The ACCC’s case against Lyoness
Back in August we reported that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) had filed a lawsuit against Lyoness.
As with our own Lyoness review, a press-release from the ACCC indicated that they had taken issue with Lyoness’ accounting unit investment scheme.
Today we take a closer look at particulars of the ACCC’s case.
The ACCC’s Statement of Claim was filed on the 28th of August in the Federal Court of Australia (NSW).
It lists four respondents:
- Lyoness Australia
- Lyoness Asia
- Lyoness UK and
- Lyoness International
The Statement of Claim briefly covers the cashback component of Lyoness’ compensation plan, before getting into the logistics of the AU investment scheme.
Lyoness affiliate downpayments are targeted, which the ACCC content offer no benefits outside of the Lyoness compensation plan and in limited circumstances, recovery of the funds used to pay for downpayments.
The ruse pushed to cover up affiliate investment in accounting units is that AU investments were “downpayments on shopping”.
Yet as the ACCC reveal downpayments made can be switched willy-nilly among Loyalty Merchants. The downpayments aren’t tied to any specific merchant.
How is this possible?
Well, as I’ve pointed out many times before, AU investment funds are deposited with Lyoness. They are external to the merchant shopping network.
The vouchers were in effect “Lyoness vouchers”, which were only converted to shopping credit with a particular merchant upon accounting unit maturity.
As to the particulars of the AU investment scheme, Lyoness affiliates are required to invest in a specific number of units to qualify for commissions. They also need to recruit at least four affiliates into the scheme (who also invest in accounting units).
With all accounting unit investment funds retained and paid out by Lyoness, naturally they can’t pay out ROIs without new money being invested.
The amount of Loyalty Commission payable to a member depends wholly on the number of units they’ve invested in and what levels those units are on. An affiliate can maximize their position leverage by investing in units adjacent to eachother (stacking).
An affiliate earns 18.75% of the total Loyalty Commission paid out to any directly recruited affiliates and 6.25% paid to any of their recruited affiliates (level 2 downline and beyond).
The Loyalty Credit is of particular note here, as many Lyoness investors market the legitimacy of the program based on the fallacy that Loyalty Credit must be spent within the merchant network.
Rather, Loyalty Credit is able to be re-invested in Accounting Units to increase an affiliate’s investment portfolio.
In addition to this credit, there’s also the creation of bonus units, subject to a specific number of units being invested in a given Accounting Unit Category.
With no membership fees, the creation of bonus units yet again demonstrates the willingness with which Lyoness shuffles actual invested funds to existing members.
Finally, the ROI itself. Lyoness’ Account Unit ROIs pay out once a specified number of units have accrued under their invested position(s).
Simply put, you get paid your >100% cash ROI once enough new investments have been made after your own.
Being a Premium member entitles an affiliate to 3 units in AC3, 3 units in AC2 and 7 units in AC1 – it also qualifies them for a volume commission.
Qualification for the volume commission required a recruited downline who had invested at least $7500 in AUs. Qualification for Loyalty Commission, as stated earlier requires the recruitment of four affiliates who in turn invest in at least one unit themselves.
As more affiliates are recruited and invest in accounting units, so too do the commissions paid out to a Lyoness affiliate.
Shopping? What shopping?
Hard numbers in the Statement of Claim reveal that actual cashback payments made to Lyoness affiliates in the first half of 2013 were just 0.2% of the AU ROI liability. This is calculated assuming all AU investment was made at Accounting Level 1. If one considers a spread over multiple Account Unit levels (categories), the margin of difference only increases.
No wonder Lyoness CEO Herbert Freidl tells affiliates Lyoness “is all about positions!”
And where does all this money come from? Well for an accounting unit to mature, new investments must be made… this isn’t rocket science.
An affiliate is only paid out when downpayments (investment in AUs) occurs by recruited affiliates (a downline). Or in other words, it’s sourced from subsequent investors.
The cash ROI alone is higher than the cost of a single account unit investment at any Accounting Unit level.
Called out are the marketing efforts of “Global Go Getters”, an Australian Lyoness group of affiliates led by Andy and Wendy Hansen and Phil and Sally Watts.
Lyoness themselves are also accused of promoting the AU investment scheme on the merits of a >100% ROI rather than anything to do with shopping.
This resulted in Global Go Getters holding affiliate workshops where they marketed Lyoness on the merit of making downpayments and the resulting potential ROIs.
