The Flawed Logic of Tool Sales Criticism

"There's no real money in Quixtar, just an elite group of 'kingpins' making all their money from IBOs with tool sales."

I've just paraphrased one of the most common criticisms you'll see leveled by internet sites critical of the opportunity side of the internet shopping portal Quixtar.com.

Given a reasonable application of logic, at least two flaws should quickly be apparent in this criticism.

1) How did these "kingpins" initially become so supposedly influental if the business model doesn't allow anyone to make any "real" money? What, were these happless IBOs so impressed with the would-be kingpin's collection of, say, monopoly money perhaps, that the IBOs sold all they had to purchase their tapes of how to acquire large quantities of monopoly money themselves?

Of course I'm fighting a losing battle with that line of questioning, as Quixtar critics are loathe to admit the prospect of actually making money utilizing a company which pays hundreds of millions in bonus money annually, because the subsequent examination of those earnings threaten to reveal the (*gasp!*) inherent relationship between effort and return.

So let's set aside those apparently inconsequential few hundred million dollars of annual bonus money (closing our eyes and repeating the shrill "$115 gross per year!" mantra) and pretend, as the critics do, that there is actually no money to be made.

If the critics are to be believed then, all it takes to succeed in the "dark underbelly" of the Quixtar business, regardless of your actual product sales volume, is to create your own system of how to be successful and Automagically! you make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year on tapes and function sales.

Uhhh... only one problem with that-- Who ya gonna sell them to? Just how did these non-money-making "kingpins" get so successful at selling tools?

"Well," the critic may reply, "first they created this vast, multi-layered organization of followers. Then," whispers the critic, pausing for dramatic effect, "they sell tapes to them!" (queue climactic music here: Dun-Dun-DUNN!!)

Wait-- you're telling me these people succeeded in creating a vast multi-layered organization of loyal volunteers consisting of thousands of families? That's amazing!

"Yes!" cries the critic breathlessly, "Then they sell tapes to them!" (repeat climactic music here: Dun-Dun-DUN!!! Overlay sound of woman screaming for extra dramatic effect.)

Wait, wait.. please tell me-- how did they manage to succeed in creating this vast multi-layered organization of loyal volunteers consisting of thousands of families?

". . ."

Pardon?

"Um, well," mumbles the critic, "I guess that's what the tapes are about-- how they did that."

Uh-HUH.

So let me get this straight-- no ability to build a vast multi-layered organization of aspiring entrepreneurial families in the thousands means no one to sell tapes to? But with the ability to build that kind of organization, their people are willing to buy their tapes... Shocker.

You've stumbled onto a big mystery there, critic-- what would compell people belonging to a vast organization to buy tapes from the founders of that organization-- about how to build a vast organization? Hmmm...

Gas Station Employee: I'm picking up your sarcasm.
Richard Hayden: Well, I should hope so, because I'm laying it on pretty thick.
-- Tommy Boy

Just taking alone the ability to organize large volunteer organizations of people, this is a highly valued skill-- not only in business but in religious and political circles as well. Take for example, the money paid to the founders of Hotmail when Microsoft purchased the free email service. Microsoft certainly could have written their own web-based email system. But what they really wanted was the Hotmail subscriber base-- the large volunteer organization of people. For their ability to organize that subscriber base, the Hotmail founders were paid some $400 Million.

And golly gee whillikers, Wally, imagine the potential if someone actually introduced products and services through those people... wouldn't that really be giving them the business?

Heh...

2) Is there something morally or ethically wrong, for a person who has succeeded in a particular accomplishment, to make money from information that reveals details about their accomplishment?

Recognize any of these names?

Steven R. Covey - Carleton Sheets - Oprah Winfrey - John C. Maxwell - Bill Clinton - Lance Armstrong - Bill Phillips - Richard Nixon - Hugh Hewitt - Oliver North - Malcom Gladwell - Jimmy Carter - Frank Feather - Robert Kyosaki - Hillary Clinton - Dale Carnegie - Victor Frankl - Suze Orman - Glenn Reynolds - Benjamin Franklin - Peter Lynch - Harry S. Dent - Helen Keller - Bruce Berman - Anthony Robbins - Martha Stewart - Donald Trump - Darren Rowse

What do all of these people have in common? This is just a small selection of people who have all published information about their experiences, accomplishments, or expertise. And got paid for it. Heck, even Donald Trump's Apprentices are doing it. And even if the accomplishment is dubious (think John Wayne Bobbitt or William Hung) often the biggest question about the event is who gets to buy the book/recording/movie rights to the story. Even lowly bloggers are getting lucrative book deals these days.

According to the logic of Quixtar critics, none of these people behaved ethically or morally in doing so! (Granted, some of them may have acted unethically/immorally in other aspects, but that's unrelated to them getting published.)

By some obscure, twisted leap of reasoning, these critics infer that the rules for the rest of the world should not apply to individuals who happen to be affiliated with the Quixtar internet portal. On the other hand, it's perfectly ethical and reasonable to publish information detailing how money is made through internet portals like Yahoo, eBay and Amazon-- am I missing something here?

To take their disingenuity one step further, some post information regarding free conference call training sessions by career MLM trainers like Jeffery Combs, Todd Falcone and Dani Johnson, giving the appearence of contrast between a free conference call and the "expensive" Quixtar-related tools systems-- without bothering to mention that these individuals also sell sets of CDs & videos, and charge hundreds to thousands of dollars for seminars and personal coaching-- I thought these critics objected to that sort of thing?

Now, some may take this second point as some sort of admission that the purpose of systems such as World Wide Dream Builders is to make money selling tools. It would take thickheaded obstinence or a flagrant lack of intellectual honesty to ignore my first point, sarcasm notwithstanding, and pretend that this is what I am saying, or to state in the face of multi-million dollar bonus payment statistics, that there is no money to be made utilizing the Quixtar internet portal.

In my last post, I established that, as Quixtar Emerald and above income levels are the real-world equivelent of corporate upper management to executive income levels, it is not reasonable to expect to attain an executive-level income without executive-level performance and leadership. I also established that to excel in any endeaver, there are foundational principles that must be applied. The methodology for applying those principles can be standardized into a system.

Systems designed to help one take advantage of the methodology needed to excel in a particular business model are not a new phenomenon. Quixtar critics, however, expect you do be dumb enough to believe that they are.

Or in the case of some, they expect you to be dumb enough to swallow that line and yet turn around and subscribe to their business model and system.

Technorati Tags: Home Based Business, Internet Marketing, Internet Business, Quixtar, WWDB, Affiliate Marketing, Yahoo, eBay, Amazon, private franchise, Trump, Apprentice