Hailsham Council suspend Lyoness local merchant project
Last month we brought you the story of the council of a town in England, gearing up to encourage local businesses to sign up as Lyoness merchants.
That town was Hailsham, with our coverage attracting the attention of town council staff.
In an attempt to answer some of the questions raised in BehindMLM’s initial article, John Harrison, Hailsham’s Town Clerk, reached out to us.
Hello,
I am the Town Clerk for Hailsham Town Council. Please could you email me directly and I will be able to answer some of the ‘questions’ and put right some of the incorrect assertions you have made on your blog concerning the promotion of Lyoness by Hailsham Forward.
I took the opportunity to refine some of the questions raised in our initial coverage, with the aim of seeking absolute clarification on the issue of a local government seemingly promoting Lyoness.
Here’s the questions I sent back, along with the answers Harrison kindly provided a few days later.
1. Who pitched Lyoness to Hailsham Council?
The first presentation by Lyoness to Hailsham Forward was given by Chris Thomson and the second by Chris Thomson and Liz Wright.
As a prominent promoter of Lyoness in Hailsham, I’d already guessed Liz Wright was probably involved.
Chris Thomson was a new name to me though, with research revealing him to be the Managing Director at Lyoness UK Limited.
2. Is anyone on Hailsham Council staff a Lyoness affiliate?
No.
This one was a bit of a surprise at first, but the answer to the next question explains why.
3. Who signed up Hailsham Forward into Lyoness. And if that hasn’t happened yet, who is the planned recipient of the upline position?
Hasn’t happened yet. Hailsham Forward as an organisation is the planned recipient.
It was agreed they would need an individual named contact. That hasn’t been agreed yet.
So we know somebody from HailSham Forward was to sign the organization up, but who had yet to be decided.
With local businesses invited to a Hailsham Forward presentation on October 2nd, presumably the contact would have been decided upon by then.
4. Who thought signing up a bunch of local businesses into Lyoness and getting them to invest in AU positions was a good idea in the first place?
This was discussed by the Hailsham Forward Executive and a democratic collective decision was made to carry this forward.
To what extent those who decided were aware of the specifics of the Lyoness compensation plan is unclear.
5. Has any government (public) funds been spent by Hailsham Forward or Hailsham Council on Lyconet/Lyoness Accounting Units?
No.
No public monies have been spent on signing up Hailsham Forward to Lyoness or on Lyoness accounting/shopping units – either from Hailsham Town Council or the Hailsham Forward ‘Portas’/Town Team funding.
Now this was great to hear. Once you step over that line of public funds being pumped into a privately held business opportunity, things get all sorts of murky.
6. What conflict of interest policies and procedures does Hailsham Council have in place to deal with situations like this?
Hailsham Town Council has adopted a code of conduct which is available on our website.
This code of conduct is that recommended by the Wealden District Council Monitoring Officer.
7. Have those policies and procedures been followed, or has nobody sought to investigate who stands to profit personally within Hailsham Council if local Hailsham businesses sign up to Lyoness?
I believe that they have, because no one individual within the Town Council or Hailsham Forward stands to profit if Hailsham businesses sign up to Lyoness.
The second answer was interesting, as it suggests an existing Lyoness affiliate (Wright?) would have been the direct upline to Hailsham Forward’s affiliate position.
I say that because Nick Collinson is apparently out, as per the following clarification from Harrison:
Cllr Nick Collinson has no affiliation to Lyoness.
Lyoness have not been presented at any of Chapter 12’s Business networking events.
Chapter 12 Wine Bar is not signed up to the Lyoness scheme.
Might Chapter 12 Wine Bar have signed up to Lyoness at a later date, thus giving Collinson an effective Lyoness affiliate position? Who knows.
But at the time of publication, that’s purportedly where things stand.
Oh, and there’s also this:
This project has been suspended until the Town Council and Hailsham Forward has more thoroughly investigated the scheme.
As I informed you last week, the 2nd October Hailsham Forward Business Forum meeting will now not include a presentation or ‘launch’ from Lyoness.
Glad to see Hailsham Council are looking further into the whole AU side of merchant affiliate accounts. Probably should have been done before the green light on encouraging local businesses to sign up was given, but I digress.
