Over the last four weeks since the closure of Rex Venture Group, LLC., I have had time to reflect on my reporting of this saga, and to really listen to the outside critics who have sent me private emails on different situations. Last night I received another such email from GlimDropper of RealScam.com, bring up a very valid area in which I failed the very network marketing community I state I am so proud of, and an advocate for.
After reading his email several times I responded and feel that my responses should be made public, not on his sight, but in this community also. For those of you who did nothing but watch one of my videos (especially the April video on Network Marketing Business Journal), I am truly sorry for not doing better due diligence on the article.
And I wish I had known long before July, that Dr. Keith Laggos had a top position inside the compensation plan. Had that information been handy at the time, I would have also reported that the article could be seen as biased.
I will always find time to talk with you. And especially answer your questions. If I have missed one please resend.
From: G [mailto:glimdropper]
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2012 2:15 AM
To: Troy Dooly
Subject: Time to Bust Your Chops a Bit
You’re a busy man, I respect that. I understand that you can’t always reply to me e-mails but I’d very much appreciate if you could get back to me on this at your soonest convenience on this one.
I never saw a copy of Kieth Laggos’ NMB Journal April article about Zeek, until tonight. I beg you sir, in light of all the facts that have emerged since you recorded your video last April, tell me how failed to appreciate the disclaimer on that article? And I quote:
Troy’s Response: I am not sure if you have the newspaper or the reprint and it really doesn’t matter in light of the whole picture. That disclaimer was added after Keith’s legal trouble with the SEC in 2005. I had done business in the past with Keith (2001-2002) when I ran ProSTEP. Based on that working experience I thought I knew how Keith worked (he never joined my company). He shows up at the location, talks with all the parties involved, takes studious notes, verifies those notes with the people inside the company and then (he writes the articles) A couple of times when sitting in the Red Carpet Day, he was writing articles on other companies and Zeek.
Based on this past working relationship, I did not take the time to read any find print in his paper. I have been getting that paper for years. Without a doubt I knew “he” wrote (again wrong assumption) on companies who had bought reprints from him. This is another example of my part where because of long term relationships with people I did respect and trust to be ethical individuals I have failed the very people I was trying to help. Not that it really matters, but this is covered in an upcoming video I am doing showing where I have failed in some areas in this situation.
G, no excused, I just flat fell short in this area. It was not until then end of things when I learned of Keith’s personal involvement in the compensation structure that I started really putting two and two together on how he is now using his “newspaper”, and you will not see me use it again as a positive reference in any company review. Is it too little too late, maybe.
All information contained in this feature article is provided by the featured company. The act of publishing a story should not be construed as an endorsement or judgment of the featured company by Network Marketing Business Journal. Network Marketing Business Journal assumes no responsibility for performance, integrity or claims made by the featured company.
Keith did not write that article or to whatever extent he did write it he was only summarizing talking points he was given to highlight taking no responsibility for the information he was provided with. He does not stand by what that article said. He published it because they paid him to. This does not pose a challenge to his credentials as a master of compensation but it does put that title in a slightly different frame.
Troy’s Response: I can tell you Keith more than likely did write the article. He has too much pride NOT to write the articles, or at least tweak them. And I can tell you he does verify that the facts can be produced by the company if he is brought into a lawsuit again, like the last SEC lawsuit. But, I also realize he doesn’t care about 3rd party validation, as we all know he does take positions in the comp plan.
Troy, how could you have failed to mention the disclaimer when you offered such gushing coverage of the printed story? It’s due diligence 101 and I don’t think you earned a passing grade.
Troy’s Response: I understand fully where you are coming from, and I have no other response than what I wrote above. I did fail in this issue!
I understand you’re getting piled on by both sides here now and you have my sympathies. Dr. Laggos wasn’t pretending what he printed was true, but you relied on an endorsement which wasn’t an endorsement to make what a lot of people at the time took as your endorsement.
Troy’s Response: Yes, I did 100%. And as I said in my upcoming video, which will not be out for a couple of three more weeks, but does talk about my own failures in areas. G, this has never been about me, sadly it has become about me. My goal is not to gain traffic, or become the end all for information. I just have a passion for the distributors who never seem to have a voice when they have issues. Zeek, in this case ripped the network marketing community down the middle. And to some extent I have realized, that due to a voice I did not realize I had, I was used as a pawn, and allow it to much of the extent. I was just not smart enough to see it.
Unlike other companies I have covered, I did not realize at the time after talking with Keith, and a few others that, like some in Zeek, they also may have been using me, to make sure their paychecks continued to grow.
I make no promises as to when I post on this issue, I’m content to let someone else beat me “to the presses” on the topic. The most interesting question in this whole affair is how did so many of the industry watch dogs get taken for a ride here and I see your failure to read a disclaimer as one link in that chain. I’d love to know your thoughts here, I want to be fair in what I write. But this will be written about.
Troy’s Responses: I know you have to publish your article, and I because of my respect of you I will not ask you to keep any of this off the record. You have been very hard on me, but I feel always fair. I, like many others let my guard down, saw folks I respected and trusted supporting (in the wrong ways), what the courts have come to see as a Ponzi, and in which I as more and more review the (offline information is sent to me) I am realizing was being run as a Ponzi. Whether or not it was created specifically with the intent of being run as a Ponzi is still a question in my mind.
Again, I make no excuses to you or anyone, I did fail the very folks I was trying to help when it comes to the Keith Laggos video, and by the time I did realize it was too late, the damage was done, the company was closed.
Thank you. [/quote]