SUBMITTED: Saturday, April 08, 2006
POSTED: Saturday, April 08, 2006
Allow me to start out by saying that, as a Team member for several months, the reason most Team members don't respond to all this rhetoric, is because no matter what you say, or how much validation you offer, some skeptic will always doubt. And it's ok to doubt, but post as though you know things when you couldn't possibly know.
From what I see, the skeptic was never a member themselves, or the skeptic was a member for a month or two and thinks they understand it all. It's usually, like, "Yep I was a member for 3 weeks and saw EVERYTHING about the Team!"
Just a word to the wise, doing something for 3 weeks or 10 weeks hardly makes ANYONE knowledgeable enough to know what something is "all about." But see, the problem with most is that few people will ever admit that they just don't know what they don't know. Most people want to project as though they know more from what little they do know. So for the record, I'll admit that I've been involved with the Team closely for several months and know quite a lot, but will only discuss what I know.
But before I continue, I'm writing this to all of those out there who are just looking for facts about an opportunity called the "Team" (formerly Team of Destiny). That's all. And I'm taking time away from my family to do it, so I hope something good comes from this (whether or not you decide that Team is for you).
I can't possibly respond to all the complaints in this thread, but I'll do the three most recent.
To "Chris" from Grand Jnc, CO: "Team of Destiny"? Even the name would make me run!"
Dear Chris,
It appears that you are weighing your opinion of Team (formerly Team of Desinty) heavily on it's name. If you were a stock broker, is this how you would pick stocks? Something tells me that your empahsis on an organization's name is not the brightest way to judge an organization. My guess is that you would pass on Fortune 500 companies like Yahoo!, Google, PepsiCo, Starbucks, Amazon, and Fiserv because, "those names are wierd." I suppose next you'll ask me, "Well, then why did they change their name?" Good question. They changed it to make it harder for people to search online and read lies about the organization from people who "think" they understand Team but don't. Sound familiar?
You wrote, "Mabey they can join up with the Superfriends and help to fight villians. "stop your evil deeds - we are the TEAM OF DESTINY" LOL;"
Please explain to me, how, if you knew very little about the compaines I mentioned above, you'd say "Yahoo! -- Oh yeah, that's a great name because it must be a company that makes money off of people that yell really loud." Or, "Google is an awesome name -- yeah, just from the word 'Google' I can really tell what the company does and it's very conservative and majestic."
You may not get the point of what I'm trying to say. After all, you did complain that an organization's name. Perhaps Amazon sounds "junglish?" But I hope others out there who are intelligent enough to look past a name (given that it's not insulting or vulgar) realize that your argument is a joke at best.
To "James" from Ludington, Michigan: The type of people that fall victim to pyramid schemes: - these folks never recognize the laws of probability and the impossibility of the scheme
Dear James,
You wrote, "However, what was unusual was the fact that whenever I attempted to learn what type of business he was involved with during the phone call, he seemed to avoid giving any details."
A legitimate concern. Since you are an inventor, allow me to ask you one thing. If you invented something that was unprecendented, appeared much like something else, seemed a little too good to be true, do you think you'd have better luck getting someone to understand your new invention by explaining over the phone, or by them seeing it in person? See, the reason why a Team member would rather talk to you in person is because 1) Team is an entrepreneurial venture. It requires one to think like an entreprenuer, not like an employee or self-employed person to have a higher chance at understanding it. It helps to be able to sketch out income vs. time graphs and so forth when explaining these things to someone. Now that's not to say you wouldn't have understood it verbally, but chances are most people won't. The first thing people think is, "What is this guy trying to sell?" Wrong already. That's the first reason why it makes more sense to discuss in person. 2) Most people try to equate something new and unprecedented with something they already know and understand. Hence this huge thread populated with comments about how Team is an MLM scheme when in the traditional understanding of MLMs, it's not. 3) Funny how you complain about it being vague, because even if it were explained in detail, should that be enough to convince you that you should commit to a new business idea? I would hope that regardless of whether the idea is presented vaguely on the phone or not, that you'd give it your due deligence and PREFER to speak to the person face-to-face for at least an hour regarding it. But who knows?
You wrote, "After the small talk is out of the way, the young man I did not know clearly wanted to do all the talking as if setting an example for my friend's son."
The reason for this is that the person who called you was new to the Team. He didn't understand enough about it yet to explain it well enough. At the time he called you, he likely felt that this business is worthwhile and would like present the opportunity to you so you could make your own decision. But at the meeting, he wanted his upline to explain it because his upline could explain it more clearly and likely answer your questions better. It's not much different than how recruiting works at a companies. The HR person may call you from a headhunter list, but when you get to the company to meet, you're likely talking to the person who will be your supervisor. Gee, why doesn't anyone question, "How come this person called me from company XYZ and now I'm talking to someone different?" For some reason, people make full sense of it because it's a company (the company must know what they're doing), but fail to make sense of it when it's the Team.
