Vemma AutoSuit

... lawsuit on autoship

Vemma’s not a scam. I know :: because I attended one of their big ol’ con-tastic events … and every single one of their Instagraming tweaker-speakers told me so.

Vemma’s no scam bro … YPR.

Do these peeps here look like scammers to you?

Hellz no :: they’re just a couple of sexy white kids tipping back a few cold ones … at a orange can themed lounge somewhere in heaven {New Jersey}.

… and you can too!

How could Vemma be a scam when :: as their suspectly named CEO BK Boreyko points out … “you know I’m paying out close to two million dollars per week — to people just like you.”


See :: if he was a scammer he’d take every last penny … instead of just most of the pennies.

Anywayz :: Vemma is for sure not a scam {#YPR} … but they did just get class action sued in California.

So that’s pretty awesome :: though the suit is regards the annoyance of autoshipping … which is a bit … meh.

It’s like getting all up in Herbalife’s face for the thousands and thousands of false :: FTC rule violating … personal health testimonials offered up by their distributors each day. Of course :: it’s happening … and it’s bad {and I do plan to get all up in their face about it}. But compared to the rest of the green slime mire :: compared to the fucking soul sucking … its seems kinda tame.

According to this Vemma Action Plan :: your family’s future depends on signing up other families for Vemma autoships …

How hard will you work for them? How much juice will you buy for them? How much of the money they need will you give to BK Boreyko and his Anthony Powell styled henchman?

>> bleep bloop

25 thoughts on “Vemma AutoSuit”

  1. Yeah, it’s basically the with-product version of continuity. Autoship is legal if it’s clearly stated, the customer explicitly agrees to it, and the company handles cancelations in a timely manner. For instance, Amazon Subscriptions are perfectly fine.

    In the past, the FTC has gone after operations that autoshipped without “obtaining the consent of customers” or “did not adequately disclose that consumers … would be enrolled in a continuity program.” This suit alleges Vemma did not follow California laws requiring retailers to correct billing errors, get consumers’ consent to autoship, and make it essay to cancel and for being unlawful, unfair, and fraudulent.

    When it comes to MLM, distributors wind up getting sucked into autoship for themselves so they can “pay for their paycheck,” and then they try to get others signed up so they can qualify for volume bonuses like the Misleading Free Vemma BMW or Benz program YPR Pariah told us about, which I think is why Jack is bringing it up now.

  2. How is it possible there is a class action about getting shipped too much crap, but not one about the fact that you lost all your money by being shipped crap in the first place..? I guess in for a penny in for a pound, bk thinks. I’ve screwed them to buy these overpriced beverages, may as well ship em more than they ordered…

  3. Why, that so-called “action plan” made me so mad I had to put down my knitting. Those sons-of-bitches!

    They say in there:

    “beware of dream stealers! What are Dream Stealers? They’re the often well-meaning folks who may not see or understand the true potential of a Vemma business.”

    That there is saying that any clear headed person who knows horseshit when they see it is a “dream stealer.” These sons-of-bitches are trying to turn poor deluded souls against their own friends and families.

    That’s just despicable. I wouldn’t even offer my homemade brownies to those assholes if they were the last available square dance partners on earth!

  4. Salty and rest of the gang… Got a request.

    Vemma just published their 2013 disclosure.

    There’s something fishy about this disclosure, but I won’t tell you what yet because I don’t want to influence your thinking yet.

    Can you all pull that income disclosure, then see if you can calculate how much commission was paid out TOTAL to all the ‘active affiliates’ in 2013? And tell me what number you got, or if not possible, tell me why?

    1. Here’s the income disclosure (PDF) for those who want to play along at home.

      I multiplied 105,251 “active” affiliates x percentage of affiliates at each level x annual average earnings at each level = total annual earnings for each level. Then I summed the level subtotals and came up with $519,699,620.39 paid out to all “active” affiliates in 2013.

      The thing that seems fishy to me is that I don’t understand this footnote:

      ***Percent of average earners per 4 week period.

      1. Thanks. I got 521.5 myself, but I’ve been rounding off. So I think I’m in the ballpark.

        The problem is this:

        According to Vemma, they did 221 million of business in 2013.

        How the hell did they pay out 520 mil out of 221 mil of revenue?

        This thing stinks all the way to orbit, man.

        1. Yeah, they announced they reached $20 million per month in sales in July 2013, so $221 million gross receipts sounds right for the year.

          When people try to quickly debunk “endless chain” schemes, they usually talk about how five levels down you’d have to have more participants than there are humans on Earth, but the “endless chain” part that’s always raised my suspicions is the commissions on an infinite downline. If everyone’s earning 20% commission on every sale in their downline, it takes no more than five levels for the company to lose money on sales.

          I don’t know the math on paying out 235% total commissions on a sale, but it sounds like a Max Bialystock scheme.

