True IBO Stories

I can't say that I have used the magazine as a prospecting tool.  I think it would be a little weird to walk around with a magazine in my hand, show it to people and say "See this? I do this, wanna check it out?"

Giving it out after an intial meeting is good.  As you said alongside the thisbiznow DVD is a great creditability tool.

Nick, a couple points. Part of the make-over the Company is going through includes a total commitment to transparency and an absence of 'spin'. Success At Home is nowhere near an independent "third party validation." The issue in question is done under contract for Quixtar/Alticor (by a company that specializes in developing tools for the network marketing industry -- see their ads in Direct Selling News) and coordinated by Robin's department... see his post on this earlier in the year. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with developing these kinds of tools, just be honest and eradicate the habit of spin and mischaracterization that has got this Company and its LOA/Systems into the hole they're now trying to 'dig out of' (first rule of holes -- stop digging!).

Second point -- each issue of this magazine is contracted/sponsored by a different direct sales company each month. Nothing unique or original for Quixtar/Alticor in that set-up (except the possible advantage of contracting out a specialized job to reduce internal workload and holding head-count steady). In the trade book industry, it would be characterized as "vanity" publishing. The Guiliani article, for example, is nothing more than a contracted excerpt from a book via a fee paid to his literary agent. He is not endorsing Quixtar anymore than a similar excerpted piece would be endorsing the direct sales competitors of ours being featured the previous or following months.

Third, I'm sure S at H is very useful for many people. However, I thought that Krakoosh Magazine was a much better produced, written, designed, photographed, exciting and overall 'messaged' promotion tool. It's unique, it's ours and would be a much superior tool to S at H in the magazine tool category. While I don't have a copy at hand to check as I write this, my recollection is that there were some third party ads not competing with Quixtar, but neither were they related to our product... please correct me if I'm wrong on that. In contrast, Krakoosh "ads" were exclusively for Quixtar products including both XS and Nutrilite, and very tastefully and appealingly done.

Robin indicated in an earlier post a few months ago that there was lots of Krakoosh magazine stock in the warehouse that hadn't moved... maybe if it had been the magazine format "tool of choice" promoted by Quixtar, it would have moved out of the warehouse more quickly.

I know you guys are already committed to the Nov. issue of S at H, but my view is that you would have been much better served focusing those same resources into a second issue of Krakoosh magazine.... highlighting and promoting some of the key product categories and revamps coming out this fall and in early 2008.

I have used it from time to time as follow up material after my guest has seen the Plan.

Thanks for pointing that out, rdknyvr. I mentioned this when the subject came up on another blog. Success from Home is really a vanity publication. If they write the stories, it is with a good bit of input from the businesses underwriting the issues. Nothing negative will ever be said there.

Shortly after that discussion, Robin was rather upfront about his department's involvement and coordination of the Success from Home issue. Portraying it as it was in this blog, however, is the stereotypical smoke and mirrors game that turns so many people off.

Good point!  I agree Krakoosh is much more appealing.

Plus S at H have also promoted other network marketing business that, in my opinion, are very shady and pale in comparison to our business.

Wait a second... thisbiznow.com is an example of third party verification? Why is everything on the site marked "copyright  1999-2007, Quixtar Inc."?

Rdkny...  you are correct that SFH is not truly third-party.  It was created in cooperation with the corporation, and that would not happen with a true third-party publication. It is, as you point out, a prospecting tool that had the additional benefit of being available on newsstands alongside other mainstream magazines, which along with advertising and non-Quixtar articles provided the "aura" of third-party credibility.

Krakoosh sought to provide the same type of third-party credibility by couching some product marketing for XS and Nutrilite (primarily) inside an "extreme" lifestyle-type publication. It was more oriented to product branding and sales than SFH, which is more about the business opportunity. Also, ads in Krakoosh were almost entirely for our products and partner stores. I'm not knocking Krakoosh ... I loved the concept and the execution. I wish more had sold (just as I wish we had sold more SFH).

Third, we did do a second issue of Krakoosh.  The first came out in 2005 and the second in 2006.  We did work with outside vendors for that publication as well and, had IBO response to them been greater I'm sure we would still be doing it.