You wrote, "When I asked him what their business proposition was, I got vague descriptions of how companies like Wal-Mart rip people off, how there are so many middle men making money on the products you buy, and how much money people would save if they joined "TEAM" (as he referred to it). He also starting sketching little diagrams on a sheet of paper as he sat across from me at my desk, and even tried to write upside-down for me as if I were a 3rd grader."
First: If they told you that Wal-Mart tries to rip people off, one of two things happened. Either that Team member said something they shouldn't have. Team standards and ethics do not condone the belittling and libeling of companies or people. Or, you took what that Team member said out of context and can not accurately recall what they truly said about Wal-Mart.
Second: They said there are so many middlemen making money on the products you buy? Well, what do you think James? I'd appreciate to read your response on how that's not true.
Third: They said how much money people would save if they joined "TEAM." I have to laugh. It's OK for stores to tell you, "You'll save money shopping with us!" but if a person comes to your house and tells you that, oh somethings up with that. Please direct me to your post elsewhere on this website where you just HAVE to mention, "Yeah, and the salesman at Wal-Mart said I'd save money. I don't know, somethings fishy here!" Puleeeze.
Fourth: He started to sketch diagrams...and tried to write upside-down for me as if I were a 3rd grader. Well James, you know maybe they just ought to put that guy in jail for trying to be nice so you could better understand his sketches. Yeah, trying to draw something for someone so they can see it better -- oh yeah, he's a scam artist alright. Sorry, but I can't help you here. If you're compelled to feel that someone who tries draw something for you to help you see it better is insulting you, then by all means, believe he's insulting you.
You wrote, "From the little diagrams, arrows, symbols; all arriving by script, within minutes I recognize a pyramid scheme reinforced by religious behavior. I commented that "it looks like Amway," but he denied Amway and that "TEAM" was way better than Amway."
James -- Amway sells products. Team does not sell products. And "religious behavior?" I really fail to see anything in your post that validates "religious" or "cult-like" behavior. A person presents you with a business idea and all of sudden he's part of a cult and acts religiously? You know, I had a gentleman stop by my house and said he was part of some "landscaping cult." Talked about how he could make my lawn look better and promised I'd save money and you know what? He dressed in a flannel shirt and jeans just like his friend was dressed!! Beware!
You wrote, "Everything you need to know about the nature of multi-level marketing and pyramid schemes like "TEAM" and their ilk, is contained in the previous 18 months of comments and rebuttals on both sides in this column. You can definitely see only certain people have the mentality to fall for it, to ignore the overwhelming odds against them, ..."
Hmmm, "mentality to fall for it, to ignore overwhelming odds against them." You know James, I can't help seeing similarities to people that "fall for" trying to invent stuff. I mean, you have to have the "mentality" to "fall for" spending day after day, and night after night trying to come up with something new that could generate money. By the way, how much money do you generate in your first month or two in trying to invent something new? If it's less than what I could earn working a McDonalds, then sounds like it could be a big waste of time. By the way, are the odds pretty easily in your favor that you'll invent something revolutionary every few months? Because, you know, if the odds are against you, sounds like you're just "igoring" the facts and falling for something that's a waste of time.
To "Timothy" from Valparaiso, Indiana: It's just too easy
You wrote, "Rather than expressing the reality, the "as big as you make it" statement is a cop-out, an excuse. Because when you ultimately fail and somebody asks your upline why you failed, he will say "because they didn't put enough work into it" or "he didn't work the system to its fullest potential" or some such garbage."
Timothy, if you failed at a franchise business where others have succeeded, and those who succeeded told you, "you didn't put enough work into it", or "you didn't work the system to its fullest potential", you honestly feel that those responses don't make sense or as you put it, are "garbage?" Sounds like you're just crying "victim." Let's make this simple. Instead of Team, let's say you tried to open a McDonalds.
"Yeah, I open a McDonalds and I'm already $1.3 million dollars in the hole because that's how much they scammed me to open up this burger joint. And they tried to tell me I could be as successful as I wanted to be, but that statement is a cop-out because it didn't work for me. It's all McDonalds fault!"
Gee Timothy, if this business model is successful for so many (and I don't know how many, but I've personally met dozens so don't complain because I don't know the exact number), but it doesn't work for you, then why is Team's fault? Does a business model have to work for 100% of the people for it to be worthy of consideration? If not 100%, then how many? 50%, 75%, 99%? Or is it good only as long as YOU can do it? Please, just grow up.