We’ll keep you updated on any further developments.
lyoness-corporate.com carries an article from hailsham about the town gearing up to join lyoness.
lyoness-corporate.com/getattachment/58c3493f-1458-47c6-997a-f260a5743656/Eastbourne-Grazette.aspx
this idea of working through small city politics/local associations, and getting whole cities to join up with lyoness, is probably encouraged by lyoness, as they are carrying this news on their website.
a small town in australia called bribie also invited the regional manager of lyoness, peter martin, to speak at the Bribie Better Business networking event.
going through city associations will naturally add a lot of credibility to lyoness, and local business will sign up willingly.
the news article from bribie doe not mention the lyoness/ACCC case at all.
lyoness-corporate.com/getattachment/de032556-691d-46f8-aca0-981e6816c021/Bribie-Weekly-(1).aspx
As I stated before. You cast aspersions on the head of this council.
in your previous article claiming he was somehow acting in a conflict of interest in order to personally benefit. I believe you owe this man an apology and it would show some real class if you do so on this forum. It seems these people are just looking out for their community.
with no personal gain intended. Of course the Lyoness rep would benefit as any salesperson from any company would if they made a sale to a town. It seems the council had no intention of putting any money in for units as it is not necessary, they were interested in promoting the shopping which is what Lyoness is all about.
I think this would be of great benefit to this town and I hope it was not your contact that halted the start of this program as you would be depriving this community of a real powerful opportunity because of your narrow minded position.
As I said before I would voluntarily have put in a couple hundred dollars for units for this town and thus start an ongoing income stream for them that they would never need to fund.
I am working on a few similar initiatives in my area that should come to fruition shortly and will keep you informed so you can try to scuttle it.
if lyoness was just about the shopping, there would be no AU unit investments. so many lyoness reps have come and gone here, but not ONE has been able to explain the AU units.
you want everyone to believe that lyoness is about the 2-5 % discounts, which will ‘benefit’ the town, then goodluck with that. the moment hailsham had signed up with lyoness, you would have been marching the streets getting people to invest in AU’s.
well, go ahead and explain the AU ponzi scheme to hailsham authorities. what’s stopping you?
Show me again how this helps any town any where.
@tower5 Seems you are of a narrow mind yourself clouded by you bias being part and parcel of the same program.
Of course you would drop in a few dollars tob further the agenda. Lets not fool ourselves.
If these towns want money or increased revenue for their shops they can use theor own resouces such as newspapers and tv. Create their own cards and shopping coupon books. Its not hard for local businesses to team up to do this.
I am sure Oz did nothing more than put facts in front of them about what they are about to get into. Who can get mad at that besides the people that stand to gain from it.
is this the new lyoness corporate plan? take over small cities and towns by infusing lyoness with city politics and associations?
you may piss off regulators with such bold selling of your ponzi scheme. be careful.
Another question could be, why on earth would a merchant pay, $2000-$3000 to join some little deal that will drive virtually zero traffic to them, when there are companies that do it for FREE?
These companies drive Millions of unique visitors to their sites, a month and respectively similar traffic to the stores?
and heres a novel idea. Traffic and sales and sale to whom, all tracked. 🙂
@Tower5
And as those ultimately responsible for this mess, rightly so.
This should have been investigated before local businesses were invited to participate.
Dunno where you got that from, all the council said was it hadn’t happened yet.
As a participant in the AU investment scheme, of course you would. Hardly surprising.
@Tower5
Answer: NO-IT-WOULD-NOT!
The shady AU investment part set aside..
For small local shops and businesses, for which these programs are intended, for less than £ 200,=/€ 300,= ONCE! and a fee per transaction only – so no high monthly recurring costs! – there are much cheaper and better alternatives that offer the same service but without all the fluff.
This would also mean a shop could probably offer a higher discount than a lousy 2-5% no consumer these days is going to be impressed about, and which would also make it more attractive for a business to join.
@EmJay
So why has 50,000 plus merchants signed up? You name me the better alternative.
You seem to overlook the fact that the merchant can sign up their existing customers and earn 1% of their shopping elsewhere through the program.
I have merchants who are actively going after that. If a merchant signs up 1000 customers who spend a paltry $200 per month which is easy because we are talking about gas and groceries and other necessities that yields him $2000 per month income when his customers are shopping somewhere else outside his business.
If he sells his business he continues to get half of that, that is a significant pension income for signing up 1000 customers which can be accomplished in 6 months for a business like a restaurant.
You may not want to believe it or accept it but the business owner is not chasing after these people to buy units we simply want hem to shop in the system.
You all keep harping on the fact that many Lyoness members have not erased from their mind the AU system pre November 8th but what about all the members after Nov 8th. Why not comment o the changes made since then.
