|
Recent Discussions
Discussions Forums
|
Previous Posts
|
Ye Old Quatloos! | Quatloos Version 2.05 © 2002- by Quatloosia Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this website may be reprinted in whole or in part without the express, written permission of Quatloosia Publishing LLC. This site is http://www.quatloos.com. Legal issues should be faxed to (877) 698-0678. Our attorneys are Grobaty & Pitet LLP (http://grobatypitet.com) and Riser Adkisson LLP (http://risad.com).
Web Development by John Barrick
|
4 Comments:
Not only does VanDruff not "nail it" in this 19 year old article, he is grossly, logically, and verifiably wrong on multiple levels.
A review of his "theoretical" analysis of MLM can be found here:
http://www.marketwaveinc.com/viewarticle.asp?id=7
Len Clements
Founder & CEO
MarketWave, Inc.
Len is 100% correct. The VanDruff analysis is logically and factually wrong.
It suprises me how otherwise intelligent people can fall for utter bogus "analyses" purely through the power of confirmation bias.
There may be some small mistakes in VanDruff's article, but the vast majority is correct now, as it was 19 years ago, and as it will be as long as the basic "laws" of commerce continue to hold (and population doesn't increase exponentially).
One (well, some writers, anyway) can imagine an economic system not based on physical goods, in which the model might apply.
This is not to confuse MLM with "conventional" direct sales, in which the selling agent gets a certain percentage of the company's share of the purchase price. It's the recruiting aspect and the fact that the recruiter gets a bounty (oops, that's illegal) a surcommision on the recruitee's sales, which makes an MLM immoral, even if it weren't illegal.
"Some small mistakes"? Practically his entire case, point by point, was logically, mathematically, legally, historically, and verifiably proven to be either completely false, or at best to simply be baseless assumptions on VanDruff's part.
http://www.marketwaveinc.com/viewarticle.asp?id=7
I believe the rebuttal speaks for itself.
Len Clements
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home