Monavie letter to Ted Nuyten regarding the Reported Revenue for 2010

I received the below letter from Monavie's Legal Counsel– Graden Jackson from Strong Hanni Law Firm-, to pull down the post Monavie Revenue 2010 under heavy pressure?  Mr. Jackson informed me that the post was malicious and alleged that the post was published with the intent of interfering with MonaVie’s business relationships with its distributors.

I think it’s obvious to say that this website regularly publishes information about the Direct Selling Industry. On this website, we share the good news and the bad news. Just recently, I published about the top earners in the network marketing industry.

4 of the top 25 earners were from MonaVie. Clearly, I do not have a grudge to settle with MonaVie.  When I receive newsworthy material, I publish it assuming that it appears accurate.  In this particular case, I got the information from this website.  Based on my observations in the industry, the information seemed accurate. Rod Cook, the MLM watchdog, recently published an article about MonaVie’s decline in numbers.

In my previous post titled, “Monavie Revenue 2010 under heavy pressure?” I have made it crystal clear that the figures are from an unverified source and I have made a disclaimer on the information.  Unlike was Mr. Jackson alleged, I did not publish the article with “malicious intent” and I did not publish the article with the hopes of “interfering” with MonaVie’s business.

I have absolutely nothing to gain by harming MonaVie. In fact, I have published articles in the past that have been positive towards MonaVie. If the statistics are true and MonaVie is in a steep decline, it’s certainly newsworthy.

Instead of threatening me with a legal action and using words like “malice” and “tortious,” the more appropriate and civil response would have been to reach out to me and provide the correct figures. Instead, they’ve chosen to attack my character without even providing any data that would suggest the numbers are incorrect. 

As a Dutch web reporter, I am provided with broad protections under the Dutch constitution to publish newsworthy information. And in the USA, one of the principles that makes it such a great nation is the broad protection afforded to speech.

I am not defaming MonaVie and I would never “maliciously” attack any company. Furthermore, I never said MonaVie was not a viable business as suggested by Mr. Jackson. If Mr. Jackson interprets a significant drop in revenue as proof of non-viability, it was his own conclusion and not mine.

I will only agree to delete the post if MonaVie provides me with accurate figures or they at least make a public representation that the figures are substantially wrong with “substantial” being defined as off by more than 5%. As requested by Mr. Jackson, I am to write on this blog that the figures are “inaccurate” and “unsupported by facts.”

How do they expect me to make this representation when they are unwilling to provide with any data to contract the publication?  Instead, in the spirit of cooperation, I will extend an invitation to MonaVie and allow them to publish a statement on my own site. I have no malicious motive towards MonaVie and I am pulling for their success.  They’re one of the larger companies in the network marketing industries and their success is certainly admirable.    

I would love to have the opinion of our readers.  Am I missing something here or should I just pull it down?

[scribd id=35851142 key=key-1z1168pkxusgv0aoyu3m mode=list]