The reality is that a bunch of other industry leading companies are using the SFH magazine as a prospecting "best practice" and succeeding wildly. In a few cases, companies have moved several million copies of the magazine through their sales forces, with reports that 1 out of 7 prospects presented the magazine are sponsored.

The main difference for Quixtar is that we have well-established IBO organizations that have well-established tools against which we are competing with SFH. Many other direct selling companies do not allow IBO-created tools.

In any case, we hope to make this year's magazine better based on last year's learnings.  We hope it is a valuable tool for IBOs to sponsor with. And if we fail with it, we probably don't do it again. I remain confident that IBOs can be very successful using this magazine to tell our opportunity story.

The success From Home Mag is a great tool. When I share the Quixtar Business Plane with a person I always

want to show the bigness of the company and the people I work with.

rdknyvr,

you nailed it!

I was going to post a comment, but you did a great job!

All Success From Home does is associate us with less than desirable network marketing companies that will be "featured" the other 11 months of the year.

Thanks..but no thanks.

Mike

Get it out soon. I have seen several other companies using SFH and pouring it on with them. The entire reason it wasn't a success in the millions is because the BIG LOSs have their own material they ONLY ALLOW to be used. Their is no money in it for the BIG LOSs, so it was squashed.  Add pv/bv to it and I'll order 100 copies tonight!! :)

Get Quixtar University off the ground and open to all of us already.

Robin;

There is a reason why the SFH issue undersold compared to those sponsored by Mary Kay, Tuperware, etc. The idea of Quixtar is that it is your business. That has been carried to an extreme lately by IBOs claiming that Quixtar is only a supplier. Who goes around touting magazines that praise one of their suppliers?

No Avon lady claims to have a cosmetics business powered by Avon, but that is the phrase used a lot in Quixtar.

At least in BWW, IBOs are encouraged to name their companies. I think a much more effective marketing resource would be a faux-third party publication where individual IBOs could purchase a one or two page profile of their own business. That would give the air of credence to "Janet International," for instance, rather than to my supplier. Don't forget, too, that a lot of IBOs try to hide the Quixtar link for a while.

The other main problem is that Quixtar is a little late to the game with Success from Home. Someone earlier mentioned that they had seen it linked to some suspicious opportunities. Vanity periodicals are so common now. I think most people can look at an issue and see it for what it is. When an IBO tries to promote it as a third party verification, it ends up backfiring by making them look naive or shady. The corporation is not doing IBOs a favor by telling them that it is a third party profile.

I see a lot of vanity press in the construction industry. Heck, I write a lot of vanity pieces (don't judge me -- I have to feed my purse addiction). I think they might impress a client who is not very involved in or aware of the industry, but in general I've found that the more reputable and respected companies are much more likely to go with a good old-fashioned brochure than try to convince people that some unbiased reporter thinks they are great.

rdknyvr is absolutely right that Success From Home is not "news". I remember at a function people being all excited that we were "written up" in USA Today. And I pointed out that it wasn't a news story, that Quixtar had paid to be in there. That is was an advertisement for DSA.

It didn't seem to phase anyone. Just like when I've heard big pins quote glowing "news articles" from stage, only to find that their source was PRNewswire! Robyn probably wrote the words they were quoting. :)

So that leads me to believe that even though it's true that SFH is a total vanity publication, most people see something in print and take it as Gospel and that's why there can be success in using this tool for other DSA members.

So I think the main reason Quixtar IBOs haven't bit with SFH is what Janet said. I think Janet hit the nail on the head.

Many IBOs, me being one of them, see this as MY business. And so I think that IS why I've never used the SFH. I noticed that the Ribbon Gift Collection stationery/biz cards/etc. offerred for purchase by the Corp., says on all of it "Quixtar-affiliated Independent Business Owner". It's beautiful stationery, but I wouldn't buy it for that reason.

I was recently at a focus group for my alma mater and the topic was on reunions. And everyone there had a wonderful, positive experience at the university, but we just didn't have that "school spirit" that other schools had. And so reunion attendence is low. I see similarities here. I am proud to be an XYZ graduate. I think it's a fantastic school. But I'm not this crazy die hard that goes to every football game, wearing my school colors, and announcing to the world that I'm a XYZ grad. People that I know, when they find out where I went to school, are surprised that I didn't tell them earlier. It's not that I'm hiding the fact. It's just that it's a PIECE of who I am, but it's not all of who I am.

