Isagenix attorney confirms corporate Amazon sales strategy
A week or so ago Isagenix co-founder Jim Coover stated:
Isagenix has never actively promoted products on Amazon or encouraged others to do the same.
Now Isagenix’s Chief Legal Officer has confirmed a corporate-level Amazon sales strategy.
On or around March 24th Justin Powell shared an update with concerned 8 Star Platinum and higher ranked Isagenix distributors.
In his post, Powell addressed Isagenix’s “strategy for dealing with Amazon sales generally”.
Powell pushes Isagenix’s Amazon strategy as a move to “protect the Isagenix business opportunity”.
We have always prohibited the marketing or selling of our products through online sites, including Amazon.
However, despite our efforts to enforce this policy, which has included millions of dollars and countless hours over the years, unauthorized resellers continued to sell our products on these sites.
Although our efforts prior to launching the currency strategy reduced the number of unauthorized resellers from thousands to hundreds, we knew we could do better.
Powell claims Isagenix corporate selling on Amazon, the world’s largest ecommerce site, was “never about a money-making venture”.
Amazon strategy is less than 1% of revenue – not even a slice of pie on the a pie chart!
As to what Isagenix’s Amazon strategy entails, it appears to mostly focus on undercutting other sellers.
Our proactive strategy has been focused on … price undercutting.
Now, nearly a year into our initiative, we see tremendous progress on these issues.
- Monthly sales by unauthorized sellers have declined by 70%
- The percentage of listing priced at or above retail has gone from about 30% to nearly 95%
Our trends continue to be positive, showing that our Amazon strategy is working and our Associates are benefiting.
Whether anyone outside of corporate is benefiting financially from Isagenix selling products is unclear.
One thing I’m unclear on is how Isagenix undercutting third-party sellers raises the overall product listing price.
If I’m selling product A for $x and the company that sold the product to be competes against me for <$x, why would I go higher?
Also if Isagenix are undercutting retail pricing on Amazon, why would I buy at retail from their distributors?
When Isagenix implemented their Amazon sales strategy is unclear.
Mid last year however, iServe claimed they were selling products on Amazon as an “authorized seller partnering directly with Isagenix”.
Finally, if this has been going on since at least mid 2019, why did Jim Coover claim Isagenix has “never actively promoted products on Amazon”?
Was this some legally concocted wordplay in an attempt to differentiate between Isagenix “selling” and “promoting” on Amazon?
Another take is that the call Coover made the claim on was made available to anyone in Isagenix. Justin Powell’s post was restricted to top earners.
Whether anyone ranked less than 8 Star Platinum was aware of Isagenix’s Amazon sales strategy is unclear.
In a March 24th press-release linked by Powell, Isagenix’s partnership with iServe is, I believe for the first time, publicly disclosed:
Isagenix does indeed have a positive relationship with Amazon and uses a single, authorized third-party reseller.
For those looking for the latest on the Amazon retail racket case, Powell also provided some information on that.
In my view, Isagenix was only dragged into this lawsuit because are perceived to be a “deep pocket”.
Everything that has come to light so far (including various Plaintiff’s text messages) points to the truth that Isagenix was not aware of the plaintiff’s schemes to sell on Amazon behind the scenes.
When we found out, we stopped them from moving forward.
And at the time in question, we had no reason to believe Jay Bennett knew what the plaintiffs were up to.
One would assume Isagenix’s believing Bennett wasn’t in on the racket was due to his representations to the company.
As our previously published receipts show however, that’s clearly not the case.
One sticking point is the use of one credit card and one address to purchase products intended to be resold on Amazon.
This has to be overridden on Isagenix’s end, meaning someone within Isagenix corporate approved the decision.
Addressing this, Powell states;
The plaintiffs represented to us, through Jay, they were coordinating bulk purchases of Isagenix products that were going to a group of employees as part of a wellness program.
As we do with everyone, we did our best to work with them to facilitate their program (including temporarily allowing the products to be ordered in bulk and shipped to a single location) on condition they give us solid evidence the products were being consumed by actual customers, and also on condition that they comply with our policies.
As time passed, it became apparent to us we were being misled. So we put a stop to it. End of story.
By Isagenix’s own admission, they were being misled by Jay Bennett.
To the best of my knowledge Isagenix has taken no action against Bennett. He remains the company’s top earner.
As per Isagenix’s March 24th press-release, the company filed a motion to dismiss the Amazon retail racket case on March 23rd.