Hello There, Guest!

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
50 PV rule
#11
ss3251 Wrote:I find it ironic that Ditto is promoted as a way to ensure that you reach the 50pv for the bonus. (just for you IBOFB, since our last debate Wink )


Good thing (for me) that in the debate I pointed out it was wrong to do it with Amway as well!

ss3251 Wrote:I also think that this is actually much closer to IBOFBs worry of being close to being almost considered illegal. This is because of the motivation part as IBOFB said. MV promotes the Autoship as a way to ensure you are eligible for your bonuses by having it automatically ship your product (that you have already chosen to purchase) during the correct weeks, so you don't accidentally go in-active by ordering in the wrong week (sorry if that is confusing, MV works in 4 week cycles and pays bonuses weekly, not monthly). Amway on the other hand is promoting the Ditto as a way to ensure you do the 50pv, which is fine, but then goes even further to suggest items to purchase to meet this 50PV. Now the motivation for purchase is clearly to get your bonus, not because of the product itself. This is similiar, if not the very same thing as Q* suggesting "Bracket Busters", which are products with the highest PV for the dollar. These items are being promoted solely for the motivation of reaching a new bonus.


Given MonaVie has less than a handful of products I don't think this is a great differentiator. Either way, still being promoted badly by both Amway and MonaVie

Quote:Personally I don't have a problem with either situation because I feel the individual still has the personal responsibility to not order anything they don't need, and neither company is refusing bonuses for not using Ditto or Autoship.

Personal responsibility is not an all encompassing excuse for encouraging bad business behaviour, or failure to control bad business behaviour. Judge Norris had a deal to say about this in the BERR vs UK case.

Folk need to take what I call organizational responsibility. If you know, as an organization, that significant numbers of folk are going to do the wrong thing with your advice, well it's your responsibility to tailor the advice in that knowledge.
 Reply
#12
In the FAQ's section it states,

Q “How will this work for those internationally sponsored”. They are not
based in Australia or New Zealand. Their personal PV is always zero?
A. This is all about local PV, if they’re generating a local performance bonus they
need to meet the 50PV minimum. It does not impact International Leadership
Payments.

Now since every IBO in my business is in Australia, this is not going to affect me but out of curiousity I have one query.

Does this mean that if a US IBO starts a number 2 business in Australia, (that is they sponsor themselves) that they need to purchase 50PV per month even though they don't live here, to qualify for performance bonuses ?
 Reply
#13
ozibo Wrote:Sorry about that stickshark......I promise to leave the next one to you.

.......

Wasn't it you who was "getting up" (theres an aussie-ism for ya) the groups that promoted personal consumption and ignored retail sales ? Were you ear marking this as borderline illegal or just dumb business practice ?

.........

Would anyone know why Amway would implement this rule ? I doubt its just a ploy to increase turnover.


ozibo, yep that was me getting steamed up about personal consumption models. I think that Amway is (re)implementing this rule. I am quite sure they used to have something along these lines, but was never enforced. The reason for the re implement I would suggest is a strategic move of some kind. Without further info I am shooting in the dark, but would suggest it is either legal motivated, or moving the business slowly towards a retail model. I agree it is unlikely to increase turnover and both my hypothesized reasons are not based upon increasing company turnover.
 Reply
#14
interesting timing considering we were posting about it only a few days ago...
 Reply
#15
ozibo Wrote:Does this mean that if a US IBO starts a number 2 business in Australia, (that is they sponsor themselves) that they need to purchase 50PV per month even though they don't live here, to qualify for performance bonuses ?


Or if an Oz IBO moves abroad, the get no bonuses on their Australian business unless they purchase 50PV/mth in Australia .... :cry:
 Reply
#16
I know how to use Ditto delivery and I can tell you it's pretty cool. It's a very useful tool to use with your customers that buy the same thing over and over again. Yeah, they have to pay shipping and handling, but if they hit $75 in the US they get free shipping. I don't mind reporting my sales on Quixtar.com, but any Ditto orders are captured automatically and recorded as retail sales. So, I don't have to do anything. It's pretty slick!

