Tweet
Esto's Testimony
Success Through Advertising "doubled" its Ad Credits in 2006 when it definitively moved from being a "cycler" to becoming a straight wholesale and retail advertising business.
That was a good move but the effect of the doubling has been devastating because, for reasons that Success Through Advertising claims are supported by the IRS, the 1099 forms that have just been sent out are flush with income claimed to be the result of this doubling.
People who have given up on the company are suffering serious shock on receipt of 1099s telling how much they earned when they in fact earned nothing.
Having essentially seen the writing on the wall, I returned 20,000 Ad Credits to STA on New Years Eve, 2006, responding to an invitation from the company to its Associates.
Still, I now find a whopping $110,000 included on my 1099 and am told if I had not given back the credits my 1099 would have been in excess of $300,000!
I have written to STA urgently demanding that they revise my form to reflect the actual dollars paid to me. I was a consultant for most of the year trying to help guide the company, with decreasing success. I advocated they move servers to a place like Rackspace and give entire responsibility for operations to Mike Hamilton. In the summer this path was definitively rejected.
I have received no response to my recent request for a revised form beyond the first which argued that I would have had the higher 1099 if I had not given the credits back.
If the actual value of the doubling was tangible, one might argue that I could claim this largesse as a purchase of advertising. But the company virtually admitted that there was no realistic relationship between the original cost of EPCs ($10) and the real world cost of advertising on the STA site. So they LOWERED the number of EPCs (now called WACs).
A good move.
But in terms of any fair market within the network marketing community, the cost of ads on the STA site is STILL high and could never be made the basis of actual cash purchases.
Originally, cash purchases for advertising from STA were predicated on a substantial money return which in fact dwindled to almost nothing as the company failed for a period of more than two years to take the advice of many to rid itself of its family business model and move into the real world of warp-speed Internet business.
I cannot believe that the outcome of this 1099 fiasco will be good for the future of the company. It would be a comedy of errors if I had not been privy to the sad stories of many who fared much worse than I. A tragedy of errors.
I have suggested a future for the company, even now: That it become an advertising venue for network marketers who pay cash up front, just for the advertising. If this ever is done, the pricing will reflect the market. And the obvious discrepancy between reality and the inflated and even deceptive figures of the 1099s will be plain to anyone with a mind.
That was a good move but the effect of the doubling has been devastating because, for reasons that Success Through Advertising claims are supported by the IRS, the 1099 forms that have just been sent out are flush with income claimed to be the result of this doubling.
People who have given up on the company are suffering serious shock on receipt of 1099s telling how much they earned when they in fact earned nothing.
Having essentially seen the writing on the wall, I returned 20,000 Ad Credits to STA on New Years Eve, 2006, responding to an invitation from the company to its Associates.
Still, I now find a whopping $110,000 included on my 1099 and am told if I had not given back the credits my 1099 would have been in excess of $300,000!
I have written to STA urgently demanding that they revise my form to reflect the actual dollars paid to me. I was a consultant for most of the year trying to help guide the company, with decreasing success. I advocated they move servers to a place like Rackspace and give entire responsibility for operations to Mike Hamilton. In the summer this path was definitively rejected.
I have received no response to my recent request for a revised form beyond the first which argued that I would have had the higher 1099 if I had not given the credits back.
If the actual value of the doubling was tangible, one might argue that I could claim this largesse as a purchase of advertising. But the company virtually admitted that there was no realistic relationship between the original cost of EPCs ($10) and the real world cost of advertising on the STA site. So they LOWERED the number of EPCs (now called WACs).
A good move.
But in terms of any fair market within the network marketing community, the cost of ads on the STA site is STILL high and could never be made the basis of actual cash purchases.
Originally, cash purchases for advertising from STA were predicated on a substantial money return which in fact dwindled to almost nothing as the company failed for a period of more than two years to take the advice of many to rid itself of its family business model and move into the real world of warp-speed Internet business.
I cannot believe that the outcome of this 1099 fiasco will be good for the future of the company. It would be a comedy of errors if I had not been privy to the sad stories of many who fared much worse than I. A tragedy of errors.
I have suggested a future for the company, even now: That it become an advertising venue for network marketers who pay cash up front, just for the advertising. If this ever is done, the pricing will reflect the market. And the obvious discrepancy between reality and the inflated and even deceptive figures of the 1099s will be plain to anyone with a mind.
Comment