One day, two men stroll into your town. They both need to make money to survive.
One has discovered a product that he believes will be so beneficial to the people in your community that he can establish a decent customer base. In fact, he is so confident in his product that he hopes to find a handful of people that he can train as salesman to continue distributing when he moves on to the next town. He starts out by seeking a busy corner of town. He starts up conversations, introduces himself to people, and (more importantly) introduces his product to people. Some are not interested. Some are. The ones that show interest get demonstrations. Some are impressed and place orders. He asks every person that places an order to, “please tell your friends”. As more and more people become familiar with the product he is offering, and point more and more people to him, he is able to move off the busy street corner. He keeps track of the people that bring in the most referrals. When he feels that there is sufficient interest in the product, he brings together the people that seem to be most interested in it and tell them that he is moving to the next town. But he wants a few people to continue servicing his customers in this town and expanding the customer base. He trains them how to “sell” the product, how to resolve potential problems, and how to get referrals from customers that are happy. Once he is satisfied that they will be successful in his absence he moves on to the next town.
The other man has discovered the same product. But the amount of work involved in developing a customer base is quite unsavory to him. The idea of demonstrating the product over and over again is beneath him. Dealing with objections, complaints and other customer service issues seems to big a burden to him. But he does have one talent that he doesn’t mind using. He is very persuasive. As he enters the town, he starts looking for people that might just be susceptible to his brand of persuasion. He finds a handful of people that are looking to make easy money, convinces them of the merits of his product, promises all kinds of things (training, leads, customer service support… anything they ask, he promises that they will get it), and talks them into taking out substantial loans to cover the cost of becoming distributors for him. As you may have guessed, once he has the money in hand, he is gone. Never to be seen again. Remember? The “work” is not worth it to him. There are thousands of towns in the U.S. and, as the saying goes, “there is a sucker born every minute”.
Now let’s just say that the product they were both offering was Mary Kay. Let’s further say that after both men leave town, a crisis develops.
It seems that the handful of people working for the salesman and the handful of people working for the conman have a few disagreements about the product they are selling and more specifically about the support that they get.
The bottom line is that the conman ought to get dragged back into town and forced to repay the money that he (essentially) robbed from these hapless victims. Unfortunately, the only person that can be “reached for comment” is the salesman. The one that actually cares about the product and the success of his team is forced to “answer” for the actions of the conman.
The handful that got conned blast the salesman for being a part of a company that allows “these things to happen”.
He counters, “I didn’t do these things and I don’t support them, but I do really believe in this product.” He also mentions, “The company that manufactures these products will allow you to return your product for 90% of your original investment.”
**
It is an unfortunate truth about human nature that some people will try to “get something for nothing” and will use any opportunity they can to do so.
It is also unfortunate that people that have been burned, because they need to ‘blame someone’, will assign the blame anywhere that it will land. The conman is long gone (or has a bulletproof defense) and so can’t be pressured into making restitution.
The moral of this story?
Same as my purpose for this site.
This is a place that the collective representation of honest salesmen (for MK) can be informed of the tricks of the collective conmen by those that were conned and do their best to resolve the problems created by the aforementioned group of conmen.
Posts
Very well put David! And definitely a good perspective from BOTH sides. As the "salesman", I can see benefits from reading this post.... And ways to work with my unit to keep them from becoming the "conman"...
ReplyDeleteSCM,
ReplyDeleteThank you.
I hope that this site will continue to develop into a place where the "real deal" salesmen and those that were conned can continue to help each other.
Unfortunately, the majority of the ones doing the conning will never see it that way. They either know it and hate the idea of losing marks or they are completely oblivious to the fact that they are hurting people. But chances are they will never "get it".
Anyway, thanks.
Your example is only two dimensional: the good salesman vs. the bad salesman. There’s a third player, the MLM paradigm. What a better situation this would be if we could reduce the problem behind the entire Mary Kay Cosmetics fiasco to a mere dichotomy; you’re either a good salesperson or a bad salesperson. The third player here is the more culpable culprit (evidence based research pending;-)).
ReplyDeleteDeleted
If the company knows of someone of it's salesforce that is conning someone, that con man should not be allowed to continue to be a part of the company. Seems simple.
ReplyDeleteAh, but did the "con man" really do anything illegal? Or in violation of any contract? And then add in what Dave said, "The conman is long gone (or has a bulletproof defense) and so can’t be pressured into making restitution."
ReplyDeleteAnd then the con man can pull another con to escape being held accountable for his previous actions...... and so the con man continues to pull one con after another and continually escapes accountability. Yes, I know that was redundant. But in my opinion, this is the very nature of the con. A continuous cycle of cons.
Aiding in the continuous cycle of the con is, as Dave said again, and we've all heard, there is a sucker born every minute.
My conclusion is this: the best way to avoid being conned is for me to take personal responsibility for myself (my decisions, choices, actions, beliefs, etc.,), apply my own value system, and make my own decisions.
Will I be perfectly successful and never be conned again? No. I will make mistakes. I will be conned again. Hopefully, the negative consequences will be minimal.
Deleted, Judi,
ReplyDeleteBoth of you make a good point.
Both of you have done a good job presenting you point.
Thank you. I genuinely appreciate that.
However, I disagree.
Because of two things.
First, the company is simply offering a product. For them to change things to the extreme that would be required to do away with the conman's ability to exploit their product would mean to severely punish all the salesmen that have spent so much time, energy and effort to get where they are.
Second, because the company has already gone a considerable length to "make things right" where people have been conned.
They DO terminate the contracts of those that they find to be pulling off cons. They DO offer 90% of purchases made back to those that feel they were conned (or just decide it is not a good fit for them) AND punish the ones that "caused" the problem by taking their commission back.
Personally, I think that MK has made it VERY hard for those trying to turn this into a con. As evidenced by many sharing their testimony on PT. (Tired of running on the hamster wheel sound familiar?)
You don't hear folks like mk4me and STRT expressing that they feel they are running on a hamster wheel! They are just keeping the ball rolling. It is hard work, but they are operating inside the confines of the rules that have been laid out and therefore don't worry (as much) about charge-backs and they know that the ones that are developing into solid team members are also building in such a way that it is unlikely they will burn out and quit. But if they do, they don't have a house of cards (so to speak) in terms of inventory that is all going to collapse on her.
I know I will never be able to convince you of this. I am resigned to that.
Allow me to reiterate, I am sorry you guys got burned.
Here's another thought: Let's say this MK con person does get busted by MK Corp. and terminated. IMO there's no way to prevent this con person from signing up in MK again using another name and doing the whole con again.
ReplyDeleteAlso, said terminated con person may very well end up on PT carrying on and on and on about how unfair and wrong MK Corp. is for terminating her/him for no reason whatsoever. And the PTers will heap oh-so-much sympathy for being so horribly wronged.... (Ok, hear my smirky warped humor on this one!)
Rebecca...
ReplyDeleteYou were so right when you said "the best way to avoid being conned is for me to take personal responsibility for myself..."
Well said and so true! Wouldn't it be so much better for one to take responsibility for a decision? a choice? or anything? I sure think so (and as a parent teach my children that they need to take responsibility for their choices and actions)!
