Amway India's sugar-coated lies of huge growth

Shyam

As you know, on February 9th 2009, the ‘Amway’ Ministry of Truth proudly proclaimed ‘450, 000 Independent Business Owners in India selling 1128 Crore (eleven billions) Rupees of products annually - a 40% increase in 2 years, projected to grow by 20% over the next 12 months.’ Sadly, these sugar-coated lies were swallowed by many casual observers, including members of the Indian financial press. However, in order to put the mainstream media to sleep, all the usual thought-stopping tactics were employed – expensive magazine and television advertising, gifts to charity, paid association with celebrities, membership of the so-called ‘Indian Direct Selling Association,’etc. Tellingly, no accurate, verifiable information has ever been offered by the corporate officers of ‘Amway India Enterprises,’ or those of the so-called ‘Indian DSA,’ as to what percentage of the company’s (apparently impressive) market comprised authentic retail transactions (i.e. external sales to persons who were not non-salaried commission agents of'Amway India Enterprises'). It seems that, so far, no mainstream Indian financial journalist or high-level Indian law enforcement agent has bothered to ask this vital question. Yet, just a slightly more thoughtful approach would have revealed that ‘Amway’has always been the title for a puerile, but nonetheless pernicious, 'commercial' fiction. For, without a consistent and sustainable source of external revenue (due to various key factors, all controlled by the billionaire bosses of the 'Amway'mob in the USA, which have created, and maintained, an effectively closed-market), the so-called ‘Amway Business Opportunity’ has always been economically unviable for the overwhelming majority of its paticipants and, therefore, inherently fraudulent under any common-sense legislation that prohibits money circulation schemes based on endless chain recruitment. Furthermore, if the accepted 50% average, annual, drop-out rate is taken into consideration, we discover that currently every five years more than one million budding ‘Amway Business Owners’ are being churned through the 'Amway' closed-market swindle in India alone. Classically, only a deluded core-group (less than 5%) of‘Amway’ adherents (usually with access to independent funds) remain bedazzled (for extended periods) by the fake offer of an exclusive place in a future, secure, Utopian existence where everyone is happy prosperous and free.

The way the 'Amway' swindle entered the Indian republic, is a perfect example of how the organization's activities follow a pattern of major racketeering activity (as defined by the US federal Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act of 1970). Exactly like the American 'Mafia', 'Amway' comprises a constantly-shifting labyrinth of (apparently independent) corporate strucures pursuing lawful, and/or unlawful, enterprises which has been maliciously created to prevent, and/or divert, investigation and isolate the organization's billionaire bosses from liability.

Back in June 1994, obsequious ambassadors of the 'Amway' mob approached the Indian Ministry of Industry (Dept. of Industrial Development) bearing gifts. By steadfastly pretendingaffinity with these officials (who, naturally, wanted to believe that all external investment creates employment), the ambassadors sought an agreement (renewable biannually) which simply paved the way for the creation a privately-controlled, unlimited-liability, commercial company, ‘Amway India Enterprises.’ As a subsidiary (entirely owned by its American parent company), the ambassadors meekly accepted that ‘Amway India Enterprises’ would be forbidden to manufacture or import. The proposed company would be permitted only to use (what its ambassadors described as) a ‘Lawful Multilevel Marketing Business Model’ to sell products sourced from local, independent, Indian manufacturers. Furthermore, ‘Amway India Enterprises’was obliged to file a separate agreement with the Reserve Bank of India, allowing the proposed subsidiary to transfer capital to, and from, its parent and, thus, act as a de facto, foreign exchange dealer. Consequently, without any real investigation, the Indian Ministry of Industry, Secretariat for Industrial Approval (Foreign Collaborations II Section) rubber-stamped the application for the proposed company within less than two months (August 26th 1994). Twelve months later, 'Amway India Enterprises' was registered after final approval by the Indian Foreign Investment Promotion Board. In this way, America’s contemporary version of the Trojan Horse was dragged unnoticed into India with the assistance of the country’s own ill-informed regulators. However, it lay largely dormant until May 5th 1998 when a network of regional offices began to be established. Six years later, the destructive contents finally began to spill out. On August 8th 2004, the (apparently safe) original (biannual) agreement was mysteriously altered (at the request of the corporate officers of ‘Amway India Enterprises’) allowing the unregulated manufacture, and/or importation, of the ‘Amway’ mob's own range of (effectively) unsaleable wampum. However, at no stage did Indian officials bother to ask how the so-called ‘Lawful Amway Business Opportunity' could possibly have a consistent and sustainable external source of revenue when ‘Amway’s' banal products were now, self-evidently, far more expensive than equivalent (and often superior) merchandise widely-available in traditional Indian retail outlets. Yet, implicit to the modified agreement was the understanding that ‘Amway India Enterprises’would respect Indian money circulation schemes legislation and recruit non-salaried agents who could earn commission payments from mostly retailing products to persons who were not agents of the company.

In plain language, Indian officials were deliberately deceived by liars acting for a gang of US-based racketeers. That said, India is a country where corruption is endemic, and it is not known what other inducements (if any) these conveniently-blind civil servants received.

David Brear (copyright 2010)