Is Quixtar deaf or just dumb?

"In addition, much of Dateline's "reporting" appeared to be lifted directly from the Web site of a Quixtar critic, who boasted online of his involvement in Dateline NBC's story."

Now I have watched the recording of the show numerous times, and I have not see one item that came from my web site, let alone any other web site.  I would have to disagree with Quixtar's assessment that "much" of the material came from a web site.  I would have to say "none" of the material came from a website critical of Quixtar.  I contend that all the material on the show was original NBC material. Let's look at the show and how it flowed.

It started out with an introduction and then went into an excerpt from the Britt function with IBOs chanting "Freedom....flush that stinking job".   They they showed line of sponsorship lifestyle videos.  They then described Quixtar and their products.  Then they spoke about Amway and the 1979 FTC case.

Then they cut to Greg Fredricks saying he makes $250,000 per year with Quixtar.   The next portion was about Bill Britt using excerpts from the Britt function Dateline attended.   After the intermission they did the Eric Schiebeler piece with background cuts from Fred Harteis.   The Mack's were interviewed and Bo Short was introduced and interviewed.  Vicky Mack was interviewed and told about how they hung out at McDonalds in malls looking for prospects.  Then they spoke about the people crying at seminars.    Next Bo talks about his conversations with Ken McDonald. 

Then Dateline made the Quixtar Amway connection.  Dateline then showed various documents and letters from Quixtar and attorneys.  Then they went back to Greg Fredricks and asked him about the income claims.  They briefly mentioned the lawsuit with Double Diamond Brig Hart and Crown Kenny Stewart.

The first version of their web site listed me as being one who had appeared on the show.  However, I was never on the show!   What a bunch of bozos.   After I wrote them, they apparently wanted to link me to the show somehow.    So my claim to fame on their web site is that I am now the lone "critic" with the unknown motives and who also posted those "nasty" mock photos (see the rest of the story).  I'm surprised they don't list any other critics than me.  Quixtar has many critics  There are numerous other critical web sites. 

Now on their "critics" page they write:

"There have been occasions where Quixtar has asked that certain materials be removed from his site, including an incidence shortly after Sept. 11, 2001, when he posted mock images of explosions at Alticor World Headquarters and the Amway Grand Plaza Hotel, suggesting the company was under attack."

Now I must take exception to Quixtar's statements that there have been "occasions" where they have asked me to remove certain materials.  The only occasion the corporation has asked me to remove materials was with the Blakey report.  But, due to the doctrine of prior restraint I had right to keep the material posted.  It is interesting that they don't mention this on their page about me.  Maybe they could make a link to it for me?  Maybe this is what they mean by "on occasion".

Now as to the mock photos, they were part of a parody I had written. I love to write parodies and satirical humor about the Amway/Quixtar business.  I had written the parody on Saturday September 22, 2001.    I quickly found that no one thought my parody was funny, and came to realize myself it was in poor taste concerning the circumstances, so I removed the images from my website on Sunday September 23, 2001.  Soon after I wrote Amway/Quixtar a letter of apology.  So technically, Quixtar never asked me to remove the images.....they were already gone before they could ask me to remove them.

..now for the rest of the story about the images....

According to my host at the time www.awod.com, Amway had threatened the host with a lawsuit and the host got scared and subsequently shut down my site.   Because of this I moved the site to  www.50megs.com.  Amway attorneys in fact subpoenaed my host for the images to be used as evidence in the almost completed Amway v. P&G, Schwartz suit.  The images were presented in court and reported upon in the news papers.  

One month later german attorneys for Amway sent me a letter with the following excerpts:

AMWAY cannot tolerate your targeted action as a "joke".   Our client suffered serious damage.

Since there is a danger that you will repeat such activities, we are formally demanding, that you sign the enclosed declaration and return it to us by November 30, 2001. 

Should the declaration not be received by the deadline stated, we will immediately initiate the appropriate legal action against you.

I asked them what the "damages" were but I guess it was double top secret and they would not tell me.  The document they "forced" me to sign, under threat of being sued (for I know not what),  binds me, under a 50,000 Deutschmark penalty,  not to tell anyone what the parody was or to give the images to anyone. In Germany they have legal procedure called a "unterlassungserlaerung", which is line a voluntary restraining order with a penalty attached.  They wanted to keep this a secret you know. 

Now what is interesting is that Amway wanted to keep this a so much a  secret that Quixtar has released the images to their lines of sponsorships!  It was an exhibit in a recent court case against me!  So much for wanting to keep everything... secret. 

Here is some text I'm sending them to update their dateline "Critics" page on me.

Scott Larsen operates a Web site critical of Quixtar and the Independent Business Owners (IBOs) it supports. His motivations for doing so are pretty clear.  He believes people are being lied to and cheated out of their money with a bogus business opportunity.   He was an Amway distributor for a brief time in the early 1990s (March 1993 to February 1994), and had written the company on numerous occasions detailing the lies and deception he found in the Amway business.  Our legal department of course said that he was misinterpreting what he heard.

The Web provides an opportunity for anyone to exercise their right to free speech. This is Mr. Larsen's right as well, provided the content he shares does not infringe on copyright laws or become libelous.

There have been occasions where Quixtar has asked that certain materials be removed from his site, including the Blakey report, which he did not remove, despite numerous letters from our attorney Richard Griffin. We have since given up trying to get him to remove it. 

There was also an incidence shortly after Sept. 11, 2001, when he posted mock images of explosions at Alticor World Headquarters and the Amway Grand Plaza Hotel, suggesting the company was under attack, but we could not ask him to remove the images, since he himself had removed them within 24 hours of posting.  Although we forced him to sign an agreement never to publish his parody or give anyone the images again, we have ourselves given the images out to our various lines of affiliation to show what mad men our critics really are.

back to the home page