Monavie is Embarrassed by Their Income Disclosure Statement? (Part 2)

27
Comments

[The following is a guest post from Anonymous Aussie, a frequent commenter on this website. I think it was intended to be a regular comment to the original article, but I think the mathematics that she points out is something that should be highlighted and are grounds for further discussion.]

MonaVie Distributor Tom states “Show me any company in the world (with revenue about $1 billion a year) that has that many distributors making more than $160K a year. If you use company’s materials stick to what they say.”

Monavie states they are making $1 billion in revenue though they do not release financial information to support such claims and therefore, this statement remains unproven. See MonaVie – Is MonaVie the Fastest Company to $1 Billion Dollars in … for more information on that.

Secondly, what percentage of any revenue earned was from bona fide sales to persons not associated with the scheme and what percentage is from the investments and purchases from its own sales force?! Monavie do not disclose this information either however, judging by Tom’s description that he is consuming everything that he buys, as does his downline (and as does his upline whom he is duplicating), I’d say not much and it serves Monavie well to withhold such a vital piece of information from the public.

Monavie hopes the average distributor is unable to perform basic arithmetic (and this is an accurate assumption in Tom’s circumstances), however we’re able to elicit from the information provided in the 2009 Global IDS the real opportunity that Monavie represents to the average distributor/consumer (again, the distributors are the consumers).

If ALL the distributors were included in the Income disclosure statement (that is, the 87% who did not qualify for commissions – 620,431), the figures would confirm the following facts:

Total distributors = 713,139

Royal Black Diamond and above through to Bronze Executives (2570) = 0.36% of the total sales force.

The above 0.36% of distributors were paid 53% of the total commissions and averaged $1516.70 per week.

Star 1000 through to Distributor level (90,138) = 12.64% of the total sales force and averaged $37.33 per week

$37.33 per week clearly represents a LOSS when all costs are factored into (autoship, training tools, phone calls, travel, attending seminars, etc).

The remaining 620,431 distributors (87%) earned ZERO.

Clearly it’s accurate to say that 99.64% of the ENTIRE sales force LOST money.

The top weighted compensation plan is further confirmed when you consider that those ranked Royal Black Diamond and above through to Ruby Executives (377) who equate to 0.053% of the total sales force received 37.53% of the total commissions paid.

The above group of 0.053% averaged $7227.87 per week.

Even with the Gold, Silver and Bronze Executive earnings included with the remaining distributors (through to distributor level), this group of 92,331 (12.94% of the total sales force) still only averaged $49.13 per week.

Lets not forget again that 620,431 of the sales force earned absolutely ZERO.

Monavie have misrepresented the facts surrounding this farcical opportunity and fraudulently promoted a scheme whereby they elude to inform people as at the time they sign up that greater than 99% of the entire sales force are losing money.

Tom, the hypocrisy lies with a company who has policies and procedures in place which are necessary to ensure the legality of the scheme but which they do no enforce in any way at all, thus leaving the business in the incapable hands of uninformed, gullible and money driven distributors such as yourself.

Originally posted 2010-06-24 20:59:48. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

The above article is intended to be accurate at the time of its original posting. MonaVie may change its pricing, product, or other policies at any time without notice.

This post involves:

... and focuses on:

monavie

Posted by Guest Author on April 23, 2017 in monavie. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

27 Responses to “Monavie is Embarrassed by Their Income Disclosure Statement? (Part 2)”
  1. team deception Says:

    I dont get it?!? Why would a company be embarrassed about the income disclosure statement if this is true: http://www.acaiberry.com/blog/2010/12/monavie-helps-create-100-millionaires/

    How can a company make 100 millionaires and have issue with an income disclosure statement? As usual it seems as if 2+2=5 with this company. If this is not true how can they get away with saying things like this?

  2. bogart Says:

    The only thing to do is warn all those below these so called black diamonds with the truth. And the truth in 99.64% of all distributars on the bottom of these legs are not making any money.If you have people below you that are not on autoship…. which is not uncommon to have only 4-5 people out of 20 on autoship.

    How do these people continue to make money inspite of such low autoship? They do it by having there downline purchase 12 cases and hoping someone buys this junk.