Oz you are being dishonest here by blaming the head of this town for causing the problem in order not to apologize for your unwarranted comments.
It seems to me this is a stand up guy. They took it to a vote in council, they were going to pick someone just to be the rep for this project he did not try to benefit himself and when it was brought to their attention they stoped and are doing a further check into the program.
That sounds like honesty to me and we wished we had more elected representatives like that. I believe you need to apologize.
See how easy it is to fool some people ???
Lyoness says it has 50,000 merchants signed up and it becomes a “fact” for people such as Mr Tower.
So, Mr Tower, I have this one-of-a-kind bridge going cheap you may be interested in buying and re erecting in Hailsham
You Lyoness drones keep overlooking the fact that nothing justifies the AU Ponzi scheme.
You are doing yourself a disservice by demonstrating your failure to read plain English.
As someone frothing at the mouth to profit on other’s investment in AUs, I’m hardly surprised.
Well hopefully they don’t ignore the AU Ponzi scheme.
What about them? Shopping Units? It’s the same Ponzi bullshit.
The only people that need to apologize here are scammers such as yourself. To your victims, go on sport…
in the specific case of hailsham, this town has a population of about 20,000.
the chances of a merchant signing up 1000 customers is highly unlikely.
a more realistic figure would be signing up a 100 people, spending 200$ each, which would generate an income of 200$, which you yourself call a paltry amount. even the number of merchants who are able to sign up 100 customers will be low.
we all know that the only way people in hailsham can make money in lyoness, will be by investing in AU’s or shopping units or whatchamacallit, and earn recruitment commissions.
stop the BS.
the head of the town should be thanking oz for saving his ass from political suicide.
bringing lyoness in with city govt support, would have blown up the town head’s chair sooner than later, when recruitment slowed in a town of low population like hailsham.
@Tower5
Try hitting your Enter key every now and then okay?
It might make your responses even more enjoyable to read..
50.000 hmm?
Did you include an extra planet to get to that number, because even when I tick ALL options, cashback, vouchers etc. on the USA site alone, no more than 2925 merchants show up.
Which makes 50.000 highly unlikely and thus it becoming very difficult to have a thousand customers using their cards anywhere/elsewhere for a merchant to receive an impressive 1%.
B.T.W. That 1% ?
That’s not extra income my friend..
It’s desperatly needed to:
A.) Help to pay the monthly recurring $199,= bill he receives regardless of the nr. of transactions he does.
B.) lower the amount in discounts he himself gave to *his* customers with a card (if any show up) and
C. pay for the high costs of joining the program in the first place.
Oh,.. and if the number of merchants would reflect the quality of a program, every McD around the world would have 3 Michelin stars wouldn’t it ?
Unfortunately I can’t name you the name, would be selfpromo, which Oz doesn’t like, but besides the very low costs of joining i mentioned earlier, and the no-transactions-no-bill i perhaps forgot to mention you *also* can sign up to receive commissions for shopping done elsewhere.
well, he does……every time he reads ‘would you like to process this transaction’ as he steals more money from unsuspecting marks.
Since you mentioned “I have merchants who are actively going after that”, what RESULTS have they managed to achieve so far?
Examples:
* Have ANY of them managed to sign up 1,000 Lyoness members in 6 months?
* Appr. how many Lyoness members have the best one managed to sign up in 6 months?
* Appr. how many Lyoness members have the average merchant managed to sign up in 6 months?
The reason for the question:
You used imaginary figures, “1,000 customers in 6 months”. I’m trying to add some real substance to it.
@EmJay What $199? Now you are resorting to out and out lying our merchants do not pay any monthly fees and you know that.
Yes 2925 merchants in the USA alone. Are you aware we are in 46 countries? Add up the merchants in each.
@M Norway I have signed up 5 merchants. The best performing has signed up about 140 of their customers since July 2015 and who keep coming back to her store.
One merchants details boats for a living and he has signed up about 50 in the two years he is on but he deals with high end fairly wealty individuals and he gives them generous cash back. I have two real estate agents who have just come on.
One gives back 30% total of her commission, she has got her first sale through Lyoness that she wold not have gotten otherwise. The other gives back 20% They have both only broght in a handful of people.
I also have one merchant tat handles childrens parties she has signed up about 50 members since joining in January 2015. The best merchant I know of in my community signed up about 5500 members in 4 months, he runs a seasonal garden centre and signed them up between April and August last year.
It is up to the merchant how well they use the program. If they just join and expect customers to show up without marketing to the community it probably wont work well for them.
