Lookie Here, You MLMers

Man, oh man with the misquotes lately. I did an interview with a news station just recently and one of the statements/questions was: "I see that you're very critical of LuLaRoe, but not MLM as a whole. Any particular reason why?" Um...no. Wrong. I'm critical of MLM like crazy. There are two main issues I have with bashing these companies though. The first is time. It takes time to read through all the tips I get, investigate them further, ask questions, debunk gossip, and there is just one of me. Sure, I have help policing my pages and removing the hateful trolls and shameless self-promoters posting their own DS link over someone else's review or every open nook or cranny in my social media existence. But that's where my help stops. I'm a one-woman show over here. And I'm also a woman who has to earn a living and be a mom and wife too. Finding the time and the restraint to not sit in front of this computer all day every day and write about every little thing these companies do is harder than you'd think. But I try. The second thing is funny, but not funny. The threats. I get scores of threats. Death threats, threats of bodily harm, doxxing, etc. Simply put, I'm only going to write about one company at this level at a time because if something were to happen to me- I'd want people to have a starting point to figure out who did it. Did you know that I got a couple anonymous letters alleging LuLaRoe was hiring a hitman to "ruin my life"...? Yeah, I can only deal with one brand of crazy at a time. But thanks. Am I critical of MLM? Oh yes. Very. But I don't think it's a beast that can be killed off in ways that many of us would like to see happen. This world is a money-hungry, greedy son of a bitch that is designed for the rich to get richer and the poor to stay poor. But the difference between poor and homeless for many American families is simply a few hundred dollars a month. For that, MLM CAN provide a little extra money. The issue is the bullshit dreams they sell you in the meantime- and how much of your own cash you spend to buy in. I've often said (and I will say it again) I simply will not endorse any brand that requires inventory loading to participate. I'm so anti-front loading that I'm working on a "MommyScore" program to look deeper into the various DS and MLM companies that are out there to determine a "risk" factor for potential participants in any program. Essentially (spoiler alert) if it requires a front load of inventory or a large financial investment, it will fail my requirements for a passing score automatically. The statistics that are out there are skewed in one way or another. Those that are for eradicating MLM from the world will tell you that 99% of MLMers don't make any money- but I will tell you that many of those reporting are "kitnapping" or enrolling for a discount on products they already buy. Many of these brands have a true and real product they have brought to market with quality and value as a definite point of contention. Who would justify spending $25 on a LipSense product? Well, when there are lipsticks at any department store for that and over $125, I'd say that SOMEONE is in the market for it. The determination of value is subjective- kind of like art. I don't "get" Andy Warhol, and I wouldn't pay any money for his art to be on my wall, but I'm a fan of Todd White and would cut off my leg for an original work of his. If you like it, and you can justify the expense- you buy it. Value is simply not as easy when talking about a luxury item or an item that doesn't have much to compare itself to in the market. LipSense really doesn't have much competition in the marketplace. There are some drugstore brands out there that share the market with them for a lip color with 12-24 hour staying power. But in the grand scheme of lip color- not many really attack that market and LipSense has a HUGE color selection to choose from, where the mainstream brands only have a handful of "popular" colors available. Well, I'm not the girl that wants to be limited to berries and corals. So I look outside of the drugstore for my makeup. But what about Younique? They carry a matte lipgloss that is right in line with drugstore competition in quality- but price is even more than LipSense- and it has no staying power to argue. $25 all day wear vs $27 rich matte color is the debate in MLMer world- but take that Younique to the drugstore and you're going to find over 15 competitors for the brand in price points ranging from $3 to $11. So, what is the determining factor for value there? I'm not arguing that I like one over the other or that those that buy Younique shouldn't- just that value is a personal decision and quality should be determined by the person making the purchase. It's a well-known fact that the cosmetic industry is just as corrupt as the pharmaceutical industry- often giving us things to hide issues that are exaggerated by the very products we use on our faces. But for the MLMer- buying into LipSense requires an enrollment of $55 for nothing really, then the purchase of a kit or products. If you opt for the products, your "discount" is reflective of the volume of your purchase. That's where we start getting into dangerous water. You have to spend over a thousand dollars to get the top-tier 50% discount. Then