Hello There, Guest!

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
$12 billion in 2012
#31
Wearyeyed Wrote:
Bridgett Wrote:"Stacking" benefits the Upline. Period.


I am not knowledgeable about the subject, hence the question, but if "stacking" is such a powerful strategy for a particular person "upline," what prevents the new guy from being one of those "upline" that "stacks" for profitability them self?


Nothing...at some point.

The philosophy we're taught is that once you're about 8 layers deep of ACTIVE IBOs, you start your 2nd leg and do the same.

1st leg>Uplines mind and body
2nd leg>Your body and uplines mind
3rd leg>Do it on your own.

The goal is efficient use of time, improving morale because IBOs have a team, and yes, breaking pins. A stated goal of the BWW system is to break numerous new Emeralds with this. It's supposed to build comaredship, unity (common sense of mission) and excitement as pins are breaking frequently.

It has seen success in the Durso and Pappalardo legs - but that's been driven by new blood and youth. Other than Vinnie himself, none of the new Emeralds or growing Q12s in that Durso-Pappalardo legs were big in the business pre-accreditation. The sense I get is ironically, that leg is much more hang-loose than others in the system (they use video presentatios at their open meetings, keep the presentation well under an hour, and they give away xs after their open meetings!). So is it the hang loose and fun of the individuals in the LOA, or is it the stacking that's working?

By the way, BWW leaders have gone to great length to say taht it is NOT "stacking". We've been briefed that stacking is when you indiscriminately sponsor new IBOs in depth AND the people under whom sponsoring is being built are kept in the dark. What differentiates this from "stacking" is 1. New IBO is warned he'll temporarily be less profitable than if he'd done width 2. He's kept aware of who is being sponsored in his depth. 3. The new IBO can insist on being sponsored personally.

It is called taprooting in our system, they've been very sensitive to make sure it is not referred to as stacking.

Bridgett, we still get WWDB CDs, do you guys still get BWW CDs?
 Reply
#32
superseiyan Wrote:Bridgett, we still get WWDB CDs, do you guys still get BWW CDs?


WWDB hasn't gotten BWW CDs since 1997 or 1998.
 Reply
#33
superseiyan Wrote:It is called taprooting in our system, they've been very sensitive to make sure it is not referred to as stacking.


Well considering that stacking is against the rules and is cause for termination, of course they're very sensitive not to refer to is as "stacking."

This is the letter that was sent to all Platinums and above back in July 2007

"July 25, 2007

To Qualified Platinums and above:

One of the fundamental principles for achieving success with Quixtar is to build a knowledgeable and successful sales force that features, as its foundation, a personal relationship between each Independent Business Owner (IBO) and his or her sponsor. That relationship is the building block for every line of sponsorship and affects the potential awards and rewards obtained through the Quixtar IBO Compensation Plan.

It would be a serious violation of an IBO's contract and Quixtar Rules to circumvent this principle by manipulating the Plan through the practice of "stacking.” Stacking occurs when an upline IBO places a new IBO under another IBO in their Quixtar line of sponsorship without regard for whether the IBO knows and has a relationship with their frontline sponsor. Accordingly, stacking is deemed to take place when a new IBO doesn’t know their sponsor or doesn't agree with whom their registered sponsor is. In all such cases, stacking is a serious violation of Rule 4.25, the Plan Manipulation Rule (see below*). Moreover, our complaint history confirms that the absence of a relationship often is accompanied by high-risk representations that trigger pyramid and securities law issues.

Quixtar wishes to make sure that all leaders know and understand that “stacking” is not acceptable and to further communicate this to their downlines.

Please understand that not all depth-building is stacking. If prospective IBOs wish to align vertically and they know their sponsor and approve of the arrangement, it is acceptable. In such instances, however, Quixtar wants to make sure IBOs understand that this choice is optional, and that an IBO with only one leg will not be as profitable as an IBO with multiple legs. In fact, the concern over potential profitability is why Quixtar encourages the building of balanced businesses that include the retail sale of product to customers and sponsoring that results in both depth and width in the line of sponsorship.

