LuLaRich - Amazon docu series about LuLaRoe

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok but what is “ugly” in the context of being unsaleable even, because about 99% of what I saw on screen was absolutely hideous. And the mixing of prints between top and bottom was atrocious. I’m a big fan of neutrals and boring, classic style, so this was essentially a visual assault on my eyeballs

This is the funniest thing I read all day.

And I bought a ton of LLR leggings a few years ago.

Not to make light because it is very sad how much money people lost…but I just cannot believe that people saw leggings with cats eating donuts or octopuses, had $5 in their bank account and decided this is how they were going to get rich

ppl are desperate to make $$$ and let the brainwash got to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok but what is “ugly” in the context of being unsaleable even, because about 99% of what I saw on screen was absolutely hideous. And the mixing of prints between top and bottom was atrocious. I’m a big fan of neutrals and boring, classic style, so this was essentially a visual assault on my eyeballs

This is the funniest thing I read all day.

And I bought a ton of LLR leggings a few years ago.

Not to make light because it is very sad how much money people lost…but I just cannot believe that people saw leggings with cats eating donuts or octopuses, had $5 in their bank account and decided this is how they were going to get rich

ppl are desperate to make $$$ and let the brainwash got to them.

This is why we desperately need financial literacy courses every year starting in K.

[Anonymous]

I have a theory that the leggings people and the beanie baby people are an overlapping circle. That’s what makes the lula roe story more fun than other mlms, it’s that they exploded so much in large part because of a craze for their ugly leggings, using the same approach as beanie babies (“retire” patterns).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a theory that the leggings people and the beanie baby people are an overlapping circle. That’s what makes the lula roe story more fun than other mlms, it’s that they exploded so much in large part because of a craze for their ugly leggings, using the same approach as beanie babies (“retire” patterns).

Nope. Ty beanie babies were manufacturer to consumer. They also have had special items where the profits go to charity. The only profits for the leggings went in that couples pocket.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a theory that the leggings people and the beanie baby people are an overlapping circle. That’s what makes the lula roe story more fun than other mlms, it’s that they exploded so much in large part because of a craze for their ugly leggings, using the same approach as beanie babies (“retire” patterns).

Nope. Ty beanie babies were manufacturer to consumer. They also have had special items where the profits go to charity. The only profits for the leggings went in that couples pocket.

Right, definitely different business models but culturally some overlap I think.

[Anonymous]

I just came across the Wikipedia article on "Confidence trick" in another context. The six stages of a con have a lot of relevant elements:

In Confessions of a Confidence Man, Edward H. Smith lists the "six definite steps or stages of growth" of a confidence game.[7] He notes that some steps may be omitted.

1. Foundation work - Preparations are made in advance of the game, including the hiring of any assistants required and studying the background knowledge needed for the role.

2. Approach - The victim is approached or contacted.

3. Build-up - The victim is given an opportunity to profit from participating in a scheme. The victim's greed is encouraged, such that their rational judgment of the situation might be impaired.

4. Pay-off or convincer - The victim receives a small payout as a demonstration of the scheme's purported effectiveness.

5. The "hurrah" - A sudden manufactured crisis or change of events forces the victim to act or make a decision immediately. This is the point at which the con succeeds or fails. With a financial scam, the con artist may tell the victim that the "window of opportunity" to make a large investment in the scheme is about to suddenly close forever.

6. The in-and-in - A conspirator (in on the con, but assumes the role of an interested bystander) puts an amount of money into the same scheme as the victim, to add an appearance of legitimacy. This can reassure the victim, and give the con man greater control when the deal has been completed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I could have watched an episode of just the dude who worked for them for 14 months and wanted to watch the IRS takedown from a nearby patio sipping vodka and cran. 😄

Yes! Love him! Unintentionally hilarious!

And he quoted a Star Trek commander! And he’ll NEVER listen to Kelly Clarkson again. Ever.

Found myself wondering if he was single . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The other scam part of this from the 2 people I knew pulled into it (and watched from beginning to end, a mere 6 months) was that the original inventory was very cute. They sold a lot. Then bought more inventory and it became uglier and uglier. They were stuck with unsellable ugly stock and just told "you just have to buy more" so that part is SO very true. Buy more, hoping to get cute stuff, get stuck with ugly unsellable stuff that you then can't return. They sold it all for $1 and donated to charity to be done with it at the end.

