Sunday, December 29, 2013

Charge-sheet filed in Speak Asia case

Two years after the crime branch of Mumbai Police registered a case in the Rs 2,276 crore Speak Asia scam, police on Thursday filed a charge-sheet.

"We have filed a charge-sheet running into more than 5,000 pages against 13 office-bearers and franchisees and eight companies," said a police officer.

Speak Asia promoters started an online marketing survey company in March 2010. It asked investors to deposit Rs 11,000 and fill survey forms of some multinational firms; on successful submission of surveys, they were promised Rs 52,000 in return.

Initially the company paid the investors, but later it wound up its business, duping scores of people.

Police sources said the charge-sheet was filed against company's COO Tarak Bajapai; Rajiv Mehrotra, director of Tulsiyat Tek; prime franchisees Deepankar Sarkar, Ashish Dandekar, Raeesh Shaikh, Rahul Shah, Sanjiv Dandona, and several others, besides SpeakAsia online, Haren Ventures Pvt Ltd, Tulsiyat Tek, Tulsient Info System, Kritanj Management and Allied Services, Seamless Outsourcing, Seven Rings Education and Seven Rings International.

Saturday, October 5, 2013

Amway continues to grow, now in China


 



While many so called multilevel marketing companies or MLMs fail to impress, and many time simply fail, Amway has achieved new records in annual sales, even during a world-wide business slow down.
Here’s an informative excerpt from Fortune Magazine:
How has Amway survived? Turns out, the direct-selling business is booming in China.
Amway has weathered the economic crisis well, and it’s been profitable for the last couple of years. Its parent company Alticor announced that it did $8.4 billion in sales for 2009, up from $7.1 billion in 2007, and “Amway comprises the vast majority of those sales,” according to Amway’s chief financial officer, Russ Evans.
Amway is positioned to do well in China thanks in part to efforts by the U.S. government to open the doors there. The Chinese government restricted direct-selling companies in the early 1990′s, when the country was beginning to liberalize its economy — the government was nervous that citizens would get burned by Ponzi schemes.
The U.S. government, meanwhile, had been pushing for American direct-sellers to be allowed to compete in China. The effort was part of an ongoing negotiation with the Chinese government to allow American companies access to the foreign market. In 2006, China lifted some of its policies against companies like Amway.
That’s when “the Chinese government allowed the direct sellers to really go to town,” says Charles Skuba, an international marketing expert at Georgetown University’s School of Business. “The China market lends itself very well to this model.”
The model works like this: Amway sells products to people, who sell them to customers — usually friends or acquaintances. Amway provides kits to train people about how to start their own business, and modern-day versions include information online and in iPad apps. In some markets, Amway gives bonuses to sales representatives who recruit others, and new recruits give a portion of their sales to people higher up the chain.
That wouldn’t fly in China, where the government was already wary of the direct-selling model, so Amway shaped its business to earn the government’s trust. The company opened its first physical stores so that sales representatives could display products. It also cut off the food chain, so representatives there don’t earn money from their recruits’ sales.
Why direct-selling works in China
Amway’s business took off. A big reason is because word of mouth matters in China, where counterfeits have traditionally been a big problem. “Family and friends are high influencers in the decisions that people make in terms of all kinds of choices,” Evans says.
This is especially true for nutritional products, which are in high demand in China and other emerging markets. The company’s best-selling product in China is a protein powder designed for children. Amway’s business model lets the company reach consumers of all economic classes, says Skuba, and lower-income buyers in particular need nutritional supplements. “The Chinese consumer tends to be more brand conscious than in many other countries in the world,” he says. “They associate foreign-branded products with quality products and value.”
The company reaches a growing population of young sales reps, Skuba says. “Amway’s direct-selling business, their model and the opportunities it provides for a highly-motivated young sales force, really tap into where China is today. China may be the most entrepreneurial country in the world.”
While from a corporate viewpoint, no one can argue with Amway’s unparalleled success, as a real opportunity for their Independent Business Owners (IBOs), many in the industry out side of Amway believe that other companies and business models have much easier, friendlier, and more lucrative compensation plans.
For me personally, as a lover of Internet marketing, I would never want to work with a company with such restrictive Policies and Procedures. It would seem to violate my very sense of what “independent” actually means. And, I love the idea of multiple streams of income.

Saturday, August 3, 2013

BIG NEWS-,Mizoram Industries secretary suspended ,Mizo Direct is not mizoram govt company!!!


  * Mizoram Industries Secretary puts govt tag on own company, signs deal with another firm RMP INFOTEC.