      2. I know there’s some flaws with this extrapolation, as one can rise and fall in ranks from month to month, and thus the income will change significantly, but it can’t be off by THAT much, can it?

        Or this graph is SIGNIFICANTLY bull**** in that this is only for the month that the rep is active, and all his INACTIVE months are ignored?

        If that’s the case, we have to divide by 13 (4 week periods) and that would make a little more sense.

        I can believe they paid out 40 mil out of 221 mil revenue. But

          1. I don’t see anything about affiliate payouts in that press release. Maybe somewhere else?

            The press release does refer to the “$100 million Verve … brand,” which is super vague. Is that profit? Sales? Blue sky?

            Obviously the turnover is astronomical. I’d really like to know how many “inactive” affiliates they have, especially as compared to “active” affiliates and “customers.”

    2. @K. Chang & @Anna:

      Thanks for the link, @Anna.

      I *should* run all this through a spreadsheet, and do all the math-y stuff. But it is difficult for me to get motivated. I already know the answer: Vemma is a scam one way or another.

      On that note–maybe I’m letting my prejudices get the better of me, but.. how ’bout that figure of customers, huh? They say 246,388. And they say it like they’re sure. So they give a specific number of customers. How can they be that sure? I mean even in a for-real retail operation, you’d have difficulty when gathering all the numbers from all the stores to be sure that you had an *exact* number of customers.

      But these guys, working with *INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS*… somehow, they get “perfect knowledge” down to a level of detail of a single customer.

      I mean, for the sake of argument, let’s pretend for 0.875 of a second that Vemma isn’t a total scam. How can they be so sure that their independent contractors reported totally accurate totally complete sales figures? Remember them? The college students?


      Oh also, this PDF is labeled “Income Disclaimer”. Presumably that means it’s the document where they fess up and say you might not get rich after all. So like only part of this document that appears to do any disclaiming is the very, very fine print at asterisk #1.

      The percentages from the two lines total to 100%. I got as far as verifying that before I just couldn’t handle the ambiguity anymore. Couple that with “***Percent of average earners per 4 week period” and… I can’t tell if we know anything.

      The most important question I think is: what do they mean by earnings? Just money paid to active affiliates paid out by Vemma to the affiliate? Or do they mean that plus the net profit the affiliates presumably got from their awesome sales?

      1. @Wyrd, This is commission only. Vemma, like all other major MLMs, do not actually track retail sales, thus they won’t know what “net profit” is.

      2. Here’s my spreadsheet if you want to check my math or build on it.

        I’m not yet super savvy about when the In the Matter of Amway Corporation, Inc. decision applies and when the Koscot Interplanetary, Inc. decision supersedes it, but I know MLMs are supposed to track their number of customers to prove they’re not pyramid schemes. Remember that’s one of the reasons why Herbalife is getting so much negative attention. Vemma has to provide a specific number that came out of their reporting process, however flawed that process is. However, I think it’s fair to assume the number of customers includes:

        – Customers inaccurately reported by the college students selling Vemma
        – Duplicate customers who buy from more than one distributor
        – “Inactive” distributors who Vemma claims only joined to get discounts

        In other words, the customer number is undoubtedly padded. Frighteningly, with 246,388 “customers” and 105,251 “active” distributors, each “active” distributor has only 2.34 “customers.” If you take out “inactive” distributors, duplicates, and errors, how many genuine retail customers does each distributor have? Can you imagine opening a retail venture that only has 2.34 regular customers? Even those intrepid entrepreneurs who set up shop on the expressway off-ramps each bring a 24-pack of bottled water expecting to serve 24 customers a day!

        I don’t know what they mean by earnings, and I’m not prepared to try to understand the compensation plan (PDF) tonight.

        1. What I find disturbing is again, how did they arrive at that 105K ‘active’? Where are all the inactives? I think they simply did not count the inactives at end of year but counted their commission at the respective ranks, thus leading to overestimation of income at each rank.

          As I quoted before, in July 2013 they claimed they are enrolling 30K “brand partners” a month. Assuming they grow evenly I think we can guesstimate that they recruited at least 300K brand partners that year, add another 100K for previous 8 years (founded 2004!) thats’ 400K brand partners.

          And now they’re left with only 246K customers and 105K affiliates, eh? Sounds like a massive reclassification of “people who didn’t buy enough are considered customers”?

        2. If we can estimate the inactives… BK said he paid out 100 mil, we got about 500 mil… but we may have counted inactive rep’s commission into those ranks?

          That would suggest 1 out of 5 reps are inactive overall, doesn’t it?

  5. Looks like Vemma got to Revanchist and his blog, YPRPariah. The blog’s gone and there’s some legalese about “content are not to be copied or republished elsewhere”.

Comments are closed.