  3. Anonymous Aussie Says:

    I think we’ve all been astounded by the manipulations used to fudge the stats in terms of rank and bonus buying – but the numbers do speak for themselves.

    It’s no wonder there’s been no income disclosure since 2009 taking into consideration what the figures prove!

  4. switch Says:

    Oh, but hey….all these millionaires rising and living the “high life” from the juice….

    I wonder what the hold up is on the IDS??? Hmmmm…

  5. Anonymous Aussie Says:

    Kelly Bangert’s description of losses amongst both himself and his highest ranked certainly makes you question as to the precise reasons an IDS hasn’t been released – clearly if there were significant revenue, they’d be reporting on it.

    I found an interesting discussion a while back where discrepancies were noted between the IDS and individual earnings claims on the Home Business Leader Board (pfft…though this is NOT what anyone should consider a reliable source of information in itself considering they’re just more unverified claims) – some interesting math is brought up.
    http://www.amwaytalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=1349

    The success of Monavie is reliant on the misinformation regarding every aspect of the business – the products and the opportunity. It’s been proven that every piece of information provided by this abysmal company is distorted and manipulated in one way or another and deserves the utmost scrutiny.

  6. Burned Out With MV Says:

    That is pretty bleak about the income, now not counting the tool and seminar profit R3G and TEAM earn for just 2 guys and after the expenses of extra products, sales tools, seminars and travel how many are REALLY making a profit?

  7. Mackwiz Says:

    The IDS is from “July 4, 2008 to June
    26, 2009”, it is going on 2 years now… where’s the new IDS? Why aren’t the conspiracy theorists shucking miracle juice crying foul?

  8. Mackwiz Says:

    Want to see something sick?

    http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=32143750319

    Yeah… I threw up a little too.

  9. CGC Says:

    It’s now February 2011 — still no MonaVie IDS since June 2009.

  10. CGC Says:

    It’s now March 2011 — still no MonaVie IDS since June 2009.

  11. Anonymous Aussie Says:

    I’ve stopped holding my breath on that one. Bit of a shame really, we would’ve loved to have taken a very close look at the next income disclosure released.

  12. humiliated Says:

    I think that is what they are afraid of Aussie..

  13. Vogel Says:

    I agree. They stopped updating not long after we did the first detailed analysis of the IDS here and on Lazyman’s site. The IDS was ugly then; I’m sure it would be much uglier now.

  14. Mackwiz Says:

    I bet that even less than 14% are even making any money whatsoever now.

    I just went over the IDS again and noticed how they put a column called “hours worked” in there. I guess that is why they use the “you didn’t work hard enough line”, although I know that distributors work many hours and are still at the bottom levels… so they are obviously fudging the numbers on that data columnn. Of course, they put a little disclaimer in there absolving themselves off all responsibility if one works 40+ hours and makes next to nothing.

    Note this line on the IDS:
    “A copy of the IDS must be presented to a prospective
    distributor (someone who is not a party to a current
    MonaVie Distributor Agreement) anytime the Compensation
    Plan is presented or discussed, or any type of
    income claim or earnings representation is made.”

    So what if I ask “Why is this a 2 year old document? Where’s the current one? Would I buy stock on 2 year old data figures?”

    How about this gem:

    “MonaVie’s corporate ethics compel us to do not
    merely what is legally required, but rather, to conduct
    the absolute best business practices. To this end, we
    have developed the Income Disclosure Statement
    (“IDS”).”

    So are they themselves saying they are shady, since now new IDS has been created? What happened to the Christ-like ethics claim this company engages in?

  15. team deception - Life training Orrin Woodward Says:

    Great job mackwiz. Question. What are the laws for companies to display this info?

  16. Anonymous Aussie Says:

    Unfortunately, the law doesn’t state they need to provide an income disclosure. Unless they’re making income claims of course.

    The DSA fought and won to keep MLM companies exempt from the FTC business opporunity rule in 2006 which would have required them by law to provide detailed financial informaton to prospects.

    Great points, Mackwiz!

    Another thing that I found particularly interesting also was the fact that despite promising time/financial freedom, the IDS shows those at Royal Black Diamond and above worked on average 40> hours per week. Bit of a contradition, yeah?