What goes around, comes around. MKC has not done enough, IMHO, and now is reaping the "rewards" for that. People do not blame the IBC or director, they blame MKC, the company.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was selling MK, my unit partook in a survey situation at a local mall. As soon as people heard "Mary Kay" the look on their face said it all! Not all, but most, did not want to make eye contact. It was rare that someone actually stopped. The reputation of MK's consultant's are desperate, crazed, pushy, aggresive, can't take "no" for an answer, will hound you 'til you move or change your phone number, etc. These are just some of the things we were called that day, by the few people who actually stopped to chat.
Do you think MK got that reputation because only a few consultant's acted that way? I doubt it. I would think more than a handful helped secure their reputation. Is it fair that the good (MK4ME, Speaking, and others I can't remember) have to be lumped in with those others? No. Just like it is not fair that I got taken advantage of. The only thing you can do is be a good salesman if you are still a consultant and if you are not, warn others.
darvin,
ReplyDeleteHi and welcome.
I find it a little rude for you to come here and post a link to your site without personally participating in the conversation.
It does not seem like you offered a link back to this site. It also does not seem that you want to be a part of the conversation here. You just want to draw some of my readers to your site.
I am not saying that this is your intention. But based on this action, it seems that way.
You are more than welcome here, and we aim to value all opinions, good or bad, about Mary Kay. But dropping a link to your site and running is not cool.
thanks
"It is an unfortunate truth about human nature that some people will try to “get something for nothing” and will use any opportunity they can to do so.
ReplyDelete"
Very true. We have scammers blow through our city from time to time. Usually the aged are targeted. Very sad. They can't get their money back, but they do report them to the police who in turn notify the news stations and newspapers of the scammers and to please call them if they are approached in the same manner. In other words, they forewarn the community at large.
Which brings me to my point. Mary Kay and others like them, may have the support of the FTC, etc., but (thankfully) you can only fool some of the people some of the time. The others will warn the people they know. Then there are the "astute" others, i.e., won't take the bate. Eventually a company can't fool anybody anytime and they turn into "Whatever ever happened to..." conversation.
If Mary Kay is as good as you say it is, and they're doing everything they can to rid themselves of wrong doing, then it has nothing to worry about. Right? If they do go belly up, then the people working their businesses ethically can't blame sites like PT or Mary Kay Corporate. They'll just have to know they worked it right and move on with no bitterness or regret.
Time will tell.
Flybye,
ReplyDeleteYou say:
"Mary Kay and others like them, may have the support of the FTC, etc., but (thankfully) you can only fool some of the people some of the time."
Are you implying that MK and others have "fooled" the Federal Trade Commission?
**
"If Mary Kay is as good as you say it is, and they're doing everything they can to rid themselves of wrong doing, then it has nothing to worry about."
Not having anything to worry about does not mean that you do not have to defend yourself against lies and inaccurate accusations.
"Time will tell."
How much time is needed?
44 years is not enough?
"Are you implying that MK and others have "fooled" the Federal Trade Commission?
ReplyDelete"
That's up for debate! :)
I said: "Time will tell"
Dave said: "44 years is not enough?"
Extrapolate the birth of the world wide net, add arrival/access to gp, so, 20 years then add 15 years. :)
I'd say 2012 at the very latest.
gp = general public
ReplyDeleteFB,
ReplyDeleteThe company is pulling the wool over the eyes of the FTC?
Seriously?
That is a mighty tall conspiracy, no?
**
Thanks for clarifying RE the GP... saved me some time :)
So, 2012 rolls around and MK is still growing... THEN their legit?
Seems reasonable to me.
Now we wait.
...
...
...
...
WoW... still 2008... I think we got some time to kill.... wanna go grab a beer?
Maybe we get to witness the end of the world while we wait?!!
;D
There are con people in all businesses. I watch the local evening news and I see people paying contractors money and the contractors never showing up. There was a story on our local news about a women that was having a $40,000 swimnming pool in her back yard...well she paid the contractor and they did some of the work...then never came back to do the rest...now she can't get ahold the contractor...
ReplyDeleteMy point here is that in all business you have people that are unethical...they take adavantage and I think they may think that they are getting away with it however it will catch up with them.
I think too that we have to take responsibility for our own actions. If something is to good to be true you know what it probably is. You have to use common sense. it seems that a lot of people want something for nothing...no hard work just give it to me. Anything worth having is worth working for.
Do I think Mk is a scam? NO I don't. I think that their are people in MK like in any other business that will take advatage of people. That is really sad...however those that do that will evidently fall...What goes around comes around...Maybe that is why MKA was so big on the golden rule...
Well Have a GREAT DAY
Dave said: "The company is pulling the wool over the eyes of the FTC?
ReplyDeleteSeriously?"
Ummm, this is where the "pyramid scheme" debate comes in and how the home party business packages itself, i.e., what it asks of its sales force in order to represent the company, who ultimately benefits, who loses, by how much, etc..
There are so many variables.
I absolutely think that "some" women in Mary Kay, PamperedChef, etc., etc., are making money legitimately. As to how many aren't, who's to say. We can only speak for ourselves and only we can say what "making money" means to each of us.
Mary Kay does quote turnover, so it is probably save to say that those women didn't make money -- for a myriad of reasons. Mary Kay doesn't collect stats on the why's so it's open for debate as to why anybody would return their inventory.
I agree with Pink Bren:
"I think too that we have to take responsibility for our own actions. If something is too good to be true you know what it probably is. You have to use common sense. it seems that a lot of people want something for nothing...no hard work just give it to me. Anything worth having is worth working for"
I really enjoyed the idea of Mary Kay. It's too bad that I had such a greedy director because if I (she for me) hadn't had invested so much $$ in bogus inventory, I might've been able to change gears and eventually climb out of the hole. But as it was I had over $4k wholesale of dated and/or stale (because it would never be published in the Look again (limited edition)) inventory. It was best for me to just return what I could, and sell the rest to a wholesaler and say buh-bye. Some would've eaten the loss and continued. That idea was/is wrong to me. In hindsight, I think I made the right decision because I would always be 'eating' profits to flip inventory that had been repackaged or discontinued.
Corporate really doesn't care. I base that statement on my own experience after multiple telephone conversations as to what I witnessed/experienced. I know I was only but one in how many million world wide. But I gotta say, there wasn't anybody in my direct vicinity (meaning my unit) that didn't experience the same "set up". Yes, the director is the one to fail. Yes the director is the one to blame. What's frustrating is knowing that and corporate closing ranks around her. That's pretty demonstrative of Corporate's loyalty. i.e., not to the sales force, but to the one making them the real money. i.e., the frontloader. But that's just my opinion. One person, right?
Dave, honestly, I don't know if 2012 will see the demise of Mary Kay. I'm just being facetious. They absolutely will thrive in China and India. New markets! Those ladies will not do anything but great things for the next 20 years or so because for them, it's the 60's again.
Who knows, maybe Mary Kay will always be available in North America. But for some reason, if it's not profitable, I doubt they'll keep this market open. Mary Kay itself, will always make the right decision for them. It will always be about them. They will not maintain a money losing proposition. I just hope that the ones left hold the (inventory bag) don't go the way of Weekenders. That would be sad. All that inventory, commissions owed, etc., etc.
We (generally speaking us) don't get to see Mary Kay's numbers because they are a private company. I guess hearing about Seminar, the number of women there, etc., will give a clearer picture as to the financial "health" of Mary Kay in North America. That's only if the ladies attending will take an honest look around them and really evaluate what they see -- in comparison to years gone by ... and not blame it on the price of gas.
