.
Only now though are we seeing a regulator do something about it.
If the FTC takes on another MLM company that’s guilty of using the same model in the next 6 months, I would agree with your statement of “Only now though are we seeing a regulator do something about it.”
If not, then it’s business as usual for the other MLM companies using a similar illegal pyramid model. Well, until the consumer complaints hit the level needed for the FTC (white knight) to ride in and save the participants (voters) of the next Zeek Rewards.
Your vehemence is commendable, but you’re basically splitting hair. The stipulation, signed off by both HLF and FTC clearly stated:
While it is true that Section 5 of FTC act does not mention “pyramid scheme” by name, it clearly stated that FTC was going after “unfair and deceptive acts or practices”.
(law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/45)
So basically HLF pled “no contest” of being an unfair and deceptive business, and agreed to change the way it does business.
Whether it was operating as a pyramid scheme or some OTHER type of unfair and deceptive business prior to the changes is a moot point. It basically admitted so.
We’ll see if other MLM companies start following the “HLF Safeguard Rules”, and whether DSA started recommending its members to do so soon.
I expect this will take several months, as the MLM lawyers, corporate lawyers, and former FTC attorneys and staff help them craft some template that they think will stop the FTC ban-hammer.
The FTC are apparently bringing out some guidelines for the MLM industry at some point.
As far as I can make out they’re in line with what I base my reviews on anyway, but I’ll certainly be taking them into consideration going forward.
If they’re concrete guidelines I might even start using them as criteria in review conclusions.
the DSA president joseph mariano has already made a vacuous statement about the FTC/herbalife settlement:
many industry voices are smarting under what they perceive as ‘overreach’ of the FTC. i suspect the DSA is going to rally its troops and push for the HR 5230 legislation, the “Anti-Pyramid Promotional Scheme Act of 2016,” which is currently pending before the ‘House Energy and Commerce Committee’.
supporters of this bill are hoping donald trump wins the presidential election as they feel his regime will be sympathetic to the MLM industry.
it will be worthwhile to track the progress of this bill.
Here’s the Complaint against Vemma.
Vemma was about a shutdown, while Herbalife is about a settlement. It’s formulated slightly different, but it has the same cause of action.
Here’s Herbalife.
There’s no significant differences there. Herbalife avoided the label “pyramid scheme” when it settled the case. FTC called it “unfair practices” rather than pyramid scheme.
Yes, it’s true: the FTC described Herbalife as a pyramid scheme, stating outright:
(1) unfair and deceptive practices
(2) the business op is an illusion for most, who must lose money for the top to make money.
Avoiding those words was clearly important to Herbalife’s global operations. They must be hoping they can continue to operate world wide, which is partially outside of the reach of US regulators.
Growth in China is risky. I have a friend who lived there for 8 years while he was getting an advanced degree at a top University there, and the government there *hates* that particular kind of behavior and has the power to immediately stamp it out if/when they choose to.
FTC didn’t classify Herbalife that way, but it clearly could have done it … based on the factual allegations.
There are some major differences, but you didn’t focus on those but rather on other factors. You focused on what you saw as “incorrect interpretation of the case”, but you didn’t exactly provide more correct interpretations yourself.
* Vemma was temporarily halted by the court order, while Herbalife has been allowed to continue “unhalted”. A negotiated deal is much better than an involuntarily solution.
* Vemma was literally out of business for a few months, while Herbalife has been given time to adjust itself to new conditions.
Both Vemma and Herbalife have been allowed to continue operating a business. It means that both were found to have some legitimate business activities. So there isn’t much difference there either.
Most MLM companies will have some legitimate business activities. They will almost always have some sale to consumers. Even BurnLounge was allowed to continue operating one part of its business. The fact that Herbalife had some retail sale doesn’t make it “more legitimate” than Vemma.
Someone wrote this on the FTC blog:
I found it interesting. Note the word ‘member’. Isn’t HL going to use ‘preferred member’ instead of ‘preferred customer’? Or am I reaching?
ftc.gov/news-events/blogs/business-blog/2016/07/its-no-longer-business-usual-herbalife-inside-look-200#comment-407243
That direct link to a specific comment didn’t work for some reason. So here’s a link to the blog post.
ftc.gov/news-events/blogs/business-blog/2016/07/its-no-longer-business-usual-herbalife-inside-look-200
herbalife’s performance after adopting the settlement conditions with the FTC, shows a sharp decline in american sales [18%] and a small decline internationally [5%]:
Herbalife (NYSE:HLF) Q2 results ($M): Global Net Sales: 1,146.9 (-4.6%); North America: 218.4 (-18.4%).
if the first results post settlement are showing such a sharp decline things dont look too good for herbalife america.
UNLESS, they lobby hard for the moolenar amendment, then rebrand herbalife for a fresh start in the US just like vemma did with bode!
You have to remember there’ll be a lot of diehards in Herbalife for which the FTC settlement hasn’t sunk in yet.
Don’t underestimate the marketing bubble world. For many Herbalife affiliates it’ll take a while to realize that without chain-recruitment they have no business.