I see with some other Direct Selling groups that their affilication with their DS company IS who they are. I see Mary Kay women with their window stickers announcing to the world their affiliation. I see Pampered Chef people wearing pins on their shirts. I see Herbalife people with their "I lost weight, ask me how" buttons.

That's not my "style" I guess. I promote ME before I promote my affliations. And, it's true that I would promote my affliation with my LOA before I would promote my affiliation with Quixtar. And that's only to distance myself from the goofiness I've heard about with other IBOs in other LOAs.

As far as Krakoosh, that is a wonderful tool. The problem is that it is so unique, so different, that very few IBOs knew how to use it. It's a tool that taught the IBO to lead with a product. THAT in itself is unique, because so many IBOs don't lead with a product. They lead with the business opportunity, and the products follow.

Krakoosh reverses it and then makes the business opportunity seem "cool" and "hip" and not dorky or "old". And, because of the "articles", it gives the appearance of being a third-party type of publication. Which leads to credibility.

Could be a very powerful tool. But it wasn't not promoted by the Corp properly nor effectively.

Very few IBOs even knew it exisited. The Corp gave more play to the first SFH than their own Krakoosh. That speaks loud and clear.

And the Corp promoted it as a catalog (it replaced the Momentum Catalog), and so IBOs were like, why would I pay $4 for a catalog when I can get the Choices for $2.50.

If the Corp had promoted Krakoosh properly, there wouldn't be a need for SFH and there wouldn't be a warehouse full of Krakooshes.

Sorry Robin.

I spelled your name wrong in one of my last comments.

Can I have a do-over? :)

Nick, Robin, I guess the key point was that utter authenticity needs to be the mantra for EVERYONE in Alticor/Quixtar (and all IBOs) going forward if the new initiatives are to succeed. Somewhere on these blogs... possibly a Jim P post... it was pointed out that the #1 value concern of Americans is now "trust" and truthfulness... even ahead of family. We all have an opportunity to (re-)do it right with what's coming down. So, for example, saying that being on the newsstands lends an "aura" of authenticity, well to me that's still a smoke and mirrors way of thinking, and I don't mean to be harsh in saying that. To get S@H on the magazine rack at B&N would likely involve a product placement fee for the SKU as there is no natural market demand for this magazine. So the "aura" is a manufactured one -- living in 'the grey area' -- not an authentic one.

And to be honest, my assessment is that your inhouse people write better than the staff/freelancers at S@H. Do the S@H people really understand what makes Quixtar's 'DNA' truely different from the rest of the pack, especially with the 'make-over' going forward into this fall and Spring 2008? Will S@H be an integral part of your/our plan going forward, including product category refocus, retailable products, company positioning, and announcements due shortly? The same freelancers at S@H that write glowingly about Quixtar one month will be doing the same with the same truncated "worldview" of network marketing for another company the following month. Anyway, I know you guys will be doing your best to make it as successful as possible, and time will tell the story. Hopefully you will also keep the Krakoosh concept in your back pocket as a tool to which you can apply whatever you're learning from these worthy and worthwhile experiments.

Yes, something I've been on about on these sites and others for some time is the lack of true third party endorsements of our product or opportunity, and when they do exist they are exceedingly difficult to find.

Surveys indicate that 80%+ of folk with internet access use the internet to do research before "purchase". The great majority of folk we approach, whether as a business prospect or customer prospect, have internet access.

So, pretend you're one of those folk and get on google or yahoo and research and see what happens. Corporate spin sites, News Releases, and critics sites.

There's a new "metrics" site out there called compete.com, which uses various database sources to track internet user behaviour.

Now, without wanting to get in to why these sites exist in the first place, let's look at some of the data  for the kind of sites people will visit if they google Amway or Quixtar -

quixtarblog critic website - 9,865 different people visiting last month

amquix critic website - 10,813 different people visiting last month

opportunityzone.com - 6,138 different people visiting last month

quixtarfacts.com - 8,008 different people visiting last month

note: from checking my own sites and logs it would appear these are underestimates, but still useful for comparison.