* Mizoram Direct Marketing ltd is Industries secretary own company and it is not govt company.

* The company's website reportedly used the "mizoram.gov.in" domain name and carried photographs of Governor Vakkom B Purushothaman and Chief Minister Lal Thanhawla.Mizoram govt dont know about this.

* Mizoram cheaf secratary said industries secratary dont have permission to sign MOU with any company on behalf of govt of mizoram.Hence Industries secretary suspended.

AIZAWL: Mizoram principal secretary, Industries, P C Lallawmsanga allegedly floated a company, Mizoram Direct Marketing Ltd (MDML), misrepresented it as "wholly-owned" by the state government, and went on to sign a business deal with another company. He was suspended on Thursday and barred from leaving Aizawl without permission. While MDML was reportedly registered in March, the issue only came to the government's notice last month. On Thursday, the Mizoram government disowned the company and put up a disclaimer on the official website of the Chief Minister's Office.

According to the government note, Lallawmsanga signed an MoU with Chennai-based RMP Infotec Pvt Ltd on December 10, 2012, purportedly on behalf of the Mizoram government, without any authorisation. A top official involved in the investigation told that a clause in the MoU authorised RMP Infotec to nominate any company it chooses to work with MDML after it was registered.

On March 11, 2013, MDML was reportedly registered under the Companies Act with Lallawmsanga as its director. Its registered Mizoram Industries Secy puts govt tag on own company, signs deal with another firm offices are in Aizawl's Tuikhuahtlang neighbourhood and Janakpuri in Delhi, according to a purported MDML business plan presentation.

Lallawmsanga allegedly misrepresented this company as "wholly-owned" by the state government. The company's website reportedly used the "mizoram.gov.in" domain name and carried photographs of Governor Vakkom B Purushothaman and Chief Minister Lal Thanhawla.

Two days later, on March 13, MDML reportedly signed a licencee agreement with a registered company called Mizo Lifestyle Marketing Pvt Ltd (MLMP), which, officials said, appeared to have been nominated by RMP Infotec as per the MoU. The official associated with the probe said as per the agreement, MLMP would use the "government-owned" MDML to market its products. Sources said MDML seeks to sell consumer goods through direct marketing.

According to the disclaimer issued by Chief Secretary L Tochhong, Lallawmsanga was not authorised to sign either the MoU or the licencee agreement. The note said the bureaucrat had acted in his "personal capacity" and the agreements "have neither been vetted by the law department nor concurred by the finance department... before approaching the Registrar of Companies."

When contacted, Lallawmsanga declined to comment. Lallawmsanga, a 1984-batch IPS officer who was Tamil Nadu's Additional DGP before being transferred here last year, also heads the trade and commerce and disaster management departments.

Two other bureaucrats are also reported to be directors of MDML. Highly-placed sources said a team headed by a Secretary-level official will investigate the issue.

Check the mizoram govt disclaimer on mizodirect

http://www.mizoram.gov.in/documents/19/c3250786-f970-4caa-91b7-82f7029b6ad9

Mizoram Industries Secretary puts govt tag on own company, signs deal with another firm

 Mizoram principal secretary, Industries, P C Lallawmsanga allegedly floated a company, Mizoram Direct Marketing Ltd (MDML), misrepresented it as "wholly-owned" by the state government, and went on to sign a business deal with another company. He was suspended on Thursday and barred from leaving Aizawl without permission.
While MDML was reportedly registered in March, the issue only came to the government's notice last month. On Thursday, the Mizoram government disowned the company and put up a disclaimer on the official website of the Chief Minister's Office.
According to the government note, Lallawmsanga signed an MoU with Chennai-based RMP Infotec Pvt Ltd on December 10, 2012, purportedly on behalf of the Mizoram government, without any authorisation. A top official involved in the investigation told The Indian Express that a clause in the MoU authorised RMC Infotec to nominate any company it chooses to work with MDML after it was registered.
On March 11, 2013, MDML was reportedly registered under the Companies Act with Lallawmsanga as its director. Its registered Mizoram Industries Secy puts govt tag on own company, signs deal with another firm offices are in Aizawl's Tuikhuahtlang neighbourhood and Janakpuri in Delhi, according to a purported MDML business plan presentation.
Lallawmsanga allegedly misrepresented this company as "wholly-owned" by the state government. The company's website reportedly used the "mizoram.gov.in" domain name and carried photographs of Governor Vakkom B Purushothaman and Chief Minister Lal Thanhawla.
Two days later, on March 13, MDML reportedly signed a licencee agreement with a registered company called Mizo Lifestyle Marketing Pvt Ltd (MLMP), which, officials said, appeared to have been nominated by RMP Infotec as per the MoU. The official associated with the probe said as per the agreement, MLMP would use the "government-owned" MDML to market its products. Sources said MDML seeks to sell consumer goods through direct marketing.

