No-Compete Zone

When I first heard that you intended to write a magazine with all your articles “scrubbed clean” of any company affiliations, I was skeptical. While it is certainly annoying (and worse!) to slog through publications that are lathered with opportunity ads, it seemed to me that Upline used to do a fine job keeping the balance: no opportunity ads, but they still named names and freely covered specific companies without apology. Were you going overboard? Wouldn’t this level of anonymity really hamstring you, in terms of being able to accurately and informatively report on real people doing the business?
I know dozens of networkers who used to be leery about recommending either Upline or Lifestyles to their groups becuase of all thre advetising messages from competing opportunities. Now, they freely recommend Networking Times to anyone.

After reading through your first two issues, I take it all back! The “scrubbed-clean” policy hasn’t affected the writing at all; if anything, it’s more useful, not less. Most of all, I know dozens of networkers who used to be leery about recommending either Upline or Lifestyles to their groups, out of concern for all the subliminal (and sometimes not so subliminal!) advertising messages from competing opportunities. Now, they freely recommend Networking Times to anyone, because it’s proven itself as a “competition-free zone”! Congratulations, and thank you!

— Bob Zelicki via the Internet


Disturbed

I was very disturbed by something I read in your recent [July/August 2002] issue. On page 22, in “Avoid the Networker’s ‘Kiss of Death’,” Steve Siebold says:

Doesn't this elitist sort of thinking blatently contradict your stated mission, to "move the heart of business"?.

“Here’s a typical scenario: A high school principle sponsors a few teachers, who in turn sponsor the janitor, the crossing guard, and the school cook. These people then sponsor others in the same or a lower socioeconomic status. Soon you have a downline made up of folks who have no money, no contacts, no track record of success—and no self-confidence. People don’t follow people who don’t believe in themselves … unless they are extremely weak themselves.”

This seems awfully harsh and elitist to me; I find myself resenting the assumption that just because someone is a janitor or school crossing guard, that they “don’t believe in themselves.” Doesn’t this elitist sort of thinking blatantly contradict your stated mission, to “move the heart of business”?

— Name Withheld By Request


No doubt, author Siebold had just this sort of concern in mind when, several paragraphs earlier, he warned:

“Sound harsh? Then you’re probably better off turning the page right now—this column is not for the touchy-feely or faint of heart.”

One of the marvelous truths about network marketing is that it is a form of business in which anyone—literally, anyone—could succeed. One of the difficult truths about network marketing is that many do not and will not. As Frank Keefer states so poignantly in this issue, “One of the toughest lessons that we have to learn in this business (and in life, for that matter) is that all the people you know, including those you love most, are where they want to be.”

Succeeding in this business takes a powerful commitment to oneself and to the entrepreneurial challenges stemming from the fact that you are in charge of yourself. Not everyone is ready or willing to make that commitment; in fact, only the minority are.

This industry has a reputation for exaggeration and hyperbole. Far too often, that reputation is deserved. We have a commitment at Networking Times to tell the truth. Exaggeration and hyperbole are not only damaging; they are utterly unnecessary. The truth about our industry is good enough to be ample good news. At the same time, we don’t want to soft-pedal, either. We applaud Steve’s willingness to take on the facts of the business and of human nature, as he observes them—without sugar-coat or gloss.

The Editors


No Lack of Sharp Readers

In your July/August issue, editor John David Mann asks: “Can some sharp reader write in and tell me which wit it was—Mark Twain? Woody Allen? Dennis Miller?—who quipped, ‘Lack of money is the root of all evil.’?” None of the above: the quotation is drawn from George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman (1903), “Maxims for Revolutionists.” Great article, thanks!

— Steve Norris via the Internet


Given Peter Powderham’s on-the-fly GBS quote (via George C. Scott a.k.a. Gen. George Patton) in this issue (p. 54), George Bernard is becoming a regular in our pages. Note: This is not the same “George Shaw” who sits on our Board of Directors!

The Editors


Love at First Site

Great Web site! Looking forward to this new publication. Thanks John Milton Fogg for your vision and leadership; you truly are the “Greatest Networker,” and I enjoy your community!

— Kathy Whittington via the Internet


Great job on your July/August 2002 online publication! Somebody definitely knows what he or she is doing. You’ve got a very good, professional look. The way it is organized is outstanding: it actually made me want to stay on your site and check out all of the topics. The content is excellent and the printer-friendly option is a great feature—I’ve already printed out some articles that got my interest, but which I didn’t have time to read online. I am very impressed by what I see and what I’ve read so far. I think you guys got it right.

I read [your premiere issue] cover to cover; great job! You have a true winner on your hands. The story on “Leadership with Innovation” about the Petersons [“Master Networkers,” May/June issue] was full of great ideas and tips. You can tell that you’re writing about real people with real successes. Thanks for helping network marketing to get even better.

— Linda Scott Austin, Texas