Trivedi innocently says that there is no compulsion to recruit people or purchase products in the Amway business model. And he also says that the High Court judgement did not say that Amway business model is illegal.Let us look at the 28th and 29th para of the AP High Court judgement which goes like this...
28. As is evident......... Supposing the sponsor member at the top does not introduce any member and if he merely sells the products given to him, he gets an income of Rs. 12,420. If he sponsors only six people and they in turn do not sponsor any member, then he will get an additional income of Rs. 23, 760. If those six members who he sponsored again sponsor four members each, he will get a further income of Rs. 1,14,480 and if the 24 members sponsor three members each, and he will get a further sum of Rs. 6,83,300. Thus the money which the member at the top of the line gets depends upon the members whom he enrolls or the members enrolled by him enroll.
29. In Para 21 of the counter affidavit of respondent No 6, the example of Raja Naren is cited and the petitioner (Amway India) did not dispute the averment relating to the income he earned in a year. The said instance is illustrative of a person earning fabulous income without doing anything after he accomplishes his task of enrolling the required number of persons as members into the scheme.
30. From the aforementioned discussion, it is proved that the scheme provides for easy/quick money to its distributors.
Is it not sufficient inducement for any mortal to go for enrollment when such huge amount is offered as commission?