I don't understand the reasoning behind phrasing the e-mail the way they did though. This sounds like a promotion on Ditto. In the US for new IBOs we always tell them they can make an extra $50 for the first three months if they have 150 PV with 50 PV in reported retail sales. I usually say that after I've told them about the 50 PV retail rule. When I follow up with the reward, they think it's pretty cool and are more apt to sell.

I don't know...
 Reply
#17
I have been very busy lately with a new contract and some other significant changes that I have eaten into my online time..

But about this 50PV topic, when it came out I got the feeling that we were pooling our ignorance on the topic (no offense to anyone who posted in this topic) so I contacted the company with my questions. The email form responded that they would try to be in contact within two working days. While over two weeks later when I had not heart anything I was very annoyed.

Anyway out of the blue a week or two ago I got a call from Simon at the corp. I think this was the same Simon who I was onstage from the company, if it is he is great guy. Anyway he was very apologetic for not getting to me sooner, as he had been on bereavement leave. The phone call took me by surprise, for a number of reasons so I forgot to offer my condolences and ask who died!

We had a bit of a chat and from my notes I took of the call the following points were made (in no particular order)

1) that is was a reiteration of an existing rule. That orginaly Rich and Jay set the rule as 50PV Retail, however in time this changed to 50PV retail and self consumption. All Amway was doing was reminding people of this rule, [and bringing an insentive for people to obey it]

2) That there as a lot of debate over bringing the "new" rule in. That wanted a positive reaction from the IBO's and they are very pleased that it has been very well received by the IBO's.

3) That it was not put at 50PV Retail as some networks do very little retail, so this would have been to bigger jump for them. So it has been left as a grey area, 50PV sales or personal consumption.

4) In the UK market there were distributor groups fleecing people [with tools] never even talking about product or moving any product. Thus this rule is a bit of butt covering, and making sure networks actually move products!

Like I say these are my notes... so don't take these words as gospel.

It is very interesting how one phone call can do so much for changing an attitude/reputation. Before the call I was very annoyed that I a was(yet again) being ingored by Amway, and after the call I was very positive and felt they cared.
 Reply
#18
Good to see you back and posting stickshark.

Quote:That it was not put at 50PV Retail as some networks do very little retail, so this would have been to bigger jump for them. So it has been left as a grey area, 50PV sales or personal consumption.

This point baffles me though.

Are Amway now accepting little or no retail from its IBO's ? Or do they just feel they could never enforce it so why bother ?

Doesn't this start to move the business into that other grey area where volume is being done purely to earn bonuses ? IBOFB was talking about that being an issue in the UK as well as with another network (see I didn't say MonaVie............doh)

Quote:That there as a lot of debate over bringing the "new" rule in. That wanted a positive reaction from the IBO's and they are very pleased that it has been very well received by the IBO's

I'm sure IBO's would react positively. It should turn those 10PV and 20PV circles into 50.15 PV circles....IBO's are very good at judging things to perfection.............. :rotfl:

Anyway.........welcome back
 Reply
#19
ozibo Wrote:IBOFB was talking about that being an issue in the UK as well as with another network (see I didn't say MonaVie............doh)

Good reply, Ozibo. I still want to call you Ozi. Tongue I'm assuming that the Rules Department meant from group to group, or LOA to LOA.
 Reply
#20
ozibo Wrote:Are Amway now accepting little or no retail from its IBO's ? Or do they just feel they could never enforce it so why bother ?


I'm pretty certain Amway Oz actually got rid of the customer volume requirement some years back. Note, as I keep pointing out, sales to IBOs for personal consumption ARE retail sales.

What they've done here is reintroduce a volume requirement similar to what's in the US (50PV) but explictly stated that it doesn't have to be from customers

ozibo Wrote:Doesn't this start to move the business into that other grey area where volume is being done purely to earn bonuses ? IBOFB was talking about that being an issue in the UK as well as with another network (see I didn't say MonaVie............doh)


Not at all. It's very easy to do 50PV on legitimate consumption. It comes down to intent - which is why MonaVie's, and Amway Oz's, recommendations to go on autoshipping in order to not miss a bonus is dangerous. It points to the bonus as being the intent, rather than actually wanting SA8,XS, Nutrilite or whatever.
 Reply

 
Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)