Jury Rules Against Touch of Pink in Case Brought by Mary Kay - what will it mean to us (consultants). I am happy to hear this verdict. Perhaps this verdict will help shut down other liquidators and make a dent in ebay and craiglist.
It will be great not to have to worry about our clients trying to save a buck finding this discounted (perhaps old or outdated product) and then coming back to us with complaints. I had one of my clients a few months ago purchase some sunless tanning because all I have is the new subtle tanning and the poor dear ended up with 4 that she paid for and then had to pay s/h on top of it. She told me the explanation date was 1996. She said it was watery and was turning brown and didn't tan her at all. She said she would never try to save a buck again as she knew I always gave her new product in perfect shape.
I see no need for the liquidatiors. If one decides MK is not right for them, they can use the Company buyback. As for consultants wanting get rid of products, now the playing field will be leveled. Any of us that acheives Court of Sales honestly, by selling our products to our clients will not have to stand beside someone who is receiving the same award for buying the award and selling the product to TOP.
I personally am so pleased that Mary Kay pursued this. I do feel if it had been allowed to continue it would have eventually impacted (negatively) all of us the do have a good customer base that we sell our products to.
PT implies that many top directors use TOP to dump product so they can buy more so that they can acheive these high production numbers- well if there is any truth to this, I guess they better get selling their products to real clients now, or get recognized for what they actually do, like the rest of us. PTers are upset because if MK is able to get the list of the consultants that are using the liquidatiors that they will now terminate their agreements. Well, so be it.. It is clearly stated - so if they actively, often, and knowingly violate their agreements, they deserve to be terminated. What is so unfair about that? Many, many of us operate withing the guidleines of our agreements, so why shouldn't the ones that choose to not be punished for wrong doing?
I don't see how some can say that Mary Kay is hurting ibc by doing this and actually without the liquidators - MK because of the 90% buyback may end up getting hit the hardest. I do believe the Company took this approach to help the ibc and directors. I think the entity that will most feel the financial impact is MK Corp and I believe they are willing to do that to help assure the best interesting of the ibc's.
I doubt it will do anything but help recruiting either. If new potentials realize the liquidators are going to be gone, that means less competition and a better opportunity to be able to sell products to the real deal client. (It all seems good to me).
I for one, am happy they did and I am very pleased with the verdict.
It will be nice to work from an even playing field. I am sure there will probably an appeal but I hope nothing changes. Woo Hoo-
For Further Reading...This Week On Pink Truth - Click Here
Pros and Cons of Mary Kay - Read or Contribute or Both!
First Post - Why I Started This Blog
The Article I Wrote For ScamTypes.com (here) (there)
If this is your first visit please leave a comment here. I would love to hear from you!
If you want to email me: firstname.lastname@example.org
But you are probably better emailing mk4me: email@example.com