To further deter and stop the practice of stacking, effective September 1, 2007, Quixtar will initiate the following policy:

POLICY - Effective September 1, 2007 whenever Quixtar becomes aware of (i) a new IBO that either does not know their sponsor or who sponsored someone they do not know or (ii) a new IBO that does not agree with whom their sponsor is, Quixtar will immediately flag that Platinum group and will begin an internal review of the situation which may include but not be limited to calling all new IBOs of the group after they register to ask them to verify their sponsor. As the Rules of Conduct hold qualified Platinums responsible for compliance within their personal groups, if the internal review reveals cases of stacking, Quixtar will take the following steps:

First Occurrence: Quixtar will place a freeze on all sponsoring within that Platinum’s group until all IBOs in that group receive training communication from Quixtar on acceptable sponsoring practices.

Second Occurrence: Quixtar will suspend the Platinum business for a minimum of 30 days, including forfeiture of bonuses.

Third Occurrence: Further action up to, and including, termination of the Platinum’s contract with Quixtar.

** As with all Quixtar enforcement actions, an IBO can appeal company action through the dispute resolution procedures described by the Rules of Conduct.**

Quixtar is extremely serious about prohibiting the practice of stacking.

Your assistance in ensuring that your group fully understands and abides by the rules against stacking is appreciated.

Thanks for your help with this."


The LETTER of the rule is to not have a new IBO's sponsor be someone they don't know. It doesn't mean, IN THE SPIRIT OF THE RULE, that you have a little get-together so that the new IBO can be introduced to their sponsor before they sign on the dotted line. This isn't some fraternity deal where you're pairing up a new frat boy with his "pledge dad."
 Reply
#34
@Bridgett

Thanks for posting that.

I was struggling "big time" with the focus on lack of profitability as the primary source of calling "stacking" abusive.

This doesn't make sense to me; claiming that stacking is only beneficial to "upline", yet anyone can choose to be an "upline" left me pretty confused, even if it may not be the fastest or best way to build profitability.

And it doesn't seem that groups who had practiced "stacking" were ever suggesting each IBO live to build one, deep leg only...

But the relationship problem...THAT I get whole-heartedly. Yucky stuff, me thinks.

Thanks!
 Reply
#35
Wearyeyed Wrote:This doesn't make sense to me; claiming that stacking is only beneficial to "upline", yet anyone can choose to be an "upline" left me pretty confused, even if it may not be the fastest or best way to build profitability.


When I say, "upline" I'm meaning Upline with a captial "U" as in higher pins. When you have legs of 25%ers, but no Platinums, there is more money for the Upline.

A leg can be at 7,500 PV, but not be a Platinum leg, because no one in the leg has the side volume (2,500 PV) outside their one big leg. So guess who gets the 4% Leaderhip Bonus? The Upline--the one with side volume or at least three 25% legs.

If you look closely at higher pin requrements, it's not, for Diamond as an example, six Platinum legs. It's six legs at the 25% Bonus Bracket.

Quote:And it doesn't seem that groups who had practiced "stacking" were ever suggesting each IBO live to build one, deep leg only...

No, however if the first 10 IBOs are going to go in to one leg, or the first 1,500 PV, the question becomes how realistic does the second leg ever get built? If you have people who are "in to" having the work done for them, then that kind of person is NOT going to go out and do the work necessary to build second and third and so legs. And even if they did, three legs, even stacked deep, is STILL less profitable than a wide Ruby.

Oh but this lil red gemstone doesn't get the recognition, doesn't have the status, as a "slim" and unstable Emerald. Even Sapphires, even though it's a dumb pin. I've yet to meet a Sapphire who is making more money than a Ruby, or even more than a "regular" Platinum. When I see a lot of Sapphires in an organizaiton, I think "stacking." They're just holding on for the one more leg, thinking (wrongly) that Emerald will be so much better and well worth going completely counter to Amway's "stair step" business model all that time.

Quote:But the relationship problem...THAT I get whole-heartedly. Yucky stuff, me thinks.

Right. So ask yourself, WHY would this be done when it is SO counter to what this business is about? Because the focus is on "breaking pins" rather than being profitable.

The conversation is all about, "Look how many pins so and so broke." All the recognition, all the oohs and aaahs go to those people.

And because this is how everyone is trained in the organization--that pins matter more than profit--the cycle continues, and continues, and continues.

Oh, and let's not forget the $150,000 Emerald and $500,000 Diamond bonuses that the Corp is now offering. Those are mighty big carrots to dangle--particularly if the rest of your Amway money is crappy because you're stacking. :doh:
 Reply
#36
Bridgett Wrote:
superseiyan Wrote:Bridgett, we still get WWDB CDs, do you guys still get BWW CDs?


