Well, in my view, Robbins is not that "smart" at all. He is a high-school drop out, and he believes some very flakey stuff.
Personally, I think his greatest "skill" is his utter ruthlessness, while being able to make people think he is a wonderful guy just out to "help people". Its that "profound duplicity", which seems to make him effective. This is why so many of his followers cannot believe what a total, ruthless, manipulative super-asshole the guy really is. They can't even imagine it.

I don't know if his ex-wife really did destroy his stuff, or if he is using it as an excuse to try and keep those lawyers from looking into his personal life.
Of course, I can only speculate, but it could very well be that his ex-wife went berserk, after she finally realized that Tony had totally played her, used her, and dumped her while lying to her face. Just think, if she really went and destroyed EVERYTHING, then what does that say? It seems to say to me that she realized that the Tony Robbins is some type of psychopathic manipulator, who is a total fraud. That is pretty heavy stuff.

On the other hand, she may have destroyed SOME things, and then Tony just used that as an excuse to avoid giving the lawyers any information. In my view, Robbins would keep all sorts of backup info around.

But if she really did destroy ALL of this stuff, that is very profound.
You see, Tony Robbins thinks of himself as a type of "Leonardo Da Vinci" and all of his journals were a type of record he was keeping for "posterity" as they would show how this "great man" pulled himself up by his bootstraps. I have no doubt that Robbins sees his journals and stuff on the same level as Leonardo, something "for the ages".

So his ex-wife knew this, and likely believed it for a long time as well. What does that say if she went and DESTROYED ALL of his stuff? She is saying that he is a complete fraud, and that all of his stuff is utterly worthless junk, and a big lie, and a big-con. Could there be any clearer message?

If Becky Robbins really did destroy all of Tony's history and stuff, then in my view she did a wonderful public service. It has been clear for some time that Robbins is a pathological liar, and is an utterly ruthless man, who will stop at nothing to get what he wants.
If Becky destroyed all of his stuff, this seems to me to acknowledge that the guy is a total, utter fraud. Frankly, I think he is. Its a quite complex total con-job, and most people cannot see it. Perhaps it all came together in Becky's mind, and she finally saw what was going on with this maniac. She would have seen the horrible things he has done to many others for many many years. But when he finally turned on her too, maybe she just finally saw the light?

Just think of the depths of what she must have been thinking and feeling to do that. I don't find it unbelievable at all. This Tony Robbins guy has ruined many people's lives, I have seen the wreckage first hand in what he did to some people.
He's a very sick man, who is totally self-obsessed to a perverse degree.
But what's even worse, is that he is very skilled at making himself appear like this swell guy who is your best friend.
This is extremely dangerous.

If Becky did destroy all of Tony's stuff, then my hat goes off to her for spontaneously acting out of a sense of integrity and dignity. She saved the future from the lies of a supreme Con-Man, who has fooled almost everyone.
The guy is just a salesman, and a super-manipulator, and a pathological liar, who will literally say ANYTHING to make the sale.

It would make a truly excellent movie...I can see the scene where the longtime faithful wife, finally sees the Truth about her sicko husband, and his decades of lies, and feels such guilt and horror for being a part of this, that she goes and destroys everything from his false past of lies.
And the movie would end with the Guru damaged, but still surrounded by adoring brainwashed fans, with the Guru paying off women he has sexually harrassed, and getting richer, and getting even more arrogant, and more dangerous...

Quote
M12002

Interesting posts!

I find it amazing that a guy as smart as Tony didn't make back up copies of journals, photos and other personal materials. Truely, what was he thinking? Making copies of irreplacable objects is common sense 101.

What a pooftie, with his all hundreds of milions, nearly billions of coned money tonyboy isn`t enought brave to tell simple thing: Yes I Want that married woman, so what? Hopefuly this is begining of the end for those monster con.