For $1490 to get Salesforce CRM tool, a Samsung tablet, 250 co branded cards, listing on our website with mobile google mapping to their door, plus the ability to market to a growing database of customers for no additional fee is a no brainer decision for a merchant.
I must apologize to OZ I thought you were a person of integrity than can admit you are wrong since
I admire some of the things you are doing n this site but it turns out you are just full of yourself and another blowhard do gooder who is busy patting himself on the back. This has gotten to your head and it is win at all cost forget about the truth.
That’s why I asked you to add some substance to it. Hypothetical income potentials are not very relevant in business.
I had a quick look at it. It looks like the number of customers each merchant can sign up without “pushing it” will be dependant on the type of business they’re running. It’s not “up to the merchant”, it will make very little sense for a merchant to start a new type of business just to be able to sign up more Lyoness members.
“The best performing has signed up 140 customers since July 2015”, the rest of them had signed up a few handfulls = 50 customers or less (in 8 months / 2 years).
The average number of customers here is closer to 50 customers in 6 months than to 1,000.
Corrected version …
@M Norway That is correct sir but this is $100 income to help offset what this merchant is giving up for his marketing expense.
If he can sign up another 50 by end of year now he can earn $200 per month. Compare that to dropping flyers and perhaps getting no response or doing Groupon and discounting your merchandise by 50% and giving half of that to Groupon, thus selling at a loss and creating no loyalty since those people are only looking for the next deal.
your mythical scenarios and allegations that real businesses don’t already have/can’t get loyal customers on their own is laughable.
I spend NOTHING on advertising (website is all) and get customers all the time – especially form word of mouth.
If you have a business that people want and are good at it, you don’t need to ever deal with lyoness/lyconet/flexkom scams.
@Tower Cut the reverse-psychology marketing BS, it’s a wasted effort.
The only truth here is that a Ponzi scheme was about to be pushed by local government. They investigated and now those plans are on hold.
Feel free to take it up with Hailsham Council if you need any further clarification, I don’t have any part in their decision-making process.
Your “best performer” probably signed up the customers she already had?
She’s fooling herself if she see those customers as “Lyoness customers”. She most likely had all of them as customers before they became Lyoness members.
A good loyalty program should offer data (customer knowledge) rather than customers, e.g. information the merchant can use to match “products of interest” with individual consumers (or groups of consumers).
That’s what other loyalty programs do, and they are much more useful for a merchant than Lyoness. They help the merchants sell more to the customers they already have, by finding products the customers can be interested in (based on purchase history).
I don’t see Groupon as very useful. It may be useful for SOME purposes. Lyoness belong in the same group, “it can be useful for SOME purposes”.
I don’t see dropping flyers as very useful either.
But I see your point. “Lyoness will look more acceptable if we compare it to something that is less useful”.
A lot of small business people are doing “something that is less useful”, since Lyoness is more useful and you have no alternative for these people to use, let them join and give it a good effort.
Many of them are very happy. Just go to youtube or vimeo and search for Lyoness merchant testimonials, you will find lots there and none of them to my knowledge mentions units but a few have referenced the 1% friendship bonus.
Unfortunately the merchant network doesn’t justify the AU investment scheme.
Testimonials are neither here nor there.
I have looked at some, e.g. “Andrew from Australia” who joined in January 2012.
youtube.com/watch?v=aV01xNflmOk
He had some “mixed experience” with Lyoness, e.g. he didn’t like Lyconet. He didn’t like Lyoness either, but he “loved the idea” of bringing more customers to struggling merchants.
So I’m familiar with testimonials.
M Norway you found one negative testimonial and 150 positive ones yet choose to dwell on the negative.
Oz get off the AU thing it is getting stale. (Ozedit: Any further attempts to derail by ignore the AU Ponzi scheme will be marked as spam.)
A downpayment to shop? What motivates a member to want to do that?
Sounds like the AU debate is still fresh as ever.
I mean thats no different than any other site asking you to prespend for a future return on investment.
Make it clear either these marketers are customers or members?
I don’t see a need in the marketplace to prepay just to shop as I just find what I want and buy at the best price at the time.
Looks like someone has high expectations of people to just prepay “invest” in future shopping just so they get
bonuses.
@Tower5
I have to apologise, I was incorrect.
In the US merchants don’t pay $199,= each month.. Its *only* $135,= monthly after 12 months.
To sign up they pay $2990,= which has the $135,= x 12 already included.
