Talk:Mary Kay

message: Thanks for archiving the talk page. Hopefully future dialog won't be lost.67.136.137.119 23:28, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given.  What exactly is the neutrality issue? User: 2602:301:77c1:bed0:e98b:d1a4:60cc:8429 9:02, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: POV Template removed. The tagging editor failed to initiate a discussion to support the placement of the tag.  Further, lack of talk page discussion is interpreted as there is no other support for the template and/or the issue is not worth fixing.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:301:77C1:BED0:7C01:FCA2:B707:53AC (talk) 16:19, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: What is the neutrality issue?

message: I renamed the section to attempt to conform more closelt to WP:NPOV.Amber luxor 17:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section renamed 

message: I do not like the current wording of the sub-section "Mary Kay Qua Pyramid Scheme".  For starters,it consists of too many direct quotes. Either dicuss it here,or rewrite it paragraph by paragraph.67.136.137.119 23:28, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From the Multi-level marketing article The structure is designed to create a marketing and sales force by compensating promoters of company products not only for sales they personally generate, but also for the sales of other promoters they introduce to the company, creating a downline of distributors and a hierarchy of multiple levels of compensation in the form of a pyramid. That definition describes  the business  model used by  Marky Kay Cosmetics. As such, it is an MLM, and hence  both 86 F.T.C. 1106 and 93 F.T.C. 618 apply, and  it  is  a pyramid scheme, unless specific criteria, which Marty  Kay Cosmetics  makes  no effort  to adhere, are  strictly adhered to.jonathon (talk) 15:05, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

text: Whilst it is  possible that the majority of members make there money selling products, I'll just point out that Mary Kay (Canada) points out that in 2008, that only  2,011 earned more than Canadian$100 in commissions. No data on how much those consultants purchase each year, but 2007 worldwide was US$1,414. Gross profit would be under US$7000 for the year.  Alternatively, look  at the figures that are required to be on National Court of Sales.  Assuming that all product that is bought from MK is sold at MSRP, you are still looking at under US$20K  for the year. Or just a fraction more than you earn with no experience flipping burgers. (US$18K with no experience.  goes up to US$20K after one year.  Plus you get  benefits which are not available to Mary Kay consultants.)   I'll also point out that the US$1,139,962 judgement against Touch of Pink represents about US$280K per year in pre-tax profit --- or more than five times the profit that the best retail vendor in Mary Kay earns. Or roughly US$280K more in profit than the average US based vendor of Mary Kay Cosmetics earns in a year.jonathon (talk) 15:05, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

text: Mary Kay Cosmetics  does not have a career path for anybody who focuses only on  retail sales. There career path is  exclusively focused on who can get the most  bodies (usually alive, but neither death nor non-physical materializations are a hindrance) into the organization, with the highest possible  initial inventory purchase. As far Queen of Court sales goes, that is based purely on wholesale purchases with no attempt to verify sales to bona fide third party retail customers. (Mary Kay retail outlets in Nigeria, amongst other countries, are supplied by the recipients of that "honour" dumping the product at a loss, to liquidators.)jonathon (talk) 15:05, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

text: Both In  Re Kescott andIn Re Amway is case law. As such, it applies  to Mary Kay. Inasmuch as Mary Kay does not operate within the defined parameters of that case law, one can say it is a product based pyramid scheme.  (You do realize that Mary Kay has settled out of court, every case in which being a pyramid scheme was an allegation against it, don't you.) jonathon (talk) 16:06, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

text: It was written that way to minimize edit wars  between those who are clueless about the legal definition of a  pyramid scheme, and those whose sources fail WP:V. jonathon (talk) 17:28, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mary Kay Qua Pyramid Scheme 

message: I've read the section Woolf v Mary Kay Cosmetics, but I didn't find it clear. Admittedly, this is due to my lack of a law degree. Things I think would help the section:
*When was the original case brought before the courts and/or when did the Dallas County court pass judgment?
*When was it appealed by Mary Kay, to whom was it appealed, and when was that judgment passed?
*What does "The Supreme Court USA ruled Certiorari Denied 31 May 2005" mean?
Thanks! — gogobera (talk) 19:05, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This case is borderline for meeting the current Wikipedia criteria for notability. I think it needs its own wiki article.  Anyway, to address the questions in reverse order:
* "Certiorari Denied" means that the case does not set binding case law, and that the Supreme Court will not review this specific decision;
* The dates of the appeal and reversal are on the PDF that the footnote links to. It was appealed to the Federal Court of the Northern District of Texas;
* The original court case was filed in 1998, in California. The Texas case was filed in 2000;jonathon (talk) 02:58, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Woolf v Mary Kay Cosmetics needs clarification 

