Even the IBOA "Experts" can get the plan wrong

It seems the tide has changed for some IBOA diamonds and they are now taking an active role to make sure only truthful and accurate things are posted on the Internet about Quixtar and their leaders.  I salute their efforts to get truth and accuracy posted, even if in the short term it is used to discredit my website.    I can only see their input as a positive one.  Sure, they might find some more things I need to correct since I am not perfect and all of my sources are not perfect.  But in the long run, if they help me to be more accurate, I only help my site visitors to get better information as well.  Contrary to most leaders in the business I welcome an open dialog.    Maybe soon I'll be able to post on my site "Reviewed by IBOAI diamond's for truthfulness and accuracy".

The IBOAI website proclaims I am a "self appointed expert" of their business.   Now, no where on my site do I state that I am an expert in their business.   How could I be?  I was only in it for a year, or a "short time" as the IBOAI publishes on their site.    After just a few months I was fed up with the lies and hypocrisy in the business that I did not review.  I found the lies so bad that I even wrote the company and the FTC.   I only found the company wanting to cover things up and wanting to say I had "misunderstood" things. 

Now let me state for the record that I had tried to establish a dialog with the company about getting the truth business on the internet. I once had a dialog but it has since been cut off.   I can only guess at the company's wishes since they are the ones who stopped communications with me.

The company or any diamond or distributor who wishes to establish a dialog, can easily find my e-mail address on my site.  However it is extremely difficult for me to establish a dialog with them since their e-mail address, addresses, and telephone numbers are not easily found.   It is interesting that on one hand the IBOAI diamonds accuse me of not bothering to contact them about information posted on my web site, yet on the other hand they also state they have no interest in a continuing dialog even thought many aspects of the business are very controversial and have led to hundreds of thousands of people to lose millions if not billions of dollars in the business over years.   

I have always welcomed corrections to my site.  No one can accuse me of not correcting or removing something when asked.  Just look at how quickly I've addressed Mr. Victor's and Mr. Florence's concerns.  I'm not perfect and I have never claimed to be an expert on their business.  I really just have a problem when the experts don't answer questions when asked.  After all they are trying to interest you in a business opportunity, which they supposedly succeeded and from which they derive numerous financial benefits if you get in.   If these guys are going to go around and preach you can become financially independent from there business in 2-5 years then I would expect a much greater dialog about the business.

As Jody Vicor points out on one of his rebuttal pages, I would surely not ask an executive of a grocery chain how much he made if I was just a shopper their store.    However, anyone who is trying to interest me to spend my time and my money in a business investment or business venture, to attain what they have, when they also benefit from me getting in their business, then I think the promoter owes a higher level of disclosure to the potential investor then just a shopper would at a grocery store.       

So on the latest page under "IBO Leaders Taking on Internet Critics" is now Billy Florence's letter to me about pages I had on his custom SA4400 pdf_icon.gif (914 bytes).    In December of 2004 a site visitor sent me Billy's custom plan, which was promoting the stacking method instead of the the typical 6-4-2 Amway plan.   In January of 2005 the site visitor send me a follow up plan with even more income being claimed from their model. 

In the end, I don't know why Mr. Florence just did not highlight a diamond ship with 6 stacked legs saying it would make "x" hundreds of thousands of dollars over "y" years.   Certainly any income scenario they can present is possible however improbable it might be.  As long as they say the "average distributors earns $115/month"  (Quixtar reported on "www.thisbiznow.com" that he Quixtar paid the average distributor only $78/month, $345 millionpaid to 370,000 distributors) then they are allowed to claim the business will deliver any desired income they can conjure up.

So it is interesting to see Billy Florence write me after one year saying some of my analysis is incorrect, of course right on top of Jody Victor's note.    No doubt Billy Florence saw the page one year ago and could have written me if he chose.   I would have welcomed the corrections then!  I don't know why he waited.    Maybe they want to see mistakes posted so they can show it to their downlines and use that to discredit my site.    It is widely know that the IBOAI diamonds, the corporation, and distributors in general follow my site on a weekly or even daily basis.    If Mr. Florence does not care to correct my misunderstandings of the plan on a timely basis what can I do?

So now it is kind of funny that Billy Florence is now calling me on the carpet for my misunderstandings of the plan, which he has surely known about for about one year.   I read his letter, looked at my pages and found that he did have some valid points.  I had misunderstood the 2500 PV side volume rule to apply to all platinum's but after rereading the compendium.   I did learn that after two qualifying legs that you don't need the side volume to get the 4% leadership bonus.  That was my "bad" I admit.  

In my page I stated a barely qualifying platinum would make $375/month on a one qualifying leg.   Here barely qualifying means 6 months out of 12 and not 12 out of 12 as Mr. Florence's examples shows.  One 7,500 PV leg would generate an average leadership bonus of 7,500 x 2.5 x 0.04 x 6/12 = $375.  Mr. Florence did not understand my definition of "barely qualifying" and took exception with my statement. 

I had another mistake where I misquoted his $56,000 income representation over a 2+ year period as being on a year basis.  Another bad on my part.  I had no problem quickly correcting the record on theses issues. 

Next he complained about my questioning the Quixtar copyright on the document.    I was quite surprised that the corporation would break from their 6-4-2 model and endorse the stacking method.  After all with stacking, the distributor has no width and makes a lot less money than if those distributors were in width.  Site visitors had reported that Ken McDonald and Larry Harper had been to line-of-sponsorship major functions talking about how stacking was not allowed.   It could be now that their talks were aimed at not stacking people that did not know each other on top of each other, or about restacking exisitng groups and not against the concept of long deep one-legged businesses.  In any case the company, via Mr. Florence's letter to me, endorses the stacking method being promoted by the numerous Yager break-away independent lines of sponsorship not associated with Britt, Yager, or WWDB.

Now I am pretty sure I sent the custom SA4400 document to the corporation asking for confirmation that it was indeed approved by the corporation.  As usual, I got no response from them.   So if the corporation would not confirm it and I did not have Billy's e-mail address, how was I going to confirm that it actually came from Quixtar and was blessed by them?

Anyway, to get to the point of this page, it is funny how Mr. Florence does not admit his original custom SA4400 pdf_icon.gif (914 bytes) also had a glaring mistake that was also approved by all the experts in the business!   I understand now why he published a revised custom SA4400 pdf_icon.gif (914 bytes).

So what was the mistake in the first custom SA4400?  

Mr. Florence can correct me if I am wrong here here, but I believe the form had indeed overstated income by $17,500.   I had not caught this a year ago since I am not an expert in the plan like Billy Florence, the corporation or the other IBOA diamonds.   After reading Mr. Florence's letter I did a little studying in the compendium and found the two one time GetFAA bonuses, amounting to $17,500, are available only to qualifying Sapphires and above.  The model shown in the custom SA4400 only showed 2 qualifying 7,500 PV groups, but to be a qualifying sapphire, one also needs to have 2,500PV in side volume.  The 2,500PV side volume leg was never shown or mentioned in the plan custom SA4400.     About a month later, the next revision of the plan added the one time sapphire bonus and made a parenthesizes highlight under the circle for "you" with (2,500PV).

In my response to Mr. Florence I asked him about it but he did not reply to my letter.    At least I can admit and acknowledge when I have made a mistake.  Will Mr. Florence admit if he had a mistake on his plan that overestimated income by 36%?   I'll apologize to Mr. Florence if he apologizes for overstating income by 36%.