To be perfectly honest with you, I just don't have the time to analyze everything she has to say. She makes some good points. But overall, I am left wondering what the point is. Perhaps it is because I am not in her shoes. Perhaps it is because when I don't like something, even if it was a mistake I made to get me "into it", I simply move on. I don't know. If you have the time (I know some of you already have an have been waiting for this post) check it out and share your thoughts.
Here are a few of mine.
"Platinum" (the author of the piece) says:
We were also told at a workshop by a National that if we wanted to become Nationals we would need to build our team in several different areas within a 2 to 8 hour radius depending on the density of the population so I determined to travel to cities within an 8 hour trip one way, and other places that would require lots of travel time to work towards my long term goals.
This is, hands down, one of the greatest examples of putting the cart before the horse that I have ever heard. I once had an idea to borrow money from my credit card (cash advance style) to invest in an interest earning account. (Of course the idea was to borrow at the promotional 0% interest rate and invest in something safe - say 4% money market) But what if the "deal" would be 18% interest on the credit card and 1.5% on the money market? Wouldn't you "abandon ship"? If driving 8 hours - one way!!!! was putting such a strain on things why why why would you keep doing that?! She also mentions elsewhere (and I hear this a lot from the "Mary Kay is evil" crowd) that all the events were a serious drain on potential profit. If that is the case, DON'T GO. Does anyone really believe that when you meet a Mary Kay lady your ability to say "NO" goes out the door?
A little later she continues:
Plus we tend to put the million dollar Directors and Nationals on huge pedestals. This is also before expences. Did you know that if you had a regular job and were earning $50,000 for 20 years, that you would have earned 1 million dollars? You have spent it on rent, vacations, food, clothes, car, gas, etc., etc., but you've earned a million dollars! If MK is viewed as a business and a replacement for a different job, the Nationals would be using their earnings to pay bills and regular family expenses as well as any extras just like any "executive" would have to. Or did you think they just save it all up for a "rainy day"?
First of all, where are the speling (int. mispelled) critics when "one of their own" spells expenses "expences"? Again, not that I care... it is "blogland" and no one checks their spelling or grammar, but it was a point I made in a recent post because of a comment angrily spewed by a PTer towards an MKers "grammer" (if you recall) and I wonder, where is that critic now?
But moving on from the petty, is this a joke? Do any of you really think that earning millions of dollars is so that you can stash it all away, taking it out occasionally to admire its "prettiness"? Money is earned so that it can be used. Spent, wasted, invested, whatever! If you are making $50K a year for 20 years, congrats, you made a million dollars. The way she asks, "Or did you think they just save it all up for a "rainy day"?" makes me think that she thought this. I mean seriously, are there people out there recruiting with lines like, "Once you get into Mary Kay, not only will you be making a ton of money immediately, but you will no longer have any expenses... those bills you are paying now will grow wings and fly away to the place where bills go when they die."???? What is that? Mary Kay puts their top achievers on a pedestal. SO WHAT!!!!
More...
Mary Kay said that "You can achieve anything you want if you want it badly enough and are willing to pay the price." I'm just not willing to pay the price anymore. How about you? Success is always "just around the corner", but for most of us that corner will never come, it's perpetual.
I got news for you... this "problem" is not exclusive to Mary Kay. No matter what you are aspiring to in life; a certain salary, a bank account balance, a new car, a spouse, children, a life of luxury, a life of leisure... there will be a price. What you have to do is figure out what priority each thing holds for you and make your decisions based on that. Don't let the Mary Kay lady tell you what your priorities are. Don't let the (scary) Pink Truth lady tell you what your priorities are. They are Your priorities. You choose them. You stick to them. And if you believe in God, and have any common sense in you, you let Him choose them!
And finally,
Head office might terminate me when they catch wind of this email,
Probably not
and that's okay. It will just prove that my story is correct all the more and that they want to keep us from speaking the truth about what is really going on.
Probably not, and even if she were terminated it would likely not be an attempt to *gasp* hide the truth (duhduhduhhhhh).
It makes their job difficult you know!
Not really, no. If anything, those consultants will finally call the corporate headquarters (like they should have in the first place) and get their questions sorted out. I know Pink Truth doesn't seem to have the ability to grasp this, but a company like Mary Kay wants to know the problems their sales force is having so they can fix those problems. It amazes me the density of some people's thinking.
And they're in it for the $$ and that is on their consciences.
Profound. They are in it for the money?! Get out!!!! You have got to be ******* me.
But wait just a tic. Why did you join?
Anyone here feel like Mary Kay would be a better place if they gave up trying to make money?