message: Would the person who added the "unverified claims" tag either list their concerns here, or add  tags to the article, where appropriate. This tag consists of two braces "{ {" then the word "fact", then two braces " }} ", with no spaces between any of the parts.(IOW, delete the space between the first two braces.)  jonathon (talk) 21:56, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original Research / Unverified Claims 

message: In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :) 
* "mkcanada2007earnings" :
** Mary Kay (Canada) Reported earnings
** Mary Kay (Canada) Reported earnings
DumZiBoT (talk) 12:20, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bot report : Found duplicate references ! 

message: I do not see the numbers that are used to calculate consultant turnover on the reference link provided:
http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/businessopprule/522418-11952.pdf Mary Kay Letter to the FTC regarding proposed changes in the rules governing MLMs
Please point out to me where these numbers are.  I'm not sure if I'm missing something.
Also, the reference link for the Canadian numbers just takes me to the MK Canadian website.  The posted number doesn't say what year it is based on nor can I find where they are basing this on the current site.  Please advise on this as well.  Thank you! PublicKnowledege300 (talk) 02:37, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Added this section back in. That data is in the cited documents. jonathon (talk) 15:16, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consultant Turnover Rate 

message: Who wrote this section?  "Mary Kay reveals as little about the financial side of the company as it can."  This is clearly not a neutral tone.  Revert to changes made by PublicKnowledege300  Mattl1983 (talk) 05:16, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Applause does not contain financial information about the company. It reports the commissions paid to  some  consultants and directors.jonathon (talk) 17:16, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The article currently says that "there is very little reliable information about actual earnings by consultants", and that's not true.  Applause _does_ provide the actual earnings of consultants.Mattl1983 (talk) 00:05, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Applause lists the amount that allegedly is paid in commissions to "top" consultants. It does not list reimbursements to Mary  Kay by directors or consultants. Neither does it list reimbursements by  Mary  Kay  to consultants or  directors.  Furthermore, it does not provide  mean, mode, or median earnings  from retail sales, wholesale purchases, recruiting, or other means of generating revenue. Nor does it list expenses that consultants and directors usually encounter. Nor  does it list any corporate financial data. Gross sales to consultants is not a meaningful financial statistics -- a report can truly state gross earnings of US$3,000,000,000, blissfully ignoring the US$1,000,000,000  that it spent to comply with the 90% buy back that federal and state law mandate.jonathon (talk) 20:56, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Alright, I get your point: there isn't a lot of published financial data out there.  It would be nice if there was, but there isn't.  However, I still don't like the language here.  As a private company, they have a right to not publish this information (unless I am mistaken).  Instead of implying an intent to conceal information, can we just say that the financial data is limited?  I'd really appreciate some neutrality in the language - that's all I'm asking.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattl1983 (talk • contribs) 23:59, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:   Applause provides data for the US market only. The article provides no data on retail sales in China --- which is required under PRC law. (I couldn't even find a hint of that data on the Mary Kay (PRC) website). Whilst Mary Kay (Corporate) does not have a legal obligation to release their financial data, they have the moral obligation to provide _accurate_ financial data to those who desire to participate in the alleged opportunity. The financial data in Applause provides a misleading representation of how much a consultant can reasonably be expected to earn. (It is biased towards the highest wholesale product purchases. It seldom, if ever, provides bona fide third party retail sales data. It omits the  amount that The data released by Mary Kay (Canada) provides a slightly better picture, but still omits how much can be reasonably expected in bona fide third party retail sales. The US$1,444 figure assumes that all product that is purchased is sold by consultants. Something that is demonstrably false, as demonstrated by both the financials for the various liquidators of Mary Kay products, and the "returned at 90%" trackers on various websites.jonathon (talk) 17:10, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Earnings subsection 