More folk (our prospects) visit these critic sites than visit corporate sites like this one - and we know that corporate sites are less trusted than "user reviews".

Now, here's a challenge - find some non-corporate/non-press release reviews/websites that right positively about Amway or Quixtar or our products?

That's what are prospects are doing in their thousands every month.

Amway needs to take some journalists on a tour of the Ada, and out to the Nutrilite farms, and to have lunch with some diamonds occasionally.

Make it available in EACHES (EACH equals ONE) along with every other piece of literature, sales aid, and product (did I mention SA8 Tablets and jars of peanut butter?), and drop the price so that it is a real value, and the stuff won't sit in the warehouse. It's as simple as that.

Robin,

You attribute a lack of sales of S&H to competetion from IBO material but have you considered that the material may pale incomparison? I participate in a very large system and this magazine was brought to the Platinums for their input along with the question whether it was beneficial. The overwhelming concensus was this magazine did not create a "third party aura" but was nothing more then a rag that promoted any and all multi-levels no matter their ethics or foundations.  In addition what are you trying to fix in this "transformation".  We have been told by our upline that recruiting is not an issue and that we lead the industry in that category.  Krakoosh was released before both the field and the company had embraced the concept that we had to become more retail focused.

Have you considered that may have been the reason it did not sell and that another run during transformation is what we need rather then trying to run this "me to" rag at us again?

I haven't and I will not use Success from Home as a prospecting tool.  As mentioned in a couple of other posts, Kraakosh is a much more credible prospecting tool.

What we face, as IBO's, is a saturated mindset/message of working from home.  From signs on the street corners, "Earn CEO income from home!!" to postings of 'career' opportunities on Monster.com.  Success from Home is more of the same.

If we want to 'connect' people to this opportunity we are going to have to re-think our message, and the communication vehicles we use to get that message out.

I am a Quixtar founders platinum, meaning I was sponsored 2 years after the change from Amway to Quixtar, and my organization is really beginning to 're-think' how we are connecting with people.  Success from Home will not be one of those, because it is too linear and the message is watered down in that vehicle.

Robin L said July 18th that other MLM companies don't allow IBO created support materials. These same companies ARE seeing substantial growth as well. Do you see a paralel here. LOA's spew out BSM for profit while our competition supplys BSM that are more effective for products sales. Throw in the UK situation where IBO produced BSM have been banned, and we can expect that Amway will be suppying most of, if not all the BSM we need.

Our competition has seen the troulbe uncontrolled LOA systems and system tools have caused A/Q and they are not going to go down that same road. They have learned from our mistakes. The question is, will A/Q?

I don't use the S@H mag because it amounts to nothing more than a LOA and lifestyle montage. This mag could be much more useful if IBO interviews focused more on what makes our company the class of the industry as well as why our products are better, less expensive/use and unique. At the end of the day, that is what prospect really wants to know. Would anyone really want to buy these products from ME. Where we get into troulbe is when IBO's try to put to much emphasis on which LOA is best.

 There is no room for corp or LOA spin in the new Amnway! Get rid of S@H and thisbiznow.com or change the format. Right now they come across as phony! The best endorsment we can get are more satisfied customers and more IBO's that are actually making the kind money we talk about in the Amway plan. Not the tool plan! Word of mouth needs to again become our biggest ally.

Greg - growth has a great deal to do with current size. The larger you are, the slower the growth, but even small growth is an enormous amount of success. I'd venture that Quixtar's relatively flat growth last year was in real terms significantly larger than most other companies. Heck it was probably larger than the total turnover for some of them!

So which MLMs are comparable to A/Q in size without systems? I know one of the biggest is Herbalife, and related BSM companies have sprung up there. There's also an awful number of independent BSM companies that are producing materials and running seminars that pretty much do the same things as the A/Q BSM companies (though generally more expensive)

IBOFB,

There's another way to look at Quixtar "growth." US GDP growth from January 2000 to December 2006 was about 34%. That includes the dotCom bubble burst and 9/11 dips. Over that same period, Quixtar (Altior/North America) really did have flat revenues -- just about zero net growth (although Alticor did exceptionally well internationally over that period, including the China market growth). You can get the US GDP numbers by googling for them... it will take you to the US Dept. of Labor for the stats, or http://eh.net/  (economic history site). Graph those numbers out along with Quixtar's static numbers of, say 1.05 or 1.10 $billion per year.(By the way, I'm not using the normalized dollar stats that you'll see at the 'eh' site... if one did, the picture might be even bleaker for the Quixtar numbers.)

