­

Russ Whitney is "swearing under oath" in his ads, but John T. Reed is having trouble to get him to do it in litigation Similar stunt in Tennessee; now in L.A. Russ Whitney got into trouble with the Tennessee Attorney General for running an ad headlined "Millionaire Swears Under Oath He Can Show Any Nashville Area Resident How To Get Rich In A Year." Now he is running an ad in May, 2005 in the Los Angeles newspapers saying, "Millionaire Swears Under Oath He Can Show Any Los Angeles Area Resident How To Build Wealth In A Single Year!" A reader sent me one that appeared on May 11, 2005 on page News 11 of the Orange County Register. Tennessee sued Whitney for that ad Here is what the Tennessee Attorney General said in a lawsuit filed against Russ Whitney for that ad:. (You can read the full text of the complaint and out-of-court settlement agreement at https://www.johntreed.com/WhitneyTN.html.) "6. The advertisement is headlined "Millionaire Swears Under Oath He Can Show Any Nashville Area Resident How To Get Rich In A Year." Defendant Whitney, who is identified in the advertisement as a "self-made millionaire" has not in fact made any such statement under oath. Mr. Whitney has informed the State that this claim is simply "advertising language." In addition, Mr. Whitney has been unable to provide substantiation that he is a millionaire or that he has become a millionaire by using the principles he will teach in his wealth-building seminar. "8. Defendants' advertisement promises that each individual will learn how to "become rich in a year," "gain security, freedom and wealth," "make serious money with only part-time effort," "turn debt into cash," "create $1,500/month in passive monthly income," and "make a fortune" with a computer. Defendants are unable to substantiate any of these claims. In fact, Mr. Whitney has informed the State that in making his claim that he can show any Nashvillian how to become "rich" in a year, he did not necessarily mean that anyone would become "rich" financially, but "rich" in a spiritual sense or as otherwise defined by the consumer's financial goals and circumstances. " 13. All of the acts

 and practices engaged in and employed by the Defendants, as alleged herein, are "unfair or deceptive acts or practices affecting the conduct of any trade or commerce" in Tennessee, which are declared unlawful by Tenn. Code Ann. '§ 47-18-104(a). "14. By implying that a money-making opportunity will result in a specified level of success or profit without substantiation for such claims, Defendants have represented or implied that goods or services have characteristics or benefits that they do not have, in violation of Tenn. Code Ann. '§'§ 47-18-104(a), (b)(5), and (b)(27). "19. By purporting to provide, in essence, a sworn guarantee that Defendant Whitney can show any Nashville area resident " how to get rich in a year" the Defendants have represented or implied that goods or services have characteristics or benefits they do not have, in violation of Tenn. Code Ann. '§'§ 47-18-104(a), (b(5), and (b)(27). "20. By using statements in their advertisement that gives a false impression of the grade, quality, quantity, value, usability or origin of the goods or services offered or which otherwise misrepresent the goods or service actually being offered, the Defendants have engaged in a scheme to "bait" consumers to their workshop and then "switch" them from the advertised goods and services in violation of Tenn. Code Ann. '§ 47-18-104(b)(21)." Whitney changed the wording slightly from the Nashville version Note that Whitney changed the wording from "get rich in a year!" to "How to build wealth in a year!" When pressed, Whitney told the Tennessee Attorney general that "get rich" meant "spiritually rich." How many people do you think would have gone to the seminar if he had disclosed that meaning of the word "rich" in the ad? And what do you suppose the chances are that, when pressed about the LA ad, Whitney will say that "build wealth" means even one penny of increase in your net worth and that he did not promise that you would build wealth, only that he would "show you how" to build wealth? Apparently this "Millionaire swears under oath" language really works. Otherwise, why would he continue to use phraseology that he previously got sued by Tennessee for? I also surmise that this extremely carefully worded headline is designed to mislead readers into thinking that he is guaranteeing to make them wealthy while leaving him a weasel out with the legal authorities. Bylined "By John Kane" Oddly, the ad that ran in the orange County (California) Register is bylined "By John Kane." What' that about? Since when are ads bylined? Kane is a Whitney marketing executive. If legal authorities press, are they going to find that the millionaire doing the swearing is Kane, not Whitney. The ad has Whitney' photograph and a caption "Millionaire Mentor & Best Selling Author Russ Whitney." The John Kane byline suggests that he plans to blame Kane for anything that is wrong with the ad. As far as I know, Russ Whitney has never proved that he was a millionaire. When the State of Tennessee asked him to substantiate the claim, he could not. When I asked him to substantiate it in court papers, he filed a motion to protect him from having to answer. Says he swore under oath but is fighting giving me those documents in court I have requested the proof that he did such swearing under oath in my requests for documents in the lawsuit Whitney filed against me. Instead of providing it, his lawyer filed a motion for a protective order to get the Fort Myers federal court to tell me I cannot have those documents. Tell the Los Angeles authorities and media about this I would appreciate it if readers in the Los Angeles area would fax this Web page to the local authorities (e.g., District Attorney, Consumer Protection, Better Business Bureau, etc.) and press (TV, radio, newspapers) ASAP. I am neither a constituent of those authorities nor a subscriber, viewer, listener of those media outlets. Los Angelenos are. Complaints like this are more effective when they come from constituents or media customers. "To the best of their knowledge" The ad says in fine print at the bottom that the "students sharing their success stories have done so to the best of their knowledge"¦" Excuse me! Why aren"t they "swearing under oath," if you"ll pardon the expression, that the statements are accurate? There is no reason why testimonials should be other than verified. I spent more time, money and effort trying to verify Whitney' claims that he is willing to spend to verfy his own testimonials. That' not right. He generates $140 million a year in revenue. These testimonials are being relied on by hundreds of thousands of people who are signing up for Whitney' seminars and mentoring. He should be verifying these testimonials and saying so in his ads. John T. Reed Copyright 2005 by John T. Reed John T. Reed, a.k.a. John Reed, Jack Reed, 342 Bryan Drive, Alamo, CA 94507, Voice: 925-820-7262, Fax: 925-820-1259, www.johntreed.com

Log in to comment
­