message: I just made two edits to the article, removing a fairly large amount of text.  The first edit was to remove 2 sections of criticism that appear to be original research.  Unless there are reliable third party sources that these controversies actually are controversies, as opposed to just someone with an axe to grind POV pushing in Wikipedia, this should stay gone.  The second edit was to remove a section that does appear to have some 3rd party reliable sourcing, but it was written in a highly POV way.
In general, companies of this type (multi-level marketing) are often criticized as "pyramid schemes" but that term has a very particular meaning, and while it can be ok to include criticisms of the business model (if they are properly sourced), it is not ok to claim, as this article did, that the company is breaking the law or doing something unethical without a very careful and solid source.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 21:12, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some removals 

message: In the article referencing the "pyramid like structure" criticism of the company, a key part (that makes this statement less biased) was left out that I added.  From the article "The company, though, isn't without its critics, many of whom focus on Mary Kay's pyramid-like marketing structure but acknowledge the company's operations aren't violating any laws."  PublicKnowledege300 (talk) 19:15, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, the current crop of people pointing out that MK  --- or at least their consultants ---  are violating US and International law, are current beauty consultants, and not its critics.jonathon (talk) 19:55, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  "pointing out" is a success verb, meaning that you are making the assertion yourself that they are currently breaking the law.  That's an accusation you'd best be prepared to back up.  If there are reliable sources with proof of this (i.e. newspaper reports of criminal convictions) please produce them.  Otherwise, you might want to back up a bit and consider your manner of speaking.  There may be accusations (direct sales companies are often accused of various things), and you'll need to document those with reliable sources.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 19:44, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: What is going on with the sales table "Mary Kay Sales Figures"? Why is this the first section of the article after the lead? It seems like a huge mess of badly sourced, very specific info that fails WP:NOT in a half-dozen ways. It's way, way too promotional. It's vague in important areas, and specific in trivial ones. Most of the fields are 'unknown', which kinda defeats the purpose of a table. Is there something I'm missing, or can I delete it and integrate the three or four worthy, non-primary sources into the rest of the article? Grayfell (talk) 23:53, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  That table was inserted into the article, as an attempt to minimize the conflict that erupted here, and elsewhere, regarding numerous claims about the Mary Kay business opportunity. It is the only set of data that all sides concede, albeit grudgingly, is "probably accurate". Whilst it would be nice to have fewer "unknown figure" in the table, that won't happen unless Mary Kay Corporate is more forthcoming with that data --- something I doubt will happen, because of where, how, and why that specific table has been used. p (talk) 04:19, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking at the edit history, it looks like a hard-fought battle, but it was added about 8 years ago, and it has not aged well. As a table it's taking up a lot of real estate for very little info, and many of the sources are dead, primary links of questionable value. A 'history' section could be added, and much of the older info could be incorporated there, while the more recent info could be selectively added to the 'Business model' and various sales earnings subsections. Seem reasonable? Grayfell (talk) 00:55, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sales figures table 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Mary Kay. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070808094903/http://www.marykay.com:80/company/company_companyinformation.aspx?tab=home to http://www.marykay.com/company/company_companyinformation.aspx?tab=home
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070711221823/http://www.marykay.com/Company/images/2006CorporatePressKit.pdf to http://www.marykay.com/Company/images/2006CorporatePressKit.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070807072322/http://www.marykay.com:80/company/company_milestones.aspx?tab=home to http://www.marykay.com/company/company_milestones.aspx?tab=home
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101005182030/http://dsef.org/press/pdfs/Avon_Products.pdf to http://www.dsef.org/press/pdfs/Avon_Products.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090822063615/http://www.tshaonline.org:80/handbook/online/articles/MM/dhm1.html to http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/MM/dhm1.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090105165905/http://www.familybusinessmagazine.com/topglobal-2.html to http://www.familybusinessmagazine.com/topglobal-2.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090325200151/http://www.marykay.com/content/company/images/2008_cpk_thecompany.pdf to http://www.marykay.com/content/company/images/2008_cpk_thecompany.pdf
