If you are approached for an opportunity, how do you know if this has a real chance of success? What should you pay attention to? And what are the properties of successful concepts? What is a good risk / reward ratio? And when is something 'too good to be true'? If you do not participate in anything, you cannot lose… But winning is therefore difficult. And what are the alternative costs if you miss a good opportunity?
In recent years we have gained a lot of knowledge and experience with concepts and systems. After all, we live off it! A few years ago we were involved in our first system. This was a concept with a trading robot in 'Binary Options'. There was a referral system behind it. You were rewarded for introducing new members to the system. The robot was very successful. In 90% of the cases, the outcome was correct and the profit increased nicely. There was only one small detail that threw a spanner in the works: You couldn't withdraw your winnings. Unfortunately, this is a very good example of a system that is not working.
We were faked! Is that bad? No not at all. If you want to win, you have to learn to lose first! It's okay to make mistakes. So don't feel ashamed, stupid or naive or… Making mistakes is the only way to get ahead in life. It is important to make a 'rulebook'. Record your lessons in your rulebook so you don't keep making the same mistakes. At the end of this blog we share our rulebook so that you have inspiration for yours.
Through trial and error
"Fail your way to the top!". That is what we can do learn from the Americans. When you come to a bank in America for financing for your new business, the first question is how often you have gone bankrupt. In the Netherlands it is very difficult to obtain financing after a bankruptcy, but in America it is a precondition. They assume that you have learned your lessons after failure, while in the Netherlands you only get one chance. If it goes wrong, you are unsuitable! Even the most brilliant entrepreneurs have failed. This narrow-mindedness in the Netherlands is not exactly stimulating for business and does not encourage entrepreneurship after failure.
Google is always right… Yeah, right 😉
Almost everyone who is approached to participate in a system immediately dives into Google's ears. But do you first wonder what you are looking for? Looking for negativity? Evidence that everything is correct? Or just more information? Or do you expect everyone cheering to share their positive findings online? First look for a company that has already proven itself in the recommendation marketing. For example: Amway or Herbalife. These are legal companies that have been around for decades and undoubtedly have everything together.
And? Is this all positive? There are countless people who earn a passive income with this. How about that? First, let's establish that Google is only good at finding related articles about your search term. That's all! It says nothing about the quality of the information. It is only a list in order of how many times it has been clicked. Is what you think is the truth? And from which angle? Or could it also be the competitor trying to thwart the system with 'incriminating' information? Are they facts or just opinions? What is the importance of the poster? There are even people who make thousands of dollars every month from posting lies from systems in referral marketing. So many conflicting interests. Sometimes opinions are very similar to facts because they are made harsh. If you look more closely, they are often no more than statements based on apparent facts. The more information you collect, the more difficult it becomes to make an objective judgment through the forest of contradictory subjective information. Try to limit your information to posts from members of the system. See what people who have been participating for a longer time have to say. Is this negative? Then it is time to find out why these members are not satisfied. Because this information is certainly not entirely objective either.
We have the experience that even government warnings are not based on facts. We have been living for years on a system that pays out our proceeds every week. On Google you will actually find hundreds of posts from non-members, governments, etc. who write negatively about this system. We know better. Systems are constantly under attack. Not everyone is happy about providing opportunities for ordinary people like you and me to make extra money. Think carefully which companies or institutions are directly disadvantaged by a good system? For the sake of convenience, we call them the competitors. If these are very influential and powerful players, they will do everything they can to throw a spanner in the works. There are even fake advertising agencies being hired to get as much negativity online as possible to scare off the potential members! Even governments are manipulated to give negative advice. We have seen it all happen and know from experience that only one thing really matters: The intention of the founders of the system.
Openness and transparency
Unfortunately, it is impossible for a system to communicate openly and transparently online. The powerful competitors also read that information and can use it again to cause as much setback as possible. Think, for example, of cyber attacks and the posting of negativity. Systems will always come across as somewhat vague, to say the least, but that says nothing about reliability.
There are scammers, no doubt. But take a good look at the revenue model. Often there are strict conditions for the payouts or paying out is very detrimental to your future profit. They want to pay as little as possible in order to run off with as much money as possible at a certain moment. Everything that is paid out is less profit. In general, setting up a system is not very interesting for criminals. Setting up the ICT is expensive. The support and promotion is also a lot of work and it generally takes a long time before it really starts. It is also very difficult not to be exposed prematurely. I am firmly convinced that many high-potential systems were destroyed by influential competitors and then falsely labeled as scam. It's a huge shark world.
Before we participate in a system, we contact the founders. If they are not available, that is a red flag for us. If they are easy to reach, we will talk to you. In addition to their vision of their company, we also ask for their 'why'. What drives the founders to set up such a system and what is their goal? There must also be a good and clear win-win plan. Good for the members, but also good for the company. Find out if there are members who declare that they have successfully withdrawn or can even live off their proceeds. Payment of earnings must be unconditional. Members' experiences is by far the most important information, if not the only reliable information available. Members are only willing to recommend if they are satisfied with a system. Why should they make recommendations if they have negative experiences?
If there are presidential elections in America, you will see that the candidates of each other pick up all the shit from the past and make it public to make each other as black as possible. They are competitors of each other and pull out all the stops to knock their opponents out. This is also the case with founders of systems. The powerful competitors will do everything to jeopardize the trustworthiness of the founders. All the mistakes they have ever committed are magnified online and if possible they are at least portrayed as losers, very untrustworthy or even as scammers. Nobody has a perfect track record. Past successes are no guarantee for the future, but past failures have often been good lessons and make these entrepreneurs stronger with greater chance of success. I would rather do business with a well-to-do entrepreneur who has had a lot of headwind and is still in the game, than with someone with a flawless career and already falling over with a breath of crosswind. All in all, we are dealing with a few important things. And if they are in order, that is a GO for us!
Certainty? Certainly not!
One hundred percent certainty is nowhere to be found. I myself experienced that in the 2009 crisis my pension evaporated with a renowned insurance company. That club of 'arranges it all'. Nothing certainty. Is also clearly stated in the fine print.
Every time you get in the car there is a chance that you will not survive. Are you still driving a car? Probably, because the risk is perceived as small and that is enough to get behind the wheel again and again. This also applies to participating in a system. If the odds of you going to earn are much higher than the odds of losing, it's a good deal.
Don't think for others, either. Everyone just has to make their own decision. If you consciously do not inform someone to protect them, you also run the risk of depriving them of an enormous chance. Let everyone decide for themselves and experience the journey for themselves. If it goes wrong, it goes wrong for everyone. Simple right? And when it comes to a relatively small amount, the losses are limited compared to the chance of winning. If we had concluded after our first experience that systems don't work and it's all scams, our lives would have been very different and we wouldn't have been financially free. The alternative costs of missing an opportunity would then be incalculable!
- The system is a legal enterprise with a legal product.
- There is a good win-win plan.
- The founders are easily accessible and have the right intentions.
- The system is not dependent on other systems, for example the banking system. We prefer paying out earnings in Cryptocurrencies.
- The earnings can be withdrawn unconditionally.
- Everyone has equal opportunities. The start time does not limit your income or development within the system in any way.
- Products are sold in which the buyer has an unconditional advantage. There is no obligation to recommend; it is your own choice.
- There is a clear source of income that does not depend on new members, but is based on sales from products and / or other profits.