[www.stockwatch.com]

CanWest's Sun trial hears it's all true about Robbins


2005-07-27 20:21 ET - Street Wire

by Stockwatch Business Reporter

The Vancovuer Sun's lawyer spent the morning of the 26th day of the Tony Robbins libel trial explaining that the evidence presented at trial shows that Mr. Robbins really is a hypocrite and an adulterer. The Sun's June 7, 2001, article is essentially true, Rob Anderson argued, and if read as a whole, does not defame the self-help guru.

Mr. Robbins is suing The Sun and other media defendants over a series of media stories published in June, 2001. Mr. Robbins claims the stories imply he is an adulterous wife-stealing hypocrite who does not follow his own advice. The media defendants claim their stories do not defame Mr. Robbins, and that except for the adultery imputation, which they state the words do not support, their stories are true.

Media defendants' closing continues

Mr. Anderson continued on his second day of closing arguments by reviewing the June 7, 2001, Vancouver Sun article by Jeff Lee, on the breakdown of the Lynch marriage, offering evidence on each paragraph that he says proves the truth behind the article. The lawyer kept stressing that the various paragraphs of the story were not defamatory, and that if read as a whole, a normal reader gets the impression of a balanced and non-defamatory article.

The article stated that Sage Robbins, formerly known as Bonnie Lynch, "ran off" with Mr. Robbins. The media defendants claim this language is dramatic but not defamatory. As for the sections of the Lee article that said Mr. Robbins was divorcing his wife of the time, and considering his new relationship "a midlife celebration," the worst meaning of the words is that it is ironic that a counsellor and self-help person would find himself in such a situation.

In the middle of the story lies a paragraph which states that Mrs. Robbins's infatuation with Mr. Robbins lead to a breakdown of the Lynch marriage. "It is hard to imagine how the fact that a woman in infatuated with you and wants to leave her marriage to be with you is defamatory," Mr. Anderson said.

The article is balanced, Mr. Anderson repeated many times throughout the morning. For every instance where a line might reflect badly on Mr. Robbins, there is also information from the "other side" of the story. The story of Mr. Lynch is contradicted, and his character cast into question, by Sharon Humphrey, Mrs. Robbins's mother, and Stephen Jaffe, Mr. Robbins's spokesman.

"Significantly ... it is Mr. Lynch and not Mr. Robbins who is responsible for Bonnie leaving her marriage. Although none of the individuals quoted in the article say so, it is apparent to any 21st century reader that neither Mr. Lynch not Mr. Robbins made the critical decision. Bonnie Lynch is a responsible adult woman, and she made the decision," Mr. Anderson said. "The article does not say bad things about Mr. Robbins. The article said that he counsels celebrities, is a multimillionaire and Bonnie became infatuated with him."

Mr. Justice L. Paul Williamson asked Mr. Anderson what he plans to do to address the accusation of hypocrisy that the defendants have admitted. Mr. Anderson replied that it is his position that the Lee article does not cast Mr. Robbins as a hypocrite, only as human.

"Adverse inferences"

Mr. Anderson suggested that the judge should not look favourably upon Mr. Robbins for not showing up to have his day in court and testify on his own behalf during his trial. The judge may also wish to think the same way of Mrs. Robbins. Mr. Anderson tried to get Mrs. Robbins in court as a witness, but she claimed she was living in California, and that the British Columbia courts had no jurisdiction over her. Mr. Robbins and Mrs. Robbins were both on the plaintiff's witness list, but Mr. McConchie ultimately decided not to call to the witness stand.

Lynch attempted suicide

The judge must decide the case on the evidence, Mr. Anderson told the court on July 26, 2005, and the evidence indicates that Mr. Lynch did try to kill himself. "The only conclusion available on the evidence is that Lynch either did attempt suicide or threatened to do so," Mr. Anderson said.