    On the other hand though, anyone who’s seen a person starting out in the business knows they spend every waking moment and opportunity in pursuit of same – to say that those in the lower ranks put in very few hours is complete BS.

  17. Anonymous Aussie Says:

    Sorry, I meant >40 hours per week.

  18. humiliated Says:

    You also have to realize the actual time put in for tastings, even if you did them every night, are likely only going to run about 2 hour. YOu have to them in the evenings because all of your potential victims have real jobs that they work during the day. Most of them don’t want to stick around late because they work the next day. You might be able to have one or two on the weekends, if you have rounded up enough victims. It is a bit misleading to say that you only worked 15 hours and you have achieved Ruby. What I think people neglect to mention is that in order to get enough victims to attend a tasting every night is almost impossible, you have to be out hustling 24/7. You eat, breathe and sleep it, every single person you meet is a potential customer who you need to get to one of the tastings. It is all consuming. If you do take the time out to attend one of your kids’s sports activities, the parents there are considered potential distributors so you are “working” them while you are there.

    My guess is these Royal Black Diamonds (most of whom were just brought in from other MLMs so didn’t even earn their way to Diamond) are including the travel time to go to the various meetings/conventions, nationally & internationally to “motivate” (aka brainwash) . This would eat up most of the “40 hours a week”. They are not out hustling business, they are letting their downlines do the grunt work but act like they are out there in the trenches with them.

    Also, none of these people make this money on a consistent basis so I think the IDs is a waste of time. That said, it would be interesting if Dateline or someone did an undercover investigation to see if they are producing the IDS at the “tastings”.

  19. Vogel Says:

    From what I’ve witnessed, the IDS takes a back seat to the pictures of yachts and jets in the Monavie sales pitch. When they do show the IDS, they focus attention only on the top ranks (“see, look how much money YOU can make!!!”).

    When forced to address the dismal statistics for distributors at the base of the pyramid, the execs muddy the waters by saying that most of the distributors at the bottom levels are retail customers who signed up only to get a discount. It’s totally untrue of course; the IDS clearly specifies that retail customers are excluded from the statistics. This also raises the obvious question as to why the company would require someone to sign a distributor agreement if they are only interested in getting a product discount and have no intention of selling. Why would they not just offer a separate preferred customer agreement that does not require a commitment to become a distributor (or divulging ones SSN)? The answer is that their intention is to hide the true (alarmingly high) failure rate.

    So the prospector’s next move is to try to convince people that most of the bottom level distributors in the IDS, even if they were in fact initially intending to work the business angle, made no real effort to build the business and simply quit (shifting the blame for failure on the distributor rather than the flawed system itself). Of course, it can’t be proven from looking at the IDS whether a distributor failed to earn money because of lack of effort. This creates a convenient out for the distributor showing the IDS to a prospect because it allows them to claim that effort is always richly rewarded and that failure only occurs as a result of lack of effort (clearly untrue in both cases).

    In regard to those distributors who do quit, it would be a logical conclusion that they did so because the system did not work and they were unable to make enough to offset the high cost of the juice and tools. Why would someone quit a business that offers success? They almost certainly wouldn’t. They quit because they realize that the “system” simply doesn’t work. So quitting the business is not a sign of individual failure; it is a reaffirmation that the system is designed so that the vast majority will fail in order that a few people at the top can prosper at their expense.

    The stats in Monavie’s IDS are massaged in many other misleading ways as well. For instance, they exaggerate the success rates by listing a distributor at a particular rank even if that distributor was unable to maintain that rank consistently over a year. The stats are also based on phone surveys to determine the number of hours worked per week. This recall-based method is a highly flawed method for capturing such data, as distributors at all ranks would tend to underestimate the number of hours worked per week (the bottom ranks would do so out of embarrassment and the top ranks would do so because they are all blatant con artists).

  20. jim Says:

    Vogel said “When forced to address the dismal statistics for distributors at the base of the pyramid, the execs muddy the waters by saying that most of the distributors at the bottom levels are retail customers who signed up only to get a discount. It’s totally untrue of course; the IDS clearly specifies that retail customers are excluded from the statistics. This also raises the obvious question as to why the company would require someone to sign a distributor agreement if they are only interested in getting a product discount and have no intention of selling. Why would they not just offer a separate preferred customer agreement that does not require a commitment to become a distributor (or divulging ones SSN)? The answer is that their intention is to hide the true (alarmingly high) failure rate.”