there's tax, their ridiculous shipping and handling rate, etc. Younique is $99 to enroll. You make a lot less of a commission on sales but there is no inventory purchase. The tradeoff is that if you want to make a higher commission, you need to sponsor other qualifying sales people- and so the MLM recruitment cycle begins. I've been a rep for almost all of the major MLMs out there for years. I've sat and watched and studied. They will tell you that they don't require any sponsorship to make any real money- and I say real money is one again- subjective. When $300 a month extra is real money to you, you might sign up to just simply sell a brand and be happy as a pig in shit to do it. Where other people might want that $300k car and the house on the hill, they might try and recruit many people into their downline to get there. It's HERE that the ugly beast starts to rear its head. The human element in MLM is an ugly one. Greed will push the nicest people to become the nastiest to the people they rely on to be their meal ticket. Not all "leadership" is doomed to become misers, but more often than not, you see people with no real business skill and no cause to become anyone's leader in "leadership" roles simply because they were better at selling a dream to their downline. Is it possible to make money in MLM? The answer is yes. I know because I've done it without building a downline. I did not lose money in LLR or any other company I participated in. HOWEVER, I didn't follow the guidelines they implement or the bullshit that the uplines feed you to be successful. I've been successful because my circle of influence trusts me. I never go "all in" with a brand. I have been straightforward about not liking things (like when I first started writing about LuLaRoe) and I'm very good at separating a dream from the reality in front of me. Is it possible to make a mint selling leggings? Sure. Is it typical? No. The biggest affront to the individual participant, in my mind, is the fodder they feed you about "owning your own business". Listen, you go ahead and participate in whatever MLM you want to. But you don't own your own business. They are using that term to psychologically connect you to the "opportunity". If by appealing to our own individual micro-entrepreneurial spirit, they can create a sense of ownership and a link between their company and your "fight to survive", they can motivate you to take it more seriously, work harder, recruit more, and push, push, push their brand. Is there anything wrong with asking you to take them seriously? No. But I do have a major issue with the industry tricking people to think they own something, have control over, or have rights to something other than the products they have in their hands- which in many cases are controlled by a contractual agreement between the individual and the company. Real business ownership involves risk- and where LulaRoe did a fine job of muddying the waters between MLM, franchise, and employment law- they did absolutely nothing to improve the industry they jumped into and shat all over. The risk these people took was an unreasonable one- investing their savings, taking loans, dipping into 401k accounts, SELLING BREASTMILK to participate in a program that they were GUARANTEED to recoup their money from- either by way of successful sales or by the bulletproof refund policy that magically changes with the direction of the wind. If you want to invest your 401k in opening a business or take a second mortgage on your home to do so- that IS your prerogative. However, the company that is hopeful that you will join them should not be inducing or enticing you- or even SUGGESTING that you do so- as a matter of ethics. If you look into the brands that shuttered their doors with no warning, you would learn a valuable lesson about investing into companies that are not controlled by you. If YOU can not control the product, the money management from a corporate level, quality, customer service, and all other aspects of running an actual business, you simply shouldn't do it. If it's a matter of spending a hundred bucks to essentially get that much worth in product and lock in a discount or commission and never have to buy another thing again or stock any of their brand as inventory, it's less of a risk in my book. I'm very critical of MLM- but I also believe that much of what has happened to the participants is a matter of self-control. If someone tells you that you must live beyond your means to participate with them, it is really UP TO YOU to take responsibility for yourself enough to exercise some self control and say no. These companies and participants prey on your desire to be more and make more- so much so that they will entice you however they can. You need to be diligent and steadfast in your knowledge of yourself and your own capabilities and situation. Common sense will tell you that no one got rich accidentally. If you are aiming for gold- statistically speaking, you're going to have to invest a lot of time in it. Is that you? Can you do that? Because if you're a chronic half-asser, "this time" isn't going to change a thing for you. It would also best serve you to understand that in any program, there will be those that succeed- and the more participants- the less room there is at the