Mr. Anderson went back to the testimony of Gary Sir John Carlsen III, Mr. Lynch's onetime legal adviser, on June 24, 2005. Mr. Carlsen testified under oath that he personally intervened to save Mr. Lynch's life, after Mr. Lynch swallowed a bunch of pills. Mr. Carlsen force-fed Mr. Lynch a dry mustard solution to induce the man to vomit. Mr. Carlsen also told a reporter from the Globe & Mail the same story in the week before the trial began.

Mr. McConchie did not deal with the mustard story during Mr. Carlsen's time on the stand, Mr. Anderson pointed out. Mr. Carlsen's Oct. 5, 2004, apology did not retract the mustard episode. That leaves the judge with evidence that Mr. Lynch did try to kill himself.

The court heard from Mr. Lynch's friend, Alan Lawrence, that when he and Mr. Lynch went for lunch in the spring of 2000, after Mrs. Robbins left him, Mr. Lawrence found his friend to be "hollow, a different person." During the meeting, Mr. Lawrence opened the glove compartment of Mr. Lynch's car and found prescription medication. Concerned, Mr. Lawrence asked Mr. Lynch if they could to go to the gym together, to help Mr. Lynch.

Adultery

Without ever saying the word, Mr. Anderson briefly touched upon the portions of the media articles that the plaintiff claims call him an adulterer. There are three facts that the evidence demonstrate. The first fact is that Mr. Robbins was married to his first wife when he met the current Mrs. Robbins. His divorce became final on March 5, 2001.

The second fact is that Mrs. Robbins and Mr. Lynch were still married when she met Mr. Robbins. The Lynch divorce hearing occurred on June 21, 2001, and became effective on July 24, 2001.

The third fact that the court needs to consider is that Mr. Robbins and Mrs. Robbins were engaged by the time of Jeff Lee's article on June 6, 2001.

"If my mother were alive, she'd say that was the end of that," Mr. Anderson said.

Hypocrite

If Mr. Robbins was in a relationship with Mrs. Robbins as described by the media defendants, which led to the breakup of the Lynch marriage, then the judge can draw the conclusion that Mr. Robbins is a hypocrite, according to the media lawyer. Pointing to Mr. Robbins's examination for discovery, Mr. Anderson said: "The plaintiff has said that he teaches that family is very important and that dishonesty destroys a marriage ... Further, the plaintiff agrees that dating a married woman who is not separated is contrary to this teachings."

That Mr. Robbins is a "hypocrite is proven by his own words," Mr. Anderson added.

Lee's conduct

Judy Jansen, another member of the media's legal team, presented the closing arguments on the conduct of the defendants. The conduct of The Sun and Mr. Lee were of great importance, now that the plaintiff is claiming Mr. Lee acted with reckless indifference to the truth, with an eye on claiming malice and damages.

The Lee article is what Patricia Graham, Sun editor-in-chief, referred to as a "dispute story," where there is more than one side to the story and no hard empirical data to back up the story. In such a case, the reporter needs to include both sides of the story to provide a balanced view.

Between 8:30 a.m. PT on June 6, 2001, when Mr. Lee received his story assignment, and when he filed his draft with his editors, the veteran reporter made approximately 50 phone calls, conducted an in-person interview with Mr. Lynch and reviewed court documents.

"Mr. Lee assembled 16 different sources for his article," Ms. Jansen told the judge. The sources included Mr. Lynch; Sam Georges, president of the Robbins companies; Mr. Jaffe; Mrs. Humphrey; Rick Zaklan, Mrs. Robbins's former brother-in-law; Mr. Carlsen; and Cathleen McClugan, Mr. Lynch's divorce lawyer. The other sources were a CNN interview on the Robbins companies, two National Post stories from January, 2001, a copy of the Star magazine, Mr. Robbins's book Awaken The Giant Within, and three documents from the Lynch divorce action.

Mr. Lee quickly established that Lynchs' married on June 5, 1993. Mrs. Robbins met Mr. Robbins in Hawaii in September, 1999, and attended more than one of his seminars. Mr. Lynch alleged in his divorce defence that Mrs. Robbins committed adultery with Mr. Robbins in the fall of 1999, a true reflection of his position at the time.