Sometimes progress can be made by agreeing there are topics regarding which we agree. I believe we can all agree there are “conmen” around nearly every corner in our lives today, not only in Mary Kay Cosmetics. A common retort to the descriptions of the MK “dream” as little more than a cult with great PR people, has been, “There are bad people in every business, not just Mary Kay.” I agree.
ReplyDeleteLet’s agree further the distribution of “conmen,” based on the assumptions of statistical probabilities, is roughly equal among MLM entities (i.e., Mary Kay Cosmetics) and non-MLM entities, (i.e., health care providers, etc.).
So then, if this assumption can be viewed as possessing even a modicum of validity, why does the MK MLM apparently have such an incredibly high (stay with me now, I’m about to get very technical) yuk factor? Why do people avoid (with exceptions, of course) the Mary Kay Lady in such droves? Why are so much training resources spent on teaching IBCs how to get beyond: “No,” or, “If you don’t step away from me I’ll scream,” or, “PLEASE, I can’t take yet another Mary Kay pitch in Target,” or, “Oh please, It’s been a hard evening, can’t I just be your waitress instead of your captive cult target”? or, “Is there a chance we could simply share our faith in Christ at this service rather than you exploiting our common religious denomination in pursuit of more recruitment”? etc., etc., etc.
Please do tell me, why the Mary Kay “dream” has such “yuk factor” baggage in comparison with the other businesses/vocations with equal distributions of conmen? Why are the Mary Kay Ladies viewed so consistently (with few exceptions) as something to be avoided? As a side thought, can you imagine the perception of flight attendants working on aircraft leaving Dallas just after seminar? What poise it must take to tell so many women you’re uninterested in their cult when each of them is absolutely positive you, yes YOU, would be PERFECT for this absolutely AMAZING opportunity which would require only a few hours per week working from your home and allow your husband to retire early!
And one other thought, isn’t the issue here not about whether the MK MLM participants are good salespeople or conmen, but about the nature of the Multi-level-marketing system? For me, the “conmen” are not so much the wonderful women who enjoy attention and positive feedback, have an abiding faith, and can easily place trust in others. No, to me, the conman is the entity that promulgates this curse onto unsuspecting women knowing the vast majority, by design, will churn and burn and experience negative consequences from their stint with the “dream” through financial, emotional or relationship losses, or a combination of these and other negative consequences.
I find the polemic certitude so often expressed here about the wonders of the Mary Kay Cosmetics opportunity to be trite. This aside, however, I’m no less convicted this curse will continue to reveal itself for what it is. I never forget the many women now involved in the MK MLM and those about to succumb to the slick sales pitches. I hope and pray for their best interests.
PB, FB, D,
ReplyDeleteI am on my way out the door, but I am really looking forward to getting back to you guys... please be patient!
Good points all.
Thanks
Deleted....Let's take a look at oh let's say the Waltons of Wal-mart. You have the family at the top of this they are the ones that are making all the money...then you have the store directors they make a modest income...then you have the managers...then you have the team leaders...then you have the workers. You see I have a problem with people referring to MK as a primiad or a multi level marketing. Most companies are this way. The only difference to me is that we are independent and choose to work it they way that we want too.
ReplyDeleteYou see when I have someone join my team I don't want them to make a financial decision that they can't handle that would defeat the purpose. You see they know better than I do what they can and can not do. I didn't want to be pressured, I didn't place an order right of the bat I waited until I had some orders. When people get into trouble they let the thought of oh I have to have this or that to make it in the business NOT TRUE!!
The comment about OH HERE COMES THE MK LADY HIDE well that is not so nice. About sharing this with people at church...you know people that I go to church with don't know that I sell MK or that I own a hairsalon. That is not the place to do business. Now if that person calls my house and gets my answering machine they will know because of my message.
I think that your wife got burned either by another person or by not knowing when to say NO. We have to take responsibility for our own actions.
About MK being cult like...I don't agree with that either. I like my MK business I enjoy it and I don't like it when people put it down. You shouldn't be so quick to judge all that are in it. That is like saying because someone in this organization did something wrong then they must all be bad. I don't know what you do for a living however what if someone in the organization that you work for did not do something that was on the up and up....you would like to be judged by the same standards that you are judging MK?? Is it really fair? I know that you say that you and your wife had a HORRIFIC expereince...personally I think that you should learn from it and move on...to keep downing everyone in MK does nothing expect make you look very bitter...
Well I will leave it at that take it however you want to take it. Just remember by the way that you judge you will be judged. And remember this to out of the mouth you can either speak life or death.
Well HAVE A GREAT DAY
Clarification -- I had over $4k retail, not wholesale. Thank God!
ReplyDeletedeleted -- yuk factor. Yup. It's true. I offered Mary Kay product for a fundraiser for my kids' school, and my offer wasn't even acknowledged. Yet there were Epicure and PamperedChef there. I thought it was an oversight the first time and was pretty much treated the same way the second time. Very embarrassing. When I wanted to hold my first skin care class I sent an invite out to every friend and acquaintance I have (that's nearly 30 invites). A handful chose to respond and of those two were yeses. I followed up with the ones that never bothered to respond and I have to say that they weren't very nice about their opinion of Mary Kay. Another very embarrassing moment. My girlfriend had a coming of age party for her daughter (just turned 13). Sleep over and make-overs. She bought everything at Wal-Mart and had another girlfriend help her out with the make-over part. She didn't want anything to do with Mary Kay. (To think that she chose to go to Wal-Mart and I would've taken a major hit for her.) Oh well! Sucks to be me! That's my reality of Mary Kay!
Pink Bren, you can't compare Corporate America with the home party business. The "structure" may look the same, i.e., levels of management down to employee for reporting purposes. That's it. In Corporate America, everybody gets paid from one envelop for hours worked. Wal-Mart's pyramid is not based on their sales volume. The cashier's take of the day isn't portioned out to her direct report, and then their direct report and so on. She doesn't get a cut of the merchandise sold. Wal-Mart just pay's their employees their money earned for hours worked out of the salary budget.
It's the manner in which people get paid that dictates the "scheme".
"She doesn't get a cut of the merchandise sold." IMO, yeah she does. If enough total merchandise is not sold, she will have her hours cut, or even be laid off.
ReplyDelete"Wal-Mart just pay's their employees their money earned for hours worked out of the salary budget." And this salary budget is totally dependant on how much total merchandise is sold. Again, if enough total merchansie is not sold, hours will be cut, or employees will be laid off.
Seems to me, that even in "Corporate America", there are some who receive commissions, or bonuses.
Even in "Corporate America", there are different levels of pay. Management is paid more than those who are managed. Okay, there it is - I see a pyramid. The long line at the bottom are those who are paid the least. The pointy point at the top are those who are paid the most. Even in Corporate America. Especially in Corporate America.
True, those in that long line on the bottom know exactly how much their paycheck will be, and when they will receive it. And they generally do have benefits. Also true (IMO) is that those at the pointy top who get paid the most depend on all those on the bottom who get paid the least to do their jobs so that the pionty top people will get their money.
Yup, looks like pyramid to me!
Now, how about the "churn" factor will all those employees on that long bottom line of this Corporate America pyramid? I suppose there will always be people available to hire to replace those who quit. Looks like a perpetual stream of "churn and burn" to me.
