home base business

10 Guidelines To Help You Select A Network Marketing Company

By: William Winch

Chances are good that if you are reading this article you were approached by representative of a fantastic company that sounds just a little too good to be true. You want to work from home and get all of the wonderful benefits this person told you about, but you’re just not sure that you want to jump into something you don’t really know anything about. If this is you, then pat yourself on the back. You’re a very smart individual.

Even though one person does well in a company, it doesn’t mean it is the right one for you. You could go ahead and sign up to become a distributor, follow the same techniques as the person who inspired you, and wind up with different results. Nothing is guaranteed…but if you put a little time and effort into researching the company you will have saved a lot of time and effort in case it doesn’t work out. Since you have the desire to learn and put forth the effort to read this far, you owe it to yourself to continue. You don’t want to be like the thousands of people who dropped out of their company because they jumped in before they could test the waters. Here are 10 important factors to be considered before choosing a Network Marketing company.

Factor #1: Can you verify the company’s profitability?

If they are a public company listed on the Stock Exchange, their infromation is available for the public. If they are not a publicly held company, contact the CEO or another of the company you want information on for a report. You may or may not get the information, but at least it’s worth a try.

Factor #2: How old is the company?

You should be looking for a company that has been in business no less that 7 years. All companies go through fluxuations, and if they’ve persevered through a rough time, it’s a good indication they are strong.

Factor #3: How exclusive is the product or service?

You want to stay away from any oddball products. Chances are if it’s strange, then it’s going to be difficult to sell and even more difficult to retain those customers. You want an element of competition. Your product should be similar but unique in a certain way. For example, if you offer customer support for your product, that is unique as your customers usually do not receive this service when purchasing from a retail store.

Factor #4: Is your product related to health, wealth or love?

These are the three elements that are the most sought after in Network Marketing.

Factor #5: Are you or can you be passionate about your product?

This is probably the single most important factor to consider. If you are not passionate about the products, you will probably struggle at selling them. If you would still continue taking the products even if you couldn’t make money selling them, that a good indication that you are passionate and the odds will be in your favor.

Factor #6: The compensation plan.

In a perfect world, you’d be making 100% on the products you sell. The reason you don’t in Network Marketing is because you don’t have to worry about inventing or manufacturing the product. It’s already done for you. Your profit should be anywhere between 40% - 50% after taking all income and expenses into consideration. If it falls below 25%, it is definately not worth your time and energy to get involved.

Factor #7: Credibility and Integrity.

This is referring to the management team and the CEO of the company. Do they have credibility? What have they done in the past to have established a good track record?

Factor #8: Market Saturation.

How available is the product or service the company markets? You don’t want a product that is similar to something that is being mass produced by other companies. Some competition is good, but too much is bad.

Factor #9: Terms, conditions, policies and procedures.

Are you limited as to how you can perform in the company? How much room is there for doing your own kind of marketing? For example, do you have to use their websites and trainings only, or can you use your own methods. If the company offers little flexibility, you might want to reconsider choosing them.

Factor #10: Does the company have a complete marketing system?

Do they have a system from beginning to end that you can follow in order to market the product successfully? It’s difficult and time consuming to re-invent the wheel, epsecially for someone who is new to network marketing.

There will never be a company that posseses ALL 10 factors. Simply rate each of these on a scale of 1-10 (10 being very desireable), then divide by 10. If your final score is over a 7, you’re looking at a solid company to join.

Most of the techniques still being taught by network marketing companies do not work the way they used to. Following a system of talking to your friends and family members won’t get you anything but blackballed from the next reunion picnic. Also, beware of costly programs. You should not have to use your entire life savings to join a certain program or pay for expensive leads. You want to make money, not give it away. A person needs to be trained on how to be a marketer. I know because I followed a system that was supposed to help me and it didn’t, and now I help others start (or start over) on the right track.

As long as you have a desire and a belief to share your product, and you have chosen the right company for you, opportunity awaits in Network Marketing.