Ms. Jansen said that Mr. Lynch and Mrs. Robbins were together as a couple until after Mrs. Robbins came back from the Tampa seminar in January, 2000. Divorce documents state that the couple separated at some point in January, 2000.

After talking to Mr. Lynch, "Mr. Lee's first priority was to get Bonnie Lynch's side of the story," Ms. Jansen explained. Eight phone calls to track Mrs. Robbins did not locate the woman, but Mr. Lee talked to her mother and to Mr. Jaffe, which he viewed as providing the other side of the story to Mr. Lynch's claims.

Mr. Robbins had an opportunity to respond to the Lynch allegations, as Mr. Lee told Mr. Jaffe and Mr. Georges about the content of his story early in the afternoon on June 6, 2001, but he never did. Instead of making Mr. Robbins available for comment, the Robbins legal team sent a libel-chill letter to The Sun at 6:40 p.m. PT on June 6, 2001. On receiving the letter, Ms. Graham and The Sun's libel lawyer Barry Gibson reviewed the Lee article and removed the references to adultery, changing the whole tone of the story.

"Ms. Graham and Mr. Gibson believed that they had placated Mr. [Brian] Wolf's concerns by removing any references to adultery," Ms. Jansen said. "And boy, were they ever wrong."

The trial continues.


[www.stockwatch.com]
CanWest's Sun lawyers say absence should be penalized


2005-07-27 21:20 ET - Street Wire

by Stockwatch Business Reporter

The Vancouver Sun's lawyers say any damages awarded to self-help guru Tony Robbins should be minimal after Mr. Robbins failed to show up for his own day in court. The Sun's lawyers spent much of Wednesday afternoon emphasizing the fact that Mr. Robbins declined to attend the trial.

Mr. Robbins is suing The Sun and others for a series of stories published in 2001 that he claims portray him as an adulterous hypocrite who should follow his own teachings. The Sun told the story of Langley businessman John Lynch, who said his wife Bonnie left him after meeting Mr. Robbins at a seminar in Hawaii in September, 1999.

Getting both sides of the story

The afternoon session began with Sun lawyer Judy Jansen continuing to present the newspaper's closing arguments, beginning with The Sun's version of how reporter Lori Culbert's article on Mr. Robbins came to be.

(The Sun says it published Ms. Culbert's article after Mr. Robbins's lawyers complained about The Sun's first story, the one that said Mr. Lynch's wife left him for Mr. Robbins.)

In asking for the second article, Ms. Jansen said Mr. Robbins's lawyer claimed Mr. Lynch and and Abbotsford resident Gary Sir John Carlsen III (also a defendant in the trial) were trying to extort money from Mr. Robbins.

The Sun, before printing the extortion allegation, sought comment from Mr. Carlsen and Mr. Lynch.

(After The Sun printed the story, Mr. Robbins's lawyers evidently were unhappy that The Sun published comments from Mr. Carlsen and Mr. Lynch.)

"The plaintiffs raised ... the extortion issue, as a result Ms. Culbert interviewed Mr. Carlsen and Mr. Lynch," Ms. Jansen said.

Without seeking their side, the story "would have been one-sided," she argued.

Despite some objections, Ms. Jansen said Brian Wolf, Mr. Robbins's California lawyer, thought the story would "get the job done."

Mr. Robbins's absence

Ms. Jansen, at several points during the afternoon, touched on the fact that Mr. Robbins himself did not appear at his own lawsuit. This goes to more than one argument, she said, the first being that nobody can gauge exactly how wounded Mr. Robbins was by the articles.

"We don't know what injury was caused to the plaintiff's feelings because he didn't come tell us," she said.

"We are no wiser at the end of the trial than we were at the beginning as to how this article affected Mr. Robbins," she added.

She argued Mr. Robbins's no-show also mitigated in a large part any damages he could receive.