Sign up, make your investment and once enough new investments have been made you get paid “significantly greater than the value of” your initial investment.
In these workshops, there was no mention made of any benefits through the merchant shopping network.
Nobody who makes any money in Lyoness does through the shopping network. “It’s all about positions!”
In conclusion, the ACCC sum up that Lyoness has been operating in Australia as a pyramid scheme.
The ACCC charges that Lyoness are in breach of Australian Consumer Law, specifically as it relates to “pyramid selling” and “referral selling”.
The ACCC have asked that an injunction against Lyoness be granted, which effectively restrain them from operating in Australia for at least five years.
Should the ACCC succeed, Lyoness in Australia will cease to exist.
In addition to the injunction sought, the ACCC also request that the Federal Court fine Lyoness a pecuniary penalty, the amount of which will be determined at a later date.
Lyoness has since filed a response to the ACCC’s lawsuit in court but I haven’t as of yet seen a copy of it.
In the meantime, a recent news report revealed that ‘a directions hearing was held last month and the matter will resume in February next year.‘
Footnote: The ACCC’s Statement of Claim can be obtained from the Federal Court of Australia for a nominated admin fee.
Thanks for the update OZ, keep fighting the good fight!
Good to see Australia is joining the fight against terrible business models in the MLM industry that are giving substance to the bad image that the general public have of the industry.
I think the ACCC will certainly succeed if Lyoness dont make any major modifications to the current model in the mean time.
“LYONESS INCOME DISCLOSURE STATEMENT – US 2013”:
cdnlarge.lyoness.net/downloads/pdf/us/info/lyo-ids-us.pdf
^^^^^THAT is a majorly KAPOW! statement !!
That statement means dick. Membership as a shopper with Lyoness is free.
Ask them how much revenue came in via AU investment versus shopping generated units. That’s the inherent Ponzi scheme, don’t get distracted.
They obviously won’t tell you but the ACCC’s figures reveal the actual cashback versus AU investment liability.
Optimally (2% cashabck) in Australia you had $7.97 million in cashback. AU investment liability meanwhile was $54.2 million best case scenario.
Furthermore:
Affiliates “not in a career level” are counted as non-affiliates. As usual the raw affiliate numbers are bullshit.
It’s the incoming revenue that matters.
yeah, look at medians given:
half Lyoness members did not get more than 0,04$ a year
from Urban Dictionary:
😉
I’m actually surprised at Lyoness’ recent Income Disclosure Statement.
Surprised they didn’t need 398 pages of legal jargon to tell us the only people making money are those who massively invest in AUs and recruit others who do the same.
It looks they made an attempt to hide the scheme from beeing visible to publicity – there’s new revision of GTC issued effective Nov 8th in the Europe, that amends previous ones and there’s no “AU’s” “downpayments and other BS mentioned – there are so-called “Shoppng Points” instead.
Anybody knows what’s gonna happen to money stucked in Lyoness binary tree (I mean “formally”, because all we know what Ponzis in reality do with such money…)?
well, the rottweilers conveniently hid that in the fine print, expecting the normal reading public to accept that only 3% lyoness members were IBR’s.
there is NO mention that IBR’s ‘pay’ for AU’s, to be part of the lyoness income program either.
MOST IBR’s will not have generated a quad of IBR’s under them.
cunningly packing such IBR’s with free members is unforgivable.
what does the SEC do with all its free time ?
OK, so 72% of spending is done by associates and (following the ratios) less than 1/10th of 1% earn a full time income.
How much would it sway the averages if the included the 7th level “presidential career level 7” incomes?
@comfort
Do shopping points function any different to AUs or is it just Gerry Nehra pseduo-compliance?
@Common
Enough so that Lyoness inexplicably censored it from the statement.
@Oz
Well, this is not clear till now. The trick seems to be that compensation plan based on an old AU’s scheme is not shared to anyone not logged into Lyoness/Lyconet network.
This approach had been used already once, in 2012 with additional GTC. It will take some time to get it from “insiders”.
Of course Premium’s claim, that in fact nothing with Ponzi part changed 😉 but no details are available till now.
At this point I would say main change is that the wording “downpayment” is removed, so one cannot demand his downpayments back based on EU Consumer Protection Law which worked many times at Austrian courts.
Lyoness will probably replace it with something like “vouchers part price payment” or so, which will make things worse for members, from legal poin of view.