Article Source:
http://www.articlecity.com/articles/business_and_finance/article_8950.shtml

Non-Comps: To Tax Or Not To Tax

By: Harold Freder

To paint the picture, we start with a successful business owner looking to sell a business. The business owner finds a willing purchaser and they negotiate a purchase price. Typically, the purchase will include a goodwill component, for example, customer lists, business name, telephone number, etc.. In order to protect that goodwill the agreement of purchase and sale will generally include some form of non-competition, non-solicitation or other similar clause, generically referred to as restrictive covenants. The tax treatment of these types of clauses in the context of a business sale has gone through somewhat of an upheaval over the last several years. Let us review where we have been, how we got there and where we are now. Unfortunately, as you will see, we are not in a happy place.

The starting point for any discussion of the taxation of restrictive covenants has got to be the Fortino case. This case which came out in 2000 was truly the dawn of a new millennium. The story in that one was a couple sold their shares in a business corporation to Loblaws and entered into a non-competition clause as part of the transaction. A substantial amount of the purchase price was allocated to the non-competition covenant and payable to the individuals. Canada Revenue Agency took a run at this in the courts and the case went up to the federal Court of Appeal. The court found that these payments were not taxable because they were not received in respect of a business carried on by the individuals. The business was carried on by the corporation. This case had a bit of a quirk in that there was an administrative hiccup on the CRA side and certain arguments in favour of the payments being taxable never made it to the court. In any event the case stood for the proposition that non-competition payments were not taxable.

As is often the case with a favourable result like Fortino, the news spread like wildfire. Despite the uncertainty raised by the glitch in Fortino, business owners and their tax advisors took the non-taxable proposition as gospel and ran with it. In the few years following Fortino, vendors became more and more aggressive and allocated more and more to restrictive covenants upon the sale of a business. They took the position, following Fortino, that there was no tax to pay. It was only a matter of time before CRA would take another run at this practice and there would be a new case before the courts.

Sure enough a few years later we got it. The next stop on this brief historical tour is the Manrell case. This case also went up to the Federal Court of Appeal. Much to the surprise of most people, the Court again found that the non-competition payments were not taxable. Now there was going to be a real free-for-all.

The reaction from the tax authorities was swift. Not willing to take a chance on the ?three strikes and you?re out? principle, the Department of Finance gave word almost immediately that the landscape was going to change. There was a press release issued within a few months of Manrell, followed by the first cut at proposed amendments to the Income Tax Act on this issue less than six months later. Not unexpectedly, these proposals were met with an onslaught of criticisms and Finance went back to work. In the summer of 2005, further amendments came out, followed by further criticisms and concern, followed by further changes and proposals culminating in what is now Bill C-33.

Surely, after all the back and forth discussions between knowledgeable tax people we would have a clear understanding of where we stand. Guess again. The tax treatment of restrictive covenants is now laden with uncertainty. Here are some of the issues and concerns:

The definition of ?restrictive covenant? is very broad and could capture situations where the parties do not even realize that they are caught.

If you are found to be offside the provisions, the result could be that the amounts will be taxed as ordinary income and not as a capital gain. This means that the effective tax rate on the restrictive covenant portion could be double what it otherwise would be.

CRA has the power to allocate a reasonable amount to the restrictive covenant and tax on that basis.

A taxpayer may be subject to tax under these provisions even if they do not receive any portion of the payment.

An election may have to be filed to achieve the desired results in some circumstances but not in others.

If the transaction involves related parties and/or non-residents the rules may be different.

In the end, what we are left with in this area is somewhat of a minefield. Unfortunately, there are no simple answers and planning tips. Each transaction must be looked at independently with proper tax, legal and accounting advice. The only thing we know for certain is that the days of using over-inflated non-competition payments to reduce tax on the sale of a business are gone for good.

Harold Feder is a partner with the law firm of BrazeauSeller LLP. He practices in the areas of tax and estate planning for individuals and business owners.

Article Source:
http://www.articlecity.com/articles/business_and_finance/article_8954.shtml