The MLM File ...an anti-MLM Information Website

Multi Level Marketing and Network Marketing explained - vital information for the potential new MLM recruit.

Previous | INDEX | Next


ARTICLE SERIES: The MLM Spin Doctors


LEONARD W. CLEMENTS - THE ANTI-ANTI-MLM ZEALOT



In a general perusal of Google links recently I happened to see the MLM think-tank still at work through the inimitable Leonard W. Clements of www.marketwaveinc.com (Go for it Leonard... There’s another link for you!)


Leonard is a strong advocate for MLM and uses atypical MLM “logic” in his “de-bunking” of those he refers to as anti-MLM zealots. I have no axe to grind, as I am not on his list of zealots, which he specifically limits to just four (or maybe five sometimes, if we take in Stephen Barrett occasionally).


A total of four paragraphs are devoted to the subject of mlm market saturation in Part XI of his series of critiques aimed squarely at the ignorance and/or vindictiveness of his anti-mlm zealots. The paragraphs are reproduced here and commented on by me...


LEONARD ON “MARKET SATURATION” (IN 2005).


Market Saturation


Paragraph 1: “The more naive of the anti-MLM crowd will typically offer a mathematical progression showing five people who get five, and so on, then gloat over their revelation that by level 14 they would have accounted for the entire population of the Earth (Van Druff uses an even more ridiculous "ten sponsor ten" scenario). However, when an MLMer uses such a scenario to demonstrate the income potential of their plan, the anti-MLMer is always quick to jump all over the absurdity of such a scenario ever playing out. So, why use it then as evidence to debunk an industry based on it's theoretical occurrence?” (Quoted from the website as it was on 17 May 2012).


The above excerpt is everything of importance that Leonard has to say about mlm market saturation in this article. The problem? The heading itself refers to market saturation, but the body of his statement doesn’t mention it. So far, if you agree with Leonard you might loosely understand that...


  1. Naive anti-MLM people do not understand how a geometrical progression recruiting scheme works when it is used properly by good MLM people to make money.
  2. The entire population of the Earth is related to market saturation somehow.
  3. Market saturation may be involved when recruiting the entire population of the Earth in the “5 gets 5” or Van Druff’s even more ridiculous “10 gets 10” scenario. Either of these recruiting scenarios is a “theoretical occurrence”.
  4. Theoretical occurrences should not be taken to their theoretical conclusions in order to debunk theoretical occurrences of the same structure, as they are very good to use to make money in MLM. See Item 1.


I think I got it, thanks Leonard. (Thinks more... Has this bloke got any idea what market saturation is?)


The fact is, Leonard is not alone in his ability to say nothing about his stated subject whilst talking the ears off an audience. It’s how he and all successful MLM-ers make their living. Is this being “MLM naive”, or is it “lies by omission”?


Quick, meaningless words, spoken with authority are the hallmark of glib salesmen. The aim is to separate fools from their money. And there’s no shortage of fools who have been separated from their money over the last “68 years”. There’s just millions and millions of ‘em.


The “Market Saturation” heading has given Leonard the opportunity to make a few more similarly irrelevant statements, each of which should be taken to task...


Paragraph 2: “In over 68 years we've managed to involve only about 2.5% of the U.S. population. By the end of this decade over 40 million Americans will turn 18, and another 9 million adults will immigrate to the US. I think there's still some room to grow.”


Let’s just take this step by step...


  1. “2.5% of the population in over 68 years”. What does this statement mean? Arithmetically, it beats me. I’ll bet you an average mlm-er’s net annual income that it beats Leonard too. It somehow sort of sounds good though, don’t it? Making light of what is complex, the simple fact is that “over the last 68 years” hundreds of millions of people world-wide have tried and failed at MLM, if failure is defined as not making any money while spending plenty to have a go at the business.


  1. “By the end of the decade 40 million will turn 18 and 9 million will immigrate”. Again, what does this statement mean? At the end of the decade the market for mlm will have increased by the sum of 49 million adult people? Again, because there are no effective parameters, the arithmetic implications in the statement are confounding. No doubt it is meant to depict an ever-increasing, burgeoning market-place that simply cannot ever buy everything we (mlm) have for sale (there’s just not enough of us!).  I suppose from it we should conclude that a marvelous opportunity exists for many. And, just as obviously, as a result of all this, market saturation (whatever that means to Leonard), simply can’t happen.


The following is also part of Leonard’s Market Saturation section.


Paragraph 3: “John Taylor is critical of the lack of disclosure as it relates to local market saturation. He advocates territorial restrictions, believing that when a certain geographical region has reached a certain number of distributors for a particular company, no more distributors should be allowed to participate in that region. The glaringly obvious flaw in this logic is that by limiting the number who can participate in a given region causes local market saturation! Can you imagine someone wanting to join your MLM program but you can't enroll them - unless they move out of the area?”


Breath-taking logic there. What has he actually said?


  1. He has paraphrased what Jon Taylor says about local market saturation as to the number of distributors in a given area.
  2. He then says that there is a “glaringly obvious” flaw in the paraphrasing, but does not tell us what this flaw is. He simply re-phrases, completing his disparaging effort with the assertion that limiting the number of distributors in an area actually causes market saturation. (Is this what they call a “leap of faith”?)
  3. He then suggests that the poor people who are anxious to get a place in an mlm downline, might be denied the opportunity unless they relocated, . (See, I can paraphrase too!)


I guess it’s really true. Nothing is as forceful as a truly passionate argument delivered passionately. Lack of logic, lack of facts, lack of commonsense, avoidance of negatives... Nope, NOTHING counts as much as passion!! Passion can win the day and just make you rich. Ask any successful mlm-er. Of course, an mlm-er may ignore the mlm virtues listed (lack of logic, etc.), at their peril. As Leonard ably demonstrates here, it is the sum of ALL these things, delivered with PASSION, that makes a successful mlm-er. And that’s true whether the mlm-er knows it or not. Leonard does all this when he’s defending the mlm concept. Imagine what he can do when he’s selling the concept!


What’s left of Leonard’s in-depth exposè of the myth of mlm market saturation? In simple words, nothing has been said so far and nothing more is to be said by him on the subject! Read on...


Paragraph 4: “Another common anti-MLM concept suggests that those who get involved too late miss out. As Taylor exclaims, he was at the top, but those after him would be at the bottom, thus be too late to achieve any real possibility of success. But... didn't he start at the bottom? Indeed, has not every single successful MLM distributor in history started at the bottom? There are numerous examples of folks who joined very mature companies, started at the bottom of what was an already large existing hierarchy, and managed to achieve success, like me - and John Taylor! Its happening every day.”

Actually, it is not a common statement - other than being constantly reiterated by Leonard and his friends as “a common statement”. Whenever they feel threatened by unanswerable or otherwise disagreeable variations of this question, particularly in public, they will burst inevitably into a presentation of this engineered paraphrase and selflessly answer it, thus simplifying everything for the crowd - all with an effortless smile.


And that’s it for Market Saturation.


In summation, market saturation has hardly received Leonard’s undivided attention. Or, if it has, folks should take note of just how obfuscation really works in the mlm world. Leonard has done no more here than he does in the real world. What he says is what he writes. Right across the board.





===================================================

Webmasters: Content for Your Site and Newsletters

===================================================


Feel free to use the above article on your website

or in your publications. You are required to include

the following 'resource information' and website link

with each use.


“Article by Peter A Blood, author of the ‘The MLM

File’, an authoritative guide to avoiding the pitfalls

inherent in the MLM marketing concept.

http://www.themlmfile.com.au


Copyright © 2003- Peter A Blood