You wrote, "The problem is that the system is NOT designed for success." This statement is sheer brilliance. The success of Team (as in almost every business) is dependent upon a successful system. If the system didn't work, it would only make sense that those who decide policy, would change the system so that the organization grows. If they didn't do this, then they would actually be allowing their business system to kill their own organization. But since, they are NOT doing this, and the size of the organization is growing (as indicated by the larger numbers of members I see at functions), common sense would tell me that the system is working. Perhaps it just didn't work for you and you decided it best to make a generalization from your sole experience.
You wrote, "Another statement that needs addressing: "You can listen to what the speakers are telling you. They have the results as they are not working." Wipe the fog from your glasses and see what's really going on. Those speakers ARE working. And what's their job? Convincing YOU that THEY actually achieved success by doing what they want you to do. But the whole thing is B.S. NONE of those speakers achieved ANY success by doing what the IBOs are doing. They achieved success by being adept at LYING TO PEOPLE and convincing people to PAY THEM to hear their lies!"
Wow, there's so much ignorance here, I really don't know where to start.
First: "Those speakers ARE working."
Yes Timothy they are. But unless we were to strap a video camera to their butts and watch them like "The Osbournes," nothing will convince you that they really are speaking at Team functions 1) Because they do so by choice 2) That they get paid probably $50-$150 to do so, and 3) They're doing it because they want to help others in the same manner that they were helped. Sounds like because you (or someone you knew) weren't succesful at the business, that those who are, are liars. This is what happens when someone hasn't been a member long enough (a few months at least) to see someone go from not making money to making money. Kind of like if I walked up to Bill Gates just as he was completing DOS and stuck around him for a month. "Yep, that Bill Gates is a scam artist, he told me DOS would lead to other operating systems and he'd one day make all types of money. I could tell after a month he wasn't making squat. He lied to me!"
Second: "So they've convinced you that the people who complain don't know about the program? Believe me, we know. Many of your fellow readers are ex-IBOs. Many of them know somebody who was exploited by this scam."
Read the reply above. Being an ex-IBO doesn't mean much. Oh yeah, and somebody who "knew somebody", yeah that's real knowledge right there. You're the same person that says, "I worked for this company for two months and I know everything about it and I can tell you they stink. Don't go work for them." Yep, that's why the company is still in business and growing because one disgruntled ex-employee is the ONLY person who REALLY knows the deal about that company."
What bothers me is not so much that a person can cry victim out of ignorance, but that there's likely people out there that will believe someone because they had a short experience with something and they're not mature enough to point the blame at themselves.
You wrote, "You said it yourself: "They are working with the Teams Co-founder Chris Brady who IS a process engineer" (emphasis added to show absurdity). In other words, the Team's co-founder is still working a 9 to 5 job, right?"
Uh no Timothy, wrong. Chris Brady left his job at GM about 5 years ago. I've met him personally and he is down to earth and polite. He is a real person and he admittedly devotes about 40 hours a month to the Team business out of his volition.
You wrote, "And finally: "I knew lots of people b-4 I got in who were not free and now they are." Nope, you know lots of slaves who've been tricked into thinkng that they're free."
It's obvious that even if what this person said were true, that as long as you couldn't make it work for you in a few weeks time, it was bunk. So I guess it will be just as meaningless to you if I said the same. It appears that you've positioned your mindset to believe that if a business opportunity didn't work for you, that 1) you are a victim, and 2) that it's the business' fault. If you're not a victim, I'd be happy to hear about everything you did according to what they ask you to do and how each thing failed. Please share in detail because I'd really like every one to hear just how much you know about the Team and its system.
Well, I hope this explains why people don't know more about the Team. First, it is very different, and doesn't work like a traditional product selling business. Secondly, when a tiny bit of information gets out, everyone becomes an expert. Third, because it's a business built around generating passive residual income (ie. it's not a job), people that don't make money in their first year who don't understand the business, cry victim and quit. Kind of like how Microsoft, McDonalds, Google, and so forth made TONS of money right away right? I mean didn't they? And fourth, I just spent about 3 1/2 hours typing all of this and I only responded to three people. It's just ridiculous to try and respond to all the disinformation. Most Team members who truly understand how Team works understand that trying to explain Team to everyone is like swimming up current with toothpick for a paddle. Thus, it takes someone like me who's fed up wtih reading all the lies, a willingness to spend hours to try and make some sense to others. For all those who I didn't get to respond to, all I can say is that I understand that Team isn't for everyone, but unless you REALLY know how Team works, you base your motivation to "help" others on what you think, and that's dangerous. Unfortunately, Team is a people business and the members that are in it may not always explain it best. For those who may have been exposed to Team, but an IBO who didn't know best how to explain it, all I can say is sorry, because the structure and system truly do make sense. But to some extent, it's unfortunate that Team is partnered with Quixtar because that makes some people label it an MLM when it's not, that Team is about pushing product when it's not, and that Team is traditional business, when it's not.
In the next rebuttal, I will try to explain more about how the Team works.