Karens Korner MLM Industry News
Aug
1

Team Minkow Losing Streak Continues

If you’ve been following any of this Barry Minkow and the FDI (fraud discovery institute) allegations against any company in the network marketing industry, you’ll find this Market Wave Alert quiet informative and amusing.

——————————————————————-

Usana Settles Law Suit with Barry MinkowMinkow Losing Streak ContinuesAugust 1st, 2008

Last Monday morning (7/28), Usana announced they had reached a settlement in their lawsuit against Barry Minkow. USANA has agreed to withdraw its lawsuit and Minkow and his “Fraud Discovery Institute” have agreed to remove all references to Usana that they control, never to comment on Usana again in the future, nor will he ever trade in Usana’s stock (long or short). See the press release here: http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080728/20080728005457.html?.v=1

The timing of Minkow’s surrender was not that surprising considering his already discredited case against Usana, and to a lesser extend Herbalife, had taken another battering the past few days. To wit:

In their effort to eradicate naked pyramid schemes, China banned all forms of multilevel commission structures in 1998. Several legitimate direct sales companies were allowed back in, on a case-by-case basis, but with single level pay structures. China’s Ministry of Commerce (similar to our FTC) just granted Herbalife five additional licenses to conduct direct-selling business in five more provinces, including Beijing.

See the press release here: http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080720/20080720005039.html?.v=1

But this was just a tremor compared to the seismic rocking Team Minkow took last Thursday (7/24). Within days of Minkow’s first anti-Usana report being published in mid-March, 2007, three class action law suits were filed on behalf of shareholders based specifically on Minkow’s claim that Usana was an illegal pyramid scheme (the most prominent allegation of wrong doing among many). The suits were eventually consolidated into one, and that suit has just been dismissed with prejudice (meaning the plaintiff is barred from ever bringing an action again based on the same claim).

The US District Court judge ruled that the plaintiffs failed to assert any actionable securities laws claims against USANA. The ruling cited all of the major attack points presented by Minkow, and specifically addressed his “Fraud Discover Institute” as the source. Here are some, but not all, of the issues the court considered, and then summarily rejected:

⇒ Lack of demand for Usana Products
⇒ Inevitable Market Saturation
⇒ Misrepresentation of Usana’s Long-Term Sustainability
⇒ Unlawful Pyramid Scheme

See the press release here: http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080724/20080724005398.html?.v=1

Commentary: Obviously, I have a lot to say about all this. Too much for a short Alert. In fact, my Commentary went to five pages.

Please see the whole Alert here:
http://www.marketwaveinc.com/alerts/alert-97.doc

Have a great weekend!

Len Clements
MarketWave, Inc.

 

_________________________________________________________
MarketWave Alerts(tm) is copyrighted material. Alerts may be freely copied or forwarded in their entirety only under the condition that they not be edited or revised in any way, the MarketWave web site address be included, and the non-subscriber recipient be agreeable to receiving it. It is the belief of MarketWave that the information presented is accurate and truthful as of the date of the Alert. Any and all commentary is the expressed opinions, views and beliefs of Len Clements protected under the U.S. Constitution. Len Clements is not an attorney nor should any part of any Alert be construed as legal advice, nor should it replace the advice of competent legal counsel.

Share and Enjoy:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • blinkbits
  • BlinkList
  • blogmarks
  • co.mments
  • connotea
  • del.icio.us
  • De.lirio.us
  • digg
  • Fark
  • feedmelinks
  • Furl
  • LinkaGoGo
  • Ma.gnolia
  • NewsVine
  • Netvouz
  • RawSugar
  • Reddit
  • scuttle
  • Shadows
  • Simpy
  • Smarking
  • Spurl
  • TailRank
  • Wists
  • YahooMyWeb

Posted in News Alerts, Karen's Korner, Articles |

3 Responses

  1. Christopher Grell Says:

    Dear Karen;
    Let me see if I have this straight. USANA sues Minkow, Minkow files a Special SLAPP Motion to Dismiss the USANA case as a frivolous lawsuit intended to chill the publics right of free speech, Minkow wins the motion to strike, the court orders USANA to pay Minkow close to $140,000 in legal fees, and USANA is the winner.
    I wonder what else USANA paid to settle the case that USANA filed???
    Typically, the person who files the lawsuit is the one who expects to get paid. When the defendant gets payed money from the plaintiff, most people would say that the Plaintiff lost the case, not the defendant.
    If you sue me, and you pay me lots of money, do you think that you won the case? If you do, please, sue me.

  2. Vintage Electric Guitar Says:

    The term Vintage in the guitar category, applies to guitars from the mid 1920’s to 1970. Guitar’s made before the mid 1920’s are judged as being too primitive in their design and therefore are not valued by collectors. At the other end of the spectrum, guitars made after 1970 - even though they are nearly 40 years old in some cases, do not have collectible appeal, mainly because of the state of the US guitar manufacturing industry during the 1970’s which saw a drop in the quality of finished products.

  3. Buy a car online Says:

    I read a simliar post just the other day by Sandra Kosineck but yours is much better.

Leave a Comment

Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.