Do those highest paid people at the pointy top of the Corporate America pryamid really care at all about those large numbers of employees on that long bottom pyramid line? Do they care if they are happy? Do they care if they like their hours? Do they care if they like their benefits? Do they care if they handle their paychecks wisely? Do they care about the turnover rate? Do they mainly care about the profit margin?
Rhetorical questions. My opinion is that some do care, some don't care at all.
Mary Kay, Inc. IS part of Corporate America. Mary Kay, **Incorporated**. Instead of having stores that sell their product, they have the sales force that sells their products via their home-based businesses.
Having a MK business is not for everyone. It does require (again IMO) large amounts of self-control (ordering & recognition among other things), self-discipline (working a schedule and sticking to it; keeping priorities straight), patience (not gonna show a profit overnight), determination (keep going thru the "no"s, obstacles; more patience), and hard work.
People don't "fail" in MK because it's structure is "designed" for failure. That's just dumber than dumb. No business is going to deliberately operate on a structure that is "designed" for failure. I really don't believe that such a business would last 44 years. HA.
It is my belief based on my own observations that a lot (specific number unknown) of those who leave MK do so because they simply gave it a try and discovered they didn't like it. That's okay. And that's certainly NOT failing.
FlyBye...Walmart does give incentives say if you sell this many of these you will get this. There are incentives. The managers and store directors also get bonus and things if they keep their cost down. This is how Corporate America works. There is always someone at the top that get more than the ones at the bottom. I know this to be true because my mom worked for WalMart. So I do know first hand.
ReplyDeleteAnyway I am glad that you were able to recoop your for you inventory.
About the running from the MK Lady...I personally don't see it however I am not pushy. I wear my MK pin and if someone approaches me then I tell them. Do I hunt people down NO I don't, because I don't want to be hunted down. This is where the Golden Rule comes into affect to treat others the way that you want to be treated.
MK has GREAT products and I use them. I do take offense when people put the business that I am in down. We just have to remember that the way that we judge are the way that we are going to judge. Like I said in the last post out of the mouth we can speak life or death...blessing or cursing. Personally I would rather bless than curse...I know that I like to have blessings spoke on me. I like to lift people up and not put them down. This is just me.
HAVE A GREAT EVENING
Wow. I just can't pass this one up!
ReplyDeleteDeleted wrote, "As a side thought, can you imagine the perception of flight attendants working on aircraft leaving Dallas just after seminar? What poise it must take to tell so many women you’re uninterested in their cult when each of them is absolutely positive you, yes YOU, would be PERFECT for this absolutely AMAZING opportunity which would require only a few hours per week working from your home and allow your husband to retire early!"
I've flown to Dallas for Seminar many many times. And I've flown home, too! (That was humor, people.) Fairly long flights. I'm going to take a leap here and say that this has probably, maybe, perhaps, actually happened. But, while sitting on the plane, for so many hours with so many MK people and so few flight attendants, I've never witnessed the flight attendants inundated with recruiting attempts. I've actually not seen any.
That's where my "leap" comes in. Just because I didn't witness it my self, does not mean it does not happen. I do believe that isolated recruiting attempts do happen.
What I have most often seen on those flights, is the fun everyone is having, flight attendants included. The fun, excitement, tiredness (yeah, we're all pooped!), the encouragement to work our business smarter and better. I've seen and heard the flight attendants having fun with us! I've been complimented by them. I've seen the flight attendants actually deliberately look at our ribbons pinned on our jackets and congratulate us!
Yes, I do realize the flight attendants are doing their customer service thing. I'm not stupid. We're not stupid. The flight attendants are not stupid. All of us (flight attendants included) know the importance of SINCERE compliments. We're all stuck together on that little tube hurtling through the sky. We can be miserable or we can have fun, be happy.
(totally posted this in the wrong place)... sorry.
ReplyDeleteFB,
First of all, I think you are right. There are a lot of variables. There is no easy answer, and I am sure that, as we speak, there are people making money (working for the FTC) trying to figure out (among other things) whether or not the direct sales, home party model (as we know it) is a feasible enough model to continue operating. A yes 35 years ago does not mean a yes today. A yes today does not mean a yes 35 years from now.
**
I am, as always, sorry to hear about what was done to you.
I am also sorry to hear that your complaints seemingly were not received well (or at all). I can’t speak for corporate. I can’t speak for customer service. I have never called Mary Kay in my life. What I have heard from my wife (and some on this site) is that they have always been very responsive to complaints made and seem to make a genuine effort to make things right. Of course, I have seen this sort of scenario with other large corporations too. I have had good friends (like minded types) complain PASSIONATELY about how terrible Verizon’s customer service is. My reaction… “Really? Whenever I call they are great!” I point out the “like minded” part because this is not one of those cases where a hot-headed acquaintance calls and gets nowhere, but my cool, reasonable awesome-ness got me the results I was looking for! For that matter, there have been some companies that I have called one day and was ready to call the BBB and the next day, was ready to buy stock in the company! Sometimes (I am not saying this is necessarily the case with you) it is the person you get – or the day they are having. Also, I know nothing about their policies and how they are trained to respond to things. So, again, I can’t speak for corporate, but I am sorry that you had a less than satisfactory experience.
**
“Mary Kay itself, will always make the right decision for them. It will always be about them. They will not maintain a money losing proposition.”
I absolutely agree. And I shudder when I hear people that seem to think that Mary Kay would rather lose money than “let down their consultants”. They are a manufacturer that is distributing a product. You are their distributor. If that arrangement stops being profitable (for either party) it can and should be dissolved. It is not a tea party where everyone is supposed to make sure everyone else feels good and is well adjusted. They want to sell a product. You (generic you) are offering to sell that product for them.
There is an agreement. Here is how you get the product. Here is how you can sell it. You can do these things. You can not do these things. If you reach this level, you can enter into a different agreement.
In regards to distributor relations, I think Mary Kay actually has a very good record of taking care of their distributors. I know that is hard for someone that got the short end of the stick to hear, but what I have seen, I have liked.
As you have mentioned, time will tell. They say hindsight has 20/20. What I wouldn't give to be able to see into the future to know how things turn out!
Deleted,
ReplyDeleteThe reason for the “yuk” factor is simple. Whether you are referring to Mary Kay specifically or Direct Sales/MLM generically, they almost all have a “name” that people say they represent. A conman working the Mary Kay “con” will say, “Get something for nothing… ask me about Mary Kay and I will give you all the secrets and before you know it you will have more money than you can spend”. People get sucked in and vigorously attempt to make it work, spreading one pair of words over and over again… “Mary Kay, Mary Kay, Mary Kay”. They are not representing Mary Kay. They are representing some conman’s version of Mary Kay. But they don’t know that and neither do the people they are talking to. (I obviously don’t agree that the training resources – from Mary Kay – teach people the things you suggest they do. For instance, stalking people in Target is not a company sanctioned “idea”!) This leads to the equivalent of a full scale pyramid scheme worth of people spreading “the ‘good news’ about Mary Kay” that really is a far cry from “the real Mary Kay”. All of the frustration and animosity towards these conmen coalesces around the “name” they claimed to be representing… in this case, Mary Kay.
