Discussions of network marketing tend to be conducted by two groups who are both exaggerating. Below are the claims that come up most often, sorted by how much truth each one contains.
"It's a pyramid scheme"
Partly meaningful, often misused. A pyramid scheme pays people for recruiting, with no real product changing hands - the money comes from entry fees, and it collapses when recruitment stops. That is illegal in most countries.
Direct selling is distinguishable: there are actual products, bought by actual people who use them, and value derives from that. Faberlic has manufactured and sold cosmetics since 1997, and its catalogue is a real catalogue.
The honest caveat: the distinction depends on whether reward genuinely follows products being used, or whether recruitment is the real activity with products as decoration. That is a fair question to ask of any specific company, and the way to answer it is to read the compensation plan and see what actually generates value.
"Nobody makes money"
Mostly true, and misleading. Most people earn little or nothing. That is not a scandal - it is what happens with any activity where participation is free, effort varies enormously, and most participants do almost nothing.
Where it misleads is the implication that the money is impossible. Some people earn meaningfully. They are a small minority, they have generally worked at it for years, and they tend to be people who like working with people.
"You have to buy stock"
False at Faberlic, and worth checking anywhere. There are no compulsory purchases and no entry fee. You order what you want when you want it.
Where the myth comes from is real: some companies historically required inventory purchases, and some sponsors still encourage stocking up. The encouragement is bad advice, not a requirement.
"It ruins friendships"
True when done badly. Mass-messaging your contacts, pitching relatives, treating social relationships as a prospect list - all of that does damage, and it is widespread enough that the reputation is earned.
It is also entirely avoidable. Consultants who mention it once and then answer questions when asked keep their friendships intact. The behaviour is the problem, not the business model.
"It's just for women"
False, though the customer base skews. Cosmetics buyers skew female, so consultants do too. Nothing in the structure restricts participation, and the men's fragrance and home-care categories exist for a reason.
"You can be financially free in a year"
False, and a warning sign. Anyone telling you this is either inexperienced or selling something. Building anything substantial takes years, most attempts do not get there, and the confident timeline is the single most reliable indicator of an unreliable source.
"It's passive income"
False. Structures consist of people, and people leave, pause and need help. Income that continues without activity is not what this is. Anyone describing it as passive has not maintained one.
"The products are just an excuse"
Depends entirely on the company, and it is testable. Buy something. Use it for a month. Decide whether you would buy it again at that price if there were no business attached.
If the answer is no, the criticism holds for that company. If the answer is yes - which for a lot of Faberlic's skincare buyers it is - then the products are doing what products are supposed to do, and the business is downstream of them rather than the other way round.
What is actually fair to say
Registration is free and carries no obligation, so the risk of trying it is close to zero. The discount is real and immediate. The larger income is real but rare, slow, and dependent on skills - patience and dealing with people - that not everyone has or wants to develop.
Anyone who tells you more than that with confidence is guessing.
For the earnings question specifically, there is a longer piece in the business section that goes into what determines the outcome.