Then shift the US GDP numbers so the US GDP growth curve becomes the baseline (equal to the x-axis). The now negative slope of the Quixtar revenue line reveals the relative economic decline of Quixtar compared to the growth of US GDP. It's like comparing a mutual fund's performance to index-linked funds. That's a terrible performance, overall (the many contributing factors have been discussed sufficiently elsewhere, Tex ;)  ), and that's what Alticor is out to 'cure' with the Transformation process, and I have no doubt that they WILL cure it!!!

[By the way, in accepting the Quixtar revenue numbers as offered by Alticor, I'm assuming that NONE of that revenue was derived from the difference between the value-based shipping charges and the actual shipping charges. However, the company I work for does a lot of shipping of similar sized packages, and it is difficult for me to accept that there wasn't a 'materially significant' (in the accounting sense) net revenue gain between the value-based shipping charges and the actual.]

What's the relevance of the above to the excellent encouragements from Dane and Nina, and others' stories in Nick's blog? What the "flat growth" numbers do not reveal are the internal or 'under the radar' growth dynamics, namely, that those wedded to the old ways are watching their numbers drop like a stone, and those like Dane and Nina are driving real new growth. The latter trend will be more evident as the 'transformation' solutions are implemented. NOW is the BEST time to turn up the jets and make things happen, and not sit around and wait.

rdknyvr - lies, damn lies, and statistics! :-) My point was simply to highlight the problem with doing comparisons with much much smaller companies. I think we're in agreement that growth has been relatively flat and needs improving.

As you say, the fact is there are many folk growing. So the opportunity as it stands now is "good enough", if folk just operate in a way that generates growth. There's no time like "now" to turn up the jets and improve things even better :-)

IBOFB, LOL, I agree. This business is a great opportunity -- the best -- and I was trying to point out, in part, what the growth potential will be when the 'Transformation' efforts are in place.

Keep up your great posts... I enjoy reading your site. :)

Nick, no need for apologies. What you wrote was pretty much what SFH says about themselves on their own site, and those of us familiar with the mag and VideoPlus' corporate strategy and positioning knew that. There is no loss of trust in you... just smile at this episode and move on, as the rest of us are (I am, at least). :) My issue is that the Corp is even working under the SFH "brand" in the first place instead of adjusting and using their own brand, Krakoosh, and that's what was behind my responding and posting. The Corp is committed to going with SFH regardless, so it's not on your shoulders.

You've got a great blog with stories that really do hearten, encourage and inspire people around the country in ways you may never know about... keep up the great work!!! :)

With appreciation and a smile,

Thanks for the post, Nick. Honesty like that goes a long way.

I think an apology from Nick is appropriate, and I accept it.

Now if we could get the upline to be similarly open about tool profits, we would be getting somewhere....

For those of you who claim I "hijack" threads, I reject that claim. We can fix ALL of the other issues, but if tool profits is not fixed, we will have accompished very little. On the other hand, if we ONLY fix the tool profits, much will be accomplished, as the other issues pale in comparison. The tool profits are this big of an issue, and MUST be fixed for the business to survive, in my opinion.

Nick, at your next performance review, you should be bringing this whole OZ exahnge about SFH vs. Krakoosh up as a positive -- the discussion was very helpful I think for the Corp and was very much in keeping with even having the OZ as a forum for healthy debate and exchange of perspectives. So take me seriously... this should be a net positive on your next review... I get reviews annually and I also give them... so don't be shy about putting this forward as an "accomplishment," and you can cite me or put this in your "smile file" for that purpose!!! :)

Best wishes,

Nick responds:

Since Kia (Robin) does my performance reviews, and he reads this and the other OZ blogs (or at least he says he does!) then ... mission accomplished!