How is HLF looking now? All the distributors and investors buying and boosting their stock (Ozedit: If you wish to discuss the stock market do it elsewhere. Offtopic derail attempts removed.)
As per their latest investor call, not too good in the US.
-7.3% last quarter year on year and -12% for the year in total from 2016.
South America dropped 10% too.
Seems the only market Herbalife are focusing on is China, where they can still operate as a pyramid scheme. Dropped $90 mill
in bribeson a “China Growth and Impact Investment Fund” only recently.bill ackman has bowed out of his herbalife short which was the reason the whole herbalife/FTC investigation began.
i guess he now believes herbalife will survive.
if herbalife was a pyramid scheme it would collapse quickly under 66% retail requirements.
if american sales have declined 12% over the year, it shows slowdown but not collapse. sudden changes to the comp plan and bad publicity could have also contributed to the slowdown.
i think there is still hope for herbalife and it’s product is not quite as worthless as ackman made it out to be. you cant go from zero retail to 66% retail in one year with only 12% fall in sales volume in the US.
MLM attorney kevin thompson has posted his viewpoint on this issue in a video on his FB page.
Remember that compliance report that came out with all but a few words unredacted?
I believe that Herbalife aren’t in full compliance yet, hence the massive redactions (on top of whatever else it is they’re hiding).
What we don’t know is how many Herbalife affiliates left over the past 12 months and how many are left in the US.
I think it’ll take a few years yet before we see a complete picture. And hopefully the FTC don’t continue to give them a free pass on settlement compliance.
i missed that news.
just read about it on the natural products insider website.
well, IF a trumpian FTC gives herbalife a free pass on compliance over the next seven years and betsy devos manages to get HR 3409 passed then herbalife will be home free, i guess.
and if the FTC is indeed giving herbalife a free pass on compliance then it means MLM regulation in the US is corrupt.
the FTC needs to follow a single set standard in regulating MLM no matter what the political climate is. cant have a messy messed up mess.
according to comments on seeking alpha, freedom of information [FOIA] requests have been filed to make the herbalife compliance reports public and the SEC is being petitioned to pressure the FTC into releasing the compliance reports.
meanwhile, icahn may take herbalife private thus shielding it from the SEC’s scrutiny while relying on the FTC to turn a blind eye on compliance:
personally, i think herbalife will manage to keep the compliance reports secret. they have a lot of political muscle, and especially now.
Nah. It would collapse slowly as affiliates met their 66% targets by persuading relatives / friends / churchgoers to buy their MLM crap, or inventing fictitious buyers. Like every other MLM pyramid scheme.
HLF business remains healthy. HLF stock price is over +65% for the past year, over 100% when looking at the past 5 years. I hope all companies in my portfolio perform that well (note, I do not work for HLF or own any of their stock). Strong growth in major markets especially China. Will easily meet FTC compliance goals.
Completely factually incorrect regarding China model. HLF sells products through store fronts in China. Communist government prevented them from selling through distributors, unless in the US.
has nothing to do with the health of the MLM business.
US is shrinking and China isn’t doing much. That’s why they pumped another hundred mill into the market.
Not without likely having to close down in the US at some point. There’s a reason the compliance report was so heavily redacted.
Lol. Herbalife doesn’t run stores in China.
Running the same pyramid scheme they were running in the US but getting new recruits to buy from a “retail store” is still a pyramid scheme.
The FTC investigation revealed Herbalife had little retail sales activity in the US. It’ll be the same all over the world.
Oz, you clearly don’t know the facts here. HLF sells through retail stores in China, similar to Amway.
They were forced to do so by the Chinese government. MLM is not the primary distribution model there.
Overall HLF product sales will continue to grow for at least a few years until demand flattens out, like it has for Amway China.
This is from the Herbalife China website:
However they have rigged it up, Herbalife is not making money in China operating as a single-level retailer.
Anyway, Brazil was their largest market last I checked. Another country with weak pyramid fraud regulation.
You can bet Herbalife retail sales in Brazil are dwarfed by affiliate recruitment and autoship volume.
Pinktruth.com the site that has been exposing Mary Kay for the MLM pyramid scheme that it is, has just posted this video. It’s hilarious.
Herbalife, among others, all get an honorable mention.
m.youtube.com/watch?v=z3gNTBNpG6A&feature=youtu.be
The Checkout! Aussies have a certain way of taking the piss 😀
How the fuck can anyone lose money if they buy products???? They consume them and if they dont its theira problem…
if you go to shop and buy protein powder do you say i lost money lol?
The same way people have been losing money in Herbalife for years.
You sign up, buy a bunch of products from your upline so they get paid. Recruitment collapses and you lose money.
Negligible retail sales is the root of MLM losses.
They did in fact prove that they had more than 66% consumers who are not in the plan and within the allotted timeframe.
In otter words, though I have never been involved in it nor will I, Herbalife is not an illegal pyramid.
(Ozedit: derail removed)
Not the FTC during the lawsuit they didn’t. Herbalife was operating as a pyramid scheme, that’s why they settled.
Feel free to provide documented evidence Herbalife’s revenue is made up of 66% retail sales.