Mr. Robbins's position that he is entitled to damages is an "extraordinary position ... when he hasn't appeared," Ms. Jansen continued.

Ms. Jansen cited several libel cases and entries in legal texts in support of her position.

"If you don't show up to protect your reputation it doesn't say much for your reputation," she said.

Debbie Humphrey whisked away

Moving on, Ms. Jansen addressed another potential witness that did not show up, Bonnie's sister, Debbie Humphrey. She said Ms. Humphrey disappeared as a direct result of The Sun's efforts to subpoena her to testify.

"We know from [Ms. Humphrey's father] that Debbie left this continent," Ms. Jansen said.

"She was taken out of the country as a result of our trying to serve her," Ms. Jansen argued.

Mr. Carlsen's apology added no facts

Ms. Jansen also spent a small amount of time addressing one matter that unfolded during the course of the trial, The Sun's failure to publish Mr. Carlsen's apology to Mr. Robbins.

(Mr. Carlsen apologized ahead of the trial for his part in the article, claiming Mr. Lynch misled him.)

"Nothing that he added in terms of facts ... were necessary to correct the record," she said.

"He stole her heart"

Ms. Jansen also contended that, at worst, The Sun's June 7, 2001, article (the one that first told the story of Mr. Lynch's divorce) meant that Mr. Robbins factored into the breakup of Mr. Lynch and his wife.

"Mr. Robbins got involved with a married woman and was a factor in the breakup of her marriage," is the most damaging meaning she argues could be attributed to the June 7 article.

The judge, at that point, said that could amount to stealing another man's wife.

Ms. Jansen disagreed. "It is a way of saying he stole her heart," she contended.

Jeff Lee's "Trojan" efforts

Ms. Jansen also said Jeff Lee, the reporter that wrote that June 7 story, was very careful to question the sources of his story and did present other views.

She said Mr. Lee made extraordinary efforts to get Mr. Robbins's side of the story through calls to his representatives, Sam Georges and Steven Jaffe.

"His efforts in that regard were Trojan," Ms. Jansen said.

The fact that Mr. Lee did not talk to either Mr. Robbins or his wife "was not due to lack of effort," she added.

Conflicting philosophies

Ms. Jansen was done speaking at that point, however, Sun lawyer Rob Anderson had a few more words to say about Mr. Robbins's teachings and how they related to a Sun column by Pete McMartin.

(Mr. McMartin, in a column appearing two days after Mr. Lee's article, compared excerpts from Giant Steps, one of Mr. Robbins's books, with some of the events in Mr. Lee's story.)

Mr. Anderson said the book is meant to be read one chapter at a time, to provide "daily philosophies."

Each lesson, he said, is to be treated as a standalone section. However, Mr. Anderson says the different lessons contradict each other.

"You can't read any of his books, and you've got two of them, and not find conflicting philosophies," he told the judge.

"You can do different things depending which page you're in," he added.

After one final request that the lawyers be permitted to argue legal costs after the judge decides a winner, Mr. Anderson completed The Sun's closing arguments. (The legal costs of the trial will likely be significant.)

The dates of the phone calls

At that point, Mr. Robbins's lawyer, West Vancouver libel specialist Roger McConchie, argued some of the phone evidence. (In that evidence, The Sun's lawyers said Bonnie tried to phone Mr. Robbins 152 times, or 1.2 times per day, in the period leading up to her separation from Mr. Lynch.)

The Robbins trial is now being looked at by the judge.
There are more than 50 articles at this site below about this case, which reveal a lot. Also, there is a "comments" section beneath each article, where tons of people have made comments about Robbins. Its quite interesting and educational.

