6th Update 6:41 p.m. EDT U.S.A. A federal judge has issued a much-anticipated order in the Federal Trade Commission’s pyramid-scheme case against Vemma that says “[t]he evidence before the Court leaves little doubt that the FTC will ultimately succeed on the merits in demonstrating that Vemma is operating a pyramid scheme.”
U.S. District Judge John J. Tuchi is doing away with the receivership approach established in August and instead will appoint a monitor, according to the order.
This section of the order suggests the judge views Vemma’s products as marketable if it can get its sales process under control both in-house and externally. Even so, a limited restart may prove to be a hollow win for Vemma. Although the company will be able to restart operations under the order, Tuchi has banned the sale of “Affiliate Packets” and a compensation system that “links or ties an Affiliate’s eligibility for bonuses, or the Affiliate’s accumulation of bonus qualifying points, to that Affiliate’s purchase of the Corporate Defendants’ product, such as through autodelivery or Two & Go.”
Was Vemma a good ambassador for the MLM trade?
Vemma’s marketing material was “replete with deceptive income statements,” Tuchi found.
And, the judge observed, “Some Vemma material also contains representations the Court would characterize as ridiculous—bordering on absurd—such that a listener could not reasonably be expected to believe them. ”
From the order (italics added):
In practice, [Vemma] Affiliates are very likely engaging in inventory loading. The great majority of Vemma product sales is to its Affiliates and, as [FTC expert witness] Dr. [Stacie] Bosley noted, under the current bonus system there is no way to unbundle the Affiliates’ intent to consume Vemma products as ultimate users from their desire to remain qualified for bonuses— bonuses that are largely driven by recruitment of other Affiliates. But their intent in purchasing Vemma products must be viewed in light of Vemma’s program design as well as its training and marketing materials, which explicitly provide that Affiliates should enroll in auto-delivery for the purpose of remaining qualified for bonuses.
In all likelihood, Affiliates’ purchases of Vemma products are incidental to the right to qualify for and obtain bonuses . . . Moreover, Vemma’s purported anti-inventory-loading safeguards are neither effective nor enforced . . . Vemma contacts only 15 of its over 90,000 Affiliates a month to ask if at least 70% of their sales were for consumption or retail. And Vemma’s Vice President of Legal Affairs admitted in her testimony that the script for those calls does not really investigate the reason an Affiliate purchased product or check for inventory loading. Moreover, the Receiver found that, in practice, Vemma is five months behind on its inventory loading audits and has never suspended or disciplined an Affiliate who failed to make the requisite sales to ultimate users. And Vemma does not even attempt to apply a rule similar to the ten customer rule that was found to be a reliable way to control inventory loading in Amway.
Also from the order:
” The FTC’s evidence is certainly sufficient to show Vemma was operating an illegal pyramid scheme through 2014, and although evidence is not yet complete for 2015, the Court notes that Vemma’s 2015 “Two & Go” program contains the same indices of pyramidal structure as the former programs. Defendants have not produced evidence that the critical defects in their programs have been remedied since 2014, and the Court thus has no reason to believe at this stage that Vemma’s violations of the FTC Act are not continuing or likely to recur in the absence of injunctive relief. In sum, the Court finds the FTC has again met its burden to show a likelihood of success on the merits in demonstrating Vemma and Mr. [B.K.] Boreyko are operating a pyramid scheme, even in light of the argument and evidence provided by these Defendants.
Tuchi has lifted the asset freeze, saying the monitor and court supervision and “an injunction against the alienation by Defendant Boreyko of any of his real estate holdings during the pendency of this action” should be enough to protect against mass dissipation.
More analysis upcoming.
Read the order at the website of Truth In Advertising, a Vemma critic that has worked with the FTC on the pyramid and deceptive-advertising case.
Our thanks to the ASD Updates Blog.