G. What Is The Basis For The 99+% Level Of IBOs Losing Money?

WHAT IS THE BASIS FOR THE 99+% LEVEL OF IBOS LOSING MONEY?

Besides my personal experience and the personal experience of literally hundreds of other bloggers since 2005, the following government investigations back up this statement:

1. The Wisconsin Attorney General’s office: http://www.amquix.info/lawsuits/Wisconsin_AG.pdf, on page 140 states the average Direct (now called Platinum, a fairly high, mid-level LCK/IBO, normally has 100-150 IBOs in their group, making these folks the lowest rung of the 1%) LOST at least $918 annually. Direct/Platinum is the normal level when the ATS kicks in on a low level, so this lawsuit is consistent with that claim. It appears the Wisconsin AG did NOT consider ATS profit, but the amount of ATS money made at the Direct/Platinum level is low, so this confirms the level at the approximate break-even point. Note this lawsuit was from 1982, long before some of the more recent methods of extracting money from downline IBOs existed, such as voice mail and web sites.

2. The UK judgment of 2008, these ATS companies were run by the same U.S. based owners, charging similar amounts of money for the tools, and flying the same LCK “flags”, such as Britt, Network21, etc.: http://www.amwaywiki.com/images/6/60/BERR_vs_Amway_UK_-_Judgement.pdf, see paragraph 7c, where it states only 90 out of 33,000 made enough bonus to cover their expenses, or 0.27%, leaving 99.73% who operated at a net loss.

In addition, the numerous lawsuits between LCKs is clear evidence of large ATS profits. Think about it, why would an LCK sue another one when they take away their ATS profit, if the profits were small compared to their Amway profit? Plus, these lawsuits clearly state the ATS profits are huge.

Keep in mind these analyses don’t even include the influence of the overpriced products, which further increases whatever the amount over 99% the figure is!