(you can read all of the articles here)
[www.google.com]

The original article from The Vancouver Sun. Jun 7, 2001, that prompted the libel lawsuit seems to be here in the "comments" section, for now. Perhaps someone wants to cut and paste this article here, before it gets deleted?
[www.stockwatch.com]


(there are some interesting comments here in the comments section)
CanWest's Sun opponent Robbins thanks supporters
[www.stockwatch.com]

Ken Wilder and Robbins both endorse this scam called the Qlink just to make some more money. Wilber blatantly lies saying it has been "scientifically" demonstrated to work.


[www.holistec.com]

Ken Wilber
President, The Integral Institute, Boulder, CO,
Author of A Brief History of Everything and 16 other books on consciousness and Integral theory and practice.

"The QLink is a technology that amplifies and clarifies the body's energies. By reducing the noise in any energy field, this technology strengthens and purifies the body's own energies.

This technology has been scientifically demonstrated to enhance the body's ability to protect itself from harmful environmental radiation, and thus it helps to remove harmful influences on the organism's health and well being.

This technology therefore removes some of the blocks to inner transformation to higher and healthier states of being."


---------------

Anthony Robbins
America's Results Coach and Author of Awaken the Giant Within


" As a speaker, I’m often onstage for 12 hours or more a day. Almost 7 years ago, Dr. Herb Ross found that the extreme low frequency waves (EMF) emitted by my wireless headset were creating a physical weakness in my body. When I began utilizing the QLink, I noticed an immediate recovery in my muscle strength & a counteracting of the negative effects from the headsets low frequency waves. Scientific research has shown that the QLink makes a significant difference in reducing the impact of these harmful low frequency waves. I have certainly benefited from the QLink."

Tony Robbins may have spent up to $1 million on libel suit: lawyer

VANCOUVER (CP) - American motivational speaker Tony Robbins may have spent up to $1 million in legal fees on his libel case against The Vancouver Sun and other media defendants, says a lawyer who was involved in the trial when it began almost six weeks ago.

"I'd say the legal fees were $750,000 to $1 million," David Sutherland said outside court when asked to estimate what Robbins would have spent on the four years of trial preparation and the six-week trial that concluded Thursday.

Sutherland represented the defendant John Lynch at the start of the trial, but Lynch settled during the first week after his lawyer read out an apology to Robbins in court.

B.C. Supreme Court Justice Paul Williamson said on Thursday he was reserving judgment in the case, which he observed had been fought with "ferociousness."

Williamson did not say how long it will be before he delivers what is expected to be a lengthy written judgment that will closely examine if the Sun stories were - as the Sun maintained - fair and balanced reporting that was not defamatory.

Robbins chose not to testify at the trial, which his lawyer, Roger McConchie, argued on Thursday should not be a factor in the judge deciding whether to award damages.

The Sun argued that an adverse inference should be drawn by Robbins not bothering to come to court to testify how the articles hurt his reputation.

Some information is coming out about more failure in Robbins personal life.

This is relevant in this sense. Here you have a guy like Robbins, who is such a manipulator, that strangers feel like he is
their "best friend".
Meanwhile his own wife of many years had such contempt for him, she destroyed all of his personal property, I would imagine due to his lies and philandering.

Now information is coming out that his own daughter Jolie Robbins, (who Robbins has talked about many times in his programs over the years), got married and DID NOT INVITE TONY ROBBINS to her wedding.

I really feel sorry for all the people who get conned by Robbins. You see it happen, over and over again like clockwork.
And sadly, the ones who get conned the worst, and hurt the most, are the most decent, honest, fair-minded people.
The supersalesmen snakes Robbins surrounds himself with know that he is a scammer, but they don't care. There is tons of money in them hills.
But the more decent, naive, and suggestible folks get taken for a ride, and they don't even know it, until the $30-50 grand is gone, and then they usually blame themselves.

Well, I truly feel sorry for all the folks who have be used and abused by Tony Robbins.
I can understand the hurt and bitterness from his own daughter, who appears to not have invited him to her wedding.

This is what happens to these cultish leaders in the end. Their family is left behind, and all they are left with are their acolytes, and their co-offenders who are on the gravy train.
Its a real shame that the people who can see through the smoke and mirrors are those with good BS detectors, whereas the more naive, and generous and kind folks are the ones who REALLY get the shaft.

