ibofightback said:
Monday, December 18, 2006 #

That's great news about the Facts About Quixtar DVD. The more info that is out there, the better.

It's interesting what you say about Real Reputation vs Web Reputation. I've been collating some statistics on feedback published to Scott Larsen's site. Over 2001 and 2002 he published emails he'd received from 597 people. Of those, less than 30% were actually "negative". 36% were positive, 6% neutral.

Given people are more likely to complain than report good things, this really puts things in perspective. Indeed, in the US, what, 3-4 times as many people qualify as NEW platinums than write to the self-described "largest public collection of Amway and Quixtar information" with some problem. And of course, more people write to him *defending* Amway and Quixtar and giving positive reports! He has also never published any of my positive letters - so the real number is probably even more skewed to the positive.

Scarily though, just over 30% of letters he published were "thank you" letters from "prospects" - people who had been researching the opportunity and decided not to pursue it due to his site. That kind of info is what persuaded me to dedicate time to Get the Facts - The Truth About Amway and Quixtar I've spent too much time and lost too many good people to misleading and sometimes outright false information on the internet. These "World Wide Whiners" are doing real damage to real people and real businesses. I am very very glad to see that the corporation has decided that ignoring them hasn't worked. Enough is enough. Keep it up!

ibofightback said:
Monday, December 18, 2006 #

ouch, look like I screwed up those links sorry! Second one looks like my mistake, first one looks like the blog software couldn't cope with the length or something. Feel free to fix them or edit them out . Preview option might be a good idea! :-)

Get the Facts - The Truth About Amway and Quixtar

Curious said:
Monday, December 18, 2006 #

Is that your picture on the front page?

Tex said:
Tuesday, December 19, 2006 #

Kia: People engaged in our business aren't actively blogging, for instance.  

Tex: Insider/IBOFB and I are both IBO's, engaged in the A/Q business, and we are both active bloggers. Plus, there are others.

Kia: Right now, our rules make it difficult for them to be a part of the Web community.  

Tex: The rules control prospecting and the advertisement/sales of products (which I agree with), but that leaves a lot of flexibility to exercise the First Amendment in the Web community.

Kia: Further, people actively engaged in our business are usually more interested in building their business than in blogging.  

Tex: Blogging has become a necessary part of building a business, this is why Insider/IBOFB started his site.

Kia: We at Quixtar, however, are trying to find ways for more of our stories to be told, not just those told by people who used to be in our business.  

Tex: As stated previously, IBOFB, me, and other active IBO's are telling our stories.

Kia said:
Wednesday, December 20, 2006 #

Tex, thanks for your clarifications.  I didn't mean to imply there is no IBO activity in the blogosphere, however, given the fact there are hundreds of thousands of IBOs, the exposure for our business through Web 2.0 channels is pretty minimal.  We hope to find ways to increase IBO participation in the dialog (finding new voices to join the few IBOs out there promoting this incredible business).  

Rules (or the perception of what rules mean) are a hinderance, since this has been brought to our attention.  That's why we're reviewing.  

Finally, business building vs. blog building: I agree that blogs and/or web dialog can be an important part of building a business.  I also think that the vast majority of IBOs are pursuing more traditional ways to build their businesses, with little time left for blogs and other online communications.

Tex said:
Wednesday, December 20, 2006 #

Kia,

I agree with you, the exposure for our business through the Web is not based on a large number of opinions. However, a large portion of this exposure is negative.

Many prospects/new IBO's (even "older" IBO's!) now check out the business on the web, via googling "Quixtar", prior to getting involved, so whatever they find is what they believe, good or bad.

Telling someone to not trust the web is not effective, as the web has quickly become, and will continue to grow, as a major source of information.

By ignoring this, I am concerned the business will continue to stagnate, especially in North America, as it has for the past decade.

Quixtar was promoted as "new and different", so it makes sense we must build it new and different, which includes realizing how prospects obtain information about the business, informtion available on the same platform as we order our products and manage our businesses, the web.

ibofighback said:
Wednesday, December 27, 2006 #

When I started engaging critics on the internet (prior to Quixtar's launch) there were quite a deal more pro-Amway sites. Amway actively shut them down, apparently due to overzealous concerns about prospecting - so it's not just a problem of "perception" of the rules on the part of IBOs. One of the reasons I choose to remain anonymous is because I perceive being public will put me at greater risk of being accused of inappropriate internet prospecting. I'm glad to hear Quixtar is reviewing this area.

Ex-IBO said:
Monday, January 15, 2007 #

It's very obvious why Quixtar and Amway have been criticized more on the web than most other businesses.  It comes down to secrecy and corruption.  We all know that the promised profits are a farce and that the higher level IBO's rake in cash from tool sales.  The methods of tape dependency are also quite suspect to be a form of mind control.  IBO’s will not speak about their income except the diamonds who love to brag about how much money they make.  If you look at the amount of time even an Emerald puts into their business, they’d be better off working at McDonald’s.  That’s right, I said it: they’d be better off having a JOB.  This is not because of their business practices, it is because the business is set up for failure, and the tapes are there to blind IBO’s with regard to their losses.  Oh yes, I would imagine this will be deleted from your blog, which is also another reason Quixtar is so criticized: your company hides any criticism from its IBO's.  Hmmm... I wonder why...

Kia said:
Tuesday, January 16, 2007 #

No, I won't delete your post. And we're not hiding from opinions, whether they be shared or not.

High-level IBOs in our business may earn a lot from their training and motivational businesses.  This is called "free enterprise."  There are several points I'd like to stress:

1) We disclose to all new IBOs that Business Support Materials are optional and that some people make significant income from them (outside the Quixtar compensation plan).

2) IBOs who create these materials first had to succeed in their Quixtar or Amway business. People who are successful in any field have the right to share with others what they did to achieve their success, and be compensated for that.

3) Many people who buy these materials and attend meetings find them very helpful in building their businesses. I attended Achievers in 2005 with a reporter from The Grand Rapids Press, and every person that reporter spoke to talked about the value of these tools in helping them learn how to build a business and stick with it.

4) If the materials were of no value, people would stop buying them. Further, the company requires that these materials are accompanied by money-back guarantees. People who don't like them should get their money back (and, if they have issues doing this, let the company know).

Finally, I think income as a Quixtar Emerald certainly places one well beyond a job at McDonald's. But that sounds like a whole different post.

Eric Hanson said:
Monday, June 04, 2007 #

I like to read Robert Kiyosaki and John Maxwell. I heard they endorse Quixtar. However, I could not find any links to information to this effect. Do you perchance have any information to this effect? Thank you.