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:07, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Rofobowman, "dual marketing" does not seem to be a well defined term, nor is it described by any article here on Wikipedia.  In contrast, the term "multi-level marketing" has a straightforward description: "the sales force is compensated not only for sales they generate, but also for the sales of the other salespeople that they recruit".  This matches Mary Kay's commission practices, where senior consultants receive commission on junior consultants' purchases, and directors receive commission on all recruited consultants.  Furthermore, numerous sources refer to Mary Kay as practicing multi-level marketing, including CNN, the Michigan Attorney General, and the Chicago Tribune.  Whether or not Mary Kay is "dual marketing" does not change that they exhibit the characteristics of multi-level marketing. Laoris (talk) 14:45, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dual marketing/multi-level marketing 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Mary Kay. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110714043901/http://www.marykay.com/content/company/images/cpk_thecompany.pdf to http://www.marykay.com/content/company/images/cpk_thecompany.pdf
*Added  tag to http://www.marykay.com.ar/Display.asp?PageID=2787&Directory=COMPANY
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080514134332/http://www.marykay.ca:80/en/home/earnings-representation.html to http://www.marykay.ca/en/home/earnings-representation.html
*Added  tag to http://www.sequence-inc.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=203:utah-woman-a-star-in-pink&catid=16:current-press&Itemid=54
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110714043901/http://www.marykay.com/content/company/images/cpk_thecompany.pdf to http://www.marykay.com/content/company/images/cpk_thecompany.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070703083907/http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/businessopprule/522418-11952.pdf to http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/businessopprule/522418-11952.pdf
*Added  tag to http://www.rfcexpress.com/lawsuit.asp?id=48858
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:20, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mary Kay. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110430053109/http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20060804/news_lz1n4nowread.html to http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20060804/news_lz1n4nowread.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:28, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Mary Kay. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929214910/http://www.marykay.ca/Display.asp?PageID=1484&LanguageID=1&Directory=Home to http://www.marykay.ca/Display.asp?PageID=1484&LanguageID=1&Directory=Home
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130115154038/http://www.marykay.ca/content/corporate/en-ca/company/marykayaroundtheworld/default.html to http://www.marykay.ca/content/corporate/en-ca/company/marykayaroundtheworld/default.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120316122817/http://www.marykay.ca/ContentPage.aspx?FileName=%2Fhome%2Fearnings-representation.html to http://www.marykay.ca/ContentPage.aspx?FileName=%2Fhome%2Fearnings-representation.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120316122817/http://www.marykay.ca/ContentPage.aspx?FileName=%2Fhome%2Fearnings-representation.html to http://www.marykay.ca/ContentPage.aspx?FileName=%2Fhome%2Fearnings-representation.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120316122817/http://www.marykay.ca/ContentPage.aspx?FileName=%2Fhome%2Fearnings-representation.html to http://www.marykay.ca/ContentPage.aspx?FileName=%2Fhome%2Fearnings-representation.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.pinktruth.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/nationals1206.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929214910/http://www.marykay.ca/Display.asp?PageID=1484&LanguageID=1&Directory=Home to http://www.marykay.ca/Display.asp?PageID=1484&LanguageID=1&Directory=Home
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:41, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Hello all. As I understand it, this page has seen a few discussions on the way the information is presented in the Sales Figures table. I hope we can agree that Its usefulness has passed, with most fields being marked "unknown". I believe the idea was to give an idea of the rate of growth of the company. Surely this can be achieved with a paragraph of text and a more selective use of details.
Proposal for discussion: replace what comes after the sentence “As a private company, Mary Kay releases few details about the average income of its sellers.”, by the following text:
Starting in 1963 with 318 consultants and sales of $198,154, Mary Kay gradually expanded its reach first within the United States, then internationally. The company exceeded $500 million in sales through 220,000 consultants by 1991. In 1995, its sales had grown to $950 million, including $25 million in Russia.
As of 2017, Mary Kay’s continuous multinational expansion had seen its sales grow to $3,7 billion with 2,5 million consultants, 39,000 directors and 600 national directors.
… and go on to Manufacturing Plants, which looks fine.
Please improve on this if you think it goes in the right direction. Maybe slip something about China in there.  Robincantin (talk) 22:37, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Text replacement for the giant table

message: I have removed a section that utilized primary sources and dead/unarchived sources that added no discernible value to the page. As well as a spam link that had no mention of the attached content within. I am posting here as the content removal was a larger portion and should remain removed as it added no intrinsic value to the page. Tipaloo (talk) 17:00, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal page clean up