Take on the other hand, the conmen that do not associate with a “name”. There may be more of them. There may be more that “use” a “name” to pull of their con. A “name” gives instant credibility. But it is easier to look up the companies official policies, so you lose more people. Who knows what the ratio is, but the mass “yuk” factor you are referring to seems to vary considerably. Where I live (L.A. is a big city) I have run into every reaction you can imagine. All I usually say (in response to, “what does your wife do”) she is a Mary Kay rep. Some people (very few) recoil. Some get excited and say, “that is great, my _______ sold Mary Kay and loved it”. Some say, “what is Mary Kay?”
The reason Mary Kay has a “yuk” factor is that someone had a “yukky” experience. Not all people have had such an experience.
The experience that you seem to have had shocks some of us. There is a difference between assuming that Mary Kay is perfect for everyone you meet and choosing not to assume that someone you meet will not be interested. It sounds like the Mary Kay you experienced was akin to “recruit anything with a heartbeat” whereas everything I have seen screams NOT to do that. When my wife tells her director about a prospective recruit, she (her director) asks her (and they in turn ask the prospective recruit) a lot of questions about them to make sure that no one rushes into a situation that ends up being a bad fit. A bad fit is bad for my wife, her director, the person that gets recruited. It just isn’t worth it.
**
“…isn’t the issue here not about whether the MK MLM participants are good salespeople or conmen, but about the nature of the Multi-level-marketing system?”
That is ONE aspect of the conversation going on here. YOU think (and seem to claim that you KNOW) the problem is the MLM model. MY point is that it is possible that the problem is not the model, but people that take advantage of the model.
**
“I find the polemic certitude so often expressed here about the wonders of the Mary Kay Cosmetics opportunity to be trite.”
Hmm. That’s funny. Because I feel the EXACT same way… except with one small change.
“I find the polemic certitude so often expressed here about the horrors of the Mary Kay Cosmetics opportunity to be trite.”
Except, drawing on another conversation I am having with Flybye, if the FTC doesn’t agree with your position, whose “certitude” is really the “polemic” one?
Either way, “talking” with you DOES seem to be growing rather trite.
Rebecca, if I worked for Wal-Mart and I recommended you, as my friend, to work for them and you were hired? I would not get commissions on your pay for the duration of time you worked for Wal-Mart. Worse yet, if you quit, the bonus I earned on your pay checks would not be garnished from mine after you quit.
ReplyDeleteManager's pay scales are always different. They always get bonuses on sales because they get to decide what inventory they're going to carry, how much of it, when to purchase, etc. In other words their store's bottom line dictates the size of their bonus at the end of the fiscal year based on how well they performed in comparison to other stores and head office's targets/expectations. Their cashiers do not push inventory. Their fliers do.
In Corporate America, there is such thing as a "finder's fee" that some high tech companies award employees for finding them talent. That's like being a third-party recruiter for enticing their talented friend to come work for X Company instead of the competition. It's nominal and a one-time bonus. That in of itself is still not comparable.
In my opinion, it doesn't matter if it's a flat org, or a "pyramid" shape. The shape of the organization DOES NOT (emphasis 'cuz I'm too damn lazy to shift in bold) mean it's classified the same way.
Lastly, Wal-Mart is Incorporated. It's its own entity. People who work for Wal-Mart are interdependent of one another. Even the sales force in Corporate America is interdependent of the organization it works for. They are NOT separate entities -- like what you find in Mary Kay, PamperedChef, Tupperware, Epicure, Weekender. Everybody in Mary Kay, and the like, owns their own business, remember?!? It's NOT the same thing. Mary Kay's sales force is completely "severed" from the "Incorporated" part. Therefore, each level gets to earn from each other's wholesale purchases with the lion's share going to Mary Kay Corporate. That does not happen at Wal-Mart, Target, Walgreen's, McDonald's, etc. Overall sales may dictate whether that organization "lives", but the employees don't get a % of sales every pay period or even at the end of the year unless it's written into their letter of offer and unless they are "management". To do so would mean that each employee "owns" a piece of the store. (Personally I think that would be great! But it doesn't happen that way.)
In any event, this may be a you say tom-ay-to, I say tom-at-o thing. But that's how I see it.
I count among my many blessings the fact that my daily communications are, for the most part, not limited to strings of consonants and vowels strewn on a page or PC screen separated by spaces with a bit of punctuation occasionally thrown in for good measure. Although ideas can indeed be expressed through the written or typed word, so much is missing. From the inflection of my voice, my tone, facial expression, gesticulation, and (what I believe is most effective), my eyes. You can’t look into my eyes when I talk and I can’t look into yours. So much of the message is either missed or left to assumption (which may as well be missed). Communicating this way leaves an information void, a void which would otherwise be robustly filled with data when conversing in person. I am a licensed clinical therapist (a bit of self revelation there); I spend hours upon hours most days simply communication, mostly listening.
ReplyDeleteWhether intentional or not, communicating on a blog prompts us to compensate for the information void. We assume the author is angry, happy, animated, excited, sad, etc. But without the visual and auditory prompts available, we all at times fill in the information void with our own assumptions. Happens all the time, I believe.
So then, as if my occasional arrogance isn’t enough, the lack of robustness in communication found in a blog can lend to perceptions of me as being condescending, sarcastic (at times intentional), angry, vitriolic, and downright mean. What’s more, this mean, condescending, patronizing son-of-a-%!#@& (me) is ALSO saying unflattering things about an activity you truly enjoy.
Well, I post this in an attempt to convey I believe you’d probably like me if we could converse in person. Even though you may vehemently disagree with my ideas re the MK MLM, I believe we could, most likely would, establish a great rapport. So, as difficult as this may seem, I present myself as a friendly guy . I also respect your right to make your own decisions about the MK MLM. I hope, though, as I continue to offer what many of you view as little more than vitriolic spew, you’ll consider the possibility that my intentions are not to make you dislike me, per se. My intention is to be an advocate more than an adversary. At times the truth, or what may ultimately be right for you, isn’t what you want to hear at the onset.
As for “good MK IBCs” and “bad MK IBCs,” I believe the vast, vast majority are not merely good, they’re wonderful people. They’re just like you and my wife. I don’t remember ever seeing a MK recruiting flyer seeking “..low down shallow women willing to be dishonest, cheat, be knavish, good at manipulation, willing to coop the personal faith of others, anxious to cause financial losses among other women, etc. No, I believe the people who get into Mary Kay do so, largely, for very honorable reasons: make lasting friendships, earn money while caring for kids, help with the family income, become enveloped in a rewarding career, have more flexible work hours, etc. Bottom line, the people in MK are inherently good. Unfortunately, in the right scenario, (or system) many will do what they would otherwise never consider doing, kind of like a drawn out riot effect. In other words, I believe the MK paradigm has helped many, many women do things they’d otherwise never consider doing. The MK MLM has (and continues to) successfully helped untold numbers of women impale themselves on the Mary Kay sword.
So, however trite my posts may well be in the eyes of some, I hope I can begin to convey my respect for all of you, no matter how large I believe a MK mistake you’re making. I continue to share my thoughts here not out of bitterness, certainly not out of anger. I continue to share on blogs with the hope I may help someone consider pulling back from the cliff.
Good night.