Posts
As far as I know, Canada uses the British spellings and not the American ones. I'm not surprised to find Canadians spelling things differently than I do.
ReplyDeleteIt's easy to say "just don't do it" but...if people are looking at this as a job, and their director as the boss, it's a bit of a leap to most people to be defiant. We're used to having to do what we're told at work. Also, there's a lot of pressure. Not everyone is super-nonconformist and ready to tell their director to go jump in a lake because no they will NOT drive 8 hours and no they will NOT go to meetings. Caution: Steer clear of victim blaming. It's easy to say "well why didn't you just disobey what you were told?" But then, society doesn't usually run that way. We're used to rules of various sorts throughout life. It appears to me that this woman got manipulated. She doesn't come across as stupid or naive...she comes across as having tried to do what she was trained to do. I mean, the general idea with training is to learn from it, not to have to steel yourself against it.
I don't find her blameworthy.
Miranda,
ReplyDeleteNice try with that one... very effective considering that even google doesn't have an American English to Canadian English translation feature.
However, according to Paul Schmiedge's Canadian English (en-CA) Spelling Dictionary Firefox Extension Yes, I installed it and checked the spelling, "Expence" is still wrong and "Expense" is still correct. If you know somewhere that it is legitimately published otherwise, please let me know. Again, the whole point was not that it was spelled wrong, but that no one questions or protests when it is a 'do no wrong' Pink Truther that wrote it, but if it is a 'do no right' Mary Kay lady, scrutinies abound.
That is all.
You said:
"Caution: Steer clear of victim blaming. It's easy to say "well why didn't you just disobey what you were told?" But then, society doesn't usually run that way."
Didn't your parents (or some other authority in your early years) teach you that there is no validity to the "everyone else was doing it" or the "they told me to do it"? Usually with an "If everyone else was jumping off a cliff would you do it?" type question.
My parents also told me to choose very carefully who I surround myself with. I have learned, throughout my life, and often the so-called "hard way" that not everyone has my best interest in mind. I easily mingle with all types. Some I trust unhesitatingly, while others not at all. However, I am a fool if "mingling with" becomes "blindly following" with the ones that have not proven their trustworthiness.
Perhaps this women fell in with people that were not trustworthy. (that much seems obvious) Perhaps you did as well. But why, oh why would that mean that, by extension, anyone associated with Mary Kay is not trustworthy, and by further extension should be avoided?
This site does not promote blind trust of anyone in Mary Kay. They are fallible people just like you. (generic you).
However, if someone claims to be a victim because (by all appearances) they gave in to peer pressure, is it really "victim blaming" for me to ask why they didn't just say no? I am sorry if this comes off cold, but perhaps that cold, objective question will save her the next time she falls in with women that would try to manipulate her. Or would you prefer that she repeats the performance over at Pink Truth... where they clearly have her best interest in mind?
(Had this post saved for two days!)-haven't read the comments so if I repeat anything, I am sorry.
ReplyDeleteThis paragraph is so very telling. (The bottom line, she wanted the “superstar image” and was will to pay any price to achieve it)- and she did pay a big price for what she wanted, now she is going to blame the Company.
{{It was so emotionally gratifying. I went from zero to hero instantly, got tons of recognition, prizes, etc. I was the superstar of my unit and everyone wanted to ask me how I did it. I wanted to keep up that superstar image and would do it at almost any cost. }}
Then in her next paragraph she admits to not taking care of her finances, but that too is the Company’s fault. She is vindicated though because she talked to others and found, they didn’t take care of their money either. This just gets better, she has very little product on her shelf (haven’t we been told by pt that every consultant has boatloads of MK stored in their homes?) but of course has lots of debt according to her almost $30,000 worth in just 4 years?!? …and gotta love this, she proves pt wrong again because she said she was always selling $1000}+ weeks, but we have been told by pt, no one can sell this product, right??? Good ole “Platinum” then continues to blame the debt on buying product to finish off star consultant, car, etc… okay, then where is all that product because she clearly says she has very little on her shelf?
The next problem I see is she has decided to give a breakdown of finances. She has neglected to put in any money from her director’s check, bonuses, etc… she only uses the profit from the sale of products.
Now as all the other pt people congratulate her on such an honest letter written right from her heart, all I can say is there is so much contradictory stuff in this letter and so much that doesn’t add up, it creates more questions than it provide answers.
What bothers me, is how no one (or almost no one) every notices all the contradictions on pt. Read long enough and one can make a case that almost everything on there is either exaggerated or a lie.
[quote]overall, I am left wondering what the point is. [/quote]
ReplyDeleteThe point is that she is resigning her directorship and she's telling he downline why. (As opposed to her downline hearing "made-up" reasons why she's leaving from somebody she feels would lie about it.)