WWDB hasn't gotten BWW CDs since 1997 or 1998.


This is interesting and I wonder why the vice versa isn't so.

Our silvers automatcially get all WWDB CDs, plus your library is available for any of us to order from our uplines.
 Reply
#37
Bridgett Wrote:Oh, and let's not forget the $150,000 Emerald and $500,000 Diamond bonuses that the Corp is now offering. Those are mighty big carrots to dangle--particularly if the rest of your Amway money is crappy because you're stacking. :doh:


Okay, OKAY!

I got it...but be careful, or you start to sound like my mom!

She seems to think there should be salary caps on medical professionals, to "ensure people who enter the field are focused on the humanitarian aspects of being so, and not driven by profit."

She is under the impression this will cause the majority of doctors, as an example, to only focus on "wellness" vs. "illness management."

I AGREE THERE IS ALWAYS OPPORTUNITY FOR ABUSE DUE TO PROFIT (the size of the carrot), and I CERTAINLY agree we have a medical profession very much entrenched in "illness management" (a WHOLE 'nuther subject I enjoy debating), but let's not be so "anti-profit" that we think even a majority of doctors are doctors "to promote illness management for money," nor so accommodating to the common folk so as to limit exceptional profit potential for those willing to perform exceptionally.... Wink
 Reply
#38
Bridgett,

Is stacking currently a problem? I'd be really surprised if anyone is doing this type of depth building, especially since the TEAM fiasco brought so much attention to it. Are your posts a warning, or a criticism of something that's happening now?

Anyways, I do appreciate the refresher. That letter that you posted gives a good definition of stacking, especially with this clarification:

Please understand that not all depth-building is stacking. If prospective IBOs wish to align vertically and they know their sponsor and approve of the arrangement, it is acceptable. In such instances, however, Quixtar wants to make sure IBOs understand that this choice is optional, and that an IBO with only one leg will not be as profitable as an IBO with multiple legs. In fact, the concern over potential profitability is why Quixtar encourages the building of balanced businesses that include the retail sale of product to customers and sponsoring that results in both depth and width in the line of sponsorship.
 Reply
#39
No, however if the first 10 IBOs are going to go in to one leg, or the first 1,500 PV, the question becomes how realistic does the second leg ever get built? If you have people who are "in to" having the work done for them, then that kind of person is NOT going to go out and do the work necessary to build second and third and so legs. And even if they did, three legs, even stacked deep, is STILL less profitable than a wide Ruby

The reasoning is that it is not charity. You've briefed that guy that there's no profitability in being one-legged. However, he has a team, and has depth. So there is motive for him to at some point develop a 2nd leg or at least stick around. ALong with breaking pins, retention is another goal of this.

Our system has never taught or edified Ruby. The only part of BWW that did was Larry Winters group who split off for their own LOA, I don't know what they're teaching. Especially now, the idea is that going too wide causes one to spray rather than focus, and becomes a job.

Interestingly though, 2 "names a day" is very much taught and is still the way we're encouraged to list build, to "go through the numbers" so to speak, which is a little contradictory admittedly.

And because this is how everyone is trained in the organization--that pins matter more than profit--the cycle continues, and continues, and continues.

I kind of buy into the tap-rooting idea to be honest.

Honestly, I tended to find the 20 PV checks confusing....when Severn, Shores, et.al. say that, is that directed at diamonds? I don't think even Kanti Gala in our system is paying out more than 10 PV checks, that's an assumption though, based on teaching and observation. Depends on the place it's coming from though. From a position of retention, building fun and excitement. Good. From a position of egoic validation "pins walking across the stage from your group", not so good.

It comes down to the new-blood you were advocating for. You guys have someone like Dean-O who is a rare example of a very high-level pin with an ear down to the street, very impressive. Usually that gets lost at around Q12.
 Reply
#40
ajgannon Wrote:Bridgett,

Is stacking currently a problem? I'd be really surprised if anyone is doing this type of depth building, especially since the TEAM fiasco brought so much attention to it. Are your posts a warning, or a criticism of something that's happening now?
[/i]


Well that's what we're debating in the later posts on this thread. Is tap-rooting as being taught in some systems essentially stacking? There's nothing officially called stacking around.
 Reply

 
Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)