Deleted/Blessed
P.S: And here’s a real strange one. Dave, I believe you’re on your way from the pro-MK side of things to the pro-clarity side (Let the force be with you Dave). Yea, it seems to me you’re beginning to see MK for what it is, slowly. Either way, it’s important to point out people with differing opinions can still respect each other and possibly, one day, enjoy a Coke with each other.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHk7kYYroRU
Flybye64: "Everybody in Mary Kay, and the like, owns their own business, remember?!? It's NOT the same thing. Mary Kay's sales force is completely "severed" from the "Incorporated" part."
ReplyDeleteI agree with part of this statement. My MK business is MY OWN business. Within the stipulations set forth in my Agreement with MK, Inc. However, is MK, Inc. did not exist, neither would the sales force. So I do not agree that we are "severed" from the Corporation.
While each member of the sales force is a "separate entity", each one is still "interdependent" on the MK Corporation. They make the product we sale.
My point, however, was that the company itself is indeed part of Corporate America.
"Therefore, each level gets to earn from each other's wholesale purchases with the lion's share going to Mary Kay Corporate."
True. But.... Each level also earns from her own sales of the products. For most of us in the sales force, this is the largest part of our MK income. The commissions we (most of us) earn from our teams is minimal. Example: It sounds to me like the largest portion of MK4Me's income comes from her actual sales of the product. Her commission income is probably very nice, but she'd have to tell us if it is larger or smaller than her income from her sales.
I also believe that most of us in the sales force realize and understand that the "lion's share" goes to MK, Inc. After all, they do have that whole corporation to run and all of those employees to pay. It's just logical and reasonable to me.
Ah, tom-ay-to, tom-at-o. We can agree to disagree.
I just think that the whole anti-MLM, MLMs are just "thinly veiled product based pyramid schemes", "barely legal", and "designed to fail" stuff is all a bunch of hooey.
Deleted - cool u-tube commercial! I'd buy you a coke!
ReplyDeleteI have a question regarding the comparison of MK to Walmart -- how much inventory does a Walmart employee (regardless of position) have to purchase?
I don't see the similarity.
Deleted wrote, "In other words, I believe the MK paradigm has helped many, many women do things they’d otherwise never consider doing. The MK MLM has (and continues to) successfully helped untold numbers of women impale themselves on the Mary Kay sword."
ReplyDelete"I continue to share on blogs with the hope I may help someone consider pulling back from the cliff."
So, basically, IF I were to believe Deleted, then I would have to believe that I am not strong enough, my values are not strong enough, my principles are not strong enough, my beliefs are not strong enough, I am not intelligent enough, my faith in and committment to God are not strong enough, to withstand "the MK paradigm".
Ha.
D,
ReplyDeleteFor someone that spends (or claims to spend) hours upon hours listening, you don’t seem to be very good at it.
Perhaps the same problem you cite as the reason we see you as “…condescending, sarcastic, angry and vitriolic…” has caused you difficulty in “listening” to the words that are spoken (or more accurately written) to you.
I am not sure how many times I will have to say this.
I understand that you think the problem is with the business model.
I think we all do.
Really.
We get it.
We really do.
We understand that you think the problem is not the people. It is not the individual. It is the model. The MLM model is eroding the values of otherwise good honest people. Apparently you CAN con an honest man (or at least, in this case, an honest woman).
We understand that you think this corrosive business model is so powerful that all 700,000 (give or take) Americans involved are being hustled into propagating the “ultimate con”.
I understand. But I disagree.
I don’t think the problem is the model. I think the model is just fine. It is, after all, a business model. It is a system of distribution.
Can it be abused? Yes.
Should it be abandoned because it can be abused? I don’t think so.
You seem to want to give the business model a life of its own. Perhaps it is just the incredible imagery that you are so fond of using, but, to me, it is what it is.
**
You said that are “polemic certitude” was “trite”. I (basically) was responding that you saying the same thing over and over again was trite.
In other words, it’s getting old dude.
A good (normal) conversation/debate goes back and forth with each side adapting to the others position.
Something like this:
Dave: Let’s talk about Mary Kay… what does everyone think about MK?
FB: I think that it manipulates women.
Dave: Really. Why do you feel that way?
FB: Well I was manipulated, for one. And also a lot of people that I have talked to had similar situations.
Dave: Really. That is terrible. Sorry to hear that. Can you tell me specifically what happened?
FB: Well my director placed my order for me and there was way too much product for me to sell before they updated the packaging it was in. It really put me at a disadvantage that I couldn’t (or didn’t want to) try to get out of.
Dave: Thanks for sharing. That is not the MK I am familiar with and I am sorry that happened to you.
**** and so on, and so on… ***
Then there’s you.
Dave: Let’s talk about Mary Kay… what does everyone think about MK?
D: Mary Kay is terrible.
Dave: Ok, why do you think that way
D: Mary Kay is really terrible.
Dave: Ok, got it. WHY do you feel that way?
D: Mary Kay is like a pit of crocodiles.
Dave: Isn’t that kind of like saying Mary Kay is terrible? Anyway, why do you feel that way?
D: Mary Kay “has (and continues to) successfully helped untold numbers of women impale themselves on the Mary Kay sword.” And, by the way, your “polemic certitude” is trite.
Dave: ((sigh)) Talking to you is becoming trite. Care to tell us WHY you feel this way?
D: I just want to save you from that terrible, terrible Mary Kay. Even if you think my posts are trite.
**
Finally, cute video. Really.
But, and I am going to be very blunt here, YOU don’t respect me. It is one thing to point out that people with differing opinions can still respect each other. It is an entirely different thing to actually respect someone with a differing view.
I am not sure that I would have thought it possible when we first started conversing, but I have lost respect for you. Primarily because of the disrespect you have shown me.
Please don’t try to condescend to me and suggest that I am beginning to see more clearly.
I have always been open to “sharing a coke” with you. I invited you to do so while you were in town. I hold nothing against you as a person.
But don’t ask for respect when you are not willing to give it. Especially when it has already been offered to you.
* All employees wages depend on sales of the products.
ReplyDelete* The majority of employees are paid less than those further up the structure.
* The minority at the top get paid the most.
* Employee turnover rates. "Churn and burn."
* Do those at the top really care all that much about those at the bottom? Or are they more concerned with the profit margin?
These are all things seen in Corporate America. These are things that the anti-MKers use against MK. Bad MK, Bad bad bad MK! Good Corporate America, good good good Corporate America.
Okay. So, what's my point? My eyebrow goes up, my eyes roll, I chuckle at the irony. I shake my head. Business is business is business.
Sure there are a ton of differing details between the MK business and Wal-Mart et al. And there are similarities.
I don't believe MK is bad. I don't think Wal-Mart et al is bad. They are just simply different types of businesses.
A Wal-Mart cashier needs to learn all the details to her job. A MK consultant needs to learn all the details to her MK business.
Well. Okay again. I ain't got me no call-edge edge-u-ca-shun so I had to get out my dickshunary....
ReplyDelete"Polemic certitude is trite"
Polemic: argument about doctrines.
Doctrine: a principle or body of principles.
Principle: a fundamental truth or doctrine on which others are based. Rules of conduct or ethical behavior.
Certitude: certainty; complete freedom from doubt. (Figured it had something to do with being certain :D .)
Trite: stale (or not fresh); hackneyed.
Hackney: make stale or trite by overuse.
Let me see.....
Our doctrinal certainty is overused.
The certainty of our principles is stale.
The certainty of our principles is overused.
Our arguments are overused.
Our principles are overused.
