Running on Fumes

It stands to reason, then, that the pills being sold by BioPerformance would be the same color as those distributed by Bio Plus Fuel International of Maryland. Despite the Irving company's insistence that it holds the exclusive rights to the pill (or as Land put it during a Florida radio interview, "We own the product from the ground to the consumer"), the EPA has it registered to one Michael G. Bonds, senior vice president of Peco, S.A. in Annapolis, Maryland. Bonds is also the head of Bio Plus Fuel International, a company that has sold its Bio Plus Fuel Additive pill since 1998.

Not only do the two pills share an EPA registration number, but they also share testimonials, such as that of Miriam Yeager of Oklahoma, who is delighted with the 51 percent increase in mileage she garnered from either or both brands. And that Mexican lab test that BioPerformance submitted to the Better Business Bureau? It was actually performed on Bio Plus Fuel. Sources familiar with the relationship say that some of the money flowing up the pyramid in Irving winds up in Maryland.

---

If BioPerformance has a twin in Bio Plus Fuel, it may have a first cousin in EnviroMax, yet another miracle fuel additive. According to a letter that briefly appeared on the BioPerformance Web site, EnviroMax makers Extreme Research have accused BioPerformance of copyright infringement. In light of Attorney General Abbott's assessment of BioPerformance as "useless," it's doubtful Extreme Research will continue its push to prove the similarities between the two. (Extreme Reseach's law firm, Dallas-based Rose Walker, declined to comment.)

But Extreme Research is just one of at least three MLM fuel additive companies eager to pick up where BioPerformance has left off. The others are Freedom Fuel International with its MPG Cap additive and 4-E Corp with Ethos FR. Already predatory Internet ads wooing disillusioned BioPerformance distributors to the other plans have appeared on marketing message boards.

This apparent glut of companies doesn't represent some new explosion of MLM schemes. "We have grown every year for the past 20 years," says Amy Robinson, a spokeswoman for the Direct Selling Association, the principal MLM trade organization. The DSA faces the formidable task of ridding the MLM industry of its shady reputation and leans heavily on the likes of Avon, Tupperware and Mary Kay for support. "There are many legitimate companies out there," Robinson insists, "but there are definitely some that are not legitimate."

Robinson has a few tips on distinguishing the bad MLMs from the good. "Call the company directly," Robinson says. "Ask them some questions. If the company won't talk to you directly, steer clear." BioPerformance's published phone number has been out of service for weeks. "Make sure you're actually selling an actual product or service that is actually going to be used by the consumer." The green pill leaves room for doubt there as well. Robinson's third tip: Most legitimate MLM companies cap their pyramids at three or four levels. BioPerformance has no cap.

With such clear signs, it may have been inevitable that BioPerformance would attract legal scrutiny. By contrast, Dallas has recently seen at least two MLM companies with unsustainable multilevel marketing schemes collapse without ever facing prosecution. Earlier this year, International Galleries of Addison, an art-reproduction MLM that in 2005 claimed 100,000 members, was quietly liquidated in Chapter 7 bankruptcy, while in 2004, the parent company of Dallas-based Excel Communications suddenly went belly-up when enrollment of new members was no longer enough to sustain it. Some Excel executives have joined a new Dallas-based MLM, Stream Energy, which sells electricity service. One of Stream's founders admitted to The Dallas Morning News that unless the company could expand beyond Texas it would collapse in two years.

None of these companies were challenged by the attorney general. Anti-MLM activist Robert Fitzpatrick, author of the book False Profits, says that's because of the state's toothless pyramid scheme law, adopted in 1995. "The Texas law is by far the worst in the nation," Fitzpatrick says. "It removes the requirement that the funds from the product have to be derived from sales to true end users," he argues. Without that requirement, the pattern of new recruits buying product from the previous group of recruits goes unchecked. "They can eat it, they can use it, they can give it away--it really doesn't matter as long as they bought it." The law, Fitzpatrick says, fails to recognize the true mark of the fraudulent pyramid scheme: "What drives them is not the product. The business opportunity is to sell the business opportunity."

It's probably not a coincidence that the DSA enlisted Texas Republican Congressman Joe Barton's help in pushing for national anti-pyramid legislation in 2004. The bill would have, for the first time, defined exactly what makes an MLM legal at the national level. As DSA Legislative Director Joe Mariano puts it, "Clearly we're on the side of the angels here." That's not at all clear to Fitzpatrick. He says Barton's bill would have all the weaknesses of the Texas law, which is logical because much of the language was identical. Had it passed, Fitzpatrick says, it would have fatally weakened tougher federal standards that are based on various court precedents.