I recently gave ear to this new business venture from an acquaintance of mine. Once the name Robert Kiyosaki was dropped during the presentation, I knew what I was in for. This is a "get rich scheme" or "become independently wealthly by selling an exclusive widget" deal.
After an hour and a half of semantics, I realized that this new approach of an "upline" network was just a pyramid drawn in vertical line (with a tangent or branch that looks strikingly similar to a pyramid).
My acquaintance tried to debunk the "get rich" theme by suggesting that it will take hard work and time to achieve this type of independent wealth. No discredit to him, but that goes without saying and is a general constant in all endeavors in all of the galatic universe. I asked more direct informative questions, I received more canned subjective answers.
From what I understood, the aim of this business is to cut out the middle man and buy direct from the manufacturer via the website. I visited the website and I all I saw was a can of cola, and some propaganda with Chris and Orrin smiling. What!? I go to Amazon or any other on-line retailer and I see product.
It is mathematically highly improbable to make the sufficent income needed to supplement my current income now, much less the income needed to retire at 30. This is only because it is designed this way. After 1 and a 1/2 years doing this, my acquaintance has only earned a double digit percentage discount off of products sold via this website.
In all fairness, I recognize that the capitalistic machine works in a way that keeps us, the citizens, perpetually chasing after the dollar. In the pursuit of this dollar, I see it aimless to spend my limited, valuable time and money for negative gain. True, losses are expected when starting a business, but often a real business has real assets, real property and real ownership. This website has failed the test in all four of these dimensions.
It is a very basic formula. Find a human need and exploit it for profit. Write some extremely fundamental books with some pretty obvious conclusions, shroud it with ornamental virtues and morals, pretend it is the New Testament, refute the skeptics with strawman arguements and sell it to the masses.
So I challenge the proponents of this discussion to present an arguement that is not filled with Ad Hominem attacks but supported with empirical evidence.