But – since I don’t like to be called a liar- I made the effort to check on pricing in some other countries and waddayou know..
-GB. £ 2299,= sign up £99,= monthly after 12 months
-Germany € 2199,= sign up € 99,= monthly after 12 months
-AUS. AUD$ 3299,= sign up AUD$ 150,= monthly after 12 months
-NL. € 2199,= sign up € 99,90 monthly after 12 months.
Who’s lying now hm. ?
All the best to you..
and if a lyconet member recruits another member who buys a $75 unit, how much commission does he get?
and your lyoness opportunity is such a joke. people have to work their asses off getting 100 people to sign up and then stand to earn approx 200$ per month, if all their sign ups spend 200$ each on shopping. hardly worth calling an ‘opportunity’.
The only thing stale here is the repeated attempts by Lyoness affiliates to ignore the AU investment scheme.
@EmJay
Lyoness has included the Salesforce Customer Relation Management tool in the package for merchants since around October 2014.
The CRM tool is used by very large companies and I believe it is about a $3000 value.
Salesforce is partnering with Lyoness to bring their program to the small business market.
Their tool is included in the merchant package for one year. If the merchant wants to continue using the tool then they pay a monthly fee, but it is totally up to them if they like using it.
It allows them to do all sorts of analytics, customer surveys, and much more that is why there s a fee. They can stop it after a year.
Previous merchants do not have it and have no fees. I will apologize to you for throwing out the “liar” label so frivolously but you are incorrect about it.
We do not get paid for the member putting in $75 Our model is not based on head hunting but on shopping.
I pay Lyoness $75 (or more), and once enough subequent payments of $75 (or more) have been made by other Lyoness affiliates, I get paid a greater than 100% ROI.
No shopping takes place, with subsequent investments of $75 (or more) made to Lyoness being the only qualifier for my ROI payout.
Lyoness doesn’t work that way. Members have a “lifeline” with units, so the new unit will be added to an existing lifeline and eventually generate some minor commissions to multiple people in upline.
“Binary lifeline”
The “lifeline” is a binary plan (“binary pairs”), placed sideways on the screen rather than from top to bottom. So instead of “left / right legs” you have “above and below”.
Commissions are paid on 3/3 (above and below), 5/5, 10/10, 15/15, 20/20 and 25/25. You also have multiple other commissions paid from the same units.
You have 5 matrices with increasing unit prices:
AC1: $75 per unit — 35+35 units
AC2: $225 per unit — 30+30 units
AC3: $600 per unit — 25+25 units
AC4: $1800 per unit — 25+25 units
AC5: $6000 per unit — 25+25 units
Typical investment = $3,000 = 7+3+3 units.
AC1: 7×$75 = $525
AC2: 3×$225 = $675
AC3: 3×$600 = $1,800
“Premium membership”
The $3,000 investment will qualify for Premium membership, and will give access to at least two other investment programs based on the same system with 5 matrices, e.g. “North American” program and “International” program.
* Andy from Canada asked the 5 investors in “Dragon’s Den” for $35,000 CAD from each of them, a total of $175,000 CAD. That was probably meant for investments in 3 different programs.
* “Andrew from Australia” was recommended by his sponsor in the UK to invest 2×$3000 AUD when he joined in January 2012.
yeah tower5, try not to use obfuscation and half lies here, to support your case.
lyoness wants lots of people to invest in multiples of 75$, before they pay recruitment commissions, that is a clear invitation to encourage recruitment.
Here’s some additional information …
The $75 unit is a minimum investment. A member must recruit minimum 4 other members, each with minimum 1 accounting unit in AC1, to become qualified for most of the commissions. It’s not a typical investment.
Some recruiters will probably sponsor the first unit so they can qualify themselves for commissions, e.g. they can qualify themselves if they sponsor 2 passive family members or friends + 2 active ones, one above and one below.
From the review …
Each unit will generate payouts to multiple people, typically people in upline — but some units will end up as “spillovers” and generate payouts for people in downline too.
AC3 payouts to qualified member:
3/3 $120 “interim payout” (matching bonus 18.75% and 6.25%)
5/5 $180 “interim”
10/10 $240 “interim”
15/15 $360 “interim”
20/20 $480 “interim”
25/25 $600 “interim”
– – – – – –
Total $1,980 cash (+ $495 matching bonus to upline)
25/25 $2,400 credit or cash, “maturity payout”
– – – – – –
Total $4,380
Credits can be reinvested in additional units, or it can be used to purchase gift cards. That’s a potential Ponzi scheme component — “reinvestment of internal funds”.
If you invest in 3+3 units, then your sponsor will get 6 units above or below, and his sponsor will get the same 6 units, and his sponsor will get the same 6 units, and so on and so forth all the way up to the top. So most payouts will go to people in upline.
No, the way YOU as an individual choose to approach the it may be “based on shopping”
The MODEL However, is members pay Lyoness $75 (or more), and once enough subsequent payments of $75 (or more) have been made by other Lyoness affiliates, they then get paid a greater than 100% ROI.
No shopping takes place, with subsequent investments of $75 (or more) made to Lyoness being the only qualifier for those members’ ROI payout.
Wow! I am confused. Seems you fellas invented the program.
All I know is I have seen people from Nova Scotia come to Toronto to buy a car (Ozedit: Offtopic derail attempts that have nothing to do with the AU investment scheme removed)
you can claim you are confused all you want, you’re just another scammer.
I guess they are giving away the cars, houses and groceries.
Nope. The AU investment scheme doesn’t require anything to be given away either.
All the people on this site care about is bashing one optional part of Lyoness and completely ignore the real business which is shopping.
You finally hit a nerve as Oz decided to edit your TRUE post detailing the shopping. Don’t worry, it happens to the best of us.
They choose to post and discuss what they want, full truth or not.
If you’re in a Ponzi scheme and feel the only legitimate way to conduct business is to ignore the Ponzi scheme, you’re doing MLM wrong.
The Lyoness AU investment scheme has nothing to do with shopping. Creating strawman arguments around shopping as an attempt to dismiss the Ponzi scheme issue is a derail attempt and will be moderated accordingly.
If it’s so optional, why did it remain in Lyoness throughout its variations?
Clearly it has far more meaning to Lyoness than what you choose to ascribe to it.
Round and round we go. I’ve discussed this ad nauseum with you two.
One more time, SHOPPING creates units (Ozedit: So does direct investment into AU/Shopping Units. Offtopic derail attempt removed.)
Optionally, Lyoness (now Lyconet) allows a member to create a unit up front and if they choose to do so, and want to get the actual money back, you can receive the money back as you, yourself, shop. Or you can leave the units in and they create payouts as other shoppers’ units are created.
And this is where the Ponzi part kicks in. All monies are paid to and out of Lyoness, with no shopping taking place.
ROIs paid out required only that subsequent investments in AUs are made (passive ROI, which constitutes a securities offering).
Whether participation in the Ponzi aspect of the business is optional or not is irrelevant.
This is the part you choose not to see: “create unit up front” means DOING NO SHOPPING AT ALL. Instead of creating units like people who shopped honestly for their AU, these people PAY LYONESS directly, and got the SAME AUs WITHOUT DOING ANY SHOPPING.
Tell me, WHY would an alleged “shopping network” allow people who had done NO SHOPPING enjoy same level of benefits as people who earned their benefits through shopping, simply by PAYING corporate directly?
If this is involving a school, you’d call it “diploma mill scam”.
But somehow because it’s Lyoness, who bombarded you with bazillion word contracts and agreements, you decided this is somehow NORMAL.
It is YOU who’s going round and round and refuse to see the elephant in the room.
Hey Markie, thanks for chiming in. I know it does not get far with this bunch but at least for someone reading who is balanced in their thinking they will be able to decipher the truth.
I will use an analogy to make it clear for these guys.
You all may have at some time purchased (Ozedit: The AU investment scheme requires no analogies or purchases. Offtopic derail attempts removed.)
Man, if this is what we as the public have to go through with Lyoness affiliates, imagine what it’s like with their lawyers and regulators…
Cognitive dissonance, Oz. Except they trained themselves to not see the parts they don’t want to, ie inconvenient truth.
Sounds like a plea for “false balance”
NOLINK://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_balance
Will your analogy explain why a “shopping network” have a provision for participants to bribe their way up the reward level instead of shopping like they should have?
Cant stop laugh:
delfi.ee/news/paevauudised/eesti/radar-vorkturundusfirma-tombas-kurtidel-naha-ule-korvade?id=72692609
Lyoness lured deaf handicaped people into Premium Membership scheme 😉
BTW did you know in Estonia their authority Tarbijakaitseamet concluded Lyoness is not any illegal scheme end of 2013?
tarbija24.postimees.ee/2610406/tarbijakaitseamet-lyoness-ei-ole-puramiidskeem