Re 8 hours commute: David, this director is from Canada. Canada is larger than the US with but a small percentage of the population density of the US. That means that this woman most likely needs to drive in order to do business. So you know, driving to another city, like "8 hours away, and spending the night, which is obviously what this woman (living in small-town-Canada) elected to do, is not really that far fetched. Okay, I admit eight hours does sound excessive. No doubt this was an exception. Most likely the person/people in that town traveled and met her "half way".
I'm just conjecturing of course..
Have you ever been to Canada? FYI, they don't eat whale meat. (A fav of my Cdn friend living and working in silicon valley California). LOLOL... Seriously, look on a map. You cannot drive your bicycle around Prince Edward Island (off the coast of Nova Scotia) in one day. Not even close. Now look at the population of PEI.
No I'm not from PEI.
"If you are making $50K a year for 20 years, congrats, you made a million dollars. The way she asks, "Or did you think they just save it all up for a "rainy day"?" "
I think she was referring to the million dollar plaque recipients thereof show off. The trophy implies that they are millionaires. But the reality is, to seasoned MK'ers, the plaque represents "cumulative" earnings. Unless you've been in sales or had some sort of similar exposure, a newbie wouldn't make the connection. And of course, the clarification isn't made when the trophy is shown off. At least I can relate to "that one".
"I got news for you... this "problem" is not exclusive to Mary Kay."
I agree with you, David. I think she knows this, too. I don't think she's saying that life was perfect before MK and now it sucks because of it. I think she's resolved herself to the fact that her career is somewhere else. I say that because she doesn't necessarily sound bitter to me. She sounds like she's resolved herself to some not so sound financial facts. She disillusioned herself for a time and she decided to share with her team how she did that incase her team is following her "example" and suffering the same illusions of grandeur. I think her departure message is good. Long, yes. But she really lays it out for them.
"If anything, those consultants will finally call the corporate headquarters (like they should have in the first place) and get their questions sorted out."
Hmmm, I think if there's something "going down", Corporate isn't going to share specifics with anybody.
"Profound. They are in it for the money?! Get out!!!! You have got to be ******* me. "
Dave? Mary Kay IS in business to make money.
"But wait just a tic. Why did you join? "
Obviously to make money. But when it was determined that making money wasn't meant to be in Mary Kay she moved on, like me and a couple of others on Balanced! :)
Miranda has a point about the way Canadians spell. They have two official languages: English and French. They incorporate many French spellings into the written English. Like centre instead of center. Favourite instead of favorite. Cheque instead of check.
I went to an on-line (free) translator and typed in expenses and translated that word to French. The translation is dépenses. So the "c" is wrong. But what of it? I always found it petty that people slam people's grammar and spelling. Whatever the site. Can we not just stick with the idea being conveyed? To make it about spelling, grammar and punctuation really does suffocate real discussion/exchange. Bad grammar doesn't make one's point less valid.
One word comes to mind: tolerance. My Christmas wish is tolerance.
"Didn't your parents (or some other authority in your early years) teach you that there is no validity to the "everyone else was doing it" or the "they told me to do it"? Usually with an "If everyone else was jumping off a cliff would you do it?" type question."
I think it depends on the generation. Our generation is more in your face than our parents'. Our parents were conditioned to NEVER question/challenge authority. A lot of the boomer ladies are evolving through that. Our daughters will be much more affluent at sticking up for their themselves, more so than we were. That's just my opinion. :)
"I am sorry if this comes off cold, but perhaps that cold, objective question will save her the next time she falls in with women that would try to manipulate her."
Bite me once, shame on you! Bite me twice.....! I believe that this woman learned her lesson. At least I hope she has!
"I was the superstar of my unit and everyone wanted to ask me how I did it. I wanted to keep up that superstar image and would do it at almost any cost. }"
The sad part about hitting the sweet spot in any career is that it's temporary. What goes up, must come down. Life is ebb and flow. We need to experience the valleys in order to savor the peaks!
mk4me, I couldn't read the whole thing, word for word. I have to admit I skimmed. As well, I was never a director so I can't "see" what you're saying.
I guess the long and the short of it all is she made the right decision. :)
Flybye,
ReplyDelete"Dave? Mary Kay IS in business to make money."
Yes, in answer to the question you didn't ask, I was being sarcastic.
"So the "c" is wrong. But what of it? I always found it petty that people slam people's grammar and spelling. Whatever the site. Can we not just stick with the idea being conveyed? To make it about spelling, grammar and punctuation really does suffocate real discussion/exchange. Bad grammar doesn't make one's point less valid."