[custom.stockwatch.com]

Here is another ugly example of some of Tony Robbins personally trained salespeople's tactics. These folks are experts at finding a person's weakness, and then exploiting that weakness into coercing them to sign the contract for up to $30,000+, and beyond, with no refunds...Notice the manipulation, browbeating, guilty, without a conscience.

She even tries a hypnotic "embedded command".
"When is NOW the right time for you to step up?"

Mastery University: costs $11,000 US, plus travel, hotels, upsells, etc.
UPW: Unleash Power Within

The names have been redacted. (taken out).

-----------------------------------

Feeling Guilty because Im Not Attending Masters University...

I Finally got my momentum session yesterday, however it wasn't quiet what I expected, First I got bombarded on the phone by a Lady telling me how I MUST ATTEND MASTERS UNIVERSITY or else I'm throwing my Life away, then I get her yelling and guilting me into it making out that I dont care enough about my future to spend $5000 for a few days.
Despite telling her I cant afford it ( I Honestly cant, unemployed and in alot of debt at the moment ) She still tells me to find the money one way or another..
Anyways because I was to chicken to tell her on the phone that I just didn't want to go at this stage in my life I decideded to send her a lovely email saying how greatfull I was that she cared enough about me to look after me and reccomend this University to me, here's my email.


Quote:
Hi ----
Thankyou once again for ringing me today, I am both honored and privileged to of heard those words you said today.

I Have been looking at stradegies to get the money for Masters University, sadly at the moment my only option apart from robbing a bank or mugging some poor old lady is to get some work and pay for it then ( As Nobody wants to lend me money at the moment as I've already borrowed so much )

I do appreciate the kick up the butt though to get moving and I can tell you now with an honest heart I am back on track, I Dont know what else to really tell you, I can still ring you on Saturday if you want, However my answer for the University is a No for the moment, I am thinking of signing up early next year, I dont mind about the cost increase.

Thanks again

Z----

then I get this as a lovely response...


Quote:
Hi Z---,

Are you doing your usual by starting something but not really taking yourself to the finishing line? I asked you to take these three days to really look at your options; even the ones that you can’t see exist right now. By continuing to ask yourself “how can I make this happen?”, your brain will want to give you an answer. But instead you didn’t even spend a day creating the possibilities. When is NOW the right time for you to step up?

I want you to understand Mastery University is just a small part of this exercise. This is YOUR LIFE!! But if that is not important enough for you to spend 3 days exploring options for your life, then Mastery University certainly is not for you anyway.

Please call me on Saturday anyway, should you actually want this.

Make it a great day!

--------

Did i do something wrong? Surely I'm not throwing my life away by not attending this university right :S I mean I want to go but I REALLY CANT AFFORD IT, even If i tell myself I can the ammount of cashflow at the moment is 0!
Did anyone else experience a bit of guilt after UPW?

I spotted AR selling "movies" on the QVC shopping network and emailed various contacts at the QVC website with info here. The product numbers, if anyone else wants to contact QVC, are E27143 and E 28699.

Dear lord, those DVD's would be full out hypno-persuasion, in surround sound.
That is new for him, to offer some DVD's, for a cheaper rate, to draw in new people.
Then he will inject endless "upsell" stuff, to get people to move into the higher seminar levels.
Now Tony gets to brainwash you in Digital 5.1 surround-sound on your big-screen TV.

I wouldn't mind seeing those DVD's.
I've heard some people buy these types of things, analyze them, and then return them! Imagine that!

Who knows, maybe I will have a look at them, and analyze them, and write some stuff up about them.

thx for the info.

Quote
Hope
I spotted AR selling "movies" on the QVC shopping network and emailed various contacts at the QVC website with info here. The product numbers, if anyone else wants to contact QVC, are E27143 and E 28699.