top. But don't be delusional with yourself- if you don't really know what it takes to be at the top, and if it requires you to be someone or something you aren't comfortable with, you probably shouldn't do it. Don't let someone's "belief in you" change your perspective of reality. To thine own self be true... If you have no understanding of the business, or ANY business, why do you think you'd be successful in this one? These manipulation tactics are employed by all MLMs, and many at the top of the pyramid will use it. It happens to me- even to this day. The "if you could use your influence here, you'd make xxx" If I'd just endorse this on my blog... But the truth is by asking me to do that on my blog- I already know better. My job HERE is to talk about the risks. Not to lead the already bruised into a lion's den. It is false to say that all MLM is the same. There are programs that are less risky than others. My issue with even those programs is that the participants are the same. If one leaves LuLaRoe as a horrible human being and joins another company- she's still a horrible human being, just with a new platform and new victims. The first step in improving this model is to vet participants. So many MLMs are hell bent on quantity over quality, that they will take just anyone who signs up. While newer companies are getting pushback for vetting their applicants- when the SHOULD BE. Most will never begin to because they simply won't risk the hit to their bottom line by removing those that would damage their image the worst- those that "lead" the companies. If MLM is just recycling the same old shit into a newer shinier bag, then the problem IS with MLM. My critique of the model comes with a hefty helping of accountability and a serious finger point to the lack of ethics from all sides. If the company won't halt the misstatements and force a more ethical participation, the company is to blame just as much as the offending party is. So many MLMs will rain down hellfire on their participants for discounting a product, citing it damages their brand value, but turn a blind eye at the lying, manipulating, money hungry wildebeest bullying her downline into buying product and harassing every last person she knows for a sale. Sure, these party pushing primadonnas add a hefty dollar to the brand's bottom line, but if more participants had a pleasant experience with the company- as either a consultant or customer, more would participate as either. If these companies started their quality control with the actual people they employ and give a false sense of power and authority to, and removed those that manipulate and twist people into participation at the level that THEY want for THEIR bottom line, more lower level participants would be in, happily performing at their comfort level and talking about how great their experiences have been. Suddenly, that woman who needs to just bring in $300 to make ends meet is doing so, not feeling any major pressure to perform or buy in beyond her means. And with better leadership, more compassionate and capable leadership in place- actually QUALIFIED to lead by experience, not byrecruitment- more participants would be inclined to enroll underneath them. No, I'm not going to call for the eradication of MLM from the world, but I will call for a serious overhaul. I'll applaud and approve of any company in the MLM world that takes a deeper look at applicants to ensure they can actually perform the job- much unlike LuLaRoe who enrolled any last person and demanded that these people perform in-home parties with hundreds of pieces of clothing- but never asked applicants if they owned a car, a driver's license, or were able to actually carry heavy bags of clothing to and from an in-home event. Certainly, if she wanted to, my 81 year old grandmother would be allowed to enroll in the program, spend her $5,000- and without a car or a license, the company would tell her she failed because she didn't follow their guidelines. Guidelines that aren't given to you on a consistent basis- and no minimum requirements are outlined before you sign up to sell this brand. Surely, advising people that the "approved sales method" involved multiple in person parties per week would have detracted many people from joining the program, in fear that they would not be able to perform as needed or recommended. There's a very popular misunderstanding that a 1099 contractor can not have minimum requirements in order to secure a job and that simply isn't true. A 1099 contractor is just a classification of worker- a non-employee. But expecting a contractor to possess a certain set of skills to do a job correctly isn't unreasonable at all. But if they can tell you how to sell the clothing, certainly they should be aware if you actually CAN sell it that way before they enter into a contract with you, don't you think? Raising the expectation for MLMs doesn't mean I'm not critical. It means I'm not delusional. I think as participants become more educated and more LuLaRoes start rearing their ugly mismatched heads, the general expectation of these companies will change. This is where my commitment comes in. I will research them, I will investigate, and I will hold them accountable- to YOU, the participant. LuLaRoe was simply the first and you never forget your first.