Desperation Ain't Pretty
I gotta comment on the Eva Cheng post from IBOFB.
Read for yourself.
What a sad, sad, little man. He's got to have something else to do with his life, wouldn't you think?
If I was involved in a business that I felt needed me to do damage control as IBOFB does, I wouldn't be in it for long.
But then, I'm not an idiot.
Read for yourself.
What a sad, sad, little man. He's got to have something else to do with his life, wouldn't you think?
If I was involved in a business that I felt needed me to do damage control as IBOFB does, I wouldn't be in it for long.
But then, I'm not an idiot.
posted by rocket at 11:42 AM
9 Comments:
steadson is a sad sad man.
So Eve Cheng is considered one of the most powerful women. So what?
How doe sit affect "Smith Enterprises" or whatever else IBOs call their businesses?
That's along the same line of justification that IBOs use when they say someone's job is a pyramid. It doesn't mean that quixtar is not a pyramid.
Quixtar did 1 billion in sales. Who cares about that if Smith Enterprises lost $5000 last year buying tapes and seminar tickets?
I have made a few comments on that board, some rather intresting responses to a simple question.
I have made a few comments on that board, some rather intresting responses to a simple question.
I saw that Mike. You and John asked very simple and straight questions and the thread got twisted and turned without an answer provided.
Wow Mike, you even answered their questions and they still did not answer your one reasonable question.
I guess you can expect that from IBOFB and his droogies.
I'm not sure what all the "hub-bub" is about.
The thread in question seemed to go "bad" quickly. I understand what both sides are saying, but I can't understand how its degraded.
Want my "take" on the subject? I thought you might.
I never got the feeling that the article made any point that Eva Cheng was an IBO that worked her way through the ranks. It's a PR piece about a woman who is considered "powerful"...a strong business person that is an asset to a company. It says Amway hires smart people. And Amway is saying, "We got her".
From an IBO standpoint, it does lend credibilty as it relates to the caliber of people working at Amway and (insert disclaimer here) supposedly supporting the field.
That should not be a point of contention with a critic or otherwise.
As far as IBOs go; if an IBO thinks that the average prospect is gonna give a flip about Eva or be impressed by her and sign up for Amway based on that; then the IBO is fooling themselves.
BUT, and it's a big but(I suddenly wanna break into a Sir Mixalot rap right now) if an IBO happens to be in a conversation with someone "in touch" with industry-related news--the IBO may have an opening to insert the Eva Cheng factor.
I think everyone might have been too quick on the draw to be so defensive of their opinion; but then again that's jut my opinion.
That's why everyone likes you Dave.
Because you aren't an idiot about stuff, accept that there are problems in Amway, and move on.
You don't feel the need to avoid questions that don't paint the business in an anything but positive light, and you don't feel the need to do damage control every time something is pointed out.
I have always maintained that ABO's could learn a lot from you.
It's unfortunate that Steadson isn't reasonable about the situation.
I'll bet he's been punched in the face more than once.
Dave Robison - I never got the feeling that the article made any point that Eva Cheng was an IBO that worked her way through the ranks. It's a PR piece about a woman who is considered "powerful"...a strong business person that is an asset to a company. It says Amway hires smart people. And Amway is saying, "We got her".
No offense Dave, but I disagree. VEHEMENTLY.
"a strong business person that is an asset to a company" - "It says Amway hires smart people"
Two statements that have ABSOLUTELY NO relevance to the VIABILITY/PROFITABILITY of the Amway Business OPPORTUNITY - as far as an IBO is concerned.
Dave Robison - From an IBO standpoint, it does lend credibilty as it relates to the caliber of people working at Amway and (insert disclaimer here) supposedly supporting the field.
If an IBO happens to be in a conversation with someone "in touch" with industry-related news--the IBO may have an opening to insert the Eva Cheng factor.
Again. WHAT RELEVANCE does the "the caliber of people working at Amway" have to the VIABILITY/PROFITABILITY of the Amway Business Opportunity from an individual IBO's standpoint?
Answer - NONE. ZIP. ZILCH. NADA.
And what exactly is an IBO going to accomplish by talking about Eva Cheung when "in a conversation with someone "in touch" with industry-related news"?
I am not going to mince words here - this is another one of those >"IMPLIED MISREPRESENTATIONS" that Amway ROUTINELY engages in.
Don't lie blatantly, but at the same time keep it vague enough to create confusion.
Another one is - putting out the list of NEW pins, without any indication as to how many OLD pins FELL OUT of qualification - to give the impression of 'growth'. Has ANYONE been able to call Amway and find out how many CURRENTLY QUALIFIED 'Diamonds' Amway has? Nope.
It's not the information that Amway 'reveals' that's the problem.
It's the information that Amway 'DOES NOT reveal' that is the problem.
Dave Robison - if an IBO thinks that the average prospect is gonna give a flip about Eva or be impressed by her and sign up for Amway based on that; then the IBO is fooling themselves.
Agreed. But - I contend - this PR effort is primarily aimed at giving the IBO the impression that Eva Cheng IS an IBO - with the broader intention of having IBOs use that as a 'tool' to recruit other IBOs.
Post a Comment
<< Home