At the height, some of the consultants were reselling the 'rare' patterns on E-bay for like 100 or 150 dollars for leggings. They didn't have that in the documentary either. That's one way to recoup your losses!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other scam part of this from the 2 people I knew pulled into it (and watched from beginning to end, a mere 6 months) was that the original inventory was very cute. They sold a lot. Then bought more inventory and it became uglier and uglier. They were stuck with unsellable ugly stock and just told "you just have to buy more" so that part is SO very true. Buy more, hoping to get cute stuff, get stuck with ugly unsellable stuff that you then can't return. They sold it all for $1 and donated to charity to be done with it at the end.

At the height, some of the consultants were reselling the 'rare' patterns on E-bay for like 100 or 150 dollars for leggings. They didn't have that in the documentary either. That's one way to recoup your losses!

Please post a link showing any “very cute” LLR inventory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other scam part of this from the 2 people I knew pulled into it (and watched from beginning to end, a mere 6 months) was that the original inventory was very cute. They sold a lot. Then bought more inventory and it became uglier and uglier. They were stuck with unsellable ugly stock and just told "you just have to buy more" so that part is SO very true. Buy more, hoping to get cute stuff, get stuck with ugly unsellable stuff that you then can't return. They sold it all for $1 and donated to charity to be done with it at the end.

At the height, some of the consultants were reselling the 'rare' patterns on E-bay for like 100 or 150 dollars for leggings. They didn't have that in the documentary either. That's one way to recoup your losses!

LOL funny story about that. In my circle of friends/acquaintances/friends of friends, there was a lady who was pretty established in the LLR pyramid. I think she was a “trainer,” but she might have even been a “coach.” (“Mentor” was the highest level so she was either 2nd or 3rd level.) Had a pretty big team under her and made a lot of money off them, back when the bonuses were based off what your downlines ordered vs. what they actually sold. Anyway, a closer friend brought a pair of leggings from her in a sought after print, but ended up not liking the fit and so she quickly re-sold them on EBay for $60. Word got back to the consultant and she was SO MAD. She wrote a long post about it in her FB group about how that’s “unethical” and they could get in trouble for it or something. So crazy. These people were really deep in the Kool-Aid for awhile.

[Anonymous]

Monat is different in that it doesnt make you buy inventory but profits are made through recruitment but if you don't recruit, you don't lose. Went to one of their meetings (because someone was trying to recruit me) and the frenzy was the same as LLR. I don't get how people don't see through it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other scam part of this from the 2 people I knew pulled into it (and watched from beginning to end, a mere 6 months) was that the original inventory was very cute. They sold a lot. Then bought more inventory and it became uglier and uglier. They were stuck with unsellable ugly stock and just told "you just have to buy more" so that part is SO very true. Buy more, hoping to get cute stuff, get stuck with ugly unsellable stuff that you then can't return. They sold it all for $1 and donated to charity to be done with it at the end.

At the height, some of the consultants were reselling the 'rare' patterns on E-bay for like 100 or 150 dollars for leggings. They didn't have that in the documentary either. That's one way to recoup your losses!

Please post a link showing any “very cute” LLR inventory.

DP, but I think the idea is/was that they're fun. If you're not into wearing fun prints, then all of it is going to be hideous to you. It looks like some of them were less busy--florals, geometric patterns, etc. Plus they got in with Disney. I just googled "good lularoe patterns" and there are some that look like they could appeal to a certain market, as well as for children. I'm glad they included the designer in the docuseries because she really brought some clarity as to WHY the patterns became so horrible. They had to create 100 prints a day?! That's insane. Of course you're going to start putting out crap and/or lifting from clipart if you only have 5 minutes to create each one.

[Anonymous]

I confess, I bought some in the 2016/2017 time frame and my daughter loved them. I still have a few pairs that I wear around the house -- mostly solids plus one pair with a Disney Villains print that I only wear occasionally. They were super soft and I lived in them for a few weeks while recovering from surgery. The dresses and most of the tops never worked for me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I confess, I bought some in the 2016/2017 time frame and my daughter loved them. I still have a few pairs that I wear around the house -- mostly solids plus one pair with a Disney Villains print that I only wear occasionally. They were super soft and I lived in them for a few weeks while recovering from surgery. The dresses and most of the tops never worked for me.

I should add that I think the only other print I had was a freebie from the consultant. My tween liked some of the prints -- a lot of the Disney ones were favorites. i also bought a couple of skirts, but none with crazy patterns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Apparently, similar MLMs include Beachbody, Avon, Mary Kay, Youunique, and Amway

Don't forget Rodan and Fields

I use R&F and its the only thing good on my sensitive skin. Buy direct from website: never have been asked to sell or become a consultant.