Mizoram government disowns company claiming to be a government undertaking



Mizoram Direct Marketing Limited
The Mizoram government on Thursday disowned a company which claimed itself to be a state government undertaking and said strict disciplinary action would be taken against the senior IPS officer who has floated the firm.

A disclaimer issued by the chief secretary's office said Mizoram Direct Marketing Limited, registered under the Companies Act 1956 on March 11, 2013 was launched by Principal Secretary of the state Industries department P C Lallawmsanga in his personal capacity, and not on behalf of the government of Mizoram.

Government officials floating business outfits to conduct commercial activities by branding the concern as a wholly owned company of the government of Mizoram required a policy decision by the Cabinet, the disclaimer said.
"Memorandum of Association & Articles of Association have neither been vetted by the Law Department nor concurred by the Finance Department, Government of Mizoram before approaching the Registrar of Companies and the Directors and have also not obtained prior permission as required under the CCS (Conduct) Rules to float a commercial concern," it said.

Lallawmsanga has not been authorised to sign the MoU between the state government and Chennai-based RMP Infotec Pvt Ltd on December 10, 2Ol2 and the licensee agreement between Mizoram Direct Marketing Ltd and Mizo Lifestyle Marketing Pvt Ltd dated March 13, 2O13 purportedly on behalf of government the disclaimer said.

Chief Secretary L Tochhong on Thursday told media persons that the government was contemplating taking disciplinary action against Lallawmsanga, a 1984 batch Tamil Nadu cadre IPS officer holding the rank of Additional DG of Police.

Punitive action might also be taken against the other two company 'directors' - Teresy Vanlalhruaii and Lalbiakthanga Chhakchhuak, sources said.

The Mizoram Direct Marketing Limited was formally launched on July 18 at Science City Auditorium in Kolkata, attended by well-known personalities including those from big companies.

Sources said Mizoram Chief Secretary informed Lallawmsanga not to attend the launching function, but the
latter disobeyed her orders claiming that he and the newly-formed company had the blessings of the state chief minister.

The company's website was taken offline soon after launching of the company while it was suspected that some other government officials in the state Information and Communication Technology department and National Informatics Centre (NIC) were involved as the website was also reportedly designed by the state government-owned Zoram Electronics Development Corporation Ltd. (ZENICS).

The company's main business, according to the pre-launch advertisements, was promoting direct selling of branded consumer goods in the country.

Sunday, July 14, 2013

FTC to be coaxed into Herbalife investigation?