The complete freedom of doubt regarding our principles is overused, or stale.
The certainty we feel about our ethical behavior is trite.
So I guess this basically means we are idiots and have no clue what our principles and our behavior should be.
Or maybe it means we need to get with the current times and adopt current principles and standards of behavior. Because what we've been doing so far is now trite, stale, not fresh, overused even.
Ooooh, no wait! The certainty of our beliefs is outdated! No, no no. Is it the certainty that is stale or overused; or is it the beliefs that are stale or overused?
Oh, dear. Some one please help me! I don't know WHAT to believe anymore. My polemic certitude is trite. Woe is me....
Rebecca said:
ReplyDelete"I just think that the whole anti-MLM, MLMs are just "thinly veiled product based pyramid schemes", "barely legal", and "designed to fail" stuff is all a bunch of hooey."
For me the difference between "conventional" corporate America and MLM corporate America is that in "conventional" corporate America they decide how many people are necessary to run their business, including their sales force. When they expand, the CEOs, etc., decide by how much and where, if they will acquire other businesses (intellectual property) to save themselves from reinventing the wheel, etc. If they need to cut, THEY cut. There'll always be attrition, etc., no matter what industry so that point is moot.
Mary Kay has some of that, but Mary Kay's existence is more dependent on their sales force's ability to be able to "expand" and sustain THEM (Mary Kay). Yes, Mary Kay is opening other markets. Only because the one they've been active for for 40+ years doesn't have the ability to renew itself like it did 25 years ago.
One of their downfalls in North America is the home party model. It's old and stale. They haven't reinvented themselves. Just their product, not how they get it to market.
So yes, they are all interdependent of one another, but IMO, in "conventional" corporate America the dog wags the tail. In MLM, it's the tail wagging the dog.
FlyBye...OK you said that MK has to move to other markets because the North American Market isn't cutting it anymore. Lets take a look at McDonalds, Wal-Mart, Taco Bell, Pizza Hut etc...They to are in other countries. OK even Dinsey is in France...we went there and took our girls. While at Disney Land in Paris we went to a McDonalds and it cost us $99.00 to eat. I know that I just moved off a little bit.
ReplyDeleteHere is the point that I am trying to make. Most companies expand. Why? Because they are in business to make money period. Why do women sign up to do MK to make money. I didn't open my hair salon not to make money and I didn't get into MK not to make money. This is what makes the world go round.
I think that MK is a good company. I think that most that don't like it got in with a greedy director that was in it all for themselves. I do have team members do I want them to go into debt to get started NO. That is not the way to have a good team. This is just my opinion.
Have a BLESSED DAY
Is the home party model dead? I don't think so. It is alive and well in my area. I know this because I still get bookings and so do people in my unit. The trick is marketing it. If you call it a party or a class people freak.
ReplyDeleteI am fortunate. I train with directors whose backgrounds before MK was marketing, finance, and sales. They are always training on new ideas to be creative when talking to prospects and making appointments. Using the wrong words will turn people off. I have customers who like me because I'm not what they think of as the "typical" MK lady. Anyway, I digress.
I read The Renegade Network Marketer by Ann Sieg. It is about finding the people who want what we have. My directors teach this. Ann Sieg takes it further so that one can learn how to attract people rather than chase them down.
Personally, I don't approach people. MK does give us the tools to NOT be pushy sales people. We have pins we can wear and we have a tote we can carry that shows the catalog. I have people approach me this way. If they want MK they can see I have it and they can talk to me. I don't have to bother them if they don't want to be bothered.
I think where it goes wrong is you have overzealous people chasing everyone in sight. They probably don't even know they are annoying. It's just their personality. I do think you get a lot of disgruntled people when they have to be persuaded to join and then it's not what it's cracked up to be.
I enjoy MK. No one pitched to me to join. I had never (and still have never) been approached by anyone in MK asking me if I want a facial. No one offered me the option to join. I decided on my own accord that I liked the product and selling it (mainly to hold the appointments because I have fun doing them) appealed to me. My goal is to find those people. They do exist. People actually do approach me about starting Mary Kay. Some are people I know and some are not. The point is, they approach me.
I never heard anyone make grandiose claims of what this business can do. They didn't have to. I already knew I wanted to try it out. I didn't even know my recruiter would get a commission. It didn't matter, though. I wanted to try it out.
Since I've joined, I have not heard anyone make over the top claims about this business. My SSD is an ESSD (Executive Senior Sales Director) and she still WORKS. She recently had two units offspring. That makes a dent in her unit size. She has to work, too; and she always shares what she is doing and how she is working. She doesn't have to work her business around a full time job like many of us do. Conversely, I know people who do well working around a full time job.
Everyone is different. People who become desperate are at risk of becoming conpeople. JMO.
OH! I should add (and I apologize if any of my lengthy posts seem incoherent. I'm typing and trying to hold my thoughts while taking phone calls) that if we focus on selling the product, that is a big part of being successful. My NSD has a Stellar Sellers program which encourages sales of $2000 in a month. That's $2000 RETAIL. And the recognition is NOT based on a wholesale order of $1000 to "prove" we sold $2000 retail. ;)
ReplyDeleteI'm just very much about selling the product and recruiting is secondary. It's what I've been taught. I'm awaare of the horror stories out there and I'm thankful for the people I'm associated with in my business.
Hi Shades,
ReplyDeleteYou said:
"I think where it goes wrong is you have overzealous people chasing everyone in sight. They probably don't even know they are annoying. It's just their personality."
I would add that in some cases those people, because of their zeal (and maybe a touch of frenzy), get frustrated when they don't see results right away. They start to "adjust" their message a little bit at a time.
"You can make money on the side and if you work really hard, you could eventually earn a respectable salary"
Slowly turns into
"Part time hours and executive pay"
Hi Dave! I agree. I do think that desperation can lead to corruption.
ReplyDeleteI will say that I know directors who are working less hours and do say things like "I earn an executive income while being home with my children." and some do say they work part time hours. Now, these people I know personally, have been in MK for 20 years or more and have well established working units. I do believe they don't have to work as much as a newbie. I also know they do have to work.
It's a delicate situation there. It does bother me when they say it at our guest events. It gives the impression they achieved this overnight (even though they all state how many years they've been in and it's typically 2 decades). I think some of these people are overzealous and don't realize exactly how people might be interpretting their words.
As a consultant, I would not tell someone they can work part time hours and earn an executive income because I have not achieved that myself. I do believe that by managing my time I can replace my current (NONexecutive) income with my MK by working it alongside my full time job. I have seen others do it. The trick is figuring out what will make it work for me.
It takes PATIENCE. And when people lose patience they might become frustrated and/or desperate and seek out those unethical routes.
Shades and Dave...I agree that many get over zealous and they freak out. Well...I never tell my recruits that you will be making top bucks. I tell with that the work is easy and it is however it is also hard in the fact that you have to work hard to make it a success.
ReplyDeleteI think that I have said this before when I first opened my hair salon I wokred from about 7 am to about 10 pm...Now however I work 3 1/2 days a week probably about 30 hours maybe. You know I even have a captive audience when I am doing hair and I don't even tell my customers that I am in MK. If they ask then I tell them.
Well have a GREAT DAY!!!
Flybye,
ReplyDeleteI enjoy your posts.
Deleted
Judi, first let me say that I noticed that you referred to mk4me and myself as good, thank you.
