66 International Journal of Cultic Studies ■ Vol. 9, 2018
in a way suggesting that the set donation price
was a bargain in comparison to what the buyer
was getting.
The prices for the instruments at times reached
more than ten thousand dollars. The System II
Healing, for instance, cost $12,000 (USD GWP,
n.d.-j, p. 1). In another instrument catalogue, the
higher-priced instruments were as much as
$2,450, $4,000, and $6,050 (GWP, n.d.-i).
454F
455 At
one point, GWP even bundled some of the
healing instruments. For example, The Universal
Healing and Alignment Symbol and the Unified
Field Symbol could be bought together for $250.
(GWP, n.d.-j, p. 1). For $400, one could obtain
both the Healing Puck and the Unified Field
Alignment System (GWP, n.d.-j, p. 1).
Occasionally IKs could get special discounts on
some of the products. GWP offered the Trauma
Card and Pain Instrument to IKs for $450
instead of the regular price of $1,250 (Smart
Business Choices, 2004). These prices seem to
have been determined arbitrarily, as emphasized
by the Trauma Card and Pain Instrument
example, which offered an IK price $800 less, or
a 64 per cent discount from the full price listed.
To be able to offer such a discount, the cost of
production would have to have been less than
the discount price this suggests that the full
price of $1,250 afforded GWP a significant
profit margin.
To encourage people to buy new instruments,
GWP provided a variety of instruments and
symbols, and slightly tweaked its promise
regarding the reputed effects of each new
instrument. Furthermore, GWP was innovative
with ways to keep clients returning and
acquiring more instruments by occasionally
implying that old instruments would be “shut ...
down” (GWP, 1995, p. 1). In a letter to IKs in
1995, GWP asserted that it would phase out old
instruments’ energetic connections after a year,
as new and improved instruments were produced
(GWP, 1995). By implying that an instrument
could, and would, be made ineffective, but
455 Although no date appears on this catalogue, the prices indicated
that it had to be after the 1995 imposition of a standard fee for the
instruments. Additionally, prices appeared to increase as time went
on. Since the prices were in the thousands of dollars, I suspect that
this catalogue dates from the late 1990s or early 2000s.
providing a new substitute, GWP encouraged
individuals to continually repurchase more
instruments. It employed this tactic more than
once over the course of its history. In 1992, for
instance, GWP sent out a notice to IKs that it
had encountered a problem in the manufacturing
process and needed to “shut down the energetic
bands for a day” (GWP, 1992, p. 1) to rectify the
problem and finish replacing outdated
instruments (GWP, 1992). Although this
business model is effective for profit (it forces
consumers to continually buy new products), it
is also potentially problematic. For instance, if
someone did not call to see whether the
instrument was still active, then would the
individual still claim to notice benefits?
GWP requested that old instruments and
manuals be returned to the organization (GWP,
1992). This request may have been a simple
matter of wanting to help IKs safely dispose of
old instruments. Because these instruments
purportedly affected a person’s energy field (if
one prescribed to GWP’s worldview), improper
disposal could be detrimental to one’s alleged
energetic field. GWP also requested that people
were not to tamper with, or try to repair, the
instruments themselves. The true motivation
behind these requests remains occluded.
Although these requests may have been altruistic
(e.g., to prevent one from inadvertently
damaging one’s assumed etheric structure by
tampering with the alleged energy-manipulation
aspects of the instruments), it would be an
oversight not to point out other possible
motivations for these warnings. Such
motivations might include protecting proprietary
information, preventing people from discovering
the true contents of the instruments, or even
preventing competition from duplicating the
instruments.
455F
456
In fact, GWP did not lack competition. The
critique of GWP products by Steve Gamble and
Ivan Fraser derived not from an academic
456 I reached this conclusion in part because the group appeared to
be protecting the information and sections of John Miller’s
deposition discussing the contents and production of the healing
instruments were marked as confidential. Additionally, at one point
GWP had a “license of intellectual property” contract for
instrument keepers to sign (GWP n.d.-l, pp. 1–3)
in a way suggesting that the set donation price
was a bargain in comparison to what the buyer
was getting.
The prices for the instruments at times reached
more than ten thousand dollars. The System II
Healing, for instance, cost $12,000 (USD GWP,
n.d.-j, p. 1). In another instrument catalogue, the
higher-priced instruments were as much as
$2,450, $4,000, and $6,050 (GWP, n.d.-i).
454F
455 At
one point, GWP even bundled some of the
healing instruments. For example, The Universal
Healing and Alignment Symbol and the Unified
Field Symbol could be bought together for $250.
(GWP, n.d.-j, p. 1). For $400, one could obtain
both the Healing Puck and the Unified Field
Alignment System (GWP, n.d.-j, p. 1).
Occasionally IKs could get special discounts on
some of the products. GWP offered the Trauma
Card and Pain Instrument to IKs for $450
instead of the regular price of $1,250 (Smart
Business Choices, 2004). These prices seem to
have been determined arbitrarily, as emphasized
by the Trauma Card and Pain Instrument
example, which offered an IK price $800 less, or
a 64 per cent discount from the full price listed.
To be able to offer such a discount, the cost of
production would have to have been less than
the discount price this suggests that the full
price of $1,250 afforded GWP a significant
profit margin.
To encourage people to buy new instruments,
GWP provided a variety of instruments and
symbols, and slightly tweaked its promise
regarding the reputed effects of each new
instrument. Furthermore, GWP was innovative
with ways to keep clients returning and
acquiring more instruments by occasionally
implying that old instruments would be “shut ...
down” (GWP, 1995, p. 1). In a letter to IKs in
1995, GWP asserted that it would phase out old
instruments’ energetic connections after a year,
as new and improved instruments were produced
(GWP, 1995). By implying that an instrument
could, and would, be made ineffective, but
455 Although no date appears on this catalogue, the prices indicated
that it had to be after the 1995 imposition of a standard fee for the
instruments. Additionally, prices appeared to increase as time went
on. Since the prices were in the thousands of dollars, I suspect that
this catalogue dates from the late 1990s or early 2000s.
providing a new substitute, GWP encouraged
individuals to continually repurchase more
instruments. It employed this tactic more than
once over the course of its history. In 1992, for
instance, GWP sent out a notice to IKs that it
had encountered a problem in the manufacturing
process and needed to “shut down the energetic
bands for a day” (GWP, 1992, p. 1) to rectify the
problem and finish replacing outdated
instruments (GWP, 1992). Although this
business model is effective for profit (it forces
consumers to continually buy new products), it
is also potentially problematic. For instance, if
someone did not call to see whether the
instrument was still active, then would the
individual still claim to notice benefits?
GWP requested that old instruments and
manuals be returned to the organization (GWP,
1992). This request may have been a simple
matter of wanting to help IKs safely dispose of
old instruments. Because these instruments
purportedly affected a person’s energy field (if
one prescribed to GWP’s worldview), improper
disposal could be detrimental to one’s alleged
energetic field. GWP also requested that people
were not to tamper with, or try to repair, the
instruments themselves. The true motivation
behind these requests remains occluded.
Although these requests may have been altruistic
(e.g., to prevent one from inadvertently
damaging one’s assumed etheric structure by
tampering with the alleged energy-manipulation
aspects of the instruments), it would be an
oversight not to point out other possible
motivations for these warnings. Such
motivations might include protecting proprietary
information, preventing people from discovering
the true contents of the instruments, or even
preventing competition from duplicating the
instruments.
455F
456
In fact, GWP did not lack competition. The
critique of GWP products by Steve Gamble and
Ivan Fraser derived not from an academic
456 I reached this conclusion in part because the group appeared to
be protecting the information and sections of John Miller’s
deposition discussing the contents and production of the healing
instruments were marked as confidential. Additionally, at one point
GWP had a “license of intellectual property” contract for
instrument keepers to sign (GWP n.d.-l, pp. 1–3)