Despite the Herbalife PR machine churning out news of sports sponsorships and the hiring of new executive staff, along with the theatrics that continue to be played out in Wall Street, a storm has been brewing between Herbalife and consumer groups in the US.
At the forefront of these groups are those who charge themselves with watching over the Hispanic population in America, a core market central to the ongoing expansion and success of Herbalife there.
Back in 2007 Herbalife revealed that the national Hispanic market contributed to 61% of their US business. What that percentage is today isn’t clear, however it’s clear that a vast majority of the company’s current operations and marketing targets Hispanics (the sponsoring famous soccer stars for example).
As of late this has caught the attention of Hispanic consumer groups and politicians who represent large proportions of Hispanic constituents. All of which express concern over Herbalife’s targeting of the Hispanic community. Back in May the Hispanic Federation write to the FTC and ‘requesting that the regulator investigate Herbalife, a multi-level marketing firm that sells nutrition products‘.
This was then followed up in June by a letter to the FTC from congresswoman Linda Sanchez, who noted concern over “allegations” that Herbalife ‘victimizes our country’s most vulnerable populations‘ and that ‘independent distributors are compensated more for recruiting new distributors than for sales‘.
Around the same time we also had New York City councilwoman Julissa Ferreras sent her own letter to the FTC expressing concerns.
Ferreras, ‘a Democrat who represents a heavily Hispanic district in Queens’, wrote     I am writing to urge the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to take a look into Herbalife. Herbalife has been accused of operating an abusive pyramid scheme that targets minority groups, especially Latinos, and falsely promises large profits.
 As a Council Member in a heavily Hispanic district in Queens, I am especially concerned about the impact this company is having on my constituents and the Latino community in New York.  Latinos in my district, and across the country, are falling prey to Herbalife’s targeted recruitment.
 Recruitment begins when victims are asked to join alleged nutrition and wellness clubs. In my district alone, there are dozens of such clubs. Herbalife representatives use these clubs to take advantage of people with little or no business experience.  By making false promises of profit and ignoring all associated risk, Herbalife representatives “recruit” club members into becoming distributors of Herbalife products.
 Since Herbalife’s success depends on this aggressive recruitment, new distributors are then pressured into recruiting additional members.  Latinos and others in my district are being unnecessarily harmed by these aggressive recruitment techniques. By promising large profits and minimal work, Herbalife preys on vulnerable immigrant communities. Since the evidence of consumer harm is widespread in my district and across the country, I believe it is critical for the FTC to conduct a thorough investigation and protect consumers from these malicious recruitment tactics and false promises. If Herbalife is acting illegally by making false income claims to vulnerable Latinos in my community, then they need to be held responsible.
To date, Herbalife’s response to criticism (largely attributed to Bill Ackman’s efforts) has pretty much been “haha you don’t can’t prove anything, (insert carefully prepared PR dept spiel). Nyah nyah nyah!”.
In what appeared to be a genuine effort at transparency and addressing the issue of retail revenue, back in February Herbalife announced that they would more clearly identify the wholesale customers among its 3.2 million distributors from April.
April came and went however and to date, Herbalife has yet to release any data. Given the Herbalife compensation plan fails to make any differentiation between wholesale customers and distributors who don’t recruit, it was expected that the company would introduce a proper wholesale customer option for consumers.
This is important because Herbalife currently claim distributors who don’t recruit are wholesale customers, which they clearly aren’t if they have signed up as distributors and are able to earn commissions via the compensation plan.
For reasons only known to them, Herbalife has continued to stall and despite repeated promises, have failed to take any action on the wholesale customer issue. The company did tout a Nielsen poll in June which it claimed clarified the matter, however all it really did was misdirect attention away from it. Herbalife refused to make public the statistical data behind the survey results, only making public a select few concluding statements they issued.
These letters to the FTC from Hispanic consumer groups and politicians representing large Hispanic communities though? That’s an entirely different kettle of fish.
Pushing the panic button and no doubt terrified that more members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus would pen letters to the FTC, Herbalife CEO Michael Johnson (right) personally flew into ‘Washington to stop them‘.
 After Johnson learned that Loretta Sanchez was planning to circulate a letter to be signed by other caucus members, the 58-year-old executive flew across the country to try to dissuade her.
Johnson told caucus members that Herbalife products help combat obesity among Hispanics and that selling Herbalife is a great business opportunity. Johnson also said if the company were shut down people would be stuck with product they could not sell.
Johnson’s House call appears to have been in vain, other caucus members are still planning to follow the lead of colleague Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.), who last month wrote a letter to the Federal Trade Commission asking it to investigate whether Johnson’s Los Angeles nutritional supplements company was a pyramid scheme — and one that hurt her Hispanic constituents, a source inside the caucus told The Post.
 Caucus Chairman Ruben Hinijosa (D-Texas) and Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.), Linda’s sister, are two who have grown concerned about Herbalife, the source said.  The caucus insider said he was not impressed with Herbalife’s arguments. “They claim that Ackman is manipulating facts, but we are never shown facts that support what they are saying,” he said.
One would think that if Herbalife’s business practices were above board, the company would of course welcome scrutiny from the FTC, however that doesn’t appear to be the case.
Things will now no doubt get even more panicky over at Herbalife, after news broke yesterday that the FTC has agreed to meet with those that have written to them these past few months.
Consumer advocates are planning to ask regulators on Monday for their commitment to investigate allegations that Herbalife is a pyramid scheme.
The National Consumers League — the first group to call for an investigation in a March 12 letter — asked for the meeting with the Federal Trade Commission, according to sources. The Hispanic Federation, the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) and Consumer Action are also expected to attend.
The activists are set to meet with Lois Greisman, the FTC’s head of consumer fraud. Jessica Rich, the new director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection, may also be there.
 At least six different letters have been sent to the FTC asking it to probe Herbalife’s practices.
Should Herbalife be worried?
 “I’m mad,” said LULAC’s National Executive Director Brent Wilkes. “I’ve seen Latinos ripped off by banks and others, but this scheme really takes the cake.”
 After talking with Herbalife “and not getting the answers I wanted to hear, I concluded they are defrauding upwards of 300,000 Latinos a year,” he said.
 Another consumer activist planning to attend the meeting said, “We think the problem is getting worse, and we think that the FTC is really important.”
If the above tone is anything to go by it would certainly seem so. But perhaps not…
 Several sources told The Post that they believe the FTC is reluctant to launch an investigation of Herbalife because of the company’s financial resources and legal firepower.
Herbalife – the MLM industry example of “too big to fail”?