ReplyDeleteI will add to your comment about the mall. I think some may draw away and make a face due to that approach, regardless of the product. I hate it when I am trying to drag my youngster through the mall and just get some things accomplished and there are these people hanging out of kiosks wanting to spray you, rub lotion on you (eew!), or some other nonsense.
I agree with Dave that desperation sometimes leads to overzealous and eventually unethical behavior. However, I think that you see this in other fields, such as the person who embezzles because wanting to be rick quick or they are in a financial bind. I think that those with character that lends itself to these types of activities might be attracted to opportunities like Mary Kay, which might appear to be, and might be presented by some to be, fast & easy money.
I don't however believe that Mary Kay makes good apples go bad, no more than working around cash entices one to be a thief.
Flybye,
ReplyDeleteHi, I have not been responding to you very much. Partly because I was "engaged" in another conversation (or something similar to one anyway). Also because I don't want to dominate every conversation here (nor am I able to, time wise, anyway) and I could see that you were getting some good conversation going with others here.
I would like to reiterate that I appreciate your presence here! It is great to have someone express things as well as you do while bringing some opposing viewpoints. Thank you.
Having said that, you said:
"Yes, Mary Kay is opening other markets. Only because the one they've been active for for 40+ years doesn't have the ability to renew itself like it did 25 years ago."
Sorry to be the "old evidence digger" I am, but on what do you base the assertion that the U.S. market does not have the ability to renew itself like it did 25 years ago?
Second,
"One of their downfalls in North America is the home party model. It's old and stale. They haven't reinvented themselves. Just their product, not how they get it to market."
In what ways do most companies reinvent themselves? Particularly those that distribute a product.
Fast food - still serving food to their customers from the same style store front they did when they started. New packaging, new product, new prices, but you still stand in line, order and get your food, like, two or three minutes later.
Automotive - still distributing through dealerships. New styles (most change their "look" almost yearly now - at least slightly - even if the dealer still has inventory... and they usually do), new prices, new financing options, but you still go in to the dealer, find the car you like, make an offer, wait for the counter offer, (well I'm getting agitated just talking about the way they 'bring their product to market!!)...
Electronics? Kitchenware? Furniture?
I really can't think of very many companies (or industries) that reinvent their method of getting their product to the end consumer.
Perhaps I am not thinking in the right categories?
These things, I am just asking. Hoping for some clarification or amplification of the idea that you are getting at.
Hi Everyone!! I'm back!!
ReplyDeleteGreat conversation going on over the last several days.
{{Shades, "I think where it goes wrong is you have overzealous people chasing everyone in sight. They probably don't even know they are annoying."}}
So innocently put, but oh so true.
I don't chase, hound, or bug. I have a great product, a money back guarantee, a try before you buy approach, and I am willing to share my time and knowledge with you free of charge because I believe you will love the product and want it. If one doesn't, I will not try to manipulate them into buying it because I do not want them to later resent me.
If someone isn't interested in what I have to offer - it is no bigger to me, it is their loss, not mine. I honestly feel this way. - I teach my unit members to develop this attitude.
Often I tell my consultants, have you ever gone out (when you were single like to a club with your girlfriends, and many of them are asked to dance and you just wish someone would ask you so you don't have to feel left out or unattractive?? ) and there you sit, feeling down about yourself?? But you can go to the same club with your same friends even in the same outfit but this trip you have a great new boyfriend, your confidence in yourself is fine, you sit there and well, ya know, who really cares if some bozo you don't even know comes over and askes you to dance, you know you've got a great thing....what happens, you have guys asking you to dance all night- why??? I just seems that when you are "hungry or needy" you seem to project that and it scares people off. - If you are confident you project an aura that just seems to attract people.
From my experience this seems to happen in our business.
Hungry/needy = unattractive
Confident/Posetive = attractive
Remember we want to attract people not attack people!!
I shared before, I will never go out just to warm chat, I actually do not warm chat, however, if someone opens the door and invites me in, I am going to make sure they are provided with the information.
We have all heard about the "pushy MK Lady", well, I know for a fact my clients do not think of me like that because I get tons of referrals - now let's face it, you aren't going to have others referring their friends to you, if they don't have some faith in you, your approach, and your knowledge - if they want to keep their friends.
Now, my next thought: my darling daughter was hired at Wendy's about 4 months ago - she is 17. She has commented on how many people have come and gone just in the time she has been there. As a matter of fact, for the most part, if she requests certain days off she gets them because of her "seniority"! (hehe) - so if you want to talk about churing and burning, it happens in lots of places, just not MK.
ReplyDelete*********************************
{{STRT: I don't however believe that Mary Kay makes good apples go bad, no more than working around cash entices one to be a thief.}}-
Amen!!
**********************************
{{STRT -Judi, first let me say that I noticed that you referred to mk4me and myself as good, thank you.}}
Judi, I, too, would like to add my
thanks - I wish you had a director that treated you right because from reading your posts over time, I really know you could have had a much btter experience in MK than the one you had - perhaps you would even be on the other side of the fence on this blog.
***********************************
and loved Rebecca's post:
"So, basically, IF I were to believe Deleted, then I would have to believe that I am not strong enough, my values are not strong enough, my principles are not strong enough, my beliefs are not strong enough, I am not intelligent enough, my faith in and committment to God are not strong enough, to withstand "the MK paradigm".
thank you for putting my feelings into words... we are stupid and in a fog because we can ...conduct this business ethically and honestly, by selling first, and recruiting second, and not manipulating but teaching others to sell. hmmmm...
and last there are some months the profit from my sales exceed my commissions, lately my commissions have been higher, but I have to admit, I have been spending way more time working with my unit and backed away just a little on my personal appointments, but still EARNED the Sales Court for the 13th year in a row - I think my top selling month was a December and it was over $7,000 Retail.
mk4me,
ReplyDeleteWELCOME BACK!!!
I trust you had a great vacation?!
- I worked at Wendy's too. It was my first job ever. Still love those square burgers to this very day!
Thanks Dave for the Welcome Back! - Hoped I was missed a little;) Had a great vacation, white water rafting, hiking, shopping, swimming,site seeing (waterfalls, etc..) and... since this blog's is to show balance.....
ReplyDeleteI did not bring my laptop, I did not check my voicemail, I did no conference calls - I was on vacation and it was time for my husband and myself. So, it is possible for a MK director to walk away from her business and enjoy time away from her office - one does not have to work 24/7 to make money in MK.
I am now back home and I have many orders to fill that were either emailed or messages left on voicemail - and we already have production in for July. - I made $$ while I was having a great time. So my business was working even when I wasn't.
-Wendy's sidenote- DH is addicted to Frosties, DD brings one home for him every night she works!!
Rebecca @ 11:07 -- AMEN!
ReplyDeleteOh, MK4ME: Welcome back! Hope you had a fun weekend! :D
ReplyDelete"ltcme said...
ReplyDeleteRebecca @ 11:07 -- AMEN!"
Seems to me that there is a huge need for MORE "polemic certitude". For instance, if some of those on PT had "polemic certitude", manipulative tactics used on them would have failed.
I'm thinkin' it would be really really difficult to manipulate or trick a person with "polemic certitude" into doing something that would go against said "polemic certitude".
Polemic certitude (IMO) should be respected and applauded, not ridiculed.