That was/is my point... it was meant to be an aside...
As in, "If I/we (at balanced) were to point out errors as viciously as PT does, we would point out this error... which makes me wonder why they didn't... but, that is unnecessary pettiness... which further proves my point from the day before."
It was just a jab. Having to explain a jab kind of defeats the purpose.
Hey Dave, I got it!! And I got to share that some time ago, (and no I am not going back to waste my time and find it) but I resisted posting a post from pt that almost made me spit out me tea when I read it.
ReplyDelete..One of the posters was making fun of the spelling and grammar of a "kaybot" and had a typo in her post. Needless to say I was rotflmao because I think if I were going to make fun of someone for doing something, I would have double and triple checked myself before I hit "enter". No one pointed out her error either.
golly gee, when I read back over some of my posts, I barely look literate, but it isn't my spelling that is bad, it is my typing. :)
golly gee, when I read back over some of my posts, I barely look literate, but it isn't my spelling that is bad, it is my typing.
ReplyDeleteHere, here.
Now there's something worth printing and posting at the water cooler for everyone to read.
Dave, obviously I was too tired to "hear" what you were saying.
ReplyDeleteI do agree that people in rock houses shouldn't be throwing stones.
And I do agree that it's capitalism that drives any private business and it's not "bad" to make money.
I do believe, though, that the selling framework could be updated so that girls can sell in line with the 21st Century. I understand MKC's need to protect their branding and maintain their image. I'm not talking about changing that. I'm talking about updating the channel/means of product distribution.
Dave...blah! I did not bother looking up the spellings. OK, it is spelled wrong, so be it. *shrug* I usually do not bother checking when they're not from the USA. Lazy, maybe, but I don't.
ReplyDeleteEven supposing this woman was a big dummy to do what she was told...WHY was she being told such things? Why is it very common in MK to be told to do things that if you apply enough common sense you should not do?
Dude, if you really do welcome both sides of the argument here, then it doesn't make that much sense to just brush me off rather than taking these points seriously. It *is* a serious problem.
Miranda,
ReplyDelete"dude", allowing or welcoming both sides (also, any and all) is not the same thing as agreeing with anything that anyone says.
For instance, you just posited that "these things" are "very common" in Mary Kay - in the form of a question.
"Why is it very common in MK to be told to do things that if you apply enough common sense you should not do?"
How can I answer that question. I don't agree with the premise. Perhaps it is "very common" in Mary Kay. Perhaps not. I have not seen evidence that this is "very common". So how can I explain "why" it is very common, if I don't even believe "that" it is very common?
In answer to your other, less broad question,
"WHY was she being told such things?"
I would probably answer, "human nature". Someone probably got it in their head that they could take a shortcut to their destination by telling her to do these things. Or they also were "in the dark". To be honest, I am not really even sure what the "such things" we are talking about are. There were a lot of "such things" in this letter... and I am sure there was probably a different "why" for each one of them. But, not knowing her, or the people that told her "such things", or the words they used (vs. what she heard)... it is hard to say why. But it is still most likely because somewhere, someone decided to be selfish. And that is NOT exclusive to Mary Kay.
Consider the "good" to "bad" ratio of people in the world. The ones that make it their effort to do right by their fellow man vs. the ones that make it their effort to do right by themselves regardless of the impact on their fellow man. Whatever that ratio is (I also believe that we can't really know this "stat") apply it to Mary Kay. Getting the Mary Kay name tag does not magically remove this tendency from people. Now please, recommend to me, a way that Mary Kay could legally prevent the "selfish" ones from being a part of Mary Kay.
You say that Mary Kay actively seeks out the morally questionable because they are more profitable to them than the others. Therefore, most of Mary Kay people are of reprehensible moral standards. I say, that does not seem likely. I say the "ratio" is probably about the same (All people vs. people in Mary Kay).
Either way, we both need to acknowledge that these are just our opinion based on our observation... unless we have some fact or proof on our side.
Oh, and about the spelling, *shrug* was my response as well. I was just pointing out the moronic pettiness of trying to disprove someones point by attacking their spelling.
I would rather be "dudette," if you please. ;) More feminine.
ReplyDeleteSorry, forgot something. Legally they have the right to take away the consultancy or directorship of people who violate their rules (or for any reason whatsoever.) So if they find out (usually by people reporting them) that someone is doing unethical things, it would make sense to talk to that person or send them a letter and say "Are you doing thing X? If so, please stop. That's not how we do business." And if they continue, MK can legally can them. I realize false reports could occur, so that is the function of communicating with the person and asking her if she is really doing that.
ReplyDelete