Guess we’ll have to wait and see what goes down Monday. Perhaps Johnson can gatecrash the party and reveal those Herbalife wholesale customer figures he’s been keeping under guarded lock and key…

TelexFree injunction denied, BBOM denies Ponzi




As was reported on Wednesday July 10th, TelexFree latest attempt to circumvent a business crippling injunction handed down against them in June was to file an injunction appeal of their own.

Upon filing their injunction, which marks the third attempt by TelexFree to lift the Acre injunction against the business, the company advised that they expected ‘a preliminary decision later this week’. Last Friday TelexFree’s injunction request was heard by Chief Justice Eva Evangelista. The decision?

TelexFree’s injunction appeal was denied.

 According to a spokesperson of the TJ-AC, the federal judge’s decision was taken after the completion of a ‘detailed analysis, in which the entire case was considered, with consideration of previous decisions’.
The decision by Judge Evangelista was reached after TelexFree presented it’s case on Tuesday last week, with lawyer Djacir Falcão arguing in court that an injunction against the injunction needed to be granted because should TelexFree  spend a few more days being prohibited from signing up new investors, they would have no money to pay the old ones.
As it stands now three appeals filed by TelexFree against the initial Acre injunction against TelexFree have been denied, with the company having failed to convince a single Judge, all of whom have analysed the business model, that the company is not a Ponzi scheme.
Looking forward it’s unclear what TelexFree’s next course of action will be. Several regulatory agencies in Brazil are investigating the company with criminal charges expected to be filed against the company by either Public Prosecutors in Acre or the Federal Police by the end of the month.
Whether, as put forth by their lawyer, TelexFree goes bankrupt as a result of the Acre injunction prohibiting the recruitment of new affiliate investors or not, remains to be seen. In related news suspected Ponzi scheme BBOM has gone on the defensive after the company’s assets were frozen mid last week.
The decision to freeze BBOM’s assets was made after a Judge examined evidence collected by federal Prosecutors against the company, and ‘agreed there was robust evidence indicating that BBOM’s business model is actually just a Ponzi scheme‘.
Joao-Francisco-de-Paulo-founder-president-BBOM Speaking to TribunaHoje, BBOM Founder and President João Francisco de Paulo (right) claims that Prosecutors did no work in this investigation; they instead worked with information from malicious people. BBOM take payments of $300, $900 or $1500 from affiliates and in exchange pay out $80, $240 or $400 a month respectively.
The company claims this money is sourced from the sale of GPS tracker units to customers, which an affiliate “rents” when they hand over money.
The problem however is that BBOM pay out their monthly return to affiliates, on condition of affiliates investing in the scheme, as opposed to trackers being sold to customers.
Affiliates who invest money with the company do little more than hand over money, with BBOM, under the brand Unepxmil, selling the actual units.
Naturally the question arises as to why BBOM need to collect payments from affiliates if they themselves are doing all the selling to customers on behalf of the affiliates.
The obvious answer? BBOM take money from affiliates and just pay it out monthly to existing affiliate investors, using the GPS tracker business as a front.
Francisco de Paulo meanwhile strongly denies this claim.   We have acquired 1.5 million GPS trackers. Of these 1.5 million trackers we generate a turnover of U.S. $120 per month.

    Unepxmil via which the services are marketed through, including monitoring and tracking, is becoming the largest GPS tracking operator in the world.  Today we add between 5000 to 10 thousand GPS units per day. Far be it for me to point out the obvious, but wouldn’t clearing the legitimacy of BBOM be as simple as providing a Judge with detailed receipts of all GPS trackers rented out to actual retail customers?
Why this has not happened and Francisco de Paulo is instead harping on about “malicious people” I have no idea.
In the interview, Francisco de Paulo also states that he “does not know why” TelexFree has been targeted as a Ponzi scheme. I’m taking a punt here but perhaps if Francisco de Paulo took some time to understand why TelexFree continues to have every appeal they file denied based on analysis of their business model – he might start to understand why.
And not only that, come to see why BBOM is in the same boat.
You can very much claim to have 1.5 million GPS trackers, but in taking payments from affiliates and paying them out a monthly ROI, it all means dick if you’re not actually selling trackers to retail customers as you claim.

Time to pony up those receipts BBOM or come clean. Either make the choice or have the Brazilian courts make it for you, either works for us.