    Isn’t it ironic that the high failure rate that is predetermined by the mathematics of the scheme is what gives it legal legitimacy? If we go by the spirit of the Amway rule that 70% must be retail customers, it is only by having an extremely high failure rate, and then classifying them as wholesale customers that validates the scheme in the eyes of the law. They never have to worry about the 70% rule because there is no way to ever come close to having 30% profitable. Dalin Larson is Dr. Evil.

  21. Scott Says:

    Monavie does have a seperate way for customers to get their products, it’s called the Preferred Customer Program. Customers can sign up and receive all of their products at wholesale price. You can read about it here http://monaviemediacenter.com/news/preferred-customer-program.

    Scott Gleason
    Independent Distributor
    ID: 2358622

  22. MonaVie Scam Says:

    Thanks Scott, we are well aware of the Preferred Customer program. Unfortunately, the program didn’t exist when the last IDS was released (mid year 2009). Please pass on a more recent one. Also please give us the numbers of people in the Preferred Customer program so we can know just how many people are interested in the juice vs. the business.

  23. Anonymous Aussie Says:

    Jim states “If we go by the spirit of the Amway rule that 70% must be retail customers, it is only by having an extremely high failure rate, and then classifying them as wholesale customers that validates the scheme in the eyes of the law.”

    IF distributors were selling 70% of there goods purchases to bona-fide customers outside the scheme, IF the company monitored the compliance regarding paying bonuses and commissions based on such sales and IF someone was auditing the company itself to ensure that they were monitoring their sales force and complying with the law themselves, then theoretically the 70% rule could work.

    The only thing is that we’re well aware that these aren’t bona-fide retail customers – the reality is that they’re distributors who failed in their ability to qualify for commissions.

    As we know, Monavie intentionally blur the distinction between the customer and distributor in the first instance by offering customers the opportunity to sign up as a distributor to receive wholesale prices (thus killing a distributor’s retail market in any event). They further blur the line by referring to distributors who didn’t qualify for commissions as their wholesale customers.

    There’s no reason to blur the line between a customer and distributor or any need to make a customer agree to the same terms and conditions as a distributor to receive discounts – except in MLM scams such as Monavie where the legality of the scheme may well hang in the balance of this very point alone.

    Monavie (and other MLM/pryamid scams just like them) do everything to conceal the extent of revenue from their own sales force as opposed to bona-fide customers because they are their biggest if not only source. There’s no doubt in my mind that this is known from the absolute onset considering the policies are put in place in the first instance – they’re in the business of pyramiding after all and distributorships is what they sell.

    Every form of manipulation is done to also conceal the true losses when putting together the IDS – which are obviously going to be far greater than depicted in same.

  24. CGC Says:

    It’s now April 2011 — still no MonaVie IDS since June 2009. I wonder if they’ll hold a party to celebrate its two year anniversary.

  25. Burned Out With MV Says:

    I noticed it too, since the blogs have been un-slanting the IDS with facts not Monavie math. One other thing I noticed was when the IDS first came out the Bronze level and aboves were over 5% two years ago it dropped to about 1%, can’t help but wonder what the true numbers are now.

  26. CGC Says:

    It’s now May 2011 — still no MonaVie IDS since June 2009. Just one month away from grand 2-year anniversary.

    Can you imagine someone asking you to invest in a company, then having them show you 2-year-old financial data?

  27. CGC Says:

    It’s now May 2011 — still no MonaVie IDS since June 2009. Just one month away from the grand 2-year anniversary.

    Can you imagine someone asking you to invest in a company, then having them show you 2-year-old financial data?

 
Comment Rules: Before commenting for the first time, please read this website's About page as well as the MonaVie Scam home page. Chances are, your comment has already been addressed elsewhere. Also, if your comment is not on the topic of the article, I may choose to not publish it. Please find an appropriate article in the MonaVie archives. If you can not find one, please to contact me and I'll work with you to get an article written.

At times comments might be disabled or moderated to a time more suiting with my schedule.

Previous: Dr. Louis Niles and his Illegal Medicinal Claims
Next: MonaVie, Acai, and Fruit Flies