So basically the AU investment comp plan stays intact, they play word games and work harder at trying to hide it from everyone (so only the old boy’s club profit).
And the Lyoness farce continues…
WOW. I just read that IDS. Just because someone wasnt able to sign 4 people up, should not exclude them from the income averages.
Going with that, and factoring in operating expenses, only 0.26% break even. Add in the omitted presidential income. and you will see even more disqusting results.
Less than 0.01% making anything over 20K??? ITS FREAKING PATHETIC! These people are complete fools. Thats a success rate of at least 4000% LESS than the company that all these stupid “cashback” deals are trying to copy.
Seriously. These people must ACTUALLY, literally, live under a rock. HOLY CRAP!
I am TOTALLY dumbfounded.
You think he’ll sue us if we coin the new term Nehra-pliance? 😉
Robert Craddock filing trademark application in 3…2…1…
only 0.26% break even!
Nehra-pliance!
Oh wow I am in stitches! hahahaha
For some reason, one element of Lyoness’ scam is rarely mentioned in these discussions – the so called “passive investments” in India, Brazil…blah, blah, blah that Lyoness offers to their IBR’s.
I was conned into investing in Brazil (shame on me) and I’ve yet to see a penny from it. Through my Internet searching, I’ve discovered many other people from other Lyoness markets invested in these passive schemes and received nothing. Noone knows how they work either.
These passive instruments that Lyoness uses to prop up the markets like Austria that, in the absence of new accounting unit investments, cannot sustain themselves.
The SEC knows about these Lyoness practices but they are so undermanned it’s hard to keep up with the number of scams out there.
MLM attorneys and others know the SEC is overloaded and I’m sure they inform their clients that they can get away with breaking securities laws regarding pyramids.
Aren’t these investments just marketing AUs to existing affiliates?
The idea is that existing affiliates can invest in AUs before a country goes live. It’s basically pre-loading the Ponzi in a new market.
Oz,
That’s partly true. Using Brazil as an example, I originally put in some money before the initial “launch” of the Brazil market. Brazil never really took off initially. So, Lyoness “relaunched” Brazil and along with the relaunch a second opportunity to get in on Brazil for IBR’s.
Yes, you are right these passive investments (passive is the term Lyoness scam artists use…what the hell does passive mean?)
I’ve read about people in Europe who invested in the North American launch who still have not received a penny. Luckily, I prepared and passed all of this information to the SEC so we’ll see how it goes.
I think Lyoness scammers believe hiding the AU investment scheme under the new bullshit “Lyconet” brand will enable them to hide the AU investment scam from the authorities.
look how it is changing:
Lyconet is lose-lose for Lyoness.
If they don’t get rid of the AU investment scheme its pseudo-compliance and isn’t going to fool anyone.
If they do get rid of the AU investment scheme (or continue to run it secretly) then earlier investors are pulling the ladder up behind them and are sooner or later going to shaft those who invested (no new AU funds coming in, or investor recruitment).
Not to mention they’ll be draining other areas of the business.
Ponzi scheme continuation confirmed?
The “friendship bonus” can also be converted into these loyalty units, just like the previous loyalty bonus could be reinvested into new accounting units.
There’s a general lack of information regarding loyalty units in that presentation, but they look to be accounting units renamed.
Whether they can be directly invested in is unclear. The video doesn’t clarify this, but Lyoness are notorious for smoke and mirrors so until I’ve seen a comp plan we won’t know for sure.
So far it looks like pseudo-complaince. Rename account units to loyalty units and add a whole bunch of other useless crap (as repeatedly stressed in the video, option ‘D’ (the loyalty unit option) is the only option those wishing to earn any money should consider).
In typical Lyoness convoluted smoke and mirrors fashion, I went to Lyoconet to find the comp plan.
It’s not there. The video shows you can view it when signing up, but if you click sign up on Lyoconet you get dumped back onto the Lyoness website (no signup form or comp plan).
This is obviously more of the same headache-inducing information control we’ve come to expect from Lyoness.
sad but true…
this is how to invest in AU’s after Lyoness spin-off, if you become a Lyconet Marketer:
cashbackleadership.com/success-blog/new-fast-track-program
/facepalm. Sounds like same old, same old.
‘Accounting units? Nah we got rid of those. Now everyone invests in “shopping points”. Totally compliant because we changed the name.’
Just for the record Oz, is ACCC conducting